Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Kramjacks
Jul 5, 2007



http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews...oling,3246.html

Interesting article on Tom's Hardware in which they test a custom 5-slot cooler for a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. I found it neat that the fans aren't actually touching the heatsink.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Alereon
Feb 6, 2004

Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed

College Slice

It would be interesting to compare that with the performance of the Arctic Cooling Accelero Xtreme 7970.

unpronounceable
Apr 4, 2010

You mean we still have another game to go through?!


Fallen Rib

Just found some leaked info about Team Green's 660Ti. If it's to be believed, it'll be virtually identical to the 670, except for a 192-bit bus width.

http://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/15...lanseringsdatum

Agreed
Dec 30, 2003

The price of meat has just gone up, and your old lady has just gone down



unpronounceable posted:

Just found some leaked info about Team Green's 660Ti. If it's to be believed, it'll be virtually identical to the 670, except for a 192-bit bus width.

http://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/15...lanseringsdatum

Jesus, they are stingy with buses these days. I remember when all the top end cards had at least a 512-bit bus, granted much slower RAM, but we already know Kepler is shackled to the bus from overclocking it. Cripes.

If it does launch in that configuration it'll be a price:performance monster and confirm my suspicion that nVidia is making these things cheeeap compared to ATI, who really can't afford another cut to meet a less bandwidth version of the 670.

Agreed fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Jul 28, 2012

Wozbo
Jul 5, 2010


Agreed posted:

Jesus, they are stingy with buses these days. I remember when all the top end cards had at least a 512-bit bus, granted much slower RAM, but we already know Kepler is shackled to the bus from overclocking it. Cripes.

I never understood this? Its like saying an engine is 3.3 Liters. Wouldn't you want to also consider things like frequency and word length too? Heck, I thought that the 256 bit bus could saturate PCIE2 x16 in SLI mode.

E: With the latest gen of GDDR, sorry if being obtuse.

Wozbo fucked around with this message at 13:19 on Jul 28, 2012

Agreed
Dec 30, 2003

The price of meat has just gone up, and your old lady has just gone down



Wozbo posted:

I never understood this? Its like saying an engine is 3.3 Liters. Wouldn't you want to also consider things like frequency and word length too? Heck, I thought that the 256 bit bus could saturate PCIE2 x16 in SLI mode.

E: With the latest gen of GDDR, sorry if being obtuse.

Yes, bus width by VRAM speed contributes to total GB/sec bandwidth. Memory buses on current gen cards are made of 64-bit chips working together. Fermi GF110 called for a combined 384-bit bus and about 4GHz GDDR3. ATI ran faster RAM on a 256-bit bus. This gen, nVidia did faster RAM, narrower bus, while AT did 5.5GHz GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus.

Old cards needed big memory buses because the memory was slow (the introduction of on-card DDR3 was huge in its day). New cards can get by with less, relying on SLI/Crossfire for parallel access times for super demanding activity.

It's also more demanding on the integrated memory controller found inthe die to run at faster rates, so I'm only kvetching, really, but nVidia actually is rather memory bandwidth limited and that shows up when you begin to really overclock it, have to spend TDP on VRAM speed to get it up to where you can see the benefits of a hefty core overclock. ATI too but iirc less so.

Josh Lyman
May 24, 2009





Wozbo posted:

I never understood this? Its like saying an engine is 3.3 Liters. Wouldn't you want to also consider things like frequency and word length too? Heck, I thought that the 256 bit bus could saturate PCIE2 x16 in SLI mode.

E: With the latest gen of GDDR, sorry if being obtuse.
The market of people who buy cards based on memory bus bandwidth is super small.

Agreed
Dec 30, 2003

The price of meat has just gone up, and your old lady has just gone down



Josh Lyman posted:

The market of people who buy cards based on memory bus bandwidth is super small.

Not so sure, look at the various GTX 460 SKUs and how deterministic the bus was for performance once they hacked a big chop out. People cottoned on to the performance difference quickly.

An unmodified GTX 670 with a 192-bit instead of a 256-bit memory bus is about the most effective and simple way to artificially limit the card's performance by a substantial margin while still making it competitive in general with any price:performance options currently on the table. For lower resolutions (1080p) may well be a new card of choice; for very high resolutions, two in SLI could lose to two 7870s going on napkin math alone.

Dogen
May 5, 2002

Bury my body down by the highwayside, so that my old evil spirit can get a Greyhound bus and ride


Isn't chopping the memory bus a good cost savings in manufacturing as well, compared to some other things?

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


I'd imagine so; fewer RAM chips to make up the set. A 192-bit bus could be done in six chips instead of the eight for the 670/680. Plus with the possible length savings from rearranging them:


(from LegitReviews)

... it might be possible to shrink the card somewhat, though that's a trade-off with engineering resources an validation.

What it also is is a way to harvest chips effectively. GPU RAM controllers tend to be distributed physically, and on GK104, they're distributed around the edges of the SMX groups.


(from AnandTech's GeForce 680 review)

The actual connections are distributed in an on-chip interconnect network, so it's not like those controllers solely handle the SMX pair they're next to. But this allows re-using chips which have a bum memory controller, either flawed in manufacturing or unable to run at the speeds needed.

I think the latter part, harvesting subpar chips, is more the point. Say Nvidia made $250 per GeForce 680 per GK104, or whatever. Without harvesting, a single flaw in an SMX means no money for that chip; instead sell it for a GeForce 670 for $200, and you've turned garbage into $200. Got two flaws, or the one flaw is on the memory controller? Sell it for $150 as a 660 Ti, and you've turned garbage into $150.

Zhentar
Sep 28, 2003

Brilliant Master Genius


What's a good brand for nVidia cards that's not EVGA these days? I'd been going with EVGA, but I'm on my third 460 from them and it's still not stable at stock speeds, so I'm not feeling so impressed with them anymore (and the warranty isn't seeming like such a plus).

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


Asus, MSI, Zotac. Also, what the hell use do you expect the warranty to be if you have a broken card and you aren't using the warranty to get it replaced with a functional one?

Zhentar
Sep 28, 2003

Brilliant Master Genius


I tried twice, but apparently they weren't interested in sending me functional replacements. At that point I decided to deal with the one that at least worked underclocked rather than risk going through it again just to get another card that didn't work at all.

doomisland
Oct 5, 2004



That's some bad luck since I have a EVGA 460 that's been stable for months.

Geno
Apr 26, 2004
STUPID
DICK


TweakTown got their hands on a 660 Ti

quote:

It's hard to fault NVIDIA's upcoming GEFORCE GTX 660 Ti and for good reason. You're talking about a video card that is rumored to hit at the mid-$200 range yet performs like a video card priced $100 more. In this case we're talking about the HD 7950 specifically. You could argue that it can be compared against the more expensive HD 7970 at times, too.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/48...view/index.html

Agreed
Dec 30, 2003

The price of meat has just gone up, and your old lady has just gone down




gently caress me, it is a 670 with a 192-bit bus. This is going to really hurt ATI. Holy gently caress nVidia is on fire this generation.

Edit: Two things - one, man oh man is this card bandwidth limited. I mean, by design, but still. I would guess you could get some pretty impressive performance improvements just by overclocking the GDDR5.

Number two, nVidia is making these things cheap. This is probably the base level for them to turn a profit on the card, which is just brutal considering how much I'm guessing ATI is cutting it close to the bone on their performance lineup after price drop #2.

Agreed fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Jul 31, 2012

doomisland
Oct 5, 2004



I was looking at a new card to replace my 460 and it seems the mid range 660 Ti here should hit that sweet spot pretty nicely.

Devian666
Aug 19, 2008

Take some advice Chris.



Fun Shoe

doomisland posted:

I was looking at a new card to replace my 460 and it seems the mid range 660 Ti here should hit that sweet spot pretty nicely.

I think I can wait until the card is released then make a decision whether I'll get a 660 or 670. I suspect I'll get the 660 if the price is right.

Agreed
Dec 30, 2003

The price of meat has just gone up, and your old lady has just gone down



doomisland posted:

I was looking at a new card to replace my 460 and it seems the mid range 660 Ti here should hit that sweet spot pretty nicely.

Pretend the black bar is the 660Ti, and yeah I'd say that should be a pretty phenomenal upgrade.

reboot
May 6, 2011


So, I'm looking at getting the fabled 690 GTX. Although, I'm using a LGA 1366 socket motherboard due to the fact that I'm running an i7 990x. After doing some research it seems that the 690 will work on PCI-E 2.0.


Now, my main question. Will the 690 GTX work with a GA-X58A-UD7 motherboard. If it won't, would someone recommend me a LGA 1366 motherboard that will allow it to run?

Thanks.

reboot fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Aug 1, 2012

Space Gopher
Jul 31, 2006
BLITHERING IDIOT

reboot posted:

So, I'm looking at getting the fabled 690 GTX. Although, I'm using a LGA 1366 socket motherboard due to the fact that I'm running an i7 990x. After doing some research it seems that the 690 will work on PCI-E 2.0.


Now, my main question. Will the 690 GTX work with a GA-X58A-UD7 motherboard. If it won't, would someone recommend me a LGA 1366 motherboard that will allow it to run?

Thanks.

Yes, it will work - but why are you doing this? Unless you're in some crazy one-in-a-million situation, you're better off buying a 670 and putting the other $600 or so in an envelope. The second the 670 starts being annoyingly slow, open the envelope and buy whatever's top-of-the-reasonable-line.

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


Dude's got an i7-990X. That thing costs as much as a GeForce 690. "Ridiculously expensive overkill" is practically the thesis of the computer, I'm guessing.

reboot
May 6, 2011


Space Gopher posted:

Yes, it will work - but why are you doing this? Unless you're in some crazy one-in-a-million situation, you're better off buying a 670 and putting the other $600 or so in an envelope. The second the 670 starts being annoyingly slow, open the envelope and buy whatever's top-of-the-reasonable-line.

Thanks for the answer, appreciate it.

The reason I'm doing it is that I've decided to switch from liquid cooling and have dual liquid cooled 580 GTX's. I'm going to be selling those and getting what I can back and putting it towards the 690. It would only wind up being a maybe $300 upgrade, which isn't bad at all.

My motherboard also died, which is a real pain in the rear end, so I was just thinking it was time to get away from liquid (which has given me so many problems in the past) and just switch to air while I still have a reason to make any changes.

Factory Factory posted:

Dude's got an i7-990X. That thing costs as much as a GeForce 690. "Ridiculously expensive overkill" is practically the thesis of the computer, I'm guessing.


You pretty much hit the nail on the head there.

reboot fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Aug 1, 2012

Star War Sex Parrot
Oct 2, 2003



Muldoon

Jesus.

doomisland
Oct 5, 2004



Devian666 posted:

I think I can wait until the card is released then make a decision whether I'll get a 660 or 670. I suspect I'll get the 660 if the price is right.

Yeah, not spending over 300 is goal when getting vid cards now. I had a 5770 before but got the 460 as a cheapo stop gap since I was thinking of getting a 560ti but never really needed it.

spasticColon
Sep 22, 2004

In loving memory of Donald Pleasance


So does this mean I shot myself in the foot getting a HD7850 back in April?

Cavauro
Jan 9, 2008



It's difficult to buy a GPU at a time when you couldn't get a more powerful card for a similar price 4-5 months later. If you only upgraded for the hell of it then this would've been a nicer score but the 7850 owns.

doomisland
Oct 5, 2004



If all your upgrades aren't done on a whim then you're forever disappointed.

Agreed
Dec 30, 2003

The price of meat has just gone up, and your old lady has just gone down



spasticColon posted:

So does this mean I shot myself in the foot getting a HD7850 back in April?

Would you say you've enjoyed playing videogames at high settings since April?

kuddles
Jul 16, 2006

Like a fist wrapped in blood...

doomisland posted:

If all your upgrades aren't done on a whim then you're forever disappointed.
Yup. Buy the 660ti now and either a price drop or new card will make you cringe in regret four months from now. With the exception of knowing that a completely new line is coming in just a few weeks, your best bet is always to just go for the best price/performance ratio you can get today and not look back.

eggyolk
Nov 8, 2007



So putting the 660ti in SLI should make for a setup that blows away the equivalently priced single 670, shouldn't it?

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


In the words of the prophet: No poo poo.

Tunga
May 7, 2004



Grimey Drawer

eggyolk posted:

So putting the 660ti in SLI should make for a setup that blows away the equivalently priced single 670, shouldn't it?

As long as you are okay with having to run everything full screen, and there are potential microlag and other incompatibilities to consider.

Wozbo
Jul 5, 2010


Tunga posted:

As long as you are okay with having to run everything full screen, and there are potential microlag and other incompatibilities to consider.

Not with NVIDIA, they do a little bit of runwaiting on a finished frame using a rolling average. ATI though is painful.

Happy_Misanthrope
Aug 3, 2007

"I wanted to kill you, go to your funeral, and anyone who showed up to mourn you, I wanted to kill them too."

eggyolk posted:

So putting the 660ti in SLI should make for a setup that blows away the equivalently priced single 670, shouldn't it?
Check the Tweaktown review posted above. It's so drat close to a 670 already that if you could a decent overclock a single 660ti is competitive, so of course SLI will destroy a single 670.

Basically it looks like ~85% of the performance of a 670 right now...and expected to sell for $250, vs ~$400 for a 670 2GB. Nice!

Welp, finally upgrading. Hey guys do think my X2 215 will be a bottleneck or should I upgrade the CPU as well

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E


I'm trying to figure out how much faster a 7750/1GB/GDDR5 is over a 6670/1GB/GDDR3.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814131461

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814150576

I know the 7750 is faster but by how much? I'm picking between these due to space constraints I need a single slot card that doesn't need external power.

movax
Aug 30, 2008



Shaocaholica posted:

I'm trying to figure out how much faster a 7750/1GB/GDDR5 is over a 6670/1GB/GDDR3.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814131461

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814150576

I know the 7750 is faster but by how much? I'm picking between these due to space constraints I need a single slot card that doesn't need external power.

I'll answer your question with another question: is it possible for you to swap cases/motherboards to use dual-slot cards and a larger PSU? I'm just curious as to what's keeping you constrained to that selection range (i.e. you need a super quiet mini-ITX box for the living room or something).

Agreed
Dec 30, 2003

The price of meat has just gone up, and your old lady has just gone down



Shaocaholica posted:

I'm trying to figure out how much faster a 7750/1GB/GDDR5 is over a 6670/1GB/GDDR3.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814131461

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...N82E16814150576

I know the 7750 is faster but by how much? I'm picking between these due to space constraints I need a single slot card that doesn't need external power.

Go with the 7750 if those are your options, also this here utility is in the OP please read the OP well gently caress me I couldn't find it in the OP, yo, Movax and FF, why don't we have the GPU comparison smack at the top of the OP? It's pretty much THE question people ask, and while I do my best to not be a dick about it, I do get kind of tired of constantly going and plugging in simple comparison choices for people when they could do it themselves just as quickly. Not exactly high-level analysis to just select that card and that other card and show the graph, we should make this tool the first thing people see when they click the thread.

I know we've framed the thread roughly as a general GPU discussion, but people come here for recommendations despite the suggestion not to, usually because they have some question that's a little weird for the parts picking thread. Can we stick the Anandtech GPU 2012 link up there where it's easy to see, please? Just to cut down on this kind of thing?

Agreed fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Aug 1, 2012

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


Did we actually put that in the OP of this thread? Because it should be.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

movax
Aug 30, 2008



Factory Factory posted:

Did we actually put that in the OP of this thread? Because it should be.

We have Top Quark's price/perf chart thing I think, I'll add this right below it as well.

e: so,

quote:

Now, as of $post_date, the current best values for 1080p gaming are:
AMD Radeon 7850, Nvidia GeForce 560 Ti or 560 Ti-448

Update to...660 Ti and 7950, if I recall correctly? Or did the GHz edition launch?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply