GTX 970/980 specs @ Techpowerup, plus 3dmark gpu-score leaks... Neo: "Woah."

rinaldo00 said:
How much faster is a 780Ti over a 680, 35-40% ?
Click to expand...

Not sure exactly.

GTX 770 ~ about equal or +5% faster than a GTX 680
GTX 780 about 25% faster than GTX 680
GTX 780 Ti is about another 10-15% faster than a GTX 780

So your guestimate is about right. Also Vram is a factor so at times you'll see a 780 Ti edge out 680 SLi by a little because it has a full GB more of usable vram.

I've seen reviews showing a 780 Ti being slightly slower than a SLi 680 setup.

Add 15-20% more performance than a 780 Ti and you have a GTX 980.

All things considered it should perform better than a 680 SLi setup (albeit 5%-10% faster probably) but since it's a single card with 2GB of more usable vram it's a win-win
 
n=1 said:
980 has only 10-15% better performance than 970, runs just as hot as 780, and costs $220 more.

If that price for 970 is real, I think it's pretty much a no-brainer at this point.
Click to expand...
Runs as hot temperature wise, but these cards are outputting less heat.
SnowBeast said:
So really the 970/980 won't beat my SLI'ed 660Ti's.
Click to expand...
Umm no. The gtx 780ti is faster than your current setup. Heck, my old 780 was a tick faster than my sli 660 ti's that I ran for two weeks.
 
Blade-Runner said:
NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-980-vs-GeForce-GTX-780-Ti.png
Click to expand...

Disappointing.
 
naticus said:
Disappointing.
Click to expand...

don't be ridiculous, we are talking about DX11 titles when in this graph we see an average 20% improvement over 780Ti.
DX12 titles will give much more boost in performance due to the feature level 12 support.

This card is a CUDA/OpenCL monster compared to previous gen, 65% faster than a 780Ti.

one things I don't understoot. what damn 2560x1600 is?
what monitor has this resolution?
 
sblantipodi said:
don't be ridiculous, we are talking about DX11 titles when in this graph we see an average 20% improvement over 780Ti.
DX12 titles will give much more boost in performance due to the feature level 12 support.

This card is a CUDA/OpenCL monster compared to previous gen, 65% faster than a 780Ti.

one things I don't understoot. what damn 2560x1600 is?
what monitor has this resolution?
Click to expand...


"Lots" of 30" monitors.
 
sblantipodi said:
don't be ridiculous, we are talking about DX11 titles when in this graph we see an average 20% improvement over 780Ti.
DX12 titles will give much more boost in performance due to the feature level 12 support.

This card is a CUDA/OpenCL monster compared to previous gen, 65% faster than a 780Ti.

one things I don't understoot. what damn 2560x1600 is?
what monitor has this resolution?
Click to expand...

15% over the 780ti is disappointing no matter how you spin it. And that gap gets lower the higher res you play at.

We will see when the AIB cards come out if they can do some serious overclocking right now the 980 is a disappointment, unless it hits the shelves @ $399USD.
 
naticus said:
15% over the 780ti is disappointing no matter how you spin it. And that gap gets lower the higher res you play at.

We will see when the AIB cards come out if they can do some serious overclocking right now the 980 is a disappointment, unless it hits the shelves @ $399USD.
Click to expand...

if it will cost like an high end card (GTX580-GTX680-GTX780) with a 15% improvement in old DX11 games that do not use the 1GB of RAM difference, with a 65% improvement in CUDA/OpenCL at 165W, I will buy two of it, at least.
 
naticus said:
15% over the 780ti is disappointing no matter how you spin it. And that gap gets lower the higher res you play at.

We will see when the AIB cards come out if they can do some serious overclocking right now the 980 is a disappointment, unless it hits the shelves @ $399USD.
Click to expand...
Yes...very disappointing...



Everyone, steer away from these cards!



Maybe I'll have a shot at scoring one payday next Wednesday...
 
sblantipodi said:
if it will cost like an high end card (GTX580-GTX680-GTX780) with a 15% improvement in old DX11 games that do not use the 1GB of RAM difference, with a 65% improvement in CUDA/OpenCL at 165W, I will buy two of it, at least.
Click to expand...

