People think we spend more on electricity expenses because our systems use more power and produce more heat. Well that's dumb. I had my room radiators closed pretty much the entire winter because computer was entertaining me and also heating the room enough that i didn't really need to spend additional heating device which in turn requires resources to operate which at the end of the day cost money. Plus GeForce cards have always been more expensive, even if for tiny bit than Radeon cards so the stuff you might save in 5 years time of using the card was already wasted when you bought the more expensive but more power saving gfx card. So it doesn't really matter. The differences are too small to justify them in the long run because lets face it, most of us here don't have the same graphic card for 4-5 years. For me it's already long to have the same one for 2 years. And when i do have them for longer it's because graphic card vendors are dicking around with renaming old stuff and making tiny jumps and expecting us to pay full price every time. Well F that.

HumanSmokeJust as well, since it's here to stay. Both AMD and Nvidia need GPGPU to survive - HSA, cloud computing/VDI, HPC, workstation. Nvidia built an empire from professional graphics, and while bang-for-buck might be OK for the consumer market (although in truth all it has done is allow AMD to retain parity), the pro markets are predicated upon high core count, high bandwidth parts. The pro markets also tend to pay the bills better than most other segments...5% of graphics unit sales account for 30% of discrete board revenue, and that percentage grows as the low end of the market gets gobbled up by IGPs. With OpenCL finally starting to see some kind of adoption, AMD don't really have any reason not to bifurcate their product line as Nvidia has done. Monolithic GPU for pro and high end consumer (where the large die and R&D is largely paid off by high ASP pro parts), and stripped down "good enough" mainstream/low end parts area-ruled for maximum yield and prioritized feature set.

From my point of of view,nVidia needed GPGPU badly.AMD already won all console market,competes greatly in iGPU segment and "always had" competitive prices in off board GPU.To me,HSA,Mantle or any other software development derivatives is just another extended capabilites AMD GPU's.They might useful,but will not add something to already been there.
For professional market,same things applies and there 2 kinds of firm,the one that depends on hardware and the one that rely on their creativity.A $750 Quadro K4000 may look better than $450 Firepro W5000 and might faster,but the outcome is nothing different.
Bottom line,it's your choice.Efficient it not a sole measurement and hardware doesn't reflects intelligence.

RejZoRPeople think we spend more on electricity expenses because our systems use more power and produce more heat. Well that's dumb. I had my room radiators closed pretty much the entire winter because computer was entertaining me and also heating the room enough that i didn't really need to spend additional heating device which in turn requires resources to operate which at the end of the day cost money. Plus GeForce cards have always been more expensive, even if for tiny bit than Radeon cards so the stuff you might save in 5 years time of using the card was already wasted when you bought the more expensive but more power saving gfx card. So it doesn't really matter. The differences are too small to justify them in the long run because lets face it, most of us here don't have the same graphic card for 4-5 years. For me it's already long to have the same one for 2 years. And when i do have them for longer it's because graphic card vendors are dicking around with renaming old stuff and making tiny jumps and expecting us to pay full price every time. Well F that.

+1.

Sony Xperia SI am against what you sGTXay and for what AMD want to do. Because ultimately higher power consumption equals to higher performance than if the former was lower. ;)

I am positive towards aggressive performance jumps. ;)

Cool story, friendo.



Wilkes consumes more power but is slower than Tsubame.

1d10tWhen people start arguing eff vs heat,there's no end to this.Take a look at CPU side,Intel got "more efficient" and "way faster" yet people blindly forgot they operates nearly twice temperatures AMD had.I mean come on, Intel CPU idles temperature is AMD load temperatures.
Same matters applied here.If AMD decide to slap some closed loop watercooling for theirs next single or dual or whatever GPU,it clearly indicates fan legacy are not viable option.Yes it will hot,but not as hell as if you've been there before.It's seem AMD FIRST move to embedding closed watercooling for their hig-end GPU's will continue year ahead...and likely followed by nVidia sooner or later :p
I don't mind more power hungry or excessive heat,i just need the ability to do MSAA HBAO+SSAO multi monitor at reasonable prices :roll:

GTX 480 is more power hungry, hotter, faster than HD 5870 but everyone said that HD 5870 is better. Explain.

yea! my amd cpu can idle bellow ambient mofo!!!!

stick that in your pipe and smoke it intel :rofl:

RecusGTX 480 is more power hungry, hotter, faster than HD 5870 but everyone said that HD 5870 is better. Explain.

