780ti benchmarks

Hardware Hub GPU
1

HardOCP says that the 290x will give the same gaming performance for a lower price. In fact, it seemed as thought they couldn't stop talking about how great of a value the 290x was during this review. That is the sense that I too am getting after looking at all of these benchmarks.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/11/07/nvidia_geforce_gtx_780_ti_video_card_review/8

Some other benchmarks which agree that the 780ti is faster than the Titan.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-780-ti-review-benchmarks,3663.html

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/62085-nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-ti/

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7492/the-geforce-gtx-780-ti-review

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_780_Ti/

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/nvidia_gtx780_ti_review/1

 

 

 

The 780ti is the fastest single gpu card out there (for gaming). I just don't see how it is worth $300 more than the 290. The 780ti also uses a ton of power. At the upper end of the market, power consumption isn't really much of a concern, but it just seems to me that along with the increased thermal ceiling (83 instead of 80), nVidia was pulling out all of the stops to try to get the crown back. But it also seems to me that the 780ti is what the 780 should have been. Seems like nVidia was pulling punches with the 780 in order to have pricing on their side. They release a super expensive card, the Titan, and then release a nearly as fast 780 at a few hundred less. Well, it is practically a steal (compared to the Titan). Now that AMD has gotten things together and is beating the performance of the 780, they push the 780 in order to get out as much performance as possible. All I can say is that with this tight of competition, the consumers are the ones who win. This card is one hell of an overclocker though.

 

2

the 780ti is more expensive, but when you consitter it runs much cooler the the r9 290 (83c vs 95c) and OC's like a beast even with the stock cooler i have to say it's worth it. But if you really want performance for a good price. Grab a 780 and overclock it.

3

2816 stream vs 2880 cuda

means AMD had an epic fail and will go out of business or fade out of the PC market

AMD destroyed ATi for their pleasure

4

A bit redundant there. Lower temperatures are of absolutely no benefit to the end user, except in overclocking headroom.

Whether or not and how much a GPU warms the inside or outside of your case is all based on TDP, not actual temperature.

5

Not sure what you're saying here. 780 ti performs within spitting distance of a 290X even with it's extra cores, and that's before AMD's inevitable driver improvements. And the 290X is a lot cheaper.

6

https://teksyndicate.com/forum/gpu/gtx780-ti/159298

7

Lower temps mean a longer life span, lower noise and lower power usage. All things that benefit the end user. Also most people who are buying this type of card are enthusiasts who are after every bit of performance they can get so OCing the card is something that bound to happen.

8

A longer lifespan isn't a very useful metric unless you intend to use the same GPU for 7 or 8 years, and even then, nobody does studies to show what the relationship is. Yes, that's some sort of benefit, but for at least 90% of people it has no actual effect.

Noise is inversely proportional to temperature, not a result of higher temperature. I could run my 7870 at 120 degrees and it would be silent.

And you got the relationship between heat and power usage backwards. More power -> more heat, not the other way around.

All that said, the 290X does use more power (situationally important), make more noise (subjective), and have less overclocking headroom (again, situational). It also performs in the neighborhood of the 780ti for much cheaper.

9

Um, you do understand you can't compare stream processor count/cuda core from one architecture to the other, especially from two different manufacturers... Only time when you can compare it is when you're comparing two card of the same architecture. Even looking at nVidia cards, going from GTX500 series to GTX600 series for the most part. Look at the 660 and 580, they are very similar in performance in gaming yet the 660 has nearly double the core count. Or for AMD, compare the HD6970 to the HD7870XT (Tahiti LE), same exact stream processor count yet the HD7870XT is 48% faster in BF3 for example. Stream processor count comparisons mean little to nothing when comparing different architectures. Shtap it. :p

10

OP don't forget about the HWC review! http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/63987-nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-ti-3gb-review.html

11

I personally wouldn't touch anything Nvidia with a 10 foot pole right now. 

They are scrambling and you can HEAR and SEE it!

Mantle is coming friends...

12

So incredibly ignorant. AMD has so much more than just the ultra high-end market right now. They are destroying Nvidia at the $300 and below mark, just eating them up, in raw gaming performance, on top of having the OpenCL performance that makes AMD king for editing and Linux (DirectX in general is not good for performance). 

AMD has not destroyed ATI, if anything, they've thrown way more work, effort, and design quality into them than Nvidia has in the past 3 years. The 780 is a terrible choice compared to a 7970; $200 more for, generally, 10 FPS more. Nvidia, this generation, just isn't worth it, and hasn't been, nor do I think will be, for a while.

13

Mantle Shmantle.

"Mantle will be the only low level API for the rest of time" - AMD fanboy. (someone probably did say that, with the way people are acting).

10 FPS difference at 1440p o.0

Impressive... impressive

14

I have to disagree Brennan. While I think the lifetime of the 290x and the 780 is shorter this time round as there is a large push from devs for more powerful GPU's, At reference speeds, (Not my Classified boost speed but reference boost) I see 20-30% compared to the 7970 in many games. While other games the 7970 is definitely still very viable due to optimisation, While the price is something I believe Nvidia needs to answer for, The card is still very powerful and you are not just spending money on the power and the badge.

Many people want the features that Nvidia bring to the table that AMD does not like myself. I find many uses for CUDA and lets face it, There are more than just a few cases where nvidia cards stomp AMD. Not necessarily in the gaming area where AMD is at a very competitive price point but in raw processing power.

Ill mention Folding as its been a common topic between us. Phantom joined the team with his dual 7950's. Now 7950's are very similar to 7970's in performance and can easily overclock to a similar level as 7970's can but as we found today, 2 7950's (Overclocked?) is competing with my 780. Now I can state this with full confidence, Nvidias drivers are SHIT when it comes to folding and they get worse with every update. I back tracked to 326.80 and even then Its rubbish.

Now ill bring this to Editing as you stated OpenCL is best in editing and so AMD is King. While I use only software from Autodesk and Adobe, I can say there has been a huge swing in performance with CUDA. While I would see better viewfinder performance if I had a 290X, I still would render faster in iRay compared to a 290X with vRay not to mention iRay seems to get cleaner renders in my experience along with others. Now its a similar story with other software that use CUDA and OpenCL. While AMD is still king on on the fly rendering in OpenCL, CUDA really comes into its own when doing complete renders.

Now AMD has got Nvidia beaten in the low cost area. There is no doubt about it, I would hands down buy a 7970 over a GTX 770 but in high performance, I feel Nvidia's cards are still viable and the old 780 is now the best buy between the 290X and the 780. But who are we kidding? The 290 (Non x) beats the crap out of all but the 780 ti when overclocked. Less cores means less heat and less power consumption. We saw it with the titan and the 780. Titan was a boss but the 780 just had more room to stretch and less cores clocked higher consumed less power and produced less heat. When the 290 has a non reference cooler, Its going to be unbelievable.

Now I am not trying to defend Nvidia for the fact that I spent a Shit ton on one of their high end cards (900 AUD to be exact) to find a price drop of $200 just a month later. I was disappointed. However this new 780 ti is going to be interesting, while some people are still spouting out that the 290X still beats the 780 ti (Which is complete rubbish) The card has the same TDP, Runs hotter and does not overclock as well as the 780. Beat the titan but that card should not be sold in its current form, Its an embarrassment and it needs an update.

I think I will hold out and see what Nvidia brings out next (As in new architecture) Im looking for improved power consumption, A more stable core much like the stability of AMD cards and cooler. While the new 780 ti is something interesting, It is still hampered the same way the titan was in that its got a TDP of 250 watts, A memory interface that isnt keeping up with AMD and temps that could have better scaling per core. As we saw with titan, More cores does not mean more performance.

15

Were these cards overclocked? It does not look like it. The 290/780 should be in front of the titan and 290x. Oh and I recon the 780ti should be next to the 690. Maybe the 290x behind 290 in front of 780 since its 1440p.

Im going from my experience and Linuses benchmarks. Looking forward to see where Logan clocks his 780 ti to.