NVIDIA Kepler speculation thread

The steam numbers are largely meaningless. In the past 3-4 years I've owned 2x4870, 4x5870, 6x5850, 4x6950, 4x6970 and now 4x7970s and not once I've opted in for their hardware survey. The only thing that the survey measures is the desire to show off your purchases.
 
The steam numbers are largely meaningless. In the past 3-4 years I've owned 2x4870, 4x5870, 6x5850, 4x6950, 4x6970 and now 4x7970s and not once I've opted in for their hardware survey. The only thing that the survey measures is the desire to show off your purchases.

Yes it's meaningless because you are way more important than the hundreds of thousands of people who do take the survey....lol.
 
As if we needed any more evidence of nVidia's original intentions for GK104.

Original, perhaps, but it has nothing to do with AMD delivered, or do you really think nVidia planned on sitting on the market without highend for what, 3 quarters?
 
The steam numbers are largely meaningless. In the past 3-4 years I've owned 2x4870, 4x5870, 6x5850, 4x6950, 4x6970 and now 4x7970s and not once I've opted in for their hardware survey. The only thing that the survey measures is the desire to show off your purchases.
This sort of situation only ruins their results if people who tend to buy certain sorts of hardware are also more likely to opt-out of the hardware survey.
 
Yes, aside from the myriad of actual flaws their hardware survey tends to have. That said, we should probably leave this discussion to another thread.

So back on topic, today Newegg actually have an MSI 680 in stock (limit 2 per customer so they have at least 2 atm).

<edit> and they're gone
 
As far as I can tell there are getting less 680's as time goes on, not more.

Never seen anything remotely like this. I feel like if another company had done this, there'd be no end to the world-is-ending kvetching over it. But this, people dont even talk about in a negative way.
 
Tridam's just published an article about GPU Boost, revisited: http://www.hardware.fr/focus/65/gpu-boost-gtx-680-double-variabilite.html

Basically, his press sample was qualified up to 1110MHz while retail cards may be limited to 1097, 1084, 1071, or perhaps as low as 1058MHz. So he benched a random retail card against his press sample, measured a 1.5% difference on average, up to 5% in Anno 2070.

So pretty much as expected. Whereas you get consistent performance with AMD cards, you have luck of the draw and variable performance with the Nvidia cards. So luck of the draw whether you get a faster or slower card than your friend.

I'll take consistent performance that matches reviews and take the risk of overclocking myself if that's what I want, over variable performance making GPU reviews meaningless any day of the week.

And either reviewers just got lucky (statistically) or they were all sent the best performing parts available in order to conduct their reviews. And while up to 5% difference may be small. When compared in reviews would reviews showing a 10-15% advantage be nearly as convincing if it was only showing a 5-10% advantage? Or potentially even lower depending on if you got a particularly bad GPU sample.

Original, perhaps, but it has nothing to do with AMD delivered, or do you really think nVidia planned on sitting on the market without highend for what, 3 quarters?

I think if you look at his post history with regards to this you'll see he thought it was due to Nvidia's inability to get GK100 out. And like me, thinks that Nvidia got really really luck that Tahiti didn't perform significantly better.

Nvidia was laughing out of relief as they had nothing on hand or in the near future to counter Tahiti had it performed better.

Regards,
SB
 
As far as I can tell there are getting less 680's as time goes on, not more.

Never seen anything remotely like this. I feel like if another company had done this, there'd be no end to the world-is-ending kvetching over it. But this, people dont even talk about in a negative way.

It's hard to tell if it's better or worse. You can find them readily enough if you're willing to pay way above msrp.
 
As far as I can tell there are getting less 680's as time goes on, not more.

Never seen anything remotely like this. I feel like if another company had done this, there'd be no end to the world-is-ending kvetching over it. But this, people dont even talk about in a negative way.

Have you tried to buy one and weren't able to do so? What do you want people to be negative about? All the people (on this board) who seem very concerned aren't even trying to purchase a 680.....

Hard evidence of decent volumes (Steam) is quickly dismissed but we should be kvetching over what exactly?
 
Have you tried to buy one and weren't able to do so? What do you want people to be negative about? All the people (on this board) who seem very concerned aren't even trying to purchase a 680.....

Hard evidence of decent volumes (Steam) is quickly dismissed but we should be kvetching over what exactly?

I was trying to buy one. Went for a 7970 instead being it was cheaper and available.

And just to get onto what Rangers was talking about, you had a problem with the 7970 volumes, but they sold roughly the same amount in the same time frame (ie.first 6 weeks of availability) according to steam.
 
2560 X 1600

huitqr.jpg


:LOL:

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 4 GB
 
Hmm, is there a performance plateau on the 680s around 1000mhz? What happened to the 10% difference in core clock? Is it simply that the TDP is much lower than the 300W limit that the 690 GPUs are being upclocked anyway?
 
Hmm, is there a performance plateau on the 680s around 1000mhz? What happened to the 10% difference in core clock? Is it simply that the TDP is much lower than the 300W limit that the 690 GPUs are being upclocked anyway?
Looks like it. The sample computerbase.de had hit 1020-1050 Mhz almost all the time. A 993 MHz hiccup in Anno 2070 was the lowest clock observed.
 
Back
Top