GTX 480 had a lot of problems and some people even claimed that it was broken from the very beginning. Understand?

If everyone says something, it doesn't mean that it is true, of course in that case HD 5870 didn't have any of the problems of its counterpart.

But generally, human kind is so primitive exactly because of mutual agreements between most.

Sony Xperia SGTX 480 had a lot of problems and some people even claimed that it was broken from the very beginning. Understand?

If everyone says something, it doesn't mean that it is true, of course in that case HD 5870 didn't have any of the problems of its counterpart.

But generally, human kind is so primitive exactly because of mutual agreements between most.

So high power usage and heat are problems to Nvidia but not for AMD? o_O

Sony Xperia SGTX 480 had a lot of problems and some people even claimed that it was broken from the very beginning. Understand?

If everyone says something, it doesn't mean that it is true, of course in that case HD 5870 didn't have any of the problems of its counterpart.

But generally, human kind is so primitive exactly because of mutual agreements between most.

What is your native language Xperia? Your english is very good but it is structured in a 'foreign' way. I'll read your posts as constructive due to a language difference, as opposed to you being 'eccentric' :D

RecusGTX 480 is more power hungry, hotter, faster than HD 5870 but everyone said that HD 5870 is better. Explain.

Price?
Would you like to pay $100 more for 21ºC

and extra 4.2 fps?

Nah...it's your call after all.I don't mind :rolleyes:

the54thvoidWhat is your native language Xperia? Your english is very good but it is structured in a 'foreign' way. I'll read your posts as constructive due to a language difference, as opposed to you being 'eccentric' :D

Yes, my native languages are different. But I thought it was correctly written. How should I structure the very same as native British?

Sony Xperia SYes, my native languages are different. But I thought it was correctly written. How should I structure the very same as native British?

You structure it just fine - don't change it. :toast:

I hope they do, for competition sake, not that currently I could afford such a card, but it drives the price of all cards down, and makes all cards that don't reach such price/performance metrics seem silly, or underpowered. See Titan Black for prime example.

SteevoI hope they do, for competition sake, not that currently I could afford such a card, but it drives the price of all cards down, and makes all cards that don't reach such price/performance metrics seem silly, or underpowered. See Titan Black for prime example.

I don't agree with this Steve. Certain GPUs are out there just to pick-up filler sales to small niche of the market and consumer base - and an often ignorant one at that.
Your example of Titan Black (or any Titan for that matter) is perfect.
Between the option of SLI 680, 690, Titan, or Titan Black, the latter three are pointless, unless there's some physical or specific reason impeding you using 680 SLI.

Anyone think that 390x is even close to being out? since amd rls'ed 285 few weeks ago would be kinda stupid for them to drop 300 series card so close to it?

arbiterAnyone think that 390x is even close to being out? since amd rls'ed 285 few weeks ago would be kinda stupid for them to drop 300 series card so close to it?

Well, according to Asetek's PR trumpeting, the cooling solution won't be out until next year, so if the 390X is AMD's answer to the GTX 980 it's either going to be verrrrrry late to the party or released with air cooling.....or, and this is probably the actual scenario - the 390X and its AIO is meant for a completely different market segment (vs the big Maxwell chip), and the GTX 980 analogue is actually the ~350-390mm^2 "Bermuda" chip as illustrated a few months ago by 3DCenter.

From my perspective it looks like AMD will be soldiering on with the 290/290X for a while yet. The only obvious imminent launch seems to be the fully enabled Tonga (R9 285X), which I'm guessing will drop once Nvidia show their hand and AMD tune the clocks.

1d10tand extra 4.2 fps?

Nah...it's your call after all.I don't mind :rolleyes:

Why would you cherry pick a single benchmark to highlight the supposed difference between cards? If you went to the trouble of finding the GTX 480 review, surely you'd use the actual aggregated performance summary which would be a better indicator? - Oops, scrub that - it shows a 10% advantage rather than the 3.6% you're trying to depict at that resolution.

Hitman_ActualAMD=old n busted

Nvidia GTX980 = New hotness

Praytell fine sir, where might I purchase this new card?

Oh yes, much like how truly awesome flying unicorns are its currently in the land of fairy tales, where your dreams CAN come true, as long as you wish hard enough.


Meanwhile, in reality,

newconroerI don't agree with this Steve. Certain GPUs are out there just to pick-up filler sales to small niche of the market and consumer base - and an often ignorant one at that.
Your example of Titan Black (or any Titan for that matter) is perfect.
Between the option of SLI 680, 690, Titan, or Titan Black, the latter three are pointless, unless there's some physical or specific reason impeding you using 680 SLI.

Yes, just like many rebrands, ignorant people will blindly buy due to it being "new". But those of us here, who read reviews, both for the brands we use, and those who compete and try to understand the strengths and weaknesses in each, should understand what and why, and shouldn't at least voice our opinions of mediocre overpriced hardware that does nothing to improve status quo, or to provide real world benefits to ourselves and mainstream consumers.

28nm are busted, waiting for maxw refresh.

arbiterAnyone think that 390x is even close to being out? since amd rls'ed 285 few weeks ago would be kinda stupid for them to drop 300 series card so close to it?

Not really, AMD is waiting to see the cards first and then make their own adjustments on top of the fact the cooler itself is not slated for anything in 2014. Even with the waiting its more or less not going to change much right now because with recent results it seems that the 980 will not be too much higher than the 780ti which would mean AMD can play the waiting game since the 290X is plenty to keep relevance (as long as price matches) while they work out something else.

SteevoI hope they do, for competition sake, not that currently I could afford such a card, but it drives the price of all cards down, and makes all cards that don't reach such price/performance metrics seem silly, or underpowered. See Titan Black for prime example.

Well we need some better prices as lately things have gotten out of control to get the top end. Its at a point though where I believe people need to step up more and preach their problems with the price system more than anything since the biggest concern seems to be the same people whining many times about prices are the first ones purchasing said cards in high quantities (Referring to some of which are on this thread even). I agree completely with you that the pricing is getting ridiculous for cards and things like the Titans were just ridiculous beyond belief.

I can see a bright light hopefully the price of these next generation of cards will not be to crazy.

HumanSmokeWhy would you cherry pick a single benchmark to highlight the supposed difference between cards? If you went to the trouble of finding the GTX 480 review, surely you'd use the actual aggregated performance summary which would be a better indicator? - Oops, scrub that - it shows a 10% advantage rather than the 3.6% you're trying to depict at that resolution.

I'm too lazy to dug deeper,it's already on the same page :laugh:
Let start over again...Would you like to pay $100 more to have astonishingly 96ºC


or pay less in trade of 10% slower?That's like 90 fps vs 100 fps...10 fps faster,or more likely 54 fps vs 60 fps....6 fps faster :roll::roll::roll:
Man,this whole percentage thingy make them look good on paper :roll:

SteevoPraytell fine sir, where might I purchase this new card?
Oh yes, much like how truly awesome flying unicorns are its currently in the land of fairy tales, where your dreams CAN come true, as long as you wish hard enough

He's just trolling.Like i stated before...

1d10thardware doesn't reflects intelligence

1d10tI'm too lazy

I don't think I believe you. You can't be bothered including representative data when its sitting right in front of you after searching the database for two separate reviews and locating three separate pages within those two separate reviews. Colour me sceptical at the very least.
As for the GTX 480 and HD 5870 the cards themselves don't really interest me so best you don't try to derail the thread too much. The point being made is that the GF100 offered marginally more performance for worse power and heat...3-4 years on, the GK110 offers marginally more performance for better power and heat - so it is less about individual cards than a developing trend and how priorities for what is good or bad are dependant upon who makes the card.

