Kepler Unbeatable: NVIDIA

[Benetanegia]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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
40 - 50% massive
60 - 80% outrageous!

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]

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.

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

 

[Benetanegia]

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]

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]

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]

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..!

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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..!

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]

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

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