The GeForce GTX 770 Review: Calling In A Hit On Radeon HD 7970?

[Novuake]

i know that but it wasn't me that making such decision. it was some other in another forum discussion why he choose nvidia in the first place. bias or not it is the fact that really happen out there. there are really people out there making their purchase based on that belief.

Spreading the same rhetoric doesn't help these ignorant souls realize their error either. I attempt to point out fallacies whenever I see them. However, my use of satire often gets in the way this since most individuals can't seem to recognize sarcasm or irony when they see it

Well damn... Its like you are inside my MIND!!! LOL i know the feel.

 

[Mousemonkey]

[citation][nom]CaptainTom[/nom]Some people think this is meh, some think it is great, but the answer is really in-between.-This should force the 7970's down a little.-This should have been about 10% stronger with its crazy high clocks.Bottom line: AMD really won't care much because of their bundles. Look at the 7850 prices. They really haven't budged more than $10, and they are still selling like hotcakes![/citation]
Nope. It's still meh.
You know why? because its not competing against the HD7970, it'll compete against the HD8950 when it comes out.
The GTX 670 was miles better than the GTX 580 when it was released for 400$. Could u say the same when comparing the GTX 770 to the GTX 680?
No, You can't, because its the same card. So the price is down by about 50$. That's nice, but it seems like everyone here forgot that when you release a new card series it's supposed to improve on more than just the price...

I think you are forgetting that its not a "new" card and that Nvidia did say over a year ago that the y weren't impressed by the HD7900 series and that their mid range chip was more than a match for it and so far that has been the case.

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25712-nvidia-not-impressed-with-hd-7900-series

 

[slomo4sho]

I think you are forgetting that its not a "new" card and that Nvidia did say over a year ago that the y weren't impressed by the HD7900 series and that their mid range chip was more than a match for it and so far that has been the case.

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25712-nvidia-not-impressed-with-hd-7900-series

That article was from Jan 2012. Considering that the GTX 680 was released back in March 2012 and was the flagship product for a full year before they released the Titan back in April 2013... I am failing to see how you would consider the GTX 680 to be a mid-ranged chip. Maybe its because of fanboys like you that nVidia doesn't need to be impressed by a cheaper and better performing GPU since they already know they got your money.

 

[de5_Roy]

but... gk104 is indeed nvidia's midrange (or arguably upper mirdange) asic. they just launched the gfx cards at high end price points. the current 770, 760ti specs eerily match the gfx cards that were supposed to be 670 and 660ti.
edit: that's a big part of the reason i disliked 770 and it's current price point. full-fat gk104 gfx cards shoulda been well under $400 by now. nvidia just seriously price-gouged people (amd did too, but nvidia got more out of it) last year because they saw very little performance competition from amd. check the quarterly reports if you want.

 

[Mousemonkey]

I think you are forgetting that its not a "new" card and that Nvidia did say over a year ago that the y weren't impressed by the HD7900 series and that their mid range chip was more than a match for it and so far that has been the case.

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25712-nvidia-not-impressed-with-hd-7900-series

That article was from Jan 2012. Considering that the GTX 680 was released back in March 2012 and was the flagship product for a full year before they released the Titan back in April 2013... I am failing to see how you would consider the GTX 680 to be a mid-ranged chip. Maybe its because of fanboys like you that nVidia doesn't need to be impressed by a cheaper and better performing GPU since they already know they got your money.

Its fanboys like you that refuse to acknowledge the what Nvidia were saying at the time of the GTX680 was true then and is still true now, the HD7900 is unimpressive and can be beaten by a midrange GPU. Truth hurts don't it! :lol:

 

[slomo4sho]

but... gk104 is indeed nvidia's midrange (or arguably upper mirdange) asic. they just launched the gfx cards at high end price points. the current 770, 760ti specs eerily match the gfx cards that were supposed to be 670 and 660ti.

The GK110 was released in November 2012 when nVidia launched the Tesla K20 and K20X. Arguing that the GK104 was not the flagship product in March 2012 when the GTX 680 was launched (or in January 2012 when nVidia indicated that they were unimpressed by the 7970) because of the availability of the current 700 series is about as absurd of an argument one can make. Congratulations on this achievement.

Its fanboys like you that refuse to acknowledge the what Nvidia were saying at the time of the GTX680 was true then and is still true now, the HD7900 is unimpressive and can be beaten by a midrange GPU. Truth hurts don't it! :lol:

Sorry to disappoint you but my build consists of Nvidia GPUs in SLI. The production of the GK110 chips didn't start until Q3 2012. It is amazing you you can't comprehend what a mid-range product is It is clear that you have no understanding of the truth judging by your inability to comprehend simple facts so I am unsure how you think your jaded view of realty constitutes the truth.

 

[Mousemonkey]

but... gk104 is indeed nvidia's midrange (or arguably upper mirdange) asic. they just launched the gfx cards at high end price points. the current 770, 760ti specs eerily match the gfx cards that were supposed to be 670 and 660ti.

The GK110 was released in November 2012 when nVidia launched the Tesla K20 and K20X. Arguing that the GK104 was not the flagship product in March 2012 when the GTX 680 was launched (or in January 2012 when nVidia indicated that they were unimpressed by the 7970) because of the availability of the current 700 series is about as absurd of an argument one can make. Congratulations on this achievement.

Ooh, someone's upset! :lol:

 

[de5_Roy]

The GK110 was released in November 2012 when nVidia launched the Tesla K20 and K20X. Arguing that the GK104 was not the flagship product in March 2012 when the GTX 680 was launched (or in January 2012 when nVidia indicated that they were unimpressed by the 7970) because of the availability of the current 700 series is about as absurd of an argument one can make. Congratulations on this achievement.

launch timing has nothing to do with sku-ing. :lol:
edit: okay, may be not directly... there were yield issues as well. when they saw gk104 based cards performing at par or better than then-amd-counterparts they sku-ed the gpus slightly above the amd counterparts and trimming (i.e. crippling) the asics improved yields and supply. helped them concentrate on supplying gk110 to tesla customers while stockpiling lower binned ones for consumer market.

 

[Novuake]

WHO CARES WHAT NVIDIA OR AMD is capable of, its about pricing, NOTHING else. If a mid range GK104 performs the same as a top-tier Tahiti, does it matter? Since they are selling at the same price. Hell we ALL know Nvidia has BETTER tech than AMD ANYWAY!

 

[de5_Roy]

WHO CARES WHAT NVIDIA OR AMD is capable of, its about pricing, NOTHING else. If a mid range GK104 performs the same as a top-tier Tahiti, does it matter? Since they are selling at the same price. Hell we ALL know Nvidia has BETTER tech than AMD ANYWAY!

price points is the only thing that matters.
although, personally i think gcn(gaming+compute) is better than kepler due to kepler's bifurcated nature (gaming/compute).

 

[Novuake]

WHO CARES WHAT NVIDIA OR AMD is capable of, its about pricing, NOTHING else. If a mid range GK104 performs the same as a top-tier Tahiti, does it matter? Since they are selling at the same price. Hell we ALL know Nvidia has BETTER tech than AMD ANYWAY!

price points is the only thing that matters.
although, personally i think gcn(gaming+compute) is better than kepler due to kepler's bifurcated nature (gaming/compute).

LOL Geforce Kepler was INTENDED to be that way. Nvidia is keeping the markets separate. Do I really have to explain why?

 

[slomo4sho]

Ooh, someone's upset! :lol:

Sure. If it helps you sleep better at night you are more than welcome to believe what you like.

launch timing has nothing to do with sku-ing. :lol:

The GF100 architecture(Fermi) spanned two generations and the trend has continued with the GK100 architecture(Kepler). I am not sure why this is so difficult to comprehend.

 

[Sakkura]

What benchmarks are you looking at? They perform nearly the same. NVidia uses SLI which performs much better than Crossfire right now, and it consumes less power. AMD is slightly less but comes with a killer game bundle. They both offer their own value points. So for those telling people this is pointless and the 7970 is better are really short-sighted. If you need Cuda or Physx you have no choice. If you want to bitmine (which is now pointless) then AMD absolutely slaughters NVidia, as with heavy compute tasks. I just went from a 7950 OC'd to a GTX 770 and the driver stability and performance alone makes the computer a totally different animal. I cannot express enough how much driver support and stability are important.

In the Toms Hardware Review:

GTX 770 Wins:
Bioshock Infinite
Borderlands 2
Crysis 3
Far Cry 3

HD 7970 Wins:
BF3
Hitman Absolution
Skyrim
Tomb Raider

All of these differences were typically less than 10% apart. In some cases it was only 1 FPS. Both are kick-ass GPUs.

Tom's reviews show that performance is similar between the GTX 770 and the HD 7970 at stock. But the 7970 overclocks much better than the GTX 770, so with overclocking taken into account, the 7970 should have a small advantage. And the 7970 is available for about $50 less than the GTX 770, even if we ignore the bundles. So for pure gaming performance per dollar, with a single GPU, the 7970 is the better buy.

You mention PhysX and CUDA, but I specifically listed those myself. If you care about them, then yeah it obviously makes the GTX 770 more attractive. But if you don't care about them, they don't matter.

You mention SLI, but so did I. I specifically said that SLI was another matter, ie. that a pair of 7970s are certainly not a better buy than a pair of GTX 770s.

 

[de5_Roy]

The GF100 architecture(Fermi) spanned two generations and the trend has continued with the GK100 architecture(Kepler). I am not sure why this is so difficult to understand.

was that somehow relevant to gk104 being midrange? 😀
btw you seem to completely deny the possibility that nvidia had internally tested kepler samples against retail tahiti cards. mass production(i forgot the exact term..) has very little to do with that. amd, intel, nvidia do this all the time. it pays to know what the competition is offering. 😉
edit: back then it was well known that nvidia had been stockpiling gpus due to yield issues.

 

[jemm]

As always a complete and nice review!

 

[AsTheDeath]

[citation][nom]tlg[/nom]Well in the UK the GTX770 is still more expensive than the HD7970.[/citation]

Yeah, here in the Netherlands I can confirm that there is indeed a $50 price difference between the cards, but not in favour of nVidia... I really don't understand why nVidia GPU's are so much pricier here in Europe than AMD's. We're used to paying more for hardware than you would in the US, but for some reason nVidia is priced way higher than AMD. Cheapest 770 I could find translates to $470...

 

[Mousemonkey]

[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]WHO CARES WHAT NVIDIA OR AMD is capable of, its about pricing, NOTHING else. If a mid range GK104 performs the same as a top-tier Tahiti, does it matter? Since they are selling at the same price. Hell we ALL know Nvidia has BETTER tech than AMD ANYWAY![/citation]

Well I think it matters. I boycotted GK104 because it was so obviously drawn up as a $300 midrange part and I had no interest in paying high end prices for it just because AMD didn't come out with something faster. I wanted GK110 as the GTX 680 like it was originally supposed to be. Now, over a year later, I am happy with a pair of $650 GK110 parts, but I'd repeat my decision to go with the 7970 over GK104 ten times out of ten, and the GTX 770 is still a "meh" part to me.

And I dunno about the tech advantage over AMD being so obvious... the more obvious differences between them are on the software side, not the tech side.

So it's software that makes a card faster not the hardware eh?

 

[Novuake]

So it's software that makes a card faster not the hardware eh?

That is being very unfair. You missed the whole point of his post, HIS DECISION, he made that CLEAR AS DAY. Price is what matters, would you like me to say it again?
Calm down. The trolls have made you seem very defensive.

 

[Mousemonkey]

So it's software that makes a card faster not the hardware eh?

That is being very unfair. You missed the whole point of his post, HIS DECISION, he made that CLEAR AS DAY. Price is what matters, would you like me to say it again?
Calm down. The trolls have made you seem very defensive.

A: I'm not being defensive, no need. And B: BM knows that was a tongue in cheek comment and C; I don't about your opinion that price is what matters as that is not what controls my decisions.

 

[Novuake]

[citation][nom]tlg[/nom]Well in the UK the GTX770 is still more expensive than the HD7970.[/citation]

Yeah, here in the Netherlands I can confirm that there is indeed a $50 price difference between the cards, but not in favour of nVidia... I really don't understand why nVidia GPU's are so much pricier here in Europe than AMD's. We're used to paying more for hardware than you would in the US, but for some reason nVidia is priced way higher than AMD. Cheapest 770 I could find translates to $470...

So it's software that makes a card faster not the hardware eh?

That is being very unfair. You missed the whole point of his post, HIS DECISION, he made that CLEAR AS DAY. Price is what matters, would you like me to say it again?
Calm down. The trolls have made you seem very defensive.

A: I'm not being defensive, no need. And B: BM knows that was a tongue in cheek comment and C; I don't about your opinion that price is what matters as that is not what controls my decisions.

C; His decision obviously.

 

[Mousemonkey]

[citation][nom]Mousemonkey[/nom]So it's software that makes a card faster not the hardware eh?[/citation]

It's both 😉 .

Liking the driver change are we? 😉

 

[Sakkura]

[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]WHO CARES WHAT NVIDIA OR AMD is capable of, its about pricing, NOTHING else. If a mid range GK104 performs the same as a top-tier Tahiti, does it matter? Since they are selling at the same price. Hell we ALL know Nvidia has BETTER tech than AMD ANYWAY![/citation]

Well I think it matters. I boycotted GK104 because it was so obviously drawn up as a $300 midrange part and I had no interest in paying high end prices for it just because AMD didn't come out with something faster. I wanted GK110 as the GTX 680 like it was originally supposed to be. Now, over a year later, I am happy with a pair of $650 GK110 parts, but I'd repeat my decision to go with the 7970 over GK104 ten times out of ten, and the GTX 770 is still a "meh" part to me.

And I dunno about the tech advantage over AMD being so obvious... the more obvious differences between them are on the software side, not the tech side.

If Nvidia had released a GK110-based GTX 680, it would have cost far more than the 7970. The GPU is two thirds bigger, so it would cost around two thirds more to manufacture.

By comparison, Tahiti is only about 20% bigger than GK104, so they are much more natural adversaries.

 

[Mousemonkey]

660Ti's ain't that bad, can't say I've had any issues and performance has been stellar at the resolution that I run.

 

[Sakkura]

The GTX 680 does pretty well at high resolutions.

Anyway, sure it's possible they were thinking about releasing the GK110 as the GTX 680, but it would have been at a competitive disadvantage against Tahiti. Either it would have had to cost way more, to the point of being not worth it for gamers, or Nvidia would have made a loss selling it (or AMD would have made a killing, if they raised 7970 prices in response).

 

[Sakkura]

We would have gotten a better product at a much higher price. Ie. less performance per dollar, ie. a worse deal.