- Status
I'd like to see 3x 1080P or 1200P monitor testing for such beasts. Perhaps also turn on Super Sampling in games like Skyrim. 2560x1600 testing is a must for this type of card as well. Someone above suggested that 2560x1600 x3 but 1 such GPU is not enough to drive 3 such monitors and GTX690 would choke even more.
@ dragonsqrrl
When HD7970 and HD7970 GE are now faster than GTX680, what did you expect people to say? HD7970 GE is now 15% faster at 1600P:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57413-amd-12-11-never-settle-driver-performance-17.html
Take into account 7970's overclocking and GTX680 is going to fade away even more. Crucially, HD7970 GE now wins in almost all GPU demanding titles: Crysis 1 / Warhead / 2, BF3, MOH: W, Arma II games, Witcher 2 Enhanced Edition, Metro 2033, Dirt Showdown, Sleeping Dogs, Skyrim with mods.
Looking at other products in AMD's line, AMD now has a faster GPU at every price level:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html
Add in 3 free games, full voltage control for every 7000 series card. Drop down to lower categories and NV is getting annihilated with HD7850 being 35-40% faster than GTX650Ti, HD7950 OC easily matching GTX680 in performance. Stock vs. stock, OC vs. OC, Price/performance, absolute single-GPU performance, game bundles, AMD is winning all of it for single-GPUs now. Add bitcoin mining that made AMD GPUs pay for themselves over time this year and NV lost this generation badly for anyone who actually paid attention.
@ dragonsqrrl
When HD7970 and HD7970 GE are now faster than GTX680, what did you expect people to say? HD7970 GE is now 15% faster at 1600P:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57413-amd-12-11-never-settle-driver-performance-17.html
Take into account 7970's overclocking and GTX680 is going to fade away even more. Crucially, HD7970 GE now wins in almost all GPU demanding titles: Crysis 1 / Warhead / 2, BF3, MOH: W, Arma II games, Witcher 2 Enhanced Edition, Metro 2033, Dirt Showdown, Sleeping Dogs, Skyrim with mods.
Looking at other products in AMD's line, AMD now has a faster GPU at every price level:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html
Add in 3 free games, full voltage control for every 7000 series card. Drop down to lower categories and NV is getting annihilated with HD7850 being 35-40% faster than GTX650Ti, HD7950 OC easily matching GTX680 in performance. Stock vs. stock, OC vs. OC, Price/performance, absolute single-GPU performance, game bundles, AMD is winning all of it for single-GPUs now. Add bitcoin mining that made AMD GPUs pay for themselves over time this year and NV lost this generation badly for anyone who actually paid attention.
djscribbles
Honorable
- Apr 6, 2012
- 1,212
- 0
- 11,460
[citation][nom]spasmolytic46[/nom]I want to start seeing 3d stuff in the benchmarks. I want to make the jump after x-mas. I know you guys did a good segment just about 3d a while ago, but even just benchmarking a couple titles using both AMD/nvidia solutions would be a nice addition to the charts.[/citation]
+1 to that. I grabbed a 7870 and 3d monitor earlier this year. Sorta unhappy (predictably) with the performance (didn't want to spend the extra on the flagship at launch). Would be nice to have some idea what I need to see solid 3d performance (or what I can expect if I upgrade).
3d benches wouldn't be fair for green vs red, but they would be helpful for red vs red or green vs green comparisons.
+1 to that. I grabbed a 7870 and 3d monitor earlier this year. Sorta unhappy (predictably) with the performance (didn't want to spend the extra on the flagship at launch). Would be nice to have some idea what I need to see solid 3d performance (or what I can expect if I upgrade).
3d benches wouldn't be fair for green vs red, but they would be helpful for red vs red or green vs green comparisons.
@ dragonsqrrl
That doesn't mean that GTX670/680 weren't worth buying earlier in the year. When they launched, they were good cards. My guess is GTX600 series continues to sell well due to early launch reviews that showed GTX670/680 beating up HD7950/7970 but since June 7950 V2 competes with 660Ti/ 7970 with 670 / 7970GE with 680. Perception stays with consumers for a long-time and I wouldn't be surprised that most people still think GTX680 is the fastest card, even though it lost to 7970 GE as early as June 2012.
That doesn't mean that GTX670/680 weren't worth buying earlier in the year. When they launched, they were good cards. My guess is GTX600 series continues to sell well due to early launch reviews that showed GTX670/680 beating up HD7950/7970 but since June 7950 V2 competes with 660Ti/ 7970 with 670 / 7970GE with 680. Perception stays with consumers for a long-time and I wouldn't be surprised that most people still think GTX680 is the fastest card, even though it lost to 7970 GE as early as June 2012.