The point is, if for example 90+°C is bad for the GTX 480, then the same is true for any other card that hits those temps. Noise, cost and any features tend to be subjective to the user so while they may be the subject of discussion they won't hold a universal value for everyone - the same can be said for heat production also if the user puts the cards underwater, or is happy so long as the components don't exceed the IC thermal threshold limit.
The only real difference - apart from cost - is that Nvidia cut its teeth on large GPUs that leveraged their software ecosystem. They started out big and hot (G80 -> GT200 -> GF100/110 -> GK110) and power/heat have been fairly consistent factors in the last 8 years - and an easy target, especially given that AMD pursued a small die policy after the R600. Now that compute has suddenly become something to have, and AMD's GPUs have become more complex (and steadily larger), the same people who quite happily pointed out the disparity between the 144W of Cypress and the 257W of GF100, and the (smaller) gap between the 185W of the HD 6970 and 226W of the GF110, have suddenly gone silent when the 290X pulls 271W against the 269W of the 780 Ti. I'd point out that this isn't obviously a one way street since Performance-per-watt wasn't a big talking point for people defending Fermi but suddenly became a must have feature with Kepler and now Maxwell. Those people aren't any more immune from criticism than the hypocrites on the other side of the imaginary divide. The only real remedy for being taken to task is to apply the same metrics as they apply to all GPUs irrespective of vendor.

HumanSmokeI don't think I believe you. You can't be bothered including representative data when its sitting right in front of you after searching the database for two separate reviews and locating three separate pages within those two separate reviews. Colour me sceptical at the very least.

I make a conclusion in my earlier post..duh :laugh:

HumanSmokeAs for the GTX 480 and HD 5870 the cards themselves don't really interest me so best you don't try to derail the thread too much. The point being made is that the GF100 offered marginally more performance for worse power and heat...3-4 years on, the GK110 offers marginally more performance for better power and heat - so it is less about individual cards than a developing trend and how priorities for what is good or bad are dependant upon who makes the card.

So its my fault then...

RecusGTX 480 is more power hungry, hotter, faster than HD 5870 but everyone said that HD 5870 is better. Explain.

Yeah..pretty much 3 star n00bs fault for responding :roll:

HumanSmokeThe point is, if for example 90+°C is bad for the GTX 480, then the same is true for any other card that hits those temps. Noise, cost and any features tend to be subjective to the user so while they may be the subject of discussion they won't hold a universal value for everyone - the same can be said for heat production also if the user puts the cards underwater, or is happy so long as the components don't exceed the IC thermal threshold limit.

As you said,this is a matter of subjective so your opinion is yours only.I never had and never tested R290X before so i know nothing about it.I'm just happy to have two R9 290,$250 more cheaper than GTX 780 or $500 if you SLI'ed them,faster in multimonitor when you crank details up,in exchange of excessive heat.And please don't talk about power consumption as 10W could make any difference :laugh:.

I like hearing news of the 290x price slash now i Can get a Sapphire 290X VaporX.

With all this talk of energy usages and comparing GPUs that aren't even out yet sure makes me wonder why my laptop raised the bill $40 last month..

Being serious. I'm happy that new GPUs are coming out around the time I should be starting to work. New cool stuff to play with. I've used Intel, AMD, and Nvidia GPUs (Intel with their uber stronk integrated :laugh:) and it really comes down to what you like best. I like Nvidia because the frames are smoother and "normally" use less power, while AMD likes to shoot their GPUs with all this wattage and go for with blunt force for higher fps. Though I like AMD for their attempts at making some smexy red and black cards. Mmmm those colors are so nice together.

SteevoYes, just like many rebrands, ignorant people will blindly buy due to it being "new". But those of us here, who read reviews, both for the brands we use, and those who compete and try to understand the strengths and weaknesses in each, should understand what and why, and shouldn't at least voice our opinions of mediocre overpriced hardware that does nothing to improve status quo, or to provide real world benefits to ourselves and mainstream consumers.

That's exactly right. The more knowledge we gain and share, the less people will accept rebadges and incremental gains on what is classed as 'new' hardware.

I'll admit, nvidia has always given me a smoother experience. But who cares, new cards! I don't see what everyone's problem is with this.

Empiracle evidence based on a single users subjective experiance, I like it. While no one else may share your observations you have properly written a disagreeing comment while adding value to the thread. Have a updog.