34 replies to this topic

[bikerbass77]

Greetings all. I am just posting this as a matter of interest for those who follow the current march of computer technology. Anandtech have today come out with details of the latest release from Nvidia, their mid-high end card based on the GK106 GPU otherwise known as Kepler.

It has been 6 months since the ultra high end and low end cards in the range were released. These are the ones that are of value for gamers who can't afford to spend £200 - £300 on a graphics card. Unfortunatey they are so long delayed they are nearly in the same window as the next series from AMD (expected 1st quarter 2013, their last range release was in March) and will likely be out-dated by their competition in short order. However it gives a bit more flexibility for people wanting to upgrade for this game.

You can read the whole review here:
http://www.anandtech...e-kepler-family

I have checked and unfortunately it seems either a 'paper' release or that us in Europe are getting it later than those in the USA. At least from this article we should get an idea of the parts performance.

Edited by Hans Davion, 14 September 2012 - 02:46 AM.

[Dymitry]

I'd move this to the Hardware section, but interesting read nonetheless.

[Yore]

Read the reviews of the GTX 660 on custom PC bit-tech site, apparently it's a bit of a letdown according to the magazines. Whereas in previous versions such as 260, 460, 560 they have always been really good cards and in some cases like the 460 its reworked architechture went on to spawn the 500 series. Given the price difference they were reccomending people buy the 670 instead.

If you only have the cash for a 660 buy it, but if you can save a little longer get the 670, its a much better card as its memory bandwidth hasn't been nerfed compared to the 660.

[bikerbass77]

Here's wishing Anandtech would dump the aged Crysis Warhead benchmark and use Crysis 2 instead. Hell, if they're not careful they will have Crysis 3 launched before they do so.

Dymitry, on 14 September 2012 - 02:45 AM, said:

I'd move this to the Hardware section, but interesting read nonetheless.

When I was posting this I looked but could not find a hardware forum on this site.

[bikerbass77]

Yore, on 14 September 2012 - 03:06 AM, said:

Read the reviews of the GTX 660 on custom PC bit-tech site, apparently it's a bit of a letdown according to the magazines. Whereas in previous versions such as 260, 460, 560 they have always been really good cards and in some cases like the 460 its reworked architechture went on to spawn the 500 series. Given the price difference they were reccomending people buy the 670 instead.

If you only have the cash for a 660 buy it, but if you can save a little longer get the 670, its a much better card as its memory bandwidth hasn't been nerfed compared to the 660.

Unfortunately for most of us, that is those on the regular £10,000 - £20,000 wage band, the costs for the top 2 in any card range is just too high to be affordable. Especially when you look up the figures and see that their is usually less than a 10 fps difference in performance for an extra £100.

The main concern I have about these cards is that they are not far removed from their current competition. I see them both tucked in (in performance terms) right between the 7850 and the 7870 often nearer the 7850 apart from a few benchmarks (such as Skyrim which for some reason really likes Nvidia GPU's more than anything else) along with the fact that the next generation for AMD is not that far away.

Edited by Hans Davion, 14 September 2012 - 03:18 AM.

[SouthernRex]

lmfao @ their tech being outdated by AMD's toys you call "video cards."

[Dervim]

Whatever it is, I can tell you one thing- I am not going back to ATI, ever.

[bikerbass77]

SouthernRex, on 14 September 2012 - 03:14 AM, said:

lmfao @ their tech being outdated by AMD's toys you call "video cards."

Looks like we have an Nvidia fanboy here.

AMD make good cards, that is a fact. I use either company depending on which gives me the best performance for the money when I am buying. My current card is a GTX 460 and the last few I had were ATI. Calling a companies products a joke without backing up the statement with any facts or figures just points you out as having your head shoved up where the son don't shine. Just to prove my point here are some figures for you.

http://images.anandt...h6276/49735.png

[Der Kopfsammler]

Hans Davion, on 14 September 2012 - 03:26 AM, said:

Looks like we have an Nvidia fanboy here.

AMD make good cards, that is a fact. I use either company depending on which gives me the best performance for the money when I am buying. My current card is a GTX 460 and the last few I had were ATI. Calling a companies products a joke without backing up the statement with any facts or figures just points you out as having your head shoved up where the son don't shine. Just to prove my point here are some figures for you.

http://images.anandt...h6276/49735.png

ATI might build good cards... but Nvidia lenghts the duration of their's and increases their performance with every driver they release.

[bikerbass77]

Here are some scores based on Crysis 2 that may be of use.

http://media.bestofm...sis2%20HIGH.png

Der Kopfsammler, on 14 September 2012 - 03:37 AM, said:

ATI might build good cards... but Nvidia lenghts the duration of their's and increases their performance with every driver they release.

You could say the same for AMD/ATI. I had a 3870 until last year which was still able to play the latest games up to when I replaced it (although I was starting to have to turn down the detail at this point). I kept up with the drivers and they gradually upped the performance as they were streamlined. I have seen many posts going on about how ATI used to have bad drivers, but honestly I have had more problems with Nvidia drivers. When I got Alan Wake a couple of months ago, the Nvidia drivers I had would not play the game at anything but freeze frame. Sure the next driver fixed it, but the driver release I had was newer than the game. In comparison the only game I couldn't play with AMD/ATI was Mechwarrior 3 - a long since unsupported release.

Edited by Hans Davion, 14 September 2012 - 03:52 AM.

[Dymitry]

Hans Davion, on 14 September 2012 - 03:51 AM, said:

Here are some scores based on Crysis 2 that may be of use.

http://media.bestofm...sis2%20HIGH.png


You could say the same for AMD/ATI. I had a 3870 until last year which was still able to play the latest games up to when I replaced it (although I was starting to have to turn down the detail at this point). I kept up with the drivers and they gradually upped the performance as they were streamlined. I have seen many posts going on about how ATI used to have bad drivers, but honestly I have had more problems with Nvidia drivers. When I got Alan Wake a couple of months ago, the Nvidia drivers I had would not play the game at anything but freeze frame. Sure the next driver fixed it, but the driver release I had was newer than the game. In comparison the only game I couldn't play with AMD/ATI was Mechwarrior 3 - a long since unsupported release.

Do not waste breath, it is a lost cause, no matter how many strong arguments you can propose, there is no worst blind man that he who does not want to see.
Fanboism is hooliganism for geeks.

ah, and the hw section should be this one? http://mwomercs.com/...es-peripherals/

[Remarius]

I'm not entirely sure with the one sided viewpoint presented by the OP (on top of his insults/goading) you can expect anything other than people to take offence and I'm saying that as someone open minded enough to be using both 680 and 7970 based computers at the moment.

[Sarriss]

You act as if ATI fanboys don't exist. I have/had a few ATI cards and they've been fine. I've had a few issues with drivers, more then I've ever had with Nvidia. When I'm looking for a new card and they are right around the same performance but a slightly higher cost on the Nvidia, I'll still buy the Nvidia. If that makes me an "Nvidia fanboy" so be it. Although I will say ATI tends to have a slimmer formfactor and a bit less noise, but in my current HAF X rig, you couldn't hear a chainsaw so it's not as important as it once was.

[Der Kopfsammler]

Hans Davion, on 14 September 2012 - 03:51 AM, said:

Here are some scores based on Crysis 2 that may be of use.

http://media.bestofm...sis2%20HIGH.png


You could say the same for AMD/ATI. I had a 3870 until last year which was still able to play the latest games up to when I replaced it (although I was starting to have to turn down the detail at this point). I kept up with the drivers and they gradually upped the performance as they were streamlined. I have seen many posts going on about how ATI used to have bad drivers, but honestly I have had more problems with Nvidia drivers. When I got Alan Wake a couple of months ago, the Nvidia drivers I had would not play the game at anything but freeze frame. Sure the next driver fixed it, but the driver release I had was newer than the game. In comparison the only game I couldn't play with AMD/ATI was Mechwarrior 3 - a long since unsupported release.

I had a GeForce 9400GT (512Mhz) before i bought my GeForce GT 630 recently (since i have no money to spend on "OP Super Ultra High End" cards), and i was considering getting an ATI just to try it out, untill i heard that my friend had to downgrade his drivers just to play Diablo III, and so i helped him replacing his card with a more recent ATI card to solve that.

Anyways, my old card had served me well for 3 years but i was already pushing too much from it. But with its most recent drivers i could still play Skyrim, WoT, Blacklight Retribution, etc. with Med/High graphics, so in overall, Nvidia really makes me confortable and encourages me to keep my old card, giving me the option to move on or not. The most recent low budget ATI cards might be good and, if not, might even have better performance than Nvidia (untill Nvidia decides to make new drivers that buffs their cards even further), but in my personal experience if im already satisfied with Nvidia's service, why to change a good thing?

[Dymitry]

No need to change if you are perfectly satisfied.
AMD is a perfectly viable alternative should you want to change, and the other way around is also true.
In the last few generations I found myself preferring AMD design choices/technologies to nVidia ones (more GPGPU/OpenCL, eyefinity among the rest) but I have never had an issue with my nVidia cards/laptop chips either. I saw more nVidia cards failing, in perfect honesty, but since people do really weird things with their laptops/pcs, and nVidia has a bigger market share, I cannot really fault the company.

[SouthernRex]

Hahahahahahaha.

[Odins Fist]

Just had a friend lose another ATI/AMD Card, this time a 6850 due to "FAILURE".... His second ATI/AMD card to bork, he's going to get a 7xxx series card by next month, and I will be eager to see how it performs "in person"..
.
Just seems funny that both of my old 8600 GTs are "STILL" running in two other computers, as well as two 8800 GTs, two 9800 GTX+s, and two GTX 260s.... Weird huh.
.
It really is whatever you want when it comes to video cards, and everyone's experience is different, just (fanboying) it up, and saying Nvidia is a better quality card depending on which company you go with, is really just a blanket statement, and nobody wants to see that.
.
I mean, I wouldn't want to get "anecdotal" and make somebody cry about it.
.
I consider ATI/AMD to be a fully acceptable alternative to Nvdia, but since it's the "ONLY" alternative, that's not saying much..
Too bad there wasn't a "THIRD" GPU brand on the market, maybe prices would be better, and performance would be better due to competition, but sadly we are spoon fed whatever Nvidia, or ATI/AMD wants to push on us with claims of "AWESOME" performance, only to want something better in a year and a half... Watch me spend $500.00 on a new card, and then whine about it in a year or so when the newest bad-boy comes out... That's exactly why I have been holding out on a "brand new card"...
.
Not to worry, many years from now everything will be "warp engines" and "holographic entertainment"... Too bad we'll all be dead.
Wait a minute, was is the upside to that..?? FML

[Vulpesveritas]

Odins Fist, on 17 September 2012 - 07:53 AM, said:

Just had a friend lose another ATI/AMD Card, this time a 6850 due to "FAILURE".... His second ATI/AMD card to bork, he's going to get a 7xxx series card by next month, and I will be eager to see how it performs "in person"..
.
Just seems funny that both of my old 8600 GTs are "STILL" running in two other computers, as well as two 8800 GTs, two 9800 GTX+s, and two GTX 260s.... Weird huh.
.
It really is whatever you want when it comes to video cards, and everyone's experience is different, just (fanboying) it up, and saying Nvidia is a better quality card depending on which company you go with, is really just a blanket statement, and nobody wants to see that.
.
I mean, I wouldn't want to get "anecdotal" and make somebody cry about it.
.
I consider ATI/AMD to be a fully acceptable alternative to Nvdia, but since it's the "ONLY" alternative, that's not saying much..
Too bad there wasn't a "THIRD" GPU brand on the market, maybe prices would be better, and performance would be better due to competition, but sadly we are spoon fed whatever Nvidia, or ATI/AMD wants to push on us with claims of "AWESOME" performance, only to want something better in a year and a half... Watch me spend $500.00 on a new card, and then whine about it in a year or so when the newest bad-boy comes out... That's exactly why I have been holding out on a "brand new card"...
.
Not to worry, many years from now everything will be "warp engines" and "holographic entertainment"... Too bad we'll all be dead.
Wait a minute, was is the upside to that..?? FML

Odin, you have already stated that you are a Nvidia fanboy who has a personal bias against AMD/ATI, who values your own personal experience above industry figures or mathematical price/performance ratios. As such I question what you hope to gain by your posting of this. In terms of card failures it is in most cases a failure of parts the AIB company makes or assembles, not the chip itself, in which case it is the fault of the AIB partner, not AMD/ATI or Nvidia.