I want to see image quality comparisons for Anti-Aliasing and Anisotropic filtering. It is a good time to revisit this briefly.
It would be great to see if either AMD or nV sacrificed any image quality with their latest driver increases and also give us another look at how image quality differs between AMD or NV (or doesn't differ). Benchmarks are good, but if one company is not providing the same image quality, it's not apple-to-apples comparison.
It would be great to see if either AMD or nV sacrificed any image quality with their latest driver increases and also give us another look at how image quality differs between AMD or NV (or doesn't differ). Benchmarks are good, but if one company is not providing the same image quality, it's not apple-to-apples comparison.
@ f-14 "1080p is not a front runner any longer and should be phased off review by now."
You want to phase out the most popular gaming resolution Steam? 27.72%
1920 x 1200 3.37%
2048 x 1152 0.11%
2560 x 1440 0.70%
2560 x 1600 0.18%
2880 x 1800 0.01%
3840 x 1024 0.01%
5040 x 1050 0.01%
5760 x 1080 0.06%
5760 x 1200 0.01%
Also, some people have 120Hz 1080P monitors and would want to see how 2 flagship cards perform for those who like fast frames in FPS titles.
You want to phase out the most popular gaming resolution Steam? 27.72%
1920 x 1200 3.37%
2048 x 1152 0.11%
2560 x 1440 0.70%
2560 x 1600 0.18%
2880 x 1800 0.01%
3840 x 1024 0.01%
5040 x 1050 0.01%
5760 x 1080 0.06%
5760 x 1200 0.01%
Also, some people have 120Hz 1080P monitors and would want to see how 2 flagship cards perform for those who like fast frames in FPS titles.
WyomingKnott
Legenda in Aeternum
- Aug 29, 2006
- 13,249
- 3
- 51,960
"Is this the world's fastest graphics card?"
Maybe this week.
My apologies to anyone who posted this snark before me; I wrote this as soon as I saw the title.
Maybe this week.
My apologies to anyone who posted this snark before me; I wrote this as soon as I saw the title.
StitchExperiment626
Distinguished
- Nov 7, 2011
- 107
- 0
- 18,710
I would like several things... one not mentioned is how does this compare to a CrossFire setup.
Second can this board be made into a CrossFire setup.
Third for the purpose of DC (Distributed Computed) can these be water cooled to run 24/7
Fourth... to think outside the box... can they be watercooled to occupy only 2 slots... will they make 2 tabs on the top of the card... and can we run these in QuadFire mode???
Fifth... where will the PCI-E buss limits occur on the data flow of a LGA 1155 or LGA 2011
Second can this board be made into a CrossFire setup.
Third for the purpose of DC (Distributed Computed) can these be water cooled to run 24/7
Fourth... to think outside the box... can they be watercooled to occupy only 2 slots... will they make 2 tabs on the top of the card... and can we run these in QuadFire mode???
Fifth... where will the PCI-E buss limits occur on the data flow of a LGA 1155 or LGA 2011
julianbautista87
Distinguished
- Jan 6, 2010
- 153
- 0
- 18,690
[citation][nom]Cryio[/nom]In my books, Nvidia lost this gen.[/citation]
Well... Nvidia is selling more than AMD though...
Fanboys are bad for the industry, they reward myths, advertisement and rumors over performance per dollar.
Well... Nvidia is selling more than AMD though...
Fanboys are bad for the industry, they reward myths, advertisement and rumors over performance per dollar.
dragonsqrrl
Distinguished
- Nov 19, 2009
- 1,280
- 0
- 19,290
[citation][nom]BestJinjo[/nom]@ dragonsqrrl When HD7970 and HD7970 GE are now faster than GTX680, what did you expect people to say? HD7970 GE is now 15% faster at 1600P: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/for [...] ce-17.htmlTake into account 7970's overclocking and GTX680 is going to fade away even more. Crucially, HD7970 GE now wins in almost all GPU demanding titles: Crysis 1 / Warhead / 2, BF3, MOH: W, Arma II games, Witcher 2 Enhanced Edition, Metro 2033, Dirt Showdown, Sleeping Dogs, Skyrim with mods. Looking at other products in AMD's line, AMD now has a faster GPU at every price level:http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews [...] ce/23.htmlAdd in 3 free games, full voltage control for every 7000 series card. Drop down to lower categories and NV is getting annihilated with HD7850 being 35-40% faster than GTX650Ti, HD7950 OC easily matching GTX680 in performance. Stock vs. stock, OC vs. OC, Price/performance, absolute single-GPU performance, game bundles, AMD is winning all of it for single-GPUs now. Add bitcoin mining that made AMD GPUs pay for themselves over time this year and NV lost this generation badly for anyone who actually paid attention.[/citation]
Wait, where did these insinuations about the HD7970 GHz Ed come from? The HD7970 GHz Ed is a great product, and I agree that AMD now offers some compelling value in the high-end market. But this wasn't what I was referring to.
