NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

[Deleted member 2197]

Check out the Guru3D review.

• Temp Target 85 Degrees C

• CPU clock +150 MHz (from default 1152 MHz)

• Mem clock +375 MHz

• Voltage + 50Mv

So his core clock is 1302 Mhz, Boost clock 1452~1477Mhz and mem clock 7818. Even though you can use Afterburner or PrecisionX, Gigabyte has their own tool called OC Guru II .

I do immediately need to address one side-note though - please keep in mind that at default the product is clocked at a 1152/1241 MHz base/boost clock. That's pretty nice already, but in order to get the 1190/1291 MHz base/boost you are forced to use Gigabyte's OC Guru software. I do dislike that, if you are going to offer an OC mode, then it should be set like that in the BIOS. End users should not be forced to use software. Not using the OC mode will result into slightly lower perf as the clock revert to 1152/1241 MHz. Regardless of my feelings on that, the OC mode results are pretty insane as the card is showing an on average 15% additional performance running up-to 30% in certain more difficult to render scenario's. That means that a card like this (and pardon my French) sodomizes the more expensive Titan X already.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_geforce_gtx_980_ti_g1_gaming_soc_review,35.html

 

[Albuquerque]

Yeah, I read pretty much every review of the G1 (and the AMP! and the STRIXX) before my purchase. I'm aware of Gigabyte's OC software, although it looks like MSI Afterburner ended up being the "preferred" method by those who used both. I also saw several of the example overclocks, which is what drove my +125 core / +500 mem / 115% power initial attempt.

Last night I also discovered that the 250mm case-side fan in my TT Armor+ case has somehow died, so I was down a considerable amount of airflow. As the G1 exhausts directly into the case, the entire lower half of the case was uncomfortably warm to my feet when I, by chance, rested the side of my foot against the side of the case. "Yeeow... WTF?" is about how it went It also appears that my fan controller channel died with it, as the fan doesn't power on when plugged directly into a PSU molex, and that controller channel doesn't power anything connected to it. D'oh.

I've got a new 25cm case fan on the way, and a new fan controller for good measure. AC repair dude will be at my house today, so perhaps I'll have better OC news before the end of the week

 

[Florin]

And for another perspective; After some iterations of Nvidia cards with custom AIB coolers I specifically went for a reference card this time around. Cheapest I could find was a Zotac.

I haven't messed with overclocking in years and the card is in fact running on an i2500 non-K (as I care more about the VT-D support) with quality but bog standard DDR3-1333. PCs are plenty quirky enough for me without pushing things

Anyway I play at 2560x1440 and anything I throw at it just flies. I mostly play GTA V Online at the moment but getting started with Witcher 3 and still firing up Elite Dangerous every once in a while and everything is up to the max and smooth. Intel isn't progressing as aggressively on the performance front as it used to and it shows. Well happy with performance on my trusty old rig with the 980TI.

 

[Deleted member 2197]

Review: Palit GeForce GTX 980 Ti Super Jetstream
July 15, 2015

The GTX 980 Ti is shaping up to be one of the finest GeForce GPUs ever released. Awesomely quick and refreshingly refined, it delivers enthusiast thrills in an efficient package that makes its hot-and-thirsty predecessors seem like a distant memory.

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/84629-palit-geforce-gtx-980-ti-super-jetstream/

 

[gongo]

I see an all time high interest in 980Ti...it is $649, but wow there sure is a market for such prices. It could be the most successful $649 card ever. People are thirsty for more 28nm power

 

[fellix]

Did AMD made a "bad" favour to Nvidia, or the 980 Ti (and vanilla 980) are flying off the shelves lately? Looks like a lot of peeps were on the fence for the Fury release.

 

[UniversalTruth]

Did AMD made a "bad" favour to Nvidia

AMD has nothing to do with this. No matter how great product AMD releases, the feedback is almost always negative.

Maybe Fury X cries for a lower price - perhaps 550$ would do better.

 

[Florin]

Did AMD made a "bad" favour to Nvidia, or the 980 Ti (and vanilla 980) are flying off the shelves lately? Looks like a lot of peeps were on the fence for the Fury release.

I can't speak for anyone else but I bought my 980Ti the day after processing the Fury X reviews at NDA expiration.

 

[trinibwoy]

AMD has nothing to do with this. No matter how great product AMD releases, the feedback is almost always negative.

Maybe Fury X cries for a lower price - perhaps 550$ would do better.

Fury X is a decent product. Fury is even better. But there are a few things in nvidia's favor.

- Fury came later and didn't convincingly beat the 980 Ti.
- The 980 Ti overclocks much better.
- AMD marketing was terrible - hyped a 4K card that isn't fast enough for 4K.
- The AIO cooler probably turned off a lot of folks who didn't want to deal with the extra mounting requirement.
- Maxwell enjoyed a much better reception than Hawaii did at launch and that sentiment still lingers.

I also suspect Gameworks is more successful at strengthening the GeForce brand than the vocal minority would like to admit.

 

[fellix]

And probably the whole DX12 feature levels confusion tipped a bit more the scales in favour of Maxwell.

 

[UniversalTruth]

- Fury came later and didn't convincingly beat the 980 Ti.

Do you really believe that it has to and why? I think not, it doesn't have to.

- The AIO cooler probably turned off a lot of folks who didn't want to deal with the extra mounting requirement.

Very strange. I have always considered an AIO cooler a more technologically advanced, innovative and attractive solution. I have no idea where exactly those folks find negativism to it.

 

[CarstenS]

Do you really believe that it has to and why? I think not, it doesn't have to.

It has to lead on some front to convince people to buy, hasn't it?

Very strange. I have always considered an AIO cooler a more technologically advanced, innovative and attractive solution. I have no idea where exactly those folks find negativism to it.

Maybe it has to do with the pump whine?

 

[trinibwoy]

Do you really believe that it has to and why? I think not, it doesn't have to.

You haven't been following the GPU market long, have you?

Very strange. I have always considered an AIO cooler a more technologically advanced, innovative and attractive solution. I have no idea where exactly those folks find negativism to it.

It has nothing to do with being technologically advanced. With an AIO cooler, case compatibility is a concern. Installation is also not as straightforward. Simple as that.

That may not be a problem for the hardware enthusiast crowd but it could be for those ppl who just want to stick a fast GPU into their computer and play games.

 

[UniversalTruth]

Ok, let's put it the other way round. If all those points were in AMD's product favour, do you honestly believe that the market would hug it ?

I think NO, it is a predetermined choice, if you wish even on psychological level. Maybe those favours could sometime put some slight direction but do not change the whole picture.

 

[silent_guy]

Ok, let's put it the other way round. If all those points were in AMD's product favour, do you honestly believe that the market would hug it ?

Look at market share graphs and correlate them with the competitiveness of AMD products. You may discover that, yes, more people buy AMD when they have something to good to offer.

 

[Razor1]

Ok, let's put it the other way round. If all those points were in AMD's product favour, do you honestly believe that the market would hug it ?

I think NO, it is a predetermined choice, if you wish even on psychological level. Maybe those favours could sometime put some slight direction but do not change the whole picture.

Yes during the Athlon x2, Pentium massacre AMD had close to 50% of the pc marketshare (and this was without much OEM support at the time). It doesn't matter if its from Intel, AMD, nV no one will buy non competitive parts, OEM and consumers in general.

 

[UniversalTruth]

Look at market share graphs and correlate them with the competitiveness of AMD products. You may discover that, yes, more people buy AMD when they have something to good to offer.

No, that's why I said "slight direction", and you "more people". These more people were never enough to put AMD the market leader.

Just look at the RV770, RV790 and Cypress times. At that time AMD completely destroyed, not only because they offered a new technology (which they do all the time in general) but as a bargain, their offerings were killer but still it was not enough.

 

[Razor1]

You have to wait at least one quarter before you see the impact of a new product line. Also you have to see what was competing with it at the time and if there were any issues of supply of either of the vendors.

The major swings we see in the graphics market is more do to lack of availability from one or the other vendor when both are fairly competitive.

The 4xxx series were first to GDDR5, and they did have supply issues for GDDR5 if I remember correctly.

 

[silent_guy]

No, that's why I said "slight direction", and you "more people". These more people were never enough to put AMD the market leader.

If you expect market shares to flip around overnight just because one has a faster part than the other, you're going to be waiting a long time.

Just look at the RV770, RV790 and Cypress times. At that time AMD completely destroyed, not only because they offered a new technology (which they do all the time in general) but as a bargain, their offerings were killer but still it was not enough.

You are remembering things incorrectly. RV770, 790, and Cypress were fantastic pieces of silicon in terms of the numbers that I like so much (perf/W, perf/mm2 etc.) They were the Maxwells of their day. But if they were ever absolute king of the hill in terms of absolute performance, it was never for a long time. There was always a GTX285 or GTX580 to steal the halo thunder.

Praised by many at the time, in hindsight, the small die strategy was a huge mistake: it was executed right at the time where Nvidia had 2 consecutive architectures that were not very competitive in terms of perf/W and perf/mm2. Had AMD unleashed the max die option, they could have crushed Nvidia for 3 or 4 years.

The current Maxwells don't have half-victory and are better at every gaming related metric both in relative and absolute terms. I can't remember when we saw this situation the last time, and the market share is moving accordingly.

But if you really believe there are some occult psychological issues at play, you have wonder: how did that come to be? It's one thing to make a good product, it's another to make people buy it. AMD is extraordinary good at sabotaging their own products.

 

[UniversalTruth]

You forget that currently R9 295X2 is the fastest and most attractive cheap solution. Small die produce excellent dual-GPU cards.