Hey guys I just came across some info on softpedia that claims to be Kepler info and I quote:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Nvidia-Kepler-GPU-Specs-Pricing-and-Release-Dates-Revealed-Report-250819.shtml
"The specifications of Nvidia’s upcoming next-generation GPUs, code named Kepler, were allegedly revealed by a recent report to hit the Web, together with their prices and approximate release dates.
This info came into the possession of the Lenzfire Website from unnamed sources, and describes in great detail the GK100-series graphics cores that Nvidia prepares to launch in the next two quarters of this year.
According to this report, the first GPU to arrive will be the GK110, which will be utilized by both the GeForce GTX 680 and GTX 670.
Nvidia Kepler aka GTX 600 series performance and prices
Enlarge picture
Despite being manufactured using TSMC’s 28nm process, the GK110 will be a particularly large chip, since it will measure no less than 550mm², 30mm² more than the current GF110 GPU, fabricated utilizing the foundry’s 40nm process technology.
As far as performance is concerned, the high-end GeForce GTX 680 is said to be up to 45% faster than AMD Radeon HD 7970, while costing $100 more ($649 for the GTX 680 vs. $549 for the HD 7970).
The slightly slower GTX 570 based on the same GK110 core is also said to be faster than AMD’s Radeon HD 7970, by approximately 20%.
Nvidia Kepler aka GTX 600 series specifications
Enlarge picture
Both of these parts will be released by Nvidia in April. Later during that month, the Santa Clara-based chip maker will launch the GTX 660 graphics card, which according to Lenzfire, delivers about the same performance as the current GTX 580, but at a $319 price point (243 EUR).
The two other graphics cards that Nvidia plans to release in the second quarter of this year are the Kepler-based GTX 650 and the GTX 640, while in Q3 of 2012 the chips maker will fill most of the gaps remaining in its 600-series lineup with the GTX 660 Ti and GTX 6540 Ti.
The third quarter of this year will also reportedly mark the introduction of the dual-GPU GTX 690, which is said to carry a whopping $999 (761 EUR) price tag. So far, the info provided by Lenzfire wasn’t confirmed by Nvidia, so take it with the usual grain of salt."
Like the article says, I take this with a grain of salt, but I can't shake the feeling that regardless of the truthfulness of this info that Nvidia really has something cooking for AMD. Its like the feeling I had about how much of a failure Bulldozer would be before it came out regardless of AMD's and other people's claims. We see Nvidia using much larger dies than AMD uses so it's natural for AMD to be out-performed, but this is ridiculous. If the part about the GTX 660 being comparable to the GTX 580 in performance and being priced around $320 is to be believed then we would need to be ready to come to terms with the possibility of AMD currently being out-gunned in both value and performance. The 7970 might be around 20% faster than the GTX 660 in this case, but I'd buy the 660 just because of it's incredible value. It would have similar value to the 6800/6950 cards and the GTX 560/560 TI without sacrificing performance to be priced that low.
Looking at the current cards, if power usage is similar to the cards they replace (model number wise) then the GTX 690 may still perform like the 7990 should so it would be a similar situation to what we have now with Radeon 6000 vs GTX 500, just even worse for AMD. These cards would be absolute beasts, handling 1440p 3D or full eyefinity sized resolutions with only one GPU if Nvidia allows a GPU to handle three or more displays at once.
Why AMD, why don't you use large enough dies to get products that can directly compete with Nvidia's best? Why did you think it was acceptable to price the 7900 cards where you have them now? Why do you claim to be the best in graphics when we all know that you're only the best because of the short time between launching the 7900 cards and Nvidia launching Kepler? Why do so many people fail to see this, they just see what they want to see and refuse to believe anything that doesn't fit into their little world, like over-zealous Apple fans? I preferred AMD, but with their poor competitive stance and poor pricing it's getting harder to justify not going to Nvidia. At least with the Radeon 6000s vs GTX 500s the difference isn't too great and prices are good in the main stream gaming area on both sides. I haven't had a Nvidia card I paid for in a while, but if there's any truth to the GTX 660, that might change if AMD doesn't lower their prices by a huge margin.
I feel that the supposed prices for the cards claimed to be released are decent for their claimed performance. They are only so high because they are so much faster than anything we have... If the 660 is as fast as the 580 which is almost as fast as the 7950 and it would only cost ~$320 then value has gone up since the last generation and substantially at that. I'm surprised that it was Nvidia that may make the first move on value, usually we watch AMD play this part cine they tend to not have the best stuff.
Does anyone have anything they'd like to say about this, anything to discuss?
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Nvidia-Kepler-GPU-Specs-Pricing-and-Release-Dates-Revealed-Report-250819.shtml
"The specifications of Nvidia’s upcoming next-generation GPUs, code named Kepler, were allegedly revealed by a recent report to hit the Web, together with their prices and approximate release dates.
This info came into the possession of the Lenzfire Website from unnamed sources, and describes in great detail the GK100-series graphics cores that Nvidia prepares to launch in the next two quarters of this year.
According to this report, the first GPU to arrive will be the GK110, which will be utilized by both the GeForce GTX 680 and GTX 670.
Nvidia Kepler aka GTX 600 series performance and prices
Enlarge picture
Despite being manufactured using TSMC’s 28nm process, the GK110 will be a particularly large chip, since it will measure no less than 550mm², 30mm² more than the current GF110 GPU, fabricated utilizing the foundry’s 40nm process technology.
As far as performance is concerned, the high-end GeForce GTX 680 is said to be up to 45% faster than AMD Radeon HD 7970, while costing $100 more ($649 for the GTX 680 vs. $549 for the HD 7970).
The slightly slower GTX 570 based on the same GK110 core is also said to be faster than AMD’s Radeon HD 7970, by approximately 20%.
Nvidia Kepler aka GTX 600 series specifications
Enlarge picture
Both of these parts will be released by Nvidia in April. Later during that month, the Santa Clara-based chip maker will launch the GTX 660 graphics card, which according to Lenzfire, delivers about the same performance as the current GTX 580, but at a $319 price point (243 EUR).
The two other graphics cards that Nvidia plans to release in the second quarter of this year are the Kepler-based GTX 650 and the GTX 640, while in Q3 of 2012 the chips maker will fill most of the gaps remaining in its 600-series lineup with the GTX 660 Ti and GTX 6540 Ti.
The third quarter of this year will also reportedly mark the introduction of the dual-GPU GTX 690, which is said to carry a whopping $999 (761 EUR) price tag. So far, the info provided by Lenzfire wasn’t confirmed by Nvidia, so take it with the usual grain of salt."
Like the article says, I take this with a grain of salt, but I can't shake the feeling that regardless of the truthfulness of this info that Nvidia really has something cooking for AMD. Its like the feeling I had about how much of a failure Bulldozer would be before it came out regardless of AMD's and other people's claims. We see Nvidia using much larger dies than AMD uses so it's natural for AMD to be out-performed, but this is ridiculous. If the part about the GTX 660 being comparable to the GTX 580 in performance and being priced around $320 is to be believed then we would need to be ready to come to terms with the possibility of AMD currently being out-gunned in both value and performance. The 7970 might be around 20% faster than the GTX 660 in this case, but I'd buy the 660 just because of it's incredible value. It would have similar value to the 6800/6950 cards and the GTX 560/560 TI without sacrificing performance to be priced that low.
Looking at the current cards, if power usage is similar to the cards they replace (model number wise) then the GTX 690 may still perform like the 7990 should so it would be a similar situation to what we have now with Radeon 6000 vs GTX 500, just even worse for AMD. These cards would be absolute beasts, handling 1440p 3D or full eyefinity sized resolutions with only one GPU if Nvidia allows a GPU to handle three or more displays at once.
Why AMD, why don't you use large enough dies to get products that can directly compete with Nvidia's best? Why did you think it was acceptable to price the 7900 cards where you have them now? Why do you claim to be the best in graphics when we all know that you're only the best because of the short time between launching the 7900 cards and Nvidia launching Kepler? Why do so many people fail to see this, they just see what they want to see and refuse to believe anything that doesn't fit into their little world, like over-zealous Apple fans? I preferred AMD, but with their poor competitive stance and poor pricing it's getting harder to justify not going to Nvidia. At least with the Radeon 6000s vs GTX 500s the difference isn't too great and prices are good in the main stream gaming area on both sides. I haven't had a Nvidia card I paid for in a while, but if there's any truth to the GTX 660, that might change if AMD doesn't lower their prices by a huge margin.
I feel that the supposed prices for the cards claimed to be released are decent for their claimed performance. They are only so high because they are so much faster than anything we have... If the 660 is as fast as the 580 which is almost as fast as the 7950 and it would only cost ~$320 then value has gone up since the last generation and substantially at that. I'm surprised that it was Nvidia that may make the first move on value, usually we watch AMD play this part cine they tend to not have the best stuff.
Does anyone have anything they'd like to say about this, anything to discuss?