I'm referring specifically to to the delayed launch of a dual GPU competitor to the GTX690, and the drastically different reception this announcement seems to garner in comparison to past Nvidia delayed launches in this ultra high-end segment. I mean, it's not even an official AMD SKU, which makes me wonder if an HD7990 will even happen.
Does this really hit too close to home for some people?
Wait, where did these insinuations about the HD7970 GHz Ed come from? The HD7970 GHz Ed is a great product, and I agree that AMD now offers some compelling value in the high-end market. But this wasn't what I was referring to.
I'm referring specifically to to the delayed launch of a dual GPU competitor to the GTX690, and the drastically different reception this announcement seems to garner in comparison to past Nvidia delayed launches in this ultra high-end segment. I mean, it's not even an official AMD SKU, which makes me wonder if an HD7990 will even happen.
Does this really hit too close to home for some people?
reprotected
Distinguished
- Oct 13, 2009
- 622
- 0
- 19,010
imho i rather get an official 690 then this, even though these may perform better. The Devil13 had the physique of a brick.
alextheblue
Distinguished
- Apr 3, 2001
- 3,078
- 106
- 20,970
[citation][nom]m1n3kraft[/nom]imho i rather get an official 690 then this, even though these may perform better. The Devil13 had the physique of a brick.[/citation]If they have the money, the need, and the space for one of these... I don't think "physique of a brick" is going to stop anyone. Next you'll be telling me you want it in pink.
[citation][nom]BestJinjo[/nom]@ f-14 "1080p is not a front runner any longer and should be phased off review by now."You want to phase out the most popular gaming resolution Steam? 27.72%1920 x 1200 3.37%2048 x 1152 0.11%2560 x 1440 0.70%2560 x 1600 0.18%2880 x 1800 0.01%3840 x 1024 0.01%5040 x 1050 0.01%5760 x 1080 0.06%5760 x 1200 0.01%Also, some people have 120Hz 1080P monitors and would want to see how 2 flagship cards perform for those who like fast frames in FPS titles.[/citation]
yes , yes i do, this should have been blown past almost as fast as the switch from 640x480 to 800x600.
if it wasn't for dvd holding everything back you'd be staring at 2560x1600 for the last 2 years instead. people only have 1080p because that's what they settle for when they are shown dvd movies over 1080p looks terrible! it's like looking at 640x480 on 1280x 1024
i for one do not give a _ _ _ _ about dvd pixelation, i'm gaming and these games more than support resolutions far superior to that when your playing a racing game and you're staring at a 24" screen instead of looking at a windsheild like representation of a real cars actual size which do you think is better?
playing a first person shooter applies the same way, looking out your own eyes vs a little itty bitty 24" screen is more appealing to you? you must work in a lab and stare at microbes thru a microscope all day to love such limited view.
my combat flight sims look so much better when it looks closer and closer to an actual cockpit bubble of display area vs a chincey 24" monitor hunched over it to the point my back even cramps up after a few hours and 5-7 hours my eyes hurt from all the strain of such a tiny itty bitty screen.
my 17"-21"CRTS were at 1600x1200 10 years ago, that's how far behind these flat panels are.
when the average tv is now 55" for $500 and is stuck at 1080p that should have been the time everybodys lightbulbs went off in their heads there was a major problem with computer displays.
i've watched friends hook 42"720p tvs up to gtx 260's when they were new and the cards handled graw2 like it was made for it.
my brother did the same thing with his 55" 1080p tv and a gtx480 (when it was new) and played yes " crysis " and it looked even better on his tv than my pcs 21" monitor, was smoother and more detailed due to the larger size bringing little things into view. same 120hz frames didn't ever dip below 40 and the latency was not even pushing 10ms.
that made my jaw drop as to what was so vastly wrong in my mind with pc monitors, prices, and limitations, i was mad. i don't know why the rest of you are not also but in my mind that should never have happened any more than a mac os pulling off better frame rates than windows7 at dirt2
yes , yes i do, this should have been blown past almost as fast as the switch from 640x480 to 800x600.
if it wasn't for dvd holding everything back you'd be staring at 2560x1600 for the last 2 years instead. people only have 1080p because that's what they settle for when they are shown dvd movies over 1080p looks terrible! it's like looking at 640x480 on 1280x 1024
i for one do not give a _ _ _ _ about dvd pixelation, i'm gaming and these games more than support resolutions far superior to that when your playing a racing game and you're staring at a 24" screen instead of looking at a windsheild like representation of a real cars actual size which do you think is better?
playing a first person shooter applies the same way, looking out your own eyes vs a little itty bitty 24" screen is more appealing to you? you must work in a lab and stare at microbes thru a microscope all day to love such limited view.
my combat flight sims look so much better when it looks closer and closer to an actual cockpit bubble of display area vs a chincey 24" monitor hunched over it to the point my back even cramps up after a few hours and 5-7 hours my eyes hurt from all the strain of such a tiny itty bitty screen.
my 17"-21"CRTS were at 1600x1200 10 years ago, that's how far behind these flat panels are.
when the average tv is now 55" for $500 and is stuck at 1080p that should have been the time everybodys lightbulbs went off in their heads there was a major problem with computer displays.
i've watched friends hook 42"720p tvs up to gtx 260's when they were new and the cards handled graw2 like it was made for it.
my brother did the same thing with his 55" 1080p tv and a gtx480 (when it was new) and played yes " crysis " and it looked even better on his tv than my pcs 21" monitor, was smoother and more detailed due to the larger size bringing little things into view. same 120hz frames didn't ever dip below 40 and the latency was not even pushing 10ms.
that made my jaw drop as to what was so vastly wrong in my mind with pc monitors, prices, and limitations, i was mad. i don't know why the rest of you are not also but in my mind that should never have happened any more than a mac os pulling off better frame rates than windows7 at dirt2
[citation][nom]BestJinjo[/nom]@ f-14 "1080p is not a front runner any longer and should be phased off review by now."You want to phase out the most popular gaming resolution Steam? 27.72%1920 x 1200 3.37%2048 x 1152 0.11%2560 x 1440 0.70%2560 x 1600 0.18%2880 x 1800 0.01%3840 x 1024 0.01%5040 x 1050 0.01%5760 x 1080 0.06%5760 x 1200 0.01%Also, some people have 120Hz 1080P monitors and would want to see how 2 flagship cards perform for those who like fast frames in FPS titles.[/citation]
P.S. i don't give a cr _ _ about your little xbox like gaming service steam as far as i am concerned steam is what waffers up off cr_ _!
real gamers mortal enemy is lag, and internet gaming is nothing but one lag session after another the more gamers that get into a game and if i am playing with 8-16 people and there is lag we are not happy but we grew up on LAN play so we know how terrible steam is year after year online gaming is for mmorpgs like wow and such or playing with your friends who are overseas contractually obligated to fight in war zones.
you want a real opinion on how bad fps are and with internet play talk to one of those guys who've been in the combat zone for a few months, they'll tell you where you can stick your steam'ing pile.
P.S. i don't give a cr _ _ about your little xbox like gaming service steam as far as i am concerned steam is what waffers up off cr_ _!
real gamers mortal enemy is lag, and internet gaming is nothing but one lag session after another the more gamers that get into a game and if i am playing with 8-16 people and there is lag we are not happy but we grew up on LAN play so we know how terrible steam is year after year online gaming is for mmorpgs like wow and such or playing with your friends who are overseas contractually obligated to fight in war zones.
you want a real opinion on how bad fps are and with internet play talk to one of those guys who've been in the combat zone for a few months, they'll tell you where you can stick your steam'ing pile.
zander1983
Distinguished
- Mar 26, 2009
- 424
- 1
- 18,860
[citation][nom]f-14[/nom]...multimonitor review if the screens are not over 1080p above 27"i think there were enough multi monitors at ...[/citation]
LOL Fool. Inches does not matter, the RESOLUTION does. 1080p on a 24 and 27" is still 1080p,,,
LOL Fool. Inches does not matter, the RESOLUTION does. 1080p on a 24 and 27" is still 1080p,,,
zander1983
Distinguished
- Mar 26, 2009
- 424
- 1
- 18,860
frack, why can't I edit my post.
Meant to say 1080p on 24 is exaclt the same as 1080p on 27", just looks shittier on a bigger screen.
Meant to say 1080p on 24 is exaclt the same as 1080p on 27", just looks shittier on a bigger screen.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
News AMD says Intel's 'horrible product' is causing Ryzen 9 9800X3D shortages- Started by Admin
- Replies: 83
-
-
Discussion PSU recommendations and power supply discussion thread - Tom's hardware- Started by Darkbreeze
- Replies: 2K
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram