# Kepler Unbeatable: NVIDIA



## btarunr (Mar 1, 2012)

The tiresome wait for NVIDIA's next-generation GPU is drawing to a close. Or so suggests a Facebook wall post by NVIDIA Italy, which reads (in Italian, of course):


> Aspettando Kepler... pazienza, pazienza, pazienza che il momento giusto arriverà, e allora... non ce ne sarà più per nessuno!


That can be translated as "Waiting for Kepler ... patience, patience, patience, the right time will come, and then ... it will be unbeatable (sic)." From various sources we're hearing that there will be hectic activity surrounding the launch of NVIDIA's next-gen GPU in the weeks to come.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Sasqui (Mar 1, 2012)

Unbeatably delayed?


----------



## Prima.Vera (Mar 1, 2012)

Unbeatable power hungry?


----------



## claylomax (Mar 1, 2012)

I'm confused; I thought we were getting a stopgap card in the next few weeks and then the high end single gpu at the end of the year, what it is then?


----------



## JrRacinFan (Mar 1, 2012)

Unbeatably overpriced? Sorry had to join in.

@Clay

My thoughts also.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Mar 1, 2012)

Prima.Vera said:


> Unbeatable power hungry?



So your one of those people that think kepler will have a 300w TDP?


----------



## Recus (Mar 1, 2012)

Sasqui said:


> Unbeatably delayed?



What delayed?







2012 April


----------



## Chaitanya (Mar 1, 2012)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> So your one of those people that think kepler will have a 300w TDP?



even I am one of those person, but thanks to CUDA I am stuck with nVidia GPU's for a long-long time on my development PC atleast.


----------



## krisna159 (Mar 1, 2012)

cmon guys... dont judge something from rumours...  just sit back and relax.. and wait the kepler release.. after that you can see and judge...  am i right??


----------



## WhiteLotus (Mar 1, 2012)

unbeatable until the next generation comes along.


----------



## OneCool (Mar 1, 2012)

He we go....


----------



## Kaynar (Mar 1, 2012)

OF COURSE it MUST be unbeatable (with a 10-20% difference) if it comes three months after the 7970 otherwise it will be a failure.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Mar 1, 2012)

Sure, Nvidia, and Intel still has that 10 GHz pentium 4 coming.


----------



## micropage7 (Mar 1, 2012)

its just marketing words that makes you asking about it again and again
so far nvidia has better performance over their competitors, but its still interesting to know what nvidia gonna offer to the market


----------



## BlackOmega (Mar 1, 2012)

Unbeatable heat output.


----------



## Disparia (Mar 1, 2012)

It better be good nVidia!

I don't need dozens of "Kepler sucks!" search results when someone Googles my name.


----------



## pioneer (Mar 1, 2012)

> unbeatable until the next generation comes along.



like hd6970?w saw how hd6900 series beat fermi :lol:

in this time kepler has extremely powerfull sm architecture and much number cuda core's .... so we saw GK107 with 75w beating hd7770 and much power full than hd6850

kepler is clear winner


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Mar 1, 2012)




----------



## ZoneDymo (Mar 1, 2012)

Hot air much? (pun unintended)


----------



## Salsoolo (Mar 1, 2012)

it better be unbeatable 
sold my gtx470 and been sitting without a pc for 2 weeks!


----------



## Casecutter (Mar 1, 2012)

Recus said:


> What delayed?


The box showing it clearly over the first part of 2012 

That guy in the hoodie holding that green sign should and have it saying "When Jen Hsung tell us we've good... adequate silicon!" 



pioneer said:


> we saw GK107 with 75w beating hd7770 and much power full than hd6850


Where's what? 



ZoneDymo said:


> Hot air much? (pun unintended)


All this over a Facebook "wall post" by NVIDIA Italy.... really! An italian that knows, reposted by a guy from India really!


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 1, 2012)

Well, the longer it takes for nVidia to release Kepler, the more people will buy a 7000-series AMD video card and the more time AMD has to work on their next GPU line up. nVidia might be taking a long time, but unless they can make their CUDA cores less bulky (they're big in comparison to AMD's shaders,) they're going to keep running into the same problems Fermi ran into.

Remember all the hype for Bulldozer? Hello, Kepler.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 1, 2012)

Wrigleyvillain said:


> http://i.imgur.com/XW9by.jpg



nVidia sure isn't.


----------



## DarkOCean (Mar 1, 2012)

Recus said:


> What delayed?
> 
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hkfkzAlkf58/ThTXU1e-4cI/AAAAAAAAEak/lvcxNP22rIQ/s1600/1.png
> 
> 2012 April



That roadmap is so old it shows everything one year ahead.


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 1, 2012)

Nvidia is trailing far behind from the looks of it, it by all means should beat AMD bad at release just due to the fact the release will be about 6 months from Amd's 8xxx release.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 1, 2012)

jpierce55 said:


> Nvidia is trailing far behind from the looks of it, it by all means should beat AMD bad at release just due to the fact the release will be about 6 months from Amd's 8xxx release.



...but until it does, it's just nVidia making claims without a product.


----------



## 1c3d0g (Mar 1, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Well, the longer it takes for nVidia to release Kepler, the more people will buy a 7000-series AMD video card and the more time AMD has to work on their next GPU line up. nVidia might be taking a long time, but unless they can make their CUDA cores less bulky (they're big in comparison to AMD's shaders,) they're going to keep running into the same problems Fermi ran into.
> 
> Remember all the hype for Bulldozer? Hello, Kepler.



Don't compare that POS faildozer to Kepler. If Kepler is even half of what it's claimed, it'll be a good improvement over Fermi. Most probably it'll slaughter AMD once again, but I guess that's just too sensitive for the red fan boys, so they won't accept this.


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 1, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> ...but until it does, it's just nVidia making claims without a product.



Oh, I agree. Nvidia has pulled so many dishonest stunts in the years gone by that I am not surprised they keep talking bologna now. My concern is they are about to release something worse than a Fermi..... something along the lines of the 2900xt. By that I mean something that DOES perform, but at a price and power premium. This new 7770 competitor gives me some concern on that level as well. Equal price and performance and way more power consumption.

I lean more in the direction of an AMD fan, but Nvidia does need to compete to keep pricing ~reasonable.

Icedog, considering how late it is it NEEDS to be 30% over 7xxx's to be considered a slaughter, because 8xxx's won't be far off. I don't doubt AMD would release 8xxx's a little early if Kepler is not far beyond the 7's.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Mar 1, 2012)

Casecutter said:


> The box showing it clearly over the first part of 2012



The graph is not showing months but DP Gflops per Watt. Last news April hard launch that's only 3 months after Tahiti.


----------



## erocker (Mar 1, 2012)

AMD should just come out and say wait for HD 8XXX series. Patience, it will blow away Kepler. Meh, Nvidia is trolling and Bta... You took the bait.


----------



## EarthDog (Mar 1, 2012)

erocker said:


> AMD should just come out and say wait for HD 8XXX series. Patience, it will blow away Kepler. Meh, Nvidia is trolling and Bta... You took the bait.


But its worth $2...each and every rumor!


----------



## Thassodar (Mar 1, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Remember all the hype for Bulldozer? Hello, Kepler.



That is EXACTLY what I was thinking as I read this! Bulldozer talked a lot of smack before it launched, and underperformed terribly. I sense the same for Kepler, but with a higher price tag because fanboys will pay for anything with a green logo.


----------



## EarthDog (Mar 1, 2012)

Kepler will not be taken as a flop like BD generally is. BD couldnt find its way out of a wet paperbag in performance and power consumption. Most dont care about power consumption (I mean who the hell buys a $500 card and complains about the meager difference in their electric bill? Seriously).

My take is: Kepler will easily beat 7970, and will take up more power, and will likely be priced higher as well. So what. You get what you pay for, the best single GPU out.



> fanboys will pay for anything with a green logo.


 Seriously.. green, red, blue, doesnt matter ALL fanboys will pay for their brand. :shadedshu


----------



## jaredpace (Mar 1, 2012)

Recus said:


> What delayed?
> 
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hkfkzAlkf58/ThTXU1e-4cI/AAAAAAAAEak/lvcxNP22rIQ/s1600/1.png
> 
> 2012 April


----------



## erocker (Mar 1, 2012)

Bah, any "fanboy" just means ignorant to me. Enough of the fanboy talk already.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Mar 1, 2012)

I kinda remember another hype that was going about the 6000 series and how they gonna smoke the hot and power hungry Fermi. Fanboys will always create hype. This time NV is extremely quiet everything you see and hear comes from speculations and fanboys. But rather sooner than later we'll know what's going on.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Mar 1, 2012)

A Facebook post in Italian, wow you guys are really scrapping the barrel! Damn Nv stop shouting from the rooftops! 

But your all waiting for Kepler, just admit it.

Hell you might be able to get a 79x0 card for a reasonable price then... maybe.


----------



## bigfish492 (Mar 1, 2012)

I want so bad a Sapphire 7950 OC so all I can say is ''Welcome Mr Kepler''...


----------



## nt300 (Mar 1, 2012)

All this talk about Kepler is only targeted to try and slow down AMDs graphics cards sales which are outselling anything in the market.


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Mar 1, 2012)

bigfish492 said:


> I want so bad a Sapphire 7950 OC so all I can say is ''Welcome Mr Kepler''...



Then you best hope that it's not a repeat of the 5800 series situation that iirc went up a bit in price once Fermi finally dropped. Not that I'm saying I expect it to be... GTX 480 was hot, power hungry and underwhelming comparatively at the time, especially being 6 months "late". Note I am not knocking that card generally as I literally just bought one new for $200.


----------



## xenocide (Mar 1, 2012)

nt300 said:


> All this talk about Kepler is only targeted to try and slow down AMDs graphics cards sales which are outselling anything in the market.



Which is hilarious since the driver support for the 7xxx series is nothing short of terrible.  I am willing to wait for an Nvidia solution since I have had it with AMD Drivers BSoDing during installation and failing to properly install unless I take precautions that make it take upwards of an hour to do a driver upgrade.  Fermi was rushed, and was using a different design (Kepler is like an evolved Fermi) so most of the problems that presented themselves with Fermi, won't be as big, or even an issue with Kepler.  If all goes according to plan at least.


