Gtx 960Ti and R9 380x

[xMishax]

hello there Few days ago I was surfing the internet looking for some information about Witcher 3 performance and on some page ( eurogamer if Im not mistaken ) I found a sentence that Gtx 960Ti maybe in the 'pipeline'. That kinda awoken a great question , wheter Nvidia will release anything between gtx 960 and gtx 970, same goes for r9 380x. Like atm there are no rumours or smth, but I searched the history of gpus from both amd and nvidia and it is shown that there were some great time gaps between releases of Ti or X versions of GPU's. Maybe it will happen again ( I hope so )
So what are your thoughts folks? Will there be anything interesting coming from our GPU maker? or not?

[escape093]

If anything, they should release a 950 Ti.

[ProdigyzMined]

If anything, they should release a 950 Ti.

Wouldn't they need to release a 950 first..? Usually the 'Ti' signifies an improvement over something that already exists

[Clyne]

If anything, they should release a 950 Ti.

If their releasing a 950 Ti.....might as well release Pascal.

[OAcesync]

Nope I doubt they will make a 960Ti and even if they did it would be worthless to get instead of a 970 and nothing between a 380X and 390 is gonna happen either it's pointless at that price point and performance only thing I can see happening is a 950Ti.

[STRMfrmXMN]

Wouldn't they need to release a 950 first..? Usually the 'Ti' signifies an improvement over something that already exists

Already released, believe it's the 750ti which uses the same architecture. Don't quote me on that.

[MageTank]

If anything, they should release a 950 Ti.

If anything, no, they shouldn't. The performance difference between the GTX 750 Ti and the GTX 960 is too small of a gap to warrant a new card. Not only that, every single person on this planet seems to forget that the GTX 750 and GTX 750 Ti are ALREADY Maxwell cards. They were introduced at the end of the 700 series to show off what was to come from maxwell, which was the power efficiency. Therefore, the GTX 750 and 750 Ti are the 50x of both the 700 and 900 series. Treat the 750 as a 750, and the 750 Ti as a 950. There, now you can be happy.

 

As for the claim regarding the 960 Ti, i just don't see it happening. Unless they have been selling current GM206's as the weaker yields this entire time, which seems unlikely. They might make a 950 to please people out of a weaker GM206, but i see no reason for it. If i recall correctly, GM206 was confirmed to have a maximum of 1024 cores, so that means they could only go down from there. 

 

So, there we have it. If a GTX 960 Ti were to exist, it can't be with GM206. It will have to be with GM204 which would come from crippled 970's, which is already a crippled 980. There really is no room to fit a 950 Ti in here, as the 750 Ti delivers amazing performance at 65w. To get closer to the 960, they would need to throw a 6 pin on it and lose out on the biggest selling point of the 750 Ti. It would do more harm than good, as the 750 Ti sits very comfortably in the budget market as is. 

 

Already released, believe it's the 750ti which uses the same architecture. Don't quote me on that.

I am quoting you on it because you are correct. So HA. Get quoted on.

[ProdigyzMined]

Already released, believe it's the 750ti which uses the same architecture. Don't quote me on that.

Yeah, I remember it being that way too. So instead of the 950, we'd get the 750X Ti, and for the 950Ti we'd get the 750X Ti +

[STRMfrmXMN]

 

 

I am quoting you on it because you are correct. So HA. Get quoted on.

FACK

Nah man, just wasn't 100% sure about that

[dougdangger]

If anything, no, they shouldn't. The performance difference between the GTX 750 Ti and the GTX 960 is too small of a gap to warrant a new card.

750ti renders GTAV @ 1080p @ 30-40fps

960 renders GTAV @ 1080p @ 60-70fps

 

Nearly double is not a small gap.

[MageTank]

750ti renders GTAV @ 1080p @ 30-40fps

960 renders GTAV @ 1080p @ 60-70fps

 

Nearly double is not a small gap.

 

Just saying "@1080p" is not helping validate your claims. Provide proof or at the very least, give me some information to work with. On high settings at 1080p, the difference between the 750 Ti and 960 is not that large of a gap. In fact, both are considered very playable.

 

 

Of course, ultra settings changes the results, but its still as expected. 

 

 

That being said, pay attention to the price:performance of each card, and the performance:watt of each card. Tell me where you think a new card would be able to fit in without completely stepping on the toes of the other two? Or do you think the 750 Ti needs a successor to replace it outright, and for it to be removed from the market as a whole? If so, i will educate you on why the 750 Ti sells. 

 

The GTX 750 Ti does not sell for being the fastest entry level GPU on the market. The r9 270x beats it in almost every bench you throw at it. The reason the GTX 750 Ti sells often, is because it does not require the additional 6 or 8 pin power that other stronger cards require. You can take a GTX 750 Ti, throw it into an OEM machine that has no PCIE power cable, and it will work perfectly fine. They come in single slot width configurations for small form factors, and they even come as small as 6.7 inches in length. This is why it has such a strong presence on the market. It offers a solution on par with cheap HDPC GPU's, but has much better gaming performance compared to those terrible GPU's.

 

The GTX 960 doubles the power usage of a GTX 750 Ti, but in no way does it come close to doubling the average performance. The GTX 960 is still limited to 1080p, as going beyond that resolution in most AAA titles causes it to drop to 30-40fps average, which is considered unplayable by most people depending on the nature of the game. It also costs 60% more on average than a GTX 750 Ti, but wont deliver 60% more performance on average. Sure, it delivers exactly 60% more performance on ultra settings in GTA 5, but in other games, you probably wont get near that large of a difference. It will vary.

 

Considering the GTX 960 barely qualifies as a 1080p ultra 60fps card, i just can't see the need for another budget card if it will not max out 1080p on ultra. The 960 can barely do it, and in games like Witcher 3, won't even get close to doing even that. The GTX 750 Ti already does a decent job at offering playable frame rates at medium-high settings, so a 950 will only do the same thing, without the full appeal that the current 750's already have with their ultra low power consumption.

 

Sorry for the long wall of text, but this is pretty much the only way to explain why a 950 should not exist. It just won't change anything.

[dougdangger]

Just saying "@1080p" is not helping validate your claims. Provide proof or at the very least, give me some information to work with. On high settings at 1080p, the difference between the 750 Ti and 960 is not that large of a gap. In fact, both are considered very playable.

 

 

Of course, ultra settings changes the results, but its still as expected. 

 

 

That being said, pay attention to the price:performance of each card, and the performance:watt of each card. Tell me where you think a new card would be able to fit in without completely stepping on the toes of the other two? Or do you think the 750 Ti needs a successor to replace it outright, and for it to be removed from the market as a whole? If so, i will educate you on why the 750 Ti sells. 

 

The GTX 750 Ti does not sell for being the fastest entry level GPU on the market. The r9 270x beats it in almost every bench you throw at it. The reason the GTX 750 Ti sells often, is because it does not require the additional 6 or 8 pin power that other stronger cards require. You can take a GTX 750 Ti, throw it into an OEM machine that has no PCIE power cable, and it will work perfectly fine. They come in single slot width configurations for small form factors, and they even come as small as 6.7 inches in length. This is why it has such a strong presence on the market. It offers a solution on par with cheap HDPC GPU's, but has much better gaming performance compared to those terrible GPU's.

 

The GTX 960 doubles the power usage of a GTX 750 Ti, but in no way does it come close to doubling the average performance. The GTX 960 is still limited to 1080p, as going beyond that resolution in most AAA titles causes it to drop to 30-40fps average, which is considered unplayable by most people depending on the nature of the game. It also costs 60% more on average than a GTX 750 Ti, but wont deliver 60% more performance on average. Sure, it delivers exactly 60% more performance on ultra settings in GTA 5, but in other games, you probably wont get near that large of a difference. It will vary.

 

Considering the GTX 960 barely qualifies as a 1080p ultra 60fps card, i just can't see the need for another budget card if it will not max out 1080p on ultra. The 960 can barely do it, and in games like Witcher 3, won't even get close to doing even that. The GTX 750 Ti already does a decent job at offering playable frame rates at medium-high settings, so a 950 will only do the same thing, without the full appeal that the current 750's already have with their ultra low power consumption.

 

Sorry for the long wall of text, but this is pretty much the only way to explain why a 950 should not exist. It just won't change anything.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious.  You finished jerking off?

A jump of