On topic; the 650 is a great card in terms of performance / power consumption but loses to the Radeon HD 7770 in a price / performance battle, and the 660 is a good card overall and is the reverse picture vs Pitcairn, holding the lower $200 market strongly.

Drivers performance may vary system to system, but in most cases with a single GPU driver support is a moot point between the two brands. Nvidia has an edge in multi-gpu driver support, but if you play one of the games that AMD actually has put time into building the drivers to, Crossfire generally scales better. Bringing it to be a situational point depending on whether you play every game that comes out of the tube, or if you happen to be one of those people who play mostly just a few titles, and some of your favorite games happen to be those with the good Crossfire support.

In all, Nvidia has the better multi-low GPU solution for many users for SLI, and they have a better HTPC / OEM upgrade card, and own much of the price / performance battle at $200-400, with sales on AMD cards varying the figures.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 17 September 2012 - 10:39 AM.

[DaRep]

I've always found slavish loyalty to a particular manufacturer and their products to be counterproductive to being a good consumer.

I went from a 9800GX2 to a 5870, which I just replaced with a GTX680 for this game. I was amazed at the heat differences vs performance between the 9800 and the 5870 (with the ATI having better thermal characteristics at the time as the 9800GX2 was a bit of a space heater), and now the 680 is a monster with good stock heat management as well.

I find staying open minded to all the variables when making a selection to be the best way to get a product that suits you at the time, while understanding that in technology, the times change quickly as the competition and advancements shift.

[Odins Fist]

Vulpesveritas, on 17 September 2012 - 08:42 AM, said:

Odin, you have already stated that you are a Nvidia fanboy who has a personal bias against AMD/ATI, who values your own personal experience above industry figures or mathematical price/performance ratios. As such I question what you hope to gain by your posting of this.

.
"YAWN".... Here's a tissue... I have no Bias "AGAINST" AMD, quite the opposite, but I can't say that I haven't been a huge fan of ATI, and yes I know AMD owns ATI, but I haven't seen a great increase in quality of drivers or crossfire support across the board..
.
Yeah personal experience means nothing huh..?? I just know i'm going to hear more crying about statements being "anecdotal" shortly, but (to whom it may concern), you can save it for someone else that might care.
.
Examples don't mean a thing unless ya read them on Tom's Hardware huh..?? Give me a break, things haven't seemed to improved noticeably from the opening days of BFBC2 (Battlefield Bad Company 2), when (if I remember correctly), everyone in my gaming Clan that had 4xxx or 5xxx series ATI cards at first couldn't play the BETA without crashing or artifacting (not that I hadn't read something about Nvidia having an issue but on a smaller scale), and then when the game was released, they (all but one) had huge black blobs artifacting on their screen. Up to that point I was seriously considering an ATI purchase, but once again (anecdotal) I thought differently.... Now fast forward to Battlefield 3, and one of my members ran into the same situation, and decided to jump ship and buy a GTX 590, yes the 590, after that he said "that's it, i'm not going back to ATI"... I know this doesn't mean anything to certain people, and I don't care if it does or not, but it was worth saying.
.
Like I said before, it's basically "Apples & Oranges", unless you know better, and have been around long enough to have been consistantly disappointed by ATI over the years... When my friend gets his 7xxx series card, i'm going to look into it, and see just what kind of grinding it does, his wife already has had a 7770, but I was not very impressed for it being a 7xxx series card, we'll see how his new 7870 will do, I already know it will be better than the 7770, but my other friend with two 560ti wants to see as well... I imagine two 7870s in Xfire will do nicely, but that will have to wait.
.
It's all up to the person buying what they want, and that's fine... Whatever floats your boat...
.
On a side note to "DaRep".... The 9800GX2 was a dual GPU, and Dual PCB Video card, and the 5870 was "NOT", that is where you find your difference in heat between the two cards... The 9800GX2 would be hotter, no matter what way you cut it, so that is not a good camparison, unless that was not your intention..
As far as the 9800GTX+, I ran two fo them for 2 1/2 years, and had no issues with heat, mostly because I set my own fan control curves with software for the Video Card.

Edited by Odins Fist, 17 September 2012 - 11:02 AM.