----------



## Andrei23 (Mar 1, 2012)

All this is doing is hyping Kepler up. The more they do it, the more they shoot themselves in the foot if it fails to deliver on all these big promises.


----------



## Casecutter (Mar 1, 2012)

Crap Daddy said:


> The graph is not showing months but DP Gflops per Watt. Last news April hard launch that's only 3 months after Tahiti.


Good point it's only showing about the number of Gflop/w they said they could of achieve over 2012. And by that they have nothing in the market to quantify that? 

Don't I look silly...



Andrei23 said:


> All this is doing is hyping Kepler up. deliver on all these big promises.


No promises just ask for "patience, patience, patience, the right time will come, and then ... it will be unbeatable" but at what...


----------



## newtekie1 (Mar 1, 2012)

Of course it will be unbeatable.  It isn't hard to get out a product that is better than your competition when you wait for your competition to release theirs so you have a line in the sand set for you to cross...


----------



## xenocide (Mar 1, 2012)

newtekie1 said:


> Of course it will be unbeatable.  It isn't hard to get out a product that is better than your competition when you wait for your competition to release theirs so you have a line in the sand set for you to cross...



Yea I mean it worked great for Bulldozer.


----------



## newtekie1 (Mar 1, 2012)

xenocide said:


> Yea I mean it worked great for Bulldozer.



NVidia is far more competent at making powerful GPUs than AMD is at making powerful CPUs...

It also helps if you have been in the lead the past two generations already, which AMD wasn't when Bulldozer came out, but nVidia is with Kepler.


----------



## Steevo (Mar 1, 2012)

Make sure to stir the pot to prevent scortching or clumps.


Nvidia news is like trying to read the tp after you wipe. Find the food in the crap.


----------



## Animalpak (Mar 1, 2012)

I think Nvidia is performing better, releases enough time between one generation and another.

AMD rather do nothing but churn GPU as a baker.


----------



## GSquadron (Mar 1, 2012)

Who is that idiot that translated the message?
Aspettando Kepler... pazienza, pazienza, pazienza che il momento giusto arriverà, e allora... non ce ne sarà più per nessuno! 
===
Waiting for Kepler ... patience, patience, patience, the right time will come, and then... there will be none!

Meaning they all will be sold! Is like publicity, nothing to do with kepler itself.
Open *google* translate see for yourself!


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 1, 2012)

Okay, everyone just stop for a second.

nVidia has not released Kepler, therefore it wins over nothing. That is all I am saying. For all of you who are saying "LOL KEPLERS SO FAST," is just talking out of their rear-end because there are no engineering samples or real sourced benchmarks to confirm any of these claims. The 7970 is *here* and it *performs well*. That is what matters right now, because until Kepler is actually release, no one will benefit from it, including nVidia.

So the next time any of you want to go bashing AMD, just remember at least their chip is already in production and in rigs as we speak.

Let's stop with the speculation and stick with the cold, hard, facts if you're going to go on a flaming rampage.


----------



## arnoo1 (Mar 1, 2012)

Who cares about power usage,
People who buy high end gpu's don't care about power usage, most hardware junkies get water blocks or aftermarket coolers

I know i can't wait and at the end of this year a will grap one, i don't care about price, my gtx275 is getting old as shit


----------



## Animalpak (Mar 1, 2012)

arnoo1 said:


> Who cares about power usage,
> People who buy high end gpu's don't care about power usage, most hardware junkies get water blocks or aftermarket coolers
> 
> I know i can't wait and at the end of this year a will grap one, i don't care about price, my gtx275 is getting old as shit



Well my Q9650 + X48 chipset are getting old as shit, bottleneck my GPU.


----------



## PopcornMachine (Mar 1, 2012)

Talk is unbeatably cheap.


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Mar 1, 2012)

newtekie1 said:


> NVidia is far more competent at making powerful GPUs than AMD is at making powerful CPUs...
> 
> It also helps if you have been in the lead the past two generations already, which AMD wasn't when Bulldozer came out, but nVidia is with Kepler.





Lead for maximum power yes, but not at sales.. I you look t he market share, AMD is in front of nVidia..

ANd I don't know why there was an annoucement, xbox720 and the new playstation will use AMD graphics, while the Wii 2 use also AMD graphics.. This is bad news for nVidia 

Anyway, AMD was good at making CPU, they just sit on their ass a few years ago, and now you see the what it does.

But for now, HD7970 is here, way faster than what nVidia has and that's it..it has a powerful overclocking capabilities, which gives spaces for newer cards or super overclocked edition. While nVidia doesn't show their Kepler, AMD might be preparing already, a new revision ot Tahiti GPU, for next gen. HD8000 will not be a new architecture, I'm sure. So it's just speculation about Kepler for now, they talk but show nothing.

I'm still waiting has I want cheaper card that will perform fine  (Or getting a second HD6950, at low price)


edit: for power consumption, AMD controlle their power consumption way better than nVidia.. If you run your rig 24/7, this could make a difference at the end of the year. anyway, mine run smooth idle but CPU 100% for BOINC


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 1, 2012)

I think as PSU prices go up that people may start having more concern over power consumption. Regardless, even if I am wrong.... IF you had 2 gpu's with the same performance/price why buy the one that uses more power? I would take a slight hit on performance for a good power saving.


----------



## NC37 (Mar 1, 2012)

Wow, AMD graphics fanboys out in force today. 

Heck I switch between sides often enough but AMD hasn't launched anything since 5000 series which really has been worth it to me. 6000 series was a bunch of rebadges in the mid and disappointments in other segments. 7000 hasn't fared much better. Fermi was a breath of fresh air after the G92 era. 

NV makes a lot of bonehead moves, why they lost all the contracts for the next consoles. But I can't fault them on building good GPUs. With Kepler moving them away from the monolithic monster GPU design, I can't wait to see it.


----------



## EarthDog (Mar 1, 2012)

I would take a slight hit on performance for a good power saving.

I would also get one single more powerful card vs SLI/Crossfire any day with a single monitor.

Why would you do that? Have you ever sat down and actually calculated out the difference between a GPU using 225W vs 300W over the course of a year? I would bet my paycheck says it would barely take your family to McDonalds* with typical GPU usage.


*Unless you participate in a distributed platform using the GPU.


----------



## cowie (Mar 1, 2012)

ChristTheGreat said:


> Lead for maximum power yes, but not at sales.. I you look t he market share, AMD is in front of nVidia..


Thats not true for the discrete market nv has a 10% lead over amd.
nvidia is the 1# seller of discrete desktop cards in the world.

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/22543
It does not help one bit in market terms that amd has the first  top dollar card out.
Now if they had luanched there 7870 that was priced 250usd and as fast as a 6970 they would have grabed market share...not with 470+ cards they wont.
470USD cards are les then 3% of total sales.
Its not first blow but the last blow that will call market winners
If you look at the whole picture igp and cpu/gpu combos then you would be right


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 1, 2012)

EarthDog said:


> I would take a slight hit on performance for a good power saving.
> 
> I would also get one single more powerful card vs SLI/Crossfire any day with a single monitor.
> 
> ...



I pay $0.15/kWh. That means it cost me near $36/month for a 300W GPU, if it ran 24/7. My power bill for January was $437.30. You bet performance/watt matters, because over 12 months, that's $432 to buy Mcdonalds with. I'll take that cheque, please, as it's easy enough for me personally to make it worthwhile. For the average user, it still might buy that McDonalds. I can't be bothered to guess at how long a GPU is at full load, on average...depends on the app and such, but it's be interesting to get a real number.


----------



## BlackOmega (Mar 1, 2012)

1c3d0g said:


> Don't compare that POS faildozer to Kepler. If Kepler is even half of what it's claimed, it'll be a good improvement over Fermi. Most probably it'll slaughter AMD once again, but I guess that's just too sensitive for the red fan boys, so they won't accept this.


 Why not? Remember when Fermi came out? All the nvidia fanboy's were like "wait for Fermi, wait for Fermi" So a lot of people did. Then when it tanked, arguably as hard as Bulldozer, ALL of the ATi video cards _sold out_ *overnight* --Literally. I watched the prices for the AMD cards rise, also overnight, $50+.

 So I'm willing to bet that nvidia saw how well the 79xx cards perform and realize they have work to do yet.


NC37 said:


> Wow, AMD graphics fanboys out in force today.
> 
> Heck I switch between sides often enough but AMD hasn't launched anything since 5000 series which really has been worth it to me. 6000 series was a bunch of rebadges in the mid and disappointments in other segments. 7000 hasn't fared much better. *Fermi was a breath of fresh air* after the G92 era.
> 
> NV makes a lot of bonehead moves, why they lost all the contracts for the next consoles. But I can't fault them on building good GPUs. With Kepler moving them away from the monolithic monster GPU design, I can't wait to see it.


More like hot air. Ever see the YouTube video where a guy cooked an egg on his 480?


cadaveca said:


> I pay $0.15/kWh. That means it cost me near $36/month for a 300W GPU, if it ran 24/7. My power bill for January was $437.30. You bet performance/watt matters, because over 12 months, that's $432 to buy Mcdonalds with. I'll take that cheque, please, as it's easy enough for me personally to make it worthwhile. For the average user, it still might buy that McDonalds. I can't be bothered to guess at how long a GPU is at full load, on average...depends on the app and such, but it's be interesting to get a real number.


Bah you're better off spending that money on power than McDonalds anyway.


----------



## HD64G (Mar 1, 2012)

pioneer said:


> like hd6970?w saw how hd6900 series beat fermi :lol:
> 
> in this time kepler has extremely powerfull sm architecture and much number cuda core's .... so we saw GK107 with 75w beating hd7770 and much power full than hd6850
> 
> kepler is clear winner



You simply forget that 6990 did beat 590. So, Fermi was beaten in the end. Somehow, I suspect the same thing is going to happen again this time...


----------



## EarthDog (Mar 1, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> I pay $0.15/kWh. That means it cost me near $36/month for a 300W GPU, if it ran 24/7. My power bill for January was $437.30. You bet performance/watt matters, because over 12 months, that's $432 to buy Mcdonalds with. I'll take that cheque, please, as it's easy enough for me personally to make it worthwhile. For the average user, it still might buy that McDonalds. I can't be bothered to guess at how long a GPU is at full load, on average...depends on the app and such, but it's be interesting to get a real number.



You are absolutely right. However most dont run distu platforms or their GPU 24/7365. You made an example out of the worst case scenario in which I specifically mentioned was an exception. Good job! 

So now, do the math and help this guy out... 75W difference (225W vs 300W) Lets just say 100W to make it easy on me (college is over, so is mathssssssssssssz). So divide your numbers by 66%. Thats the difference if you run 24/7/365 between a 225W card and a 300W card (142.xx /year or ~$12 /month at your rate assuming my math is correct.

Now, if someone plays games 2 hours /day for 30 days (so 60 hours vs 720 /month), you can see the Mcdonalds analogy coming CLEARLY in to focus I would imagine... which is why I put the "*" disclaimer there in the first place to prevent replies like yours!


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Mar 1, 2012)

If some rumours and slides are to believed Keplar will have 100% increase in performance over the 5** series for the respectable replacements, I seriously hope this is true as I would buy double the performance of an 570 for the same price, nevermind TWIMTBP, TWTUTBM = the way they used to be made


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 1, 2012)

EarthDog said:


> I would take a slight hit on performance for a good power saving.
> 
> I would also get one single more powerful card vs SLI/Crossfire any day with a single monitor.
> 
> ...



Why would you not??? Keep in mind I said slight hit for GOOD power savings.


----------



## EarthDog (Mar 1, 2012)

I'm not sure you are understanding how negligible the differences are for 'average' users. If one want sto save a few dollars /year on your electric bill, why the hell are they buying $500 GPU's in the first place?

Do the math to see what the differences actually are (Its about $1 /month if used ~2 hours /day @ .15 kw/h...again assuming my math is correct from above). 

If you are trying to save $12 a year, i would say not to buy a $500 GPU instead.


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 1, 2012)

HD64G said:


> You simply forget that 6990 did beat 590. So, Fermi was beaten in the end. Somehow, I suspect the same thing is going to happen again this time...



Really?

In the summary page (7970 xfire review), the 590 beats the 6990 at every resolution. Here's the 2560 res summary.







I'm only putting this in to stop blatant mistruths.  Lots of people give the 590 a hard time but it runs cooler and quieter by most accounts and the very own TPU round up for the link above puts 590 as better for every resolution.  But as always, it's really game dependant.

I'm pissed NV is holding back info on Kepler as I'm looking to upgrade but it's so close I need to wait to see how Kepler performs as I'm keen to see a 7970 price drop.  Unless Kepler is way better (doubt it).

If Kepler bombs, I'm buying 2 7970's just as a capitalist reaction!!


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Mar 1, 2012)

NC37 said:


> Wow, AMD graphics fanboys out in force today.
> 
> Heck I switch between sides often enough but AMD hasn't launched anything since 5000 series which really has been worth it to me. 6000 series was a bunch of rebadges in the mid and disappointments in other segments. 7000 hasn't fared much better. Fermi was a breath of fresh air after the G92 era.




 exatctly what ive been thinking, and no need for bickering amd is winning now for a bit then its nvidias turn for a bit then lo and behold its amd's turn add nauseum

I just hope nvidia dont fully drop the ball, as amd did with its hype management when releasing BD, the fallout of such a thing could prove expensive to us enthusiasts

ie kepler Needs to be good and worthy of such hype ,either way tho i will deffinately be buying a low to mid kepler card for some folding/hybrid physx action(gits will obv make this bit hard unnecessarily)



EarthDog said:


> I'm not sure you are understanding how negligible the differences are for 'average' users.



to be fair dude you are on TPU and this is a place not oft visited by the Average user, i want it all personally max performance and minimal power draw, the power pulled can be highly regarded by some as it is by me, if you fold and can run two cards 24/7 with a smaller psu and cheaper case doors can open(welll not doors more folding oportunities)


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Mar 1, 2012)

NC37 said:


> 6000 series was a bunch of rebadges in the mid and disappointments in other segments



Not completely. The crossfire scaling was much improved and overall great which is what led me to go through the hassle and hit of selling my 5850 to buy two 6850s instead of just getting another of the former. Very happy with that $300 purchase for the power for the last year and likely would still be using them for awhile but I wanted to try the NV drivers again for a change and also want more vram than 1GB. So I just found a cheap 480 for now (lots out there too; soon to be even more surely come April...).


----------



## magibeg (Mar 1, 2012)

Reading the original post here, I can't help but feel like we gained no new information. This is just nvidia saying: "Hey guys! The stuff we make will be awesome!"


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Mar 1, 2012)

magibeg said:


> Reading the original post here, I can't help but feel like we gained no new information. This is just nvidia saying: "Hey guys! The stuff we make will be awesome!"



bang on

70 posts later the dabate rages on


----------



## xenocide (Mar 1, 2012)

I don't think anyone can really refute that Nvidia will offer more powerful cards, they have pretty reliably, but the real question is both cost and relative performance.  If you could pay $1000 for a 680 that has 30-40% higher performance than an HD7970, you're not exactly compelled to buy it.  If Nvidia can match AMD at price points and offer much higher performance they will crush the competition.

I have high hopes for Kepler and plan on getting a 6xx series GPU to give Nvidia a shot since the last time I had an Nvidia card was a 7900GS a few years back.  Nvidia is just trying to keep people in anticipation of their new line, but given the problems with the 7xxx series and drivers I've seen around, I don't think they really have much to worry about.


----------



## sclera (Mar 1, 2012)

Reasons to care about Kepler:


AMD price drops


----------



## Crap Daddy (Mar 1, 2012)

What you will see in April or maybe even sooner won't destroy the 7970. Instead it will bring something that NV was behind: perf/watt and maybe also a better perf/dollar. Don't expect a "performance" chip to beat AMD's top dog. That will come later with the GK110. I think GK104 will be (at stock clocks) between the 7950 and the 7970.


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 1, 2012)

EarthDog said:


> I'm not sure you are understanding how negligible the differences are for 'average' users. If one want sto save a few dollars /year on your electric bill, why the hell are they buying $500 GPU's in the first place?
> 
> Do the math to see what the differences actually are (Its about $1 /month if used ~2 hours /day @ .15 kw/h...again assuming my math is correct from above).
> 
> If you are trying to save $12 a year, i would say not to buy a $500 GPU instead.



More power consumption boils down to more than energy savings per month. I don't even look at it that way. I think about a smaller power supply, a power supply lasting longer, and a quieter system due to less heat output.

This argument is pointless though, for all we truly know Kepler could use very little energy.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 2, 2012)

I like how everyone is ranting about a chip where there is almost no factual information available yet. How many times do I have to say that we're still waiting on Kepler and that it does no one any good until it is released. The 7970 is here and it is doing great, that is more I can say for Kepler at the moment...


----------



## EarthDog (Mar 2, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> to be fair dude you are on TPU and this is a place not oft visited by the Average user, i want it all personally max performance and minimal power draw, the power pulled can be highly regarded by some as it is by me, if you fold and can run two cards 24/7 with a smaller psu and cheaper case doors can open(welll not doors more folding oportunities)


 This place is littered with average users. But the point you may have missed is how I defined an average user and the exception(s). Take a minute and reread my posts again.

And for the rest of your post, sorry, Im tired as hell but that makes no sense to me... 



jpierce55 said:


> More power consumption boils down to more than energy savings per month. I don't even look at it that way. I think about a smaller power supply, a power supply lasting longer, and a quieter system due to less heat output.
> 
> This argument is pointless though, for all we truly know Kepler could use very little energy.


You looked at it that way up top.. now the numbers come out so more reasons come out? Timely... 

PSU wont last longer with a slightly lesser load, my god man..pass the dutchy this way.

So you are going to go out and buy a lesser PSU? Does that make sense...?

The discussion (not an argument) is relevent.. or it was when you brought up those points... now...... its not?


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

Crap Daddy said:


> Don't expect a "performance" chip to beat AMD's top dog. That will come later with the GK110. I think GK104 will be (at stock clocks) between the 7950 and the 7970.



Well I fully expect that to happen actually. GF114 (aka fully enabled GF104) did match AMD's top dog, Cypress. 40 nm didn't play very well for Nvidia, BUT if everything had gone well, their performance chip GF104 would have matched AMD's fastest, and GF100 would have been 40% faster (like GF110 is).

Most people don't take these things into account, but they are very important, because that's what Nvidia is going to aim for this time around too. Why? Because of the die size, we know they are aiming at the same kind of improvement they tried with GF104 over the previous gen. And we know how that would had played if 40 nm had not become a nightmare for Nvidia. AMD released Barts and Cayman, replacements that were significantly bigger than the chips they were replacing at the time that Nvidia only "fixed" GF100/104, and that's why GF110/GF114 vs Cypress/Juniper is a comparison no one does, but in order to better understand what are the posibilities with Kepler it's very very important to note them, because once again the die sizes are the same. Conditions are pretty much the same, except that 28nm is simply much better.

This time around things are supposed better for Nvidia, and GCN is clearly less efficient (for gaming) than VLIW, so 10% here + 10% here and GK104 could easily end up being significantly faster than HD7970.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Mar 2, 2012)

EarthDog said:


> This place is littered with average users. But the point you may have missed is how I defined an average user and the exception(s). Take a minute and reread my posts again.
> 
> And for the rest of your post, sorry, Im tired as hell but that makes no sense to me...



ok , but im not sure what kind of language your typeing their dude , try again

I will,,,,,, if Kepler runs Cooler and cheaper(low performance per watt) i can buy more of them, and the bits to run them,  Cheaper  grammar tart fag   yeh it was me, i said it

People really name their PC? ,er yes, same as i name my car ,but a different name   < much better version of a gay dig at someone , just so you know of course

and if something costs the earth, eats too much of ya life, and rapes you of any available cash, ya better call it something ,if not', your wife!.