In your case going from the 500 series surely they will be a great investment --well only if they overclock better than 780 lightning/classified & 780ti -- and if not then a 780 might still be better if you can find one unless power draw is that important to you. Personally I couldn't care less about power draw, it's all about that price/performance/overclock.
 
naticus said:
In your case going from the 500 series surely they will be a great investment --well only if they overclock better than 780 lightning/classified & 780ti -- and if not then a 780 might still be better if you can find one unless power draw is that important to you. Personally I couldn't care less about power draw, it's all about that price/performance/overclock.
Click to expand...

this is your point, a 4GB card with DX12 support IMHO is way better than a 3GB card with DX11 also with the same performance in old games.
next gen is coming, DX12 and 4GB of VRAM will make the difference.
 
SnowBeast said:
Wow. 28nm and charging a premium. Couldn't really give the fans a break huh? Thanks for the performance increase. So really the 970/980 won't beat my SLI'ed 660Ti's. But I CAN SAVE POWAH! Fuck of Nvidia, fuck off. I switched to you for performance and stable drivers 10 years ago. Now we're POWAH SAVA's, for a crusty old 28nm and a price premium. Blow me. :mad:
Click to expand...

PqZ09XX.jpg


t1337Dude said:
Yes...very disappointing...

Everyone, steer away from these cards!
Click to expand...

I always enjoy the inevitable "NVIDIA U owe me" and "Not touching it unless 50% faster" anger posts that crop up every NVIDIA upgrade cycle. Like NV is really going to be impacted by a silent protest of people that weren't going to buy the cards anyway. The reality is these new cards are going to be snapped up and sold out faster than anyone can write #TitanConspiracyIsReal on a mirror with their mother's lipstick.
 
DPI said:
PqZ09XX.jpg




I always enjoy the inevitable "NVIDIA U owe me" and "Not touching it unless 50% faster" anger posts that crop up every NVIDIA upgrade cycle. Like NV is really going to be impacted by a silent protest of people that weren't going to buy the cards anyway. The reality is these new cards are going to be snapped up and sold out faster than anyone can write #TitanConspiracyIsReal on a mirror with their mother's lipstick.
Click to expand...


The other truth is that consumers are dumb and will lap up dog shit because of the marketing frenzy only to later bitch about it non-stop until the next product drops. The cycle never ends both ways.
 
The last poster was being facetious.

Personally, I'm not in the market, but I don't see this release as particularly disappointing. I wasn't expecting anything truly remarkable performance-wise.

For what it's worth, though, I think the 970 is going to make a great card for Steam Machines. That's a use case where power consumption is truly important, and the 970 seems like it slots in pretty nicely. The 980 is obviously a harder sell for existing 780 owners, and even 680 owners might want to consider either holding out for something a little beefier.
 
sblantipodi said:
this is your point, a 4GB card with DX12 support IMHO is way better than a 3GB card with DX11 also with the same performance in old games.
next gen is coming, DX12 and 4GB of VRAM will make the difference.
Click to expand...

Kepler supports DX12. So why do you keep bringing this up?

Oh nevermind, have fun with your new cards!
 
i'll just wait for all reviews to go live before i make any statements about any of the cards. Hopefully they show some improvements in all areas. But for now no reason to get upset before official reviews comes out.
 
naticus said:
Kepler supports DX12. So why do you keep bringing this up?

Oh nevermind, have fun with your new cards!
Click to expand...

Kepler support level API 12 not feature level 12.
Both support are necessary to get good performance on new titles that uses that APIs.
 
if the pricing rumors are true the $329 GTX 970 could be the steal of the century!
 
wonderfield said:
For what it's worth, though, I think the 970 is going to make a great card for Steam Machines. That's a use case where power consumption is truly important, and the 970 seems like it slots in pretty nicely. The 980 is obviously a harder sell for existing 780 owners, and even 680 owners might want to consider either holding out for something a little beefier.
Click to expand...

Excellent point.
 
sblantipodi said:
Kepler support level API 12 not feature level 12.
Both support are necessary to get good performance on new titles that uses that APIs.
Click to expand...
The first part is true, but the second part really isn't. Intel's recent demo suggests that DX12 — just the API itself — brings good improvements.

Emphasis on 'suggests'.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Not sure exactly.

GTX 770 ~ about equal or +5% faster than a GTX 680
GTX 780 about 25% faster than GTX 680
GTX 780 Ti is about another 10-15% faster than a GTX 780

So your guestimate is about right. Also Vram is a factor so at times you'll see a 780 Ti edge out 680 SLi by a little because it has a full GB more of usable vram.

I've seen reviews showing a 780 Ti being slightly slower than a SLi 680 setup.

Add 15-20% more performance than a 780 Ti and you have a GTX 980.

All things considered it should perform better than a 680 SLi setup (albeit 5%-10% faster probably) but since it's a single card with 2GB of more usable vram it's a win-win
Click to expand...
Well I have an OCed 680 with 4GB vram.

But let us do some math ;)

Let us say a 680 is 1 unit of power, so 2 680s is 2 units of power, (1+1)
Now let us be overly optimistic and say a 780Ti is 50% faster than a 680.
So that makes a 780Ti 1.5 units of power, (1+1*50%)

2 is greater than 1.5 so how is a 780Ti faster tghan 680 SLI?
 
wonderfield said:
The first part is true, but the second part really isn't. Intel's recent demo suggests that DX12 — just the API itself — brings good improvements.

Emphasis on 'suggests'.
Click to expand...

Kepler does not support feature level 12.
History is ciclycal, you can play dx12 games on Kepler but it will run slow because of the lack of the feature level 12 that isn't accelerated in hardware.
 
wonderfield said:
The first part is true, but the second part really isn't. Intel's recent demo suggests that DX12 — just the API itself — brings good improvements.

Emphasis on 'suggests'.
Click to expand...

But much like Mantle though the improvements seemed to be greatest in lower end hardware, like older CPU's with low and midrange discrete GPU's, iGPU's, APU's, etc. Whereas the high end discrete cards don't really benefit that much.
 
sblantipodi said:
Kepler does not support feature level 12.
Click to expand...
I'm aware. I said the same thing much earlier in the thread.

sblantipodi said:
History is ciclycal, you can play dx12 games on Kepler but it will run slow because of the lack of the feature level 12 that isn't accelerated in hardware.
Click to expand...
There's nothing to suggest that's the case. Intel's demo showed strong performance improvements without feature level 12_0 hardware. Microsoft's demo at the DX12 announcement, running on Kepler hardware, suggests the same.
 
polonyc2 said:
if the pricing rumors are true the $329 GTX 970 could be the steal of the century!
Click to expand...

Its hard to imagine that if NVIDIA were to MSRP 970's at $329 that Newegg and other retailers would be able to resist the temptation to gouge and mark them up to $399 or more. Especially if there's stock shortage (which at $329 there would be - they would be instantly gone, everywhere). I mean they certainly gouged on the AMD 280/290 line, especially while mining was hot.

That price just seems too good to be true.
 
rinaldo00 said:
Well I have an OCed 680 with 4GB vram.

But let us do some math ;)

Let us say a 680 is 1 unit of power, so 2 680s is 2 units of power, (1+1)
Now let us be overly optimistic and say a 780Ti is 50% faster than a 680.
So that makes a 780Ti 1.5 units of power, (1+1*50%)

2 is greater than 1.5 so how is a 780Ti faster tghan 680 SLI?
Click to expand...

It depends on vram usage in some games, at certain resolutions and in some scenarios. There isn't a 1:1 relationship comparing these 2 things.

Keep in mind SLi scaling is not 100% so by having 2 680s you are not getting 2x the performance of a single GTX 680. It happens from time ot time but different apps and scenarios will affect the SLi scaling. You may have an extra 40% performance or an extra 60% performance. It varies. SLi profiles impact this and so do apps and how well their optimized.

Basically alot of things play a role here. Do some research and look at some performance charts out there. You will find that a single GTX 780 Ti Wins some and loses some against a pair of GTX 680s. I would say that a 680 SLi setup is about 5% faster to 10% faster unless the application is a Vram whore. Single cards also don't suffer from microstuttering or frame pacing issues.

So what's just said above by me is an example. Factor in that a GTX 980 is about 15% faster than a GTX 780 Ti and that puts it definitely faster than a GTX 680 SLi setup by a little bit. Then it's a single card and has all the bennefits mentioned above vs a multi card setup.

All of this is coming from a owner of a GTX 680 SLi setup that is moving to a pair of GTX 980s. Why more than one you ask, More Powah!! :D
 
wonderfield said:
I'm aware. I said the same thing much earlier in the thread.


There's nothing to suggest that's the case. Intel's demo showed strong performance improvements without feature level 12_0 hardware. Microsoft's demo at the DX12 announcement, running on Kepler hardware, suggests the same.
Click to expand...

Because they don't used feature level 12 on feature level 11 hardware. This is obvious. I'm not saying anything new, is the same story since DX 4 that I can remember.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
It depends on vram usage in some games, at certain resolutions and in some scenarios. There isn't a 1:1 relationship comparing these 2 things.

Keep in mind SLi scaling is not 100% so by having 2 680s you are not getting 2x the performance of a single GTX 680. It happens from time ot time but different apps and scenarios will affect the SLi scaling. You may have an extra 40% performance or an extra 60% performance. It varies. SLi profiles impact this and so do apps and how well their optimized.

Basically alot of things play a role here. Do some research and look at some performance charts out there. You will find that a single GTX 780 Ti Wins some and loses some against a pair of GTX 680s. I would say that a 680 SLi setup is about 5% faster to 10% faster unless the application is a Vram whore. Single cards also don't suffer from microstuttering or frame pacing issues.

So what's just said above by me is an example. Factor in that a GTX 980 is about 15% faster than a GTX 780 Ti and that puts it definitely faster than a GTX 680 SLi setup by a little bit. Then it's a single card and has all the bennefits mentioned above vs a multi card setup.

All of this is coming from a owner of a GTX 680 SLi setup that is moving to a pair of GTX 980s :D
Click to expand...

Very true of WoT. SLI does nothing for that game, 2560x1600 = 40-60FPS, and sometimes dips to 20 at a start of the game.

That's why I'm looking into the GTX 980. Waiting for reviews....
 
DogChainX said:
Very true of WoT. SLI does nothing for that game, 2560x1600 = 40-60FPS, and sometimes dips to 20 at a start of the game.

That's why I'm looking into the GTX 980. Waiting for reviews....
Click to expand...

Is reviews supposed to be released this night?
 
Lord_Exodia said:
I have a feeling by the time 4k really gets some traction people will be moving on to 6k, 7k, or 8k.
<Shrug>
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from but for now 4k numbers are a great indication for the future & longevity of a card. 4k is quickly becoming the new 1080p. 5,6,7k will be niche until 8k becomes the new 4k.

4k market penetration is still very thin & we have not seen many variations on the standard. ie: no 3d 4k which means no 120Hz+ monitors, no ULMB, Gync is only just beginning to arrive, not enough IPS & higher quality panels @ 4k, no 21:9 A/R, OLED 4k hopefully someday as well & finally it'll be a while until prices fall in line for the masses. But still there is way more investment in 4k panels than anything since 1080p. I'm sure the industry will want to milk it for all they can before spending more to have an incremental bump to anything below 8k

While here @ [H] everyone wants to be on the bleeding edge the reality is we can't all be there :p With all the marketing hype behind 4k it will surely be the gold standard for years to come & hopefully console next gen will handle it native :D

Back OT Yeesh looks like GTX 970 for me, I can't wait to see the price hike us Canucks will have to pay. I don't think I'd want to stomach an after tax price of over $620 for a 980
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top