GeForce GTX 750 Ti Review: Maxwell Adds Performance Using Less Power

[smeezekitty]

Although I don't like Nvidia's philosophy when it comes to PhysX and some other things. I have to say I'm impressed with Maxwell's power efficiency. It seems the AMD's GPU division will end up similar to the CPU division, using much more power to get the job done.

I tend to agree with this

 

[Onus]

I do too. I've "played" with an nVidia card in the last couple of years (a GTX650Ti), but try to avoid them in general due to the way they shut down PhysX in "mixed" environments. That denial of choice means I'm not going to choose them, unless I have to. A single-slot, low-profile card [nearly] as powerful as a HD7850 would be a very compelling offering, and it looks like Maxwell could do it if the demand is there.

Before anyone cites driver issues, both companies have/had them, to varying degrees. One reason I'm not currently running the GTX650Ti is because recent driver versions have introduced an annoying flicker.

 

[tcb1005]

I do too. I've "played" with an nVidia card in the last couple of years (a GTX650Ti), but try to avoid them in general due to the way they shut down PhysX in "mixed" environments. That denial of choice means I'm not going to choose them, unless I have to. A single-slot, low-profile card [nearly] as powerful as a HD7850 would be a very compelling offering, and it looks like Maxwell could do it if the demand is there.

Before anyone cites driver issues, both companies have/had them, to varying degrees. One reason I'm not currently running the GTX650Ti is because recent driver versions have introduced an annoying flicker.

I don't like how NVIDIA treated XFX when they began also making AMD cards.

 

[Someone Somewhere]

That was probably before my time.

I've had some nasty experiences with nVidia Optimus on Linux systems - there's some mediocre open-source support (nothing from nVidia), but you still can't really use any displays attached directly to the dedicated card.

 

[nanoprobe]

FWIW their kh/s mining LTC on the 270X isn't even close. Mine easily do 470 kh/s. Why would 302 kh/s be listed unless it's to make the 750ti look better? A plain 270 will do 440 kh/s. I call bogus on this review.

 

[Someone Somewhere]

Whoever setup the mining benchmarks for this article doesn't have a clue what they're doing... I get 450kh/s out of my R9 270x on stock clocks. Learn how to configure CGminer, thanks.

I've read a lot of people "claiming 450kH/s" from a card with 1,280 shaders but yet to see proof. Until then, it's bs. Like a lot of people on the Litecoin Wiki page. No validations and for some reason want to lie about it.

It's a 300-350kH/s card with matching WU's or close to it (.9). Getting 450kH/s and -/+300 WU's means the hashrate is junk.

I can see people getting 400+kH/s with the 7870XT with the Tahiti LE chip but not Pitcairn. Needless to say, every card is different from the components used to it's firmware. A simple Google will easily show that most with Pitcairn GPU's with 1,280 shaders average hashrate is right around 300kH/s.

FWIW their kh/s mining LTC on the 270X isn't even close. Mine easily do 470 kh/s. Why would 302 kh/s be listed unless it's to make the 750ti look better? A plain 270 will do 440 kh/s. I call bogus on this review.

 

[GrimSky]

good job! nvidia