----------



## sergionography (Mar 2, 2012)

Crap Daddy said:


> I kinda remember another hype that was going about the 6000 series and how they gonna smoke the hot and power hungry Fermi. Fanboys will always create hype. This time NV is extremely quiet everything you see and hear comes from speculations and fanboys. But rather sooner than later we'll know what's going on.



and they totaly did, when nvidia released fermi i thot it was a total flop, a gtx480 performed like 10-15% better than a hd5870 but consumed like 25% more energy(meaning it was less efficient) what that translates to is that amd with the same 5000series architecture couldve released a card that is 15% more powerful and 15%more power hungry to match a gtx480 and still be 10% better in consumption meaning they had a better architecture(tho fermi smoked amd in compute and GPGPU thats for sure)  
i see everyone in this thread neglecting power efficiency but it is actualy everything! not only for the enthusiast side but all across the spectrum, it is what one would look at to see which architecture is superior, a gtx580 is faster than a hd6970 but it also has a bigger die size and higher tdp and requires more power
comparing nvidia and amd in the past has always been like comparing american car engines to european car engines, europe having smaller refined engines(amd), while america replies with its big engines with MOAR POWER(nvidia) 
that being said its interesting to see nvidia changing directions with its new kepler chips


----------



## seronx (Mar 2, 2012)

GTX 580 also beats the 7970 but at 450W TDP

GTX 670 beats the 7970 @ 225W TDP bhutwhutevuh no one listens to little ole Seronx


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 2, 2012)

EarthDog said:


> This place is littered with average users. But the point you may have missed is how I defined an average user and the exception(s). Take a minute and reread my posts again.
> 
> And for the rest of your post, sorry, Im tired as hell but that makes no sense to me...
> 
> ...



It seems you are trolling at this point in time.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Mar 2, 2012)

It seems there are lots that are willing to accept rumors as truth and ride AMD and their crap drivers right off the ledge.


----------



## Makaveli (Mar 2, 2012)

I find the whole fan boy talk hilarious.

AMD and NV and been one upping each other for how many years now and it will continue aslong as they are making money.

Who really give a fuck who is faster aslong as it plays your games and doesn't break your wallet.

It really sad to have so much invested in a brand and unless you own stock what is the point. They both just want your money....


When I see NV released a product that is reviewed then this will catch my interest until then its all hearsay and utterly USELESS! 

Except to have you guys fighting like little girls watching oprah...


----------



## jamsbong (Mar 2, 2012)

Unbeatably hyped up. LOL


----------



## alexsubri (Mar 2, 2012)

Yup ... I saw this coming a mile away !


----------



## dj-electric (Mar 2, 2012)

This happens every year the past 10 years...
For crying out loud, please... :shadedshu

And mister bellerano, ur in trouble mate


----------



## nt300 (Mar 2, 2012)

xenocide said:


> Which is hilarious since the driver support for the 7xxx series is nothing short of terrible.  I am willing to wait for an Nvidia solution since I have had it with AMD Drivers BSoDing during installation and failing to properly install unless I take precautions that make it take upwards of an hour to do a driver upgrade.  Fermi was rushed, and was using a different design (Kepler is like an evolved Fermi) so most of the problems that presented themselves with Fermi, won't be as big, or even an issue with Kepler.  If all goes according to plan at least.


I never had problem with ATI and now AMD drivers. I know nobody that had problems. The only time I remember was back then with the good old 9700 Pro, 9800 Pro and 9800 XT where the 1st driver release were a little buggy, but got resolved quick.

*Blast from the Past*


----------



## Primalz (Mar 2, 2012)

nshittya will  for sure be charging way to much for the news cards when the come out...
Remember the XFX 8800 ultra XXX. here in Australia they were over $1000.


----------



## Jonap_1st (Mar 2, 2012)

nt300 said:


> I never had problem with ATI and now AMD drivers. I know nobody that had problems. The only time I remember was back then with the good old 9700 Pro, 9800 Pro and 9800 XT where the 1st driver release were a little buggy, but got resolved quick.



same as mine, 

i've got 6 years experience with radeon. and what they had called buggy driver. i've only experienced not much than all the fingers in my hand..

what they faced isnt a buggy driver, but mostly crappy and bad configuration on their hardware ..


----------



## Depth (Mar 2, 2012)

Hahaha oh wow, you guys! I just got the CRAZIEST idea!

Why don't we all.... Get this. Why don't we all buy what we want to buy and not flame anyone who buys something else?


----------



## v12dock (Mar 2, 2012)

I do not expect spectacular results from Kepler


----------



## wolf (Mar 2, 2012)

Don't kock it till you see reviews, just because AMD laucnhed barely 3 months ago (without availiability) doesnt mean Nvidia had to... this is all going according to their roadmap remember, have some patience.

IMO given their stance these new cards will perform very well.


----------



## jamsbong (Mar 2, 2012)

wolf said:


> Don't kock it till you see reviews, just because AMD laucnhed barely 3 months ago (without availiability)



There are tons of 7970 available now. Just need the $$$ to get one.  The availability of new-gen GPU is normally scarce on the first month or so especially if they are top-end cards. Mid-ends and lower tend to have lots of availability because they're easier to manufacture and get 'quality pass'.

I agree that we should wait for the reviews before judging Kepler.


----------



## seronx (Mar 2, 2012)

jamsbong said:


> I agree that we should wait for the reviews before judging Kepler.



How can you "judge" Kepler if you don't know the architecture for Kepler?!  It's not like CPU architectures where AMD & Intel go out of their way to say we introduced this and that ISA and we now have an ops cache!  I have yet to see a whitepaper of Nvidia Kepler or a die shot of AMD Graphic Core Next.

Also, you would have to wait for reviews anyway because whitepapers aren't always accurate.


----------



## D4S4 (Mar 2, 2012)

4 pages of spam generated by a single stupid facebook post... good going tpu.


----------



## sergionography (Mar 2, 2012)

seronx said:


> How can you "judge" Kepler if you don't know the architecture for Kepler?!  It's not like CPU architectures where AMD & Intel go out of their way to say we introduced this and that ISA and we now have an ops cache!  I have yet to see a whitepaper of Nvidia Kepler or a die shot of AMD Graphic Core Next.
> 
> Also, you would have to wait for reviews anyway because whitepapers aren't always accurate.



well this isnt about kepler being bad, both nvidia and amd had good products in the past and always been on par. however kepler has to be better than the hd7000 since its coming out almost 4-5 month after. with graphic cards refreshing every 12month that is a huge chunk of time for extra tricks.
but on the long run for some1 like me who usually cant afford the top end it really makes no difference what i buy since competition in the market almost always leads to the cards being priced accordingly.
i guess it all nails down to the features and which architecture you prefer(certain games favor some architectures to other)


----------



## seronx (Mar 2, 2012)

Luckily GK104 isn't the top end

The top-end for the HPC community doesn't come with GK104.



> "This is going to be an exciting year in Oak Ridge as our users take advantage of our new XK6 architecture
> and get ready for the new NVIDIA Kepler GPUs in the fall," Wells said. "A lot of work by many people is
> beginning to pay off."



GK104 Spring
GK106 Summer
GK112(GK110) Fall

Also, (my) projections:

GK104 Max ASIC Stock Clock: 3,891.2 GFlops/ 3.8 TFlops, $299 ~342 mm²
GK112 Max ASIC Stock Clock: 9,830.4 GFlops/ 9.8 TFlops, $499-599 ~544mm²
2 x GK112 Max ASIC Stock Clock: 15,974.4 GFlops/ 16 TFlops, $899-999 2x ~544mm²


----------



## Shurakai (Mar 2, 2012)

seronx said:


> GTX 580 also beats the 7970 but at 450W TDP
> 
> GTX 670 beats the 7970 @ 225W TDP bhutwhutevuh no one listens to little ole Seronx



Might want to check W1zzard's 7970 review, nope.

Less hate more love for competition!


----------



## visz963 (Mar 2, 2012)

newtekie1 said:


> NVidia is far more competent at making powerful GPUs than AMD is at making powerful CPUs...
> 
> It also helps if you have been in the lead the past two generations already, which AMD wasn't when Bulldozer came out, but nVidia is with Kepler.



Nvidia was not in the lead for years. GTX580 is not a better solution than 6970, it is just bigger and hotter. Ever heard of the sweetspot strategy from AMD? If you want to compare where they are, compare a 6990 and an 590. This is where they have an equal power barrier.


----------



## radarblade (Mar 2, 2012)

It is unbeatable! AMD just keeps on messing up things. First with their 8 core CPU's that cant complete against Sandy Bridge and secondly launch the 7XXX series ahead of Nvidia's Kepler when they know the green team will obliterate them!


----------



## Recus (Mar 2, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> Who is that idiot that translated the message?
> Aspettando Kepler... pazienza, pazienza, pazienza che il momento giusto arriverà, e allora... non ce ne sarà più per nessuno!
> ===
> Waiting for Kepler ... patience, patience, patience, the right time will come, and then... there will be none!
> ...











nt300 said:


> I never had problem with ATI and now AMD drivers. I know nobody that had problems. The only time I remember was back then with the good old 9700 Pro, 9800 Pro and 9800 XT where the 1st driver release were a little buggy, but got resolved quick.
> 
> *Blast from the Past*
> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9vgJ1nwu_xA/S774cTvfPTI/AAAAAAAACv0/aS3Sc2AGETE/s1600/ati_vs_nvidia.jpg
> ...


----------



## Horrux (Mar 2, 2012)

arnoo1 said:


> Who cares about power usage,
> People who buy high end gpu's don't care about power usage, most hardware junkies get water blocks or aftermarket coolers
> 
> I know i can't wait and at the end of this year a will grap one, i don't care about price, my gtx275 is getting old as shit



Actually, if you had to change your PSU in order to accommodate your new videocard, I bet you would care. A lot.




cadaveca said:


> I pay $0.15/kWh. That means it cost me near $36/month for a 300W GPU, if it ran 24/7. My power bill for January was $437.30. You bet performance/watt matters, because over 12 months, that's $432 to buy Mcdonalds with. I'll take that cheque, please, as it's easy enough for me personally to make it worthwhile. For the average user, it still might buy that McDonalds. I can't be bothered to guess at how long a GPU is at full load, on average...depends on the app and such, but it's be interesting to get a real number.


You are forgetting that for 7-8 months of the year at least, you are heating your house, and the power used by your GPU is power you're not using to heat your house, so remove at least half of what you calculated. Moreover, you likely NEED it to run a lot less than 24/7... Say 4 hours a day to be reasonable, remove 5/6th of that... A more realistic figure for that $432 thus becomes $36 a year. Well, you can buy one game. With the power your whole GPU uses. But say the difference in power consumption between competing GPUs is a whopping 20%.... Then your $36 a year becomes $7.20. Barely enough for a taste of the shit they serve at McDonalds.




HD64G said:


> You simply forget that 6990 did beat 590. So, Fermi was beaten in the end. Somehow, I suspect the same thing is going to happen again this time...


It's almost guaranteed it will, given that AMD can pack higher performance in the power budget of a single card, due to their higher performance per watt. This is another reason why power consumption DOES matter. A LOT.



NdMk2o1o said:


> If some rumours and slides are to believed Keplar will have 100% increase in performance over the 5** series for the respectable replacements, I seriously hope this is true as I would buy double the performance of an 570 for the same price, nevermind TWIMTBP, TWTUTBM = the way they used to be made


Not gonna happen. The engineers are really making the best they can out of the current tech. Given that, there is no way you can expect anything close to 100% increase in performance. In the early days of a technology, engineers still learn new tricks and can squeeze huge performance gains from their chips. Take for example the 486DX2 VS 486. Pretty much double the performance. But the difference between a 2600k and a 2700k? A gain of 2.9%. Yay. But that's what a new CPU model gives you today. Same with GPUs. 25% to 33% between generations is bound to become more the norm than the exception, and soon progress will get closer to 25%, then 20%... And so on.



the54thvoid said:


> Really?
> 
> In the summary page (7970 xfire review), the 590 beats the 6990 at every resolution. Here's the 2560 res summary.
> 
> ...


Again using "All resolutions"... How about comparing them at 1080p or 1920x1200 or 2560xwhatever? You think people are getting $750 video cards to play at 1024x768?



xenocide said:


> I don't think anyone can really refute that Nvidia will offer more powerful cards, they have pretty reliably, but the real question is both cost and relative performance.  If you could pay $1000 for a 680 that has 30-40% higher performance than an HD7970, you're not exactly compelled to buy it.  If Nvidia can match AMD at price points and offer much higher performance they will crush the competition.
> 
> I have high hopes for Kepler and plan on getting a 6xx series GPU to give Nvidia a shot since the last time I had an Nvidia card was a 7900GS a few years back.  Nvidia is just trying to keep people in anticipation of their new line, but given the problems with the 7xxx series and drivers I've seen around, I don't think they really have much to worry about.


Of course nV will release cards at prices that put AMD's products to shame. That's because AMD is milking its business the way they should. Once Kepler is actually available, AMD will adjust its pricing to compete. Yes, that should mean price reductions...


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

Horrux said:


> Again using "All resolutions"... How about comparing them at 1080p or 1920x1200 or 2560xwhatever? You think people are getting $750 video cards to play at 1024x768?



Lol, blind much? He posted 2560x1600, where it's 7% faster, just saying.


----------



## Horrux (Mar 2, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Lol, blind much? He posted 2560x1600, where it's 7% faster, just saying.



I stand corrected. Damn, and I just got told by my optometrist that my glasses are perfect, yesterday. Can't trust anyone these days.


----------



## Super XP (Mar 2, 2012)

Kepler Unbeatable: NVIDIA?
Are they kidding 

OK I like to buy one now please. Oh, but wait they are not available.


----------



## Horrux (Mar 2, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Kepler Unbeatable: NVIDIA?
> Are they kidding
> 
> OK I like to buy one now please. Oh, but wait they are not available.



Unbeatable at being impossible to find?


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Kepler Unbeatable: NVIDIA?
> Are they kidding
> 
> OK I like to buy one now please. Oh, but wait they are not available.



"*Waiting* for Kepler ... *patience*, patience, patience, the right time will come, *and then* ... it will be unbeatable"

It's not exactly like he is saying that Kepler is out now, considering that in 1 sentence he used 4 different expressions that point out that it's not here yet.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 2, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> "*Waiting* for Kepler ... *patience*, patience, patience, the right time will come, *and then* ... it will be unbeatable"
> 
> It's not exactly like he is saying that Kepler is out now, considering that in 1 sentence he used 4 different expressions that point out that it's not here yet.



Last I checked the 7970 was still on the market and Kepler is waiting to be released. What is that again? AMD actually has a working product? Kepler might *end up being faster* but it's taking them enough time to release it and in that time a lot more people are willing to buy a 7970 instead of waiting for Kepler.

Plus, hype is just hype. It's not making the GTX 6xx series come any faster. When push comes to shove, at least the 7970 has verified numbers on how it performs. nVidia has released no numbers and has just said it is fast. If anyone else said something like that, the community would laugh, and honestly, nVidia is no different.

I laugh at Kepler until it can prove to me that it will deliver.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Last I checked the 7970 was still on the market and Kepler is waiting to be released. What is that again? AMD actually has a working product? Kepler might *end up being faster* but it's taking them enough time to release it and in that time a lot more people are willing to buy a 7970 instead of waiting for Kepler.
> 
> Plus, hype is just hype. It's not making the GTX 6xx series come any faster. When push comes to shove, at least the 7970 has verified numbers on how it performs. nVidia has released no numbers and has just said it is fast. If anyone else said something like that, the community would laugh, and honestly, nVidia is no different.
> 
> I laugh at Kepler until it can prove to me that it will deliver.



All I read is bla bla bla, already said a million times bla bla. We know that Kepler has not been released yet, I don't think we need just one more guy saying it and it's not what is being discused, it's not news, but it's performance. Kepler might come later, it might even be late (delayed) but we don't really know, since no schedule has ever been released (besides 2012). But the fact of the matter is that it will posibly be much faster, or that's what the Nvidia guy said. He also said we will have to wait, which is what my post was pointing out. "Nvidia" is not saying that they *have* a faster product, it's saying that they *will have* a faster product. If true no amount of "but it's been released yet? AMD has. bla bla" is going to change that fact.

As to sales, if you want to be any realistic, AMD is not selling many HD7000 cards right now, because the ramp up has just begun. In Q2 AMD and Nvidia will sell much much more cards than in Q1, and in Q3 a lot more than that and in Q4 a hell of a lot more, so much more, in fact, that the number of HD7000 cards sold in these couple of months will be negligible. And that's the reality, that's why Nvidia is not in a rush to release Kepler. This is not HD5000 with new DX11, 30% faster than previous gen, et al. HD7000 and Kepler bring very little "new", and HD7970 is 10-15% faster than previous gen, so there's no rush. Even HD5000 didn't sell so much more than GTX400 when factoring the fact that it was more than double the time for sale. And HD6000 vs GTX500, GTX500 won in sales, by a good margin too, considering its higher ASP. So they are not in a rush at all.


----------



## faramir (Mar 2, 2012)

Prima.Vera said:


> Unbeatable power hungry?



My thoughts exactly.


----------



## Horrux (Mar 2, 2012)

If it's unbeatable, it means it's the last architecture nVidia will EVER release.


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 2, 2012)

newtekie1 said:


> Of course it will be unbeatable.  It isn't hard to get out a product that is better than your competition when you wait for your competition to release theirs so you have a line in the sand set for you to cross...



My exact thoughts.


----------



## HD64G (Mar 2, 2012)

the54thvoid said:


> Really?
> 
> In the summary page (7970 xfire review), the 590 beats the 6990 at every resolution. Here's the 2560 res summary.
> 
> ...



http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_590/23.html

This is the first review of 590 and it loses slightly from 6990 on top resolutions. So, it's a matter of driver maturing. Besides that, in the graph you posted difference in tiny (3-4%) and efficiency is much better for AMD...


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 2, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> All I read is bla bla bla, already said a million times bla bla. We know that Kepler has not been released yet, I don't think we need just one more guy saying it and it's not what is being discused, it's not news, but it's performance. Kepler might come later, it might even be late (delayed) but we don't really know, since no schedule has ever been released (besides 2012). But the fact of the matter is that it will posibly be much faster, or that's what the Nvidia guy said. He also said we will have to wait, which is what my post was pointing out. "Nvidia" is not saying that they *have* a faster product, it's saying that they *will have* a faster product. If true no amount of "but it's been released yet? AMD has. bla bla" is going to change that fact.
> 
> As to sales, if you want to be any realistic, AMD is not selling many HD7000 cards right now, because the ramp up has just begun. In Q2 AMD and Nvidia will sell much much more cards than in Q1, and in Q3 a lot more than that and in Q4 a hell of a lot more, so much more, in fact, that the number of HD7000 cards sold in these couple of months will be negligible. And that's the reality, that's why Nvidia is not in a rush to release Kepler. This is not HD5000 with new DX11, 30% faster than previous gen, et al. HD7000 and Kepler bring very little "new", and HD7970 is 10-15% faster than previous gen, so there's no rush. Even HD5000 didn't sell so much more than GTX400 when factoring the fact that it was more than double the time for sale. And HD6000 vs GTX500, GTX500 won in sales, by a good margin too, considering its higher ASP. So they are not in a rush at all.



Well.......arriving almost half a year later it must by all means beat amd by a decent margin don't you think? It's so obvious.
What would be nice is if nvidia prices gk110 the same as hd7970.


----------



## GSquadron (Mar 2, 2012)

Recus said:


>



That guy is wrong too and looks like a lot of people don't know italian.... 
How can these people be so foolish to accept that translation???
and he is surely an italian, but "EXTREME ENTHUSIAST" of Nvidia

EDIT: lol, now i am seeing even in english is translated: there will be no cut for everyone


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> Well.......arriving almost half a year later it must by all means beat amd by a decent margin don't you think? It's so obvious.
> What would be nice is if nvidia prices gk114 the same as hd7970.



I don't know in your universe, but in mine 3 months is not half a year. 

And no just because you come later, that does not mean that it has to or that you can be faster*. GPUs are designed and manufactured in a process that lasts 3-5 years, and this process ends whenever it ends. And you can't change much either later on on the cycle, in the last 3 months you can change nothing at all, except clocks and fully knowing that changing clocks will affect yields. So GK104 is what Nvidia expected to be at least 2+ years ago, accomodated to the real/final state of 28nm process and maybe slightly adjusting clocks to fine tune where in the performance scale they want to end up. And that's it. According to them such cycle ended up making GK104 "unbeatable" by AMD. I'm sure that means that AMD does not have anything coming soon that will be able to beat it, including a higher clocked HD7980 or something like that.

* GeForce FX? HD2900? Bulldozer? etc etc Also every AMD card has launched later than Nvidia's in the past years (usually 1-2 months later) except HD5000 and they were never faster. When a card is launched, has nothing to do with how it performs, the physical limits that the manufacturing process imposes is pretty much the only thing that matters (and because of this which die size you choose to go with) and 28 nm will be used now and until 20 nm launches in 2 years or so. neither AMD or Nvidia will be able to make a much better chip than they already did. They can make a bigger one and a slightly better one, but no magic will be made. For example, the best that AMD did 12+ months after Cypress was Cayman, a chip that despite using the VLIW4 advantage over VLIW5 and being ~15% bigger than Cypress, it's only 15% faster. So they achieved what the process allowed them to do.


----------



## radrok (Mar 2, 2012)

I can confirm that the translation is a bit forced on the unbeatable part, and yes I am italian born.


----------



## Horrux (Mar 2, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> I don't know in your universe, but in mine 3 months is not half a year.
> 
> And no just because you come later, that does not mean that it has to or that you can be faster*. GPUs are designed and manufactured in a process that lasts 3-5 years, and this process ends whenever it ends. And you can't change much either later on on the cycle, in the last 3 months you can change nothing at all, except clocks and fully knowing that changing clocks will affect yields. So GK104 is what Nvidia expected to be at least 2+ years ago, accomodated to the real/final state of 28nm process and maybe slightly adjusting clocks to fine tune where in the performance scale they want to end up. And that's it. According to them such cycle ended up making GK104 "unbeatable" by AMD. I'm sure that means that AMD does not have anything coming soon that will be able to beat it, including a higher clocked HD7980 or something like that.
> 
> * GeForce FX? HD2900? Bulldozer? etc etc Also every AMD card has launched later than Nvidia's in the past years (usually 1-2 months later) except HD5000 and they were never faster. When a card is launched, has nothing to do with how it performs, the physical limits that the manufacturing process imposes is pretty much the only thing that matters (and because of this which die size you choose to go with) and 28 nm will be used now and until 20 nm launches in 2 years or so. neither AMD or Nvidia will be able to make a much better chip than they already did. They can make a bigger one and a slightly better one, but no magic will be made. For example, the best that AMD did 12+ months after Cypress was Cayman, a chip that despite using the VLIW4 advantage over VLIW5 and being ~15% bigger than Cypress, it's only 15% faster. So they achieved what the process allowed them to do.



The 7970 was launched 3 months ago...


----------



## erocker (Mar 2, 2012)

Horrux said:


> The 7970 was launched 3 months ago...



January 9th was three months ago?


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 2, 2012)

erocker said:


> January 9th was three months ago?



technically, it launched in December. not quite 3 months, but close.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 2, 2012)

It will at least be half a year until Kepler actually gets released? That's a lot of extra sales for AMD.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

Even taking late December (21st I think?) as launch, which we know it is not really true.

21st january == 1 month
21st feb == 2 months
23rd march == 3 months

Far really far from half a year. And if it's hard launch in the end, it's more like 2 months.


----------



## claylomax (Mar 2, 2012)

erocker said:


> January 9th was three months ago?



Yep; time flies, doesn't it?


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

claylomax said:


> Yep; time flies, doesn't it?



 No it's not, January 9 was not 3 months ago, it's not even been 2 full months (~60 days) since then.

So while the "time flies" expression is usually true, it's pretty obvious that it does not apply in this case. Apparently time passes reaaaaaaaaaaally sloooooow for some people when they are waiting for a release.


----------



## claylomax (Mar 2, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> No it's not, January 9 was not 3 months ago, it's not even been 2 full months (~60 days) since then.
> 
> So while the "time flies" expression is usually true, it's pretty obvious that it does not apply in this case. Apparently time passes reaaaaaaaaaaally sloooooow for some people when they are waiting for a release.



Joking? Irony? Sarcasm?
Where the heck are you from?


----------



## Horrux (Mar 2, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Even taking late December (21st I think?) as launch, which we know it is not really true.
> 
> 21st january == 1 month
> 21st feb == 2 months
> ...



Like nVidia never paper launches huh?

And when we say Kepler, we mean, ANY card based on the new architecture?  Or are we waiting for the top offering? In that case it will be closer to 6 months.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

Horrux said:


> Like nVidia never paper launches huh?
> 
> And when we say Kepler, we mean, ANY card based on the new architecture?  Or are we waiting for the top offering? In that case it will be closer to 6 months.



They have specifically said they won't paper launch. It could be true it could be false. If it's false, then we start countinf from Dec 21 and it's 3 months later. If it's true and they do not paper launch, we count from Jan 9 and it's 2 months and a half.

And we are talking about the part that is to compete with HD7970 obviously. GK104.

@claylomax

No I'm not joking, it's 2 months. Or are you talking about the "reaaaaally sloow" thing? Then yes it's irony, but not only necessarily pointing at you. Some people are saying that Kepler comes half a year later, so clearly time passes slowly for them.

EDIT: YOU were joking, using sarcasm, no? I think I get it now. Or not. Whatever it is, I blame british humour.


----------



## claylomax (Mar 2, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> They have specifically said they won't paper launch. It could be true it could be false. If it's false, then we start countinf from Dec 21 and it's 3 months later. If it's true and they do not paper launch, we count from Jan 9 and it's 2 months and a half.
> 
> And we are talking about the part that is to compete with HD7970 obviously. GK104.
> 
> ...


Yes finally you get it.
But I'm confused, I thought the Kepler high end single gpu was to be launched at the end of the year; so what's coming in April then? A stopgap solution.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 2, 2012)

claylomax said:


> Yes finally you get it.
> But I'm confused, I thought the Kepler high end single gpu was to be launched at the end of the year; so what's coming in April then? A stopgap solution.



GK110 is going to release at the end of the year. My theory is GK100 is going to release in April/May/June. Basically a repeat of what happened with Fermi (but high-end and performance positions changed). No one ever heard of GF110 tape out, but considering when it released, it had to tape out around the same time of the year that GK110 did. This time around it would be GK100 the tape out that was missed. GK104 too btw.

And yeah british humour, no one gets it.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 3, 2012)

Unbeatbly tired and yawning at the talks of how great kepler is. Reminds me of how effective the POTUS talks are of spurring the economy which are lies.


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 3, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> I don't know in your universe, but in mine 3 months is not half a year.
> 
> And no just because you come later, that does not mean that it has to or that you can be faster*. GPUs are designed and manufactured in a process that lasts 3-5 years, and this process ends whenever it ends. And you can't change much either later on on the cycle, in the last 3 months you can change nothing at all, except clocks and fully knowing that changing clocks will affect yields. So GK104 is what Nvidia expected to be at least 2+ years ago, accomodated to the real/final state of 28nm process and maybe slightly adjusting clocks to fine tune where in the performance scale they want to end up. And that's it. According to them such cycle ended up making GK104 "unbeatable" by AMD. I'm sure that means that AMD does not have anything coming soon that will be able to beat it, including a higher clocked HD7980 or something like that.
> 
> * GeForce FX? HD2900? Bulldozer? etc etc Also every AMD card has launched later than Nvidia's in the past years (usually 1-2 months later) except HD5000 and they were never faster. When a card is launched, has nothing to do with how it performs, the physical limits that the manufacturing process imposes is pretty much the only thing that matters (and because of this which die size you choose to go with) and 28 nm will be used now and until 20 nm launches in 2 years or so. neither AMD or Nvidia will be able to make a much better chip than they already did. They can make a bigger one and a slightly better one, but no magic will be made. For example, the best that AMD did 12+ months after Cypress was Cayman, a chip that despite using the VLIW4 advantage over VLIW5 and being ~15% bigger than Cypress, it's only 15% faster. So they achieved what the process allowed them to do.



I said almost half a year, and that's because i've seen, that the gtx580 replacement comes hard launch in late may - june
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-kepler-gk104-geforce-gtx-670ti-arrives-march-2012-performs-gtx-580-hd7950/
(* GeForce FX? HD2900? Bulldozer? etc etc) All of them, exceptions that just proof the rule, and i'm talking about nvidia.
And wtf? 3 months? GK110 comes in april? you sure? i don't think so.

(it's only 15% faster.) Cayman uses the same 40nm, so that was to be expected.

EDITread latest posts), i was talking about GK100, which as you say comes in may - june "almost half a year"
GK104, "gtx680", will be "faster" (not that you can notice it), like 15% more than 7970, so it won't blow it out of the water, that's great because the price won't go up. (i based on the speculations that gtx670ti will be between 7970 and 7950, gtx680 won't be like MUCH faster than its sibling)
And then the question, will gk104 be as good at o/c as hd79XX?, seeing that 7950 can go as high as 1100 Mhz that's 40% give or take.....
For one i would be so much happy to see the gtx670 ti at U$299, and faster than 7950, that would mean hd7870 U$250 atm.


----------



## Super XP (Mar 3, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> "*Waiting* for Kepler ... *patience*, patience, patience, the right time will come, *and then* ... it will be unbeatable"
> 
> It's not exactly like he is saying that Kepler is out now, considering that in 1 sentence he used 4 different expressions that point out that it's not here yet.


I was being  Obviously NVIDIA will do anything to try and slow down Radeon sales. Hopefully Kepler is fast so AMD will be forced to drop prices


----------



## Munki (Mar 3, 2012)

Everyone just shut up until we see benchmarks. Damn vultures.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 3, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> I said almost half a year, and that's because i've seen, that the gtx580 replacement comes hard launch in late may - june
> http://wccftech.com/nvidia-kepler-gk104-geforce-gtx-670ti-arrives-march-2012-performs-gtx-580-hd7950/
> (* GeForce FX? HD2900? Bulldozer? etc etc) All of them, exceptions that just proof the rule, and i'm talking about nvidia.
> And wtf? 3 months? GK110 comes in april? you sure? i don't think so.
> ...



I didn't say GK110 in April. I said GK100 in April and that's pure speculation on my part, so don't take it as anything other than that.

But GK100/110 is not the chip that will go against HD7970, that one is a lot faster and more heavily oriented for compute, so I don't know why anyone would want to compare them. The competition to Tahiti is GK104 (same die size) and again according to rumors it is significantly faster. 15% is not much? lol then I guess HD7970 is worthless to you and so must be HD7950, but you are apparently praising them, so I'm confused.

Regarding GTX670 or 680, etc. No one is sure of what the name for the highest binned GK104 SKU will be, but that's the one that is suposed to be 45-50% faster than GTX580, not any GK100/110 based card. So "Kepler" as in cards that will compete or beat HD7000 gen of cards will launch in March/April, so definitely NOT 6 months later.


