NVIDIA Kepler speculation thread

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...orce-GTX-780&p=5071088&viewfull=1#post5071088

 

That's the same for Civ 5 too - the "late game benchmark" (favoured by anandtech) which used to favour Nvidia by such a large margin wasn't indicative of actual gaming performance, so they didn't bench it on Hardware Canucks.

SKYMTL might be sympathetic to the green side but he is certainly honest when it comes to this nonsense.

 

Min Fps

Could the driver be configured to only power boost when it detected low frame rates?

i.e. instead of running at 200 fps could the clock rates be lowered to give say 100 fps. Then when the frame rate drops (say 30 fps), boost the clocks (and power consumption) to compensate (until the chip heated up).

 

He's a reviewer, so he isnt like the usual suspects that are showing up here recently.

 

Unigine max 680 v 7970 without and with tessellation optimised...

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...orce-GTX-780&p=5071228&viewfull=1#post5071228

 

Interesting. I thought AMD Optimised was the default setting in CCC?

 

Excuse my ignorance, but what's an AMD optimized Unigine?

 

Limits the tess factor to 16(?), IIRC.

 

Will the new BF3 patch coincide with the launch of this card?

 

Nothing is profiled though.

 

Quick question:
Why then does this setting "AMD optimized" exist anyway (as a driver default)? As far as I can see the only thing it accomplished was raising concern about cheating.

 

4 months late and overpriced.

 

You mean it will only be in stores on May 9th?

 

So its 20% slower than 7970 unless you choke the 7970 with 64x tessellation?

 

everyone seems fixated on comparing GK104 to Tahiti but if you stuck 6gbps memory on pitcairn and upped its clock, GK104 and Tahiti both wouldn't look that great as a GPU with a die of 210mm would be in spitting distance.

reality is Tahiti is underclocked, it will be interesting to see GK104 head room assuming equal or + a few percent preformance @around 1000/6000 .

 

No. You could only draw that conclusion if the 680 was also run with the tessellation factor limited. I can't see any reason one wouldn't expect the 680's performance to also increase with a lower tessellation factor.

 

on a 6970 alteast, performance only really increases once you limit it to 8x the difference between 16 and 32 isn't very much and 32 to 64 there isn't any. It was ages ago that i tested so things might be different on newer drivers.

 

Well, the performance clearly increased in the tests which were linked. Perhaps AMD "optimized" is lower than 16 or the 7970 just performs differently?

7970 Off -> On
Min: 25.8 -> 42.9
Avg: 61.6 -> 98.7
Max: 160.2 -> 195.4


While I think the "optimized" setting has merit for actual gameplay, it should obviously be disabled for benchmarking purposes as the whole point is to compare the amount of time it takes to do X amount of work.

 

Afaik 16 is the maximum factor in Heaven anyway.

 

Something like that, giving the fact that it will be in short supply, plus retail stores don't get new product right away.