Thursday, October 4th 2012
GeForce GTX 650 Ti Final Specifications Out
Sources among retailers confirmed what could be the finalized specifications of NVIDIA's upcoming GeForce GTX 650 Ti graphics processor. Some of these specifications were first leaked when Newegg.com accidentally listed Galaxy GTX 650 Ti GC. According to the sources, the GTX 650 Ti, which is based on the 28 nm GK106 silicon, will carry the ASIC label "GK106-220," it will be configured with 768 CUDA cores (and not 576, as earlier believed).
GeForce GTX 650 Ti will have a narrower 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, holding 1 GB of memory. The source also revealed NVIDIA-reference clock speeds to be 925 MHz core, with 1350 MHz (5.40 GHz GDDR5-effective) memory, churning up 86.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. The chip's TDP is rated at 110W, and cards based on it feature one 6-pin PCIe power connector. According to older reports, the GTX 650 Ti is slated for October 9.
Source:
Hermitage Akihabara
GeForce GTX 650 Ti will have a narrower 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, holding 1 GB of memory. The source also revealed NVIDIA-reference clock speeds to be 925 MHz core, with 1350 MHz (5.40 GHz GDDR5-effective) memory, churning up 86.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. The chip's TDP is rated at 110W, and cards based on it feature one 6-pin PCIe power connector. According to older reports, the GTX 650 Ti is slated for October 9.
58 Comments on GeForce GTX 650 Ti Final Specifications Out
Maybe Expensive and surely bottlenecked, like the GTX660 is. Where is the powerconsumption-advantage here?
I will buy a 2GB 7850 or 7850 before the 650Ti Release because the Prices will go up after that.
And GTX660 bottleneck? Not at all. The 660 Ti is bottlenecked in some situations, 660 is not. GTX650 will be bottlenecked? Maybe, but not as sure as 660 Ti:
660 Ti SP to MC ratio - 1344 / 192 bit = 7
650 Ti SP to MC ratio - 768 / 128 bit = 6
670 - 1344 / 256 = 5.2
680 - 1536 / 256 = 6
Same ratio as the GTX 680. Now is the 680 bottleneck? hmmmmm yeeeeah. Did that small bottleneck prevent it from being highly competitive? Nope.
7750 $89
650 $117
7770 $120
You are paying 31% more for same performance (7750 vs 650), or
negligible more for +23% performance (7770, 650)
Hands down AMD wins here, 77x0 has been around for ages, so this is expected
7850 $175
660 $230
7870 $245
660Ti $300
+31% for +13% (7850, 660) AMD wins again
+6.5% for +5.7% (660, 7870) too close to call, esp when individual games are taken to account
+22% for 9.8% (7870, 660Ti) AMD wins again (see next bit)
7950 $300
660Ti $300
670 $380
7970 $390
680 $480
7970 Ghz $450
0% for +1% (7950, 660Ti) same
2.6% for +2.6% (670, 7970) same
23% for 6% (7970, 680) we have firmly arrived in diminishing returns here, so take a look at the next before passing judgement
-6.7% for +2.4% (680, 7970 GHz) AMD wins this one
Interesting bits:
For 660/7850, 660Ti/7950 Nvidia is not losing price/perf.
For the rest AMD has a slim to clear lead.
It is worth noting that 6950 $180 is still around, but is slightly less powerful and price efficient than 7850. Also, GTX 570 can be had for $230, and is more or less equal to GTX 660.
Conclusion
AMD is cheaper, but only on certain products. The only lemon in the bunch is the new 650, and Nvidia's holes in the lineup. GTX 680 is also disappointing, but not as bad. So unless you are buying budget stuff (7770 and below), or going for the best of the best (7970 Ghz), going either company will do you not much wrong. Power consumption figures are close enough not to matter, but Nvidia seems to hold a slight edge most of the time. Also, AMD's lineup has been around for longer than Nvidia's, so situation might change slightly in the future, or when 8000 series comes out.
680 - 7970
670 - 7950
660Ti - 7870
660 - 7850
650Ti -7770
650 - 7750
In each comparison Nvidia wins hands down. But then AMD's successive price cuts come into effect changing completely the situation as we now compare the 670 to 7970, 7950 to the 660Ti and so on. Nvidia seems happy with their prices, they know their business so I'm not commenting but this situation makes many AMD cards from this generation more appealing today.
store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
DX11 cards
GTX 670 1.6% +0.25%
vs
HD 7970 0.6% +0.0%
vs
GTX 680 1.24% +0.24%
GTX 660 Ti 0.50% +0.50%
vs
HD 7950 0.46% +0.10%
vs
HD7870 0.48% +0.14
I mean really in just 1 month 660 Ti has catched up with AMD cards that have been 9 months in the market*. It's simply no contest there.
And I'd say it's all AMD's fault an no one else's, AMD is better value NOW, no doubt, but at launch of all those Nvidia cards, Nvidia's value was much much better and you just can't let the brand with strongest recognition have such an impact on reviews.
*It's also significative that 20%+ of AMD cards' volume has happened this past month, that is, after price reductions.
However I was talking about (just like the context of this thread) the segment of the 650ti, where (and generally all around low end cards) AMD is clearly cheaper. You jumping at me with comparing the entire market, but I don't understand why.
ps.: and about the comparison: what resolution and with what settings may I ask, 8xAA and ultra high res is not for Kepler for example, so usage and situation matters.
With 650 it boils down to GK107 sucks and Nvidia doesn't give a flying fuck about how many of them they sell on retail, because they are selling them like hotcakes to OEMs and any extra sales beyond meeting those contracts would only lead to them having to compromise (even further) the wafer allocation for the much more profitable GK104 and GK106.
And then GTX 660. Only reason AMD is better is because they cut prices significantly before its launch, with old prices 660 would top them. AMD finally did what it was required. I don't expect Nvidia to lower prices for the same reason other Nvidia cards are still on launch prices. They sell, they sell extremely well, probably as fast as TSMC can make them.
If you look up all the reviews about the GTX 650 (here on TPU for example), you will find that all the conclusion have the very same line which states: "Price too high to make it competitive" as a con. And that's not a reviewer mistake, those cards should be cheaper because people will pick cheaper AMD cards in that segment.
Now that I know about the $150 btarunr just mentioned, that's a very good one indeed. The question is now that how much AMD will cut off from their prices, and how faster this card will be compared to the 7770-7850 ones. I think that the 650 is another example how good Kepler really is, that TPU's MSI GTX 650 test showed some truly remarkable low-end capabilities of the chip
I agree with the rest:)
I think reference these will be right at a 560Ti, and while better performance/watt I think it will be closure to a 7770, while not as good as the 7870. MSRP for reference $180 if anyone actually releases something in such trim. What you see is the typical marketing and promoting of "Über clocked customs", which will proliferate with all kind of wild shrouds and box’s.
The catch is AMD's AIB's will be all releasing 1Gb 7850 and they will end up priced better and will outshine. Then in a couple of months AMD will have their Oland GPU ready, and Nvidia will have to relinquish their price by 25-30% to stay competitive in Christmas buying season.