I suppose this fits here, too:
Original source:
http://www.chiphell.com/thread-1196441-1-1.html (but it just keeps loading, loading and loading)
Graphs available here too:
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulle...7#post10455327
Claimed tests from ChipHell, a site known for both legit and fake leaks, but without getting to see if those tests are actually ChipHell's own or just random forum post, it's hard to say one way or another whether it's more likely fake or real.
According to first graph, averaging performance over 20 games, Fiji XT Engineering Sample is somewhere around 10-15% faster than GTX 980 while GM200's cut-down version is some 2-5% faster than Fiji XT ES.
They claim that in BF4 multiplayer, Fiji XT ES uses some 15-20% more power than GTX 980 while cut-down GM200 uses some 5% give or take few %'s more than Fiji XT ES.
The second graph has numbers for BF4 MP, CoD AW, DA:Inquisition, Ryse and Watch Dogs, it also includes "full fat GM200" and Bermuda XT ES in addition to the Fiji XT ES and cut-down GM200
In it, Bermuda XT ES is faster than GM200 full-fat on all games, difference ranging from just few %'s to well over 10%. Fiji XT meanwhile is slower than GM200 cut-down version in most games, but slightly faster in DragonAge and Ryse.