----------



## leonard_222003 (Mar 3, 2012)

If they are not in a price fixing deal we could expect the new Nvidia monster to make AMD start a price war wich could benefit whoever wants a new card.


----------



## Chappy (Mar 3, 2012)

Unbeatable Price?


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 3, 2012)

Munki said:


> Everyone just shut up until we see benchmarks. Damn vultures.



Most reasonable thing that anyone has said in this entire thread.


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Mar 3, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Unbeatbly tired and yawning at the talks of how great kepler is. Reminds me of how effective the POTUS talks are of spurring the economy which are lies.



First of all, I guess you haven't been paying attention to any economic news lately. Secondly, no politician-especially the president who cannot even actually make policy-has much effect on the ginormous and complex US economy in the first place. Thirdly, take it to GN.


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 3, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> I didn't say GK110 in April. I said GK100 in April and that's pure speculation on my part, so don't take it as anything other than that.
> 
> But GK100/110 is not the chip that will go against HD7970, that one is a lot faster and more heavily oriented for compute, so I don't know why anyone would want to compare them. The competition to Tahiti is GK104 (same die size) and again according to rumors it is significantly faster. 15% is not much? lol then I guess HD7970 is worthless to you and so must be HD7950, but you are apparently praising them, so I'm confused.
> 
> Regarding GTX670 or 680, etc. No one is sure of what the name for the highest binned GK104 SKU will be, but that's the one that is suposed to be 45-50% faster than GTX580, not any GK100/110 based card. So "Kepler" as in cards that will compete or beat HD7000 gen of cards will launch in March/April, so definitely NOT 6 months later.



Well.. definetly we weren't talking about the same thing 
GK104, two gpu's gtx670ti and gtx680(read the link) or whatever, do you really think there will be like a 40% distance between them? really?, at the most 30%(very unlikely), and hd7970 being faster(leaked info says gtx670ti is faster than gtx580 and 7950 NOT 7970) than gtx670ti, why would you think gtx680 would be a LOT faster than 7970?. 
I'm not "praising" anything, i'm at the side of whoever offers me the best bang for the buck, i've had both. 
You think 15% will make a difference? LOL, can you see differences between 30 and 34 fps?
If you take a look at my pc you'll see i have a 2.5 year old card, because i always get something that offers me at least 250% and the same or less price, but for some reason in the last 2.5 years nothing like that has came out.

I so don't care about who beats who, BUT i think you'll agree that they have to be close in order to keep prices in check. If one of the two is too far from the other, then prices skyrocket. no good for anyone of us but for nvidia or amd.

Take a look at this, they compare the highest binned gk104sku(gtx680) against gtx580, 7970 and 7950, guess what? 13.8% "faster"(not that you'll ever notice, but faster nonetheless) than 7970 at 1080p , will it widen or shrink at 2560x1536? dunno.
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-kepler-gk104-gaming-performance-figures-exposed-faster-gtx580-hd7900-series/

And if those are nvidia handpicked benchmarks.............go figure.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 3, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> Well.. definetly we weren't talking about the same thing
> GK104, two gpu's gtx670ti and gtx680(read the link) or whatever, do you really think there will be like a 40% distance between them? really?, at the most 30%(very unlikely), and hd7970 being faster(leaked info says gtx670ti is faster than gtx580 and 7950 NOT 7970) than gtx670ti, why would you think gtx680 would be a LOT faster than 7970?.
> I'm not "praising" anything, i'm at the side of whoever offers me the best bang for the buck, i've had both.
> You think 15% will make a difference? LOL, can you see differences between 30 and 34 fps?
> ...



When you say "leaked information" you mean some nVidia fan boy who lives in their mother's basement in China? Please site your source.

Oh, let me cite your source for you...
http://we.pcinlife.com/thread-1831876-1-1.html
Do you really trust a person posting on a forum without a source? I call shenanigans.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 3, 2012)

Wrigleyvillain said:


> First of all, I guess you haven't been paying attention to any economic news lately. Secondly, no politician-especially the president who cannot even actually make policy-has much effect on the ginormous and complex US economy in the first place. Thirdly, take it to GN.



The economy is in a better place than when Obama took office. I think we need to focus on the topic at hand...


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 3, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> When you say "leaked information" you mean some nVidia fan boy who lives in their mother's basement in China? Please site your source.
> 
> Oh, let me cite your source for you...
> http://we.pcinlife.com/thread-1831876-1-1.html
> Do you really trust a person posting on a forum without a source? I call shenanigans.



Seems legit! lol

Anyway, based on the rumors of the 670ti performance, it seems, 680, will be slightly faster than 7970.
Why is it so many people want one of the to brands to be so superior to the other?
Don't you see that'll only benefit those companies? ffs....


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 3, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> Seems legit! lol
> 
> Anyway, based on the rumors of the 670ti performance, it seems, 680, will be slightly faster than 7970.
> Why is it so many people want one of the to brands to be so superior to the other?
> Don't you see that'll only benefit those companies? ffs....



I like basing my assumptions on factual information with *real* sources and as so many people have been kind enough to point out, nVidia hasn't released any information about it. :shadedshu


----------



## radrok (Mar 3, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> Why is it so many people want one of the to brands to be so superior to the other?



Fanboys want it so badly, don't ask me why but they exist.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 3, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> Well.. definetly we weren't talking about the same thing
> GK104, two gpu's gtx670ti and gtx680(read the link) or whatever, do you really think there will be like a 40% distance between them? really?, at the most 30%(very unlikely), and hd7970 being faster(leaked info says gtx670ti is faster than gtx580 and 7950 NOT 7970) than gtx670ti, why would you think gtx680 would be a LOT faster than 7970?.
> I'm not "praising" anything, i'm at the side of whoever offers me the best bang for the buck, i've had both.
> You think 15% will make a difference? LOL, can you see differences between 30 and 34 fps?
> ...



We are talkng about a different thing. I'm not saying GTX580 < GTX670 Ti < HD7970 < GTX680. Basically 670 Ti == 680. Highest GK104 SKU will be either of those (both are not going to exist at the same time) and that one is said to be much faster than HD7970. I'm just going by recent rumours, not that I know anything myself.

Also you are using very very old info for your performance figures, and those charts are suposed to have been demostrated fake. I'm going by the recent news appearing here in TPU in the last couple days and a comment by Kyle Bennet from [H] who said it's (up to) 45-50% faster than GTX580. I had a hard time believing that it is so much faster, at first, but it's not imposible considering the specs (2x the Tflops, 2x the texturing power, etc.) so that's why I included that info in my post.

There's been so many rumours that at this point GK104 could be slower than HD7800 or up to 50% faster than GTX580. Since rumors tend to be more accurate as we come close to release, I'm going with the latest info, and that's 50% faster, but bear in mind I do not personally believe that's the case, although I made my calculations based on specs some time ago and it's within the upper range of what's posible.

PS: And yes I notice a massive difference between 30 and 34 fps. At low fps every single one of them improves the experience incredibly. Every extra frame is a blessing. And by your logic AMD shouldn't have bothered with HD7970 or HD7950 because they're "only" ~15% faster that GTX580 and HD6970, respectively. That's why I made that comment about praising them. In the end you'll always find a card that is 10-15% apart from one another, so by your logic, if you don't see a difference between 30 and 34 fps, you'd see any between 27 and 30? And what about 25 and 27? How low can we go (where do you draw the line)? Oh but maybe someone (many actually) can't bare anything below 40, 50, 60... and it's going to be different with every game too, so what's enough? Basically what I'm saying is that a card that is 15% faster than another one, it's 15% faster always (on average) and it has it's place.


----------



## erocker (Mar 3, 2012)

I think both companies should take a break for a year or so, so I can enjoy my console ports.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 3, 2012)

Wrigleyvillain said:


> First of all, I guess you haven't been paying attention to any economic news lately. Secondly, no politician-especially the president who cannot even actually make policy-has much effect on the ginormous and complex US economy in the first place. Thirdly, take it to GN.



cry me a river dude.


----------



## Horrux (Mar 3, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> We are talkng about a different thing. I'm not saying GTX580 < GTX670 Ti < HD7970 < GTX680. Basically 670 Ti == 680. Highest GK104 SKU will be either of those (both are not going to exist at the same time) and that one is said to be much faster than HD7970. I'm just going by recent rumours, not that I know anything myself.
> 
> Also you are using very very old info for your performance figures, and those charts are suposed to have been demostrated fake. I'm going by the recent news appearing here in TPU in the last couple days and a comment by Kyle Bennet from [H] who said it's (up to) 45-50% faster than GTX580. I had a hard time believing that it is so much faster, at first, but it's not imposible considering the specs (2x the Tflops, 2x the texturing power, etc.) so that's why I included that info in my post.
> 
> ...



The difference between 30 and 34 fps is not massive. It is there, but it is relatively subtle. Now between 30 and 45 fps, that's another matter. I consider anyone who will pay $500 to go from 30 to 34 fps in most of his games an utter fool, or someone with just lots and lots of money to waste.


----------



## xenocide (Mar 3, 2012)

Horrux said:


> The difference between 30 and 34 fps is not massive. It is there, but it is relatively subtle. Now between 30 and 45 fps, that's another matter. I consider anyone who will pay $500 to go from 30 to 34 fps in most of his games an utter fool, or someone with just lots and lots of money to waste.



My thoughts exactly.  I could have upgraded to like an HD6950 or a 560Ti, but it never seemed worth it coming from an HD5850.  I don't really care for upgrades unless they give me upwards of a 20% performance gain, and if I'm gonna spend $400-500, it better be like a 50% gain.


----------



## magibeg (Mar 3, 2012)

xenocide said:


> My thoughts exactly.  I could have upgraded to like an HD6950 or a 560Ti, but it never seemed worth it coming from an HD5850.  I don't really care for upgrades unless they give me upwards of a 20% performance gain, and if I'm gonna spend $400-500, it better be like a 50% gain.



I personally follow the *atleast double* path myself. Currently have a 4890 so it would seem it's about time.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 3, 2012)

Horrux said:


> The difference between 30 and 34 fps is not massive. It is there, but it is relatively subtle. Now between 30 and 45 fps, that's another matter. I consider anyone who will pay $500 to go from 30 to 34 fps in most of his games an utter fool, or someone with just lots and lots of money to waste.



Maybe you don't see a difference but there is a difference and for me it's massive. It's the line between a slideshow and a somewhat bearable experience. Now between 50 and 60 that's another thing. Anyway you don't pay $500 for 4 fps and never said that. But paying an extra $50-100 or so would be totally worth it if you are paying $450 (say HD7950) in the frst place. 15% more $ for 15% more fps is OK.

Personally I don't spend that much, far from it, but even in my price range I'd pay x% more for x% more performance. IMO your case is a falacy, like I said because there's no card that will give you 30-34 fps in all games. On some games, a particular card might be enough, in others it won't and let's not start talking about settings. So like I said a card that s faster it's faster and always will. It's not my bussiness or your bussiness to decide if those extra $100 are worth it for the people who are willing to pay $400++ for a card.

When you say "anyone who will pay $500 to go from 30 to 34 fps in most of his games an utter fool" you are calling a fool to ALL enthusiasts, because that's what you get. A 15% increment no matter if it's at 30 fps or at 200, its a substantial difference and worth paying for some people. At 30 fps is going to be ever more important than at 200 plain and simple.

According to your logic overclocking is useless, because you'll never achieve much more than 15% more actual performance and the best you would do is obtain those extra 3-4 fps.



xenocide said:


> My thoughts exactly.  I could have upgraded to like an HD6950 or a 560Ti, but it never seemed worth it coming from an HD5850.  I don't really care for upgrades unless they give me upwards of a 20% performance gain, and if I'm gonna spend $400-500, it better be like a 50% gain.



And this and what I'm saying are not mutually exclusive either. I'd do the same, but that does not mean that a 15% difference is meaningless. If you have to choose between HD7970 and GTX580 for the exact same price (and you can pay that price) you'll go with the Radeon. If the difference is 15% or less, much of the same.


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 3, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> We are talkng about a different thing. I'm not saying GTX580 < GTX670 Ti < HD7970 < GTX680. Basically 670 Ti == 680. Highest GK104 SKU will be either of those (both are not going to exist at the same time) and that one is said to be much faster than HD7970. I'm just going by recent rumours, not that I know anything myself.
> 
> Also you are using very very old info for your performance figures, and those charts are suposed to have been demostrated fake. I'm going by the recent news appearing here in TPU in the last couple days and a comment by Kyle Bennet from [H] who said it's (up to) 45-50% faster than GTX580. I had a hard time believing that it is so much faster, at first, but it's not imposible considering the specs (2x the Tflops, 2x the texturing power, etc.) so that's why I included that info in my post.
> 
> ...



So, they're going to release a single card mmm, even so, i agree with you, it is not going to be much faster than 7970 IF, it is faster, and that i haven't found anywhere, i've only seen and read that's going to be faster than gtx580 and 7950, NOT 7970, maybe if you give me that link where the gtx670 ti is said to be faster than 7970.

And no my friend, 30 or 34 fps aren't noticeable, not in my experience.
Maybe W1zzard can answer that? w1zzard, is that a massive difference?

i made this scale xD:
10 - 15% slight
25% noticeable
30 - 35% much faster
40 - 50% massive
60 - 80% outrageous!

....and hey, who said being an extreme enthusiast doesn't include being a fool?, of course they're fools who have lots of money or doesn't have any responsabilities, that spend 500 bucks for 4 fps..!


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 3, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> So, they're going to release a single card mmm, even so, i agree with you, it is not going to be much faster than 7970 IF, it is faster, and that i haven't found anywhere, i've only seen and read that's going to be faster than gtx580 and 7950, NOT 7970, maybe if you give me that link where the gtx670 ti is said to be faster than 7970.



No they will release more than one card, but it will most definitely be either GTX680 + GTX670 OR GTX670 Ti and GTX670 non-Ti. maybe 670 Ti and 660 Ti, but IMO that's less likely, but again this is my opinion.

Most rumors say it will be faster (the fastest one), only a few say that GK104 will not beat HD7970.



> And no my friend, 30 or 34 fps aren't noticeable, *not in my experience*.
> Maybe W1zzard can answer that? w1zzard, is that a massive difference?



In your experience. Definitely not in mine. And W1zzard cannot answer that question. It may be noticeable for him or not, but there is no unique answer to that.


> i made this scale xD:
> 10 - 15% slight
> 25% noticeable
> 30 - 35% much faster
> ...



I mostly agree with that scale in general terms, except when we are talking about 30 fps. In that case ANY increase is massively noticeable to me.


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 3, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Even taking late December (21st I think?) as launch, which we know it is not really true.
> 
> 21st january == 1 month
> 21st feb == 2 months
> ...



everybody needs to keep in mind the rumor when this thread started was an April release.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 3, 2012)

jpierce55 said:


> everybody needs to keep in mind the rumor when this thread started was an April release.



You have a point, but from what I've read it's always been late March or fist week of April. Anyway the march 23 release date article was posted in TPU front page the same day as this thread afaik, so imo, no excuse.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 3, 2012)

jpierce55 said:


> everybody needs to keep in mind the rumor when this thread started was an April release.



No, people have to keep in mind that there is absolutely no legit information on Kepler and everything that everyone is talking about are simply rumors, that is all.

Kepler very well could be fast, I'm getting annoyed with all the people who say that Kepler *is* fast without any valid basis for that assumption. All I've been saying is that the 7970 is here and it performs. Kepler is not, therefore it doesn't.


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 3, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> No, people have to keep in mind that there is absolutely no legit information on Kepler and everything that everyone is talking about are simply rumors, that is all.
> 
> Kepler very well could be fast, I'm getting annoyed with all the people who say that Kepler *is* fast without any valid basis for that assumption. All I've been saying is that the 7970 is here and it performs. Kepler is not, therefore it doesn't.



I don't disagree. It is just speculation and rumor.

I do suspect Kepler to be faster, but only a little....... for the same reason I did not expect 7970 to be faster than what it is. G-cards are getting faster than what most people need and they are not going to make a card so fast you don't need to upgrade for several years in the future. Unfortunately considering the supposed problem with GPU yields I doubt it will be much cheaper if at all compared to AMD. It IS all SPECULATION.


----------



## jpierce55 (Mar 3, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> So, they're going to release a single card mmm, even so, i agree with you, it is not going to be much faster than 7970 IF, it is faster, and that i haven't found anywhere, i've only seen and read that's going to be faster than gtx580 and 7950, NOT 7970, maybe if you give me that link where the gtx670 ti is said to be faster than 7970.
> 
> And no my friend, 30 or 34 fps aren't noticeable, not in my experience.
> Maybe W1zzard can answer that? w1zzard, is that a massive difference?
> ...



I think 4 fps would not be noticeable if the g-card stayed in that consistent range. If it that was the minimum fps I doubt it would be noticeable either. If that is the max it would be. 30fps vs. 34fps average is hard to compare without knowing min. and max fps values. Would I pay 4-500 for that difference??? No way!


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 3, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> No, people have to keep in mind that there is absolutely no legit information on Kepler and everything that everyone is talking about are simply rumors, that is all.
> 
> Kepler very well could be fast, I'm getting annoyed with all the people who say that Kepler *is* fast without any valid basis for that assumption. All I've been saying is that the 7970 is here and it performs. Kepler is not, therefore it doesn't.



If you don't like speculation don't read. We are not here to please you, we are here to talk about what we like. And TPU posts this kind of news posts because they like us to come in and discuss. If you don't like it send a request to btarunr.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 4, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> If you don't like speculation don't read. We are not here to please you, we are here to talk about what we like. And TPU posts this kind of news posts because they like us to come in and discuss. If you don't like it send a request to btarunr.



I'm trying to put objectiveness to the thread. I understand that people like to speculate on what is going to go on. I'm just pointing out that people shouldn't get all worked up for information that isn't necessarily valid and that the fan-boy battle is just getting a bit ridiculous and a little common sense will do a speculation thread some good.

If you're trying to say that my comments aren't welcome then so be it.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 4, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> If you're trying to say that my comments aren't welcome then so be it.



No, I'm saying that you should respect others' comments. If reading the opinion f other people annoys you then don't read it.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 4, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> No, I'm saying that you should respect others' comments. If reading the opinion f other people annoys you then don't read it.



I am, I'm just pointing out that there is no information on Kepler to base such assumptions on. Please note the first post of this thread as a simple translation basically saying "when it comes, it will be fast," and I have no dispute with that. It is the things people say as if they're factual and spreading information that is simply false. I'm annoyed with comments like yours with your domineering attitude, and you are basically saying my comments aren't welcome and I don't appreciate you pushing back every time I try to explain my reasoning.


----------



## erocker (Mar 4, 2012)

Just keep on topic everyone. There's no need to get feelings involved since the one's making the millions by selling video cards aren't even taking part in the discussion. Be cool.


----------



## Aquinus (Mar 4, 2012)

erocker said:


> Just keep on topic everyone. There's no need to get feelings involved since the one's making the millions by selling video cards aren't even taking part in the discussion. Be cool.



Sorry for any inconvenience, erocker. Just trying to be objective in a sea of chaos.


----------



## Goodman (Mar 4, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> i made this scale xD:
> 10 - 15% slight
> 25% noticeable
> 30 - 35% much faster
> ...



I agree...

As for my scale would be

+5-10 fps , is that all?
+10-15 fps , it's a start
+15-20 fps , that is good
+20-25 fps , now you're talking
+25-30 fps , awesome this is what i was waiting for
30+ fps , just take my money...

As for Kepler high end i believe it will outperform the 7970 but probably not in every benchs or games maybe 70% of it


----------



## sergionography (Mar 4, 2012)

Goodman said:


> I agree...
> 
> As for my scale would be
> 
> ...



well remember that gk110 was supposed 2 be nvidia's top end, but it wont be coming till the end of the year
so if gk104 beats hd7900 it will be by a small margin.

there is no way nvidia will downgrade and use 256bit on their high end when a gtx 580 has 384bit bandwidth

so that being said i agree with you totally on the last statement, and to add to it i expect most situations that are memory hungry and bandwidth hungry will favor amd
and higher resolutions definitely will favor amd as well for its 3gb and 384bit bandwidth

so for general use bandwidth doesnt linearly affect performance , so nvidia might do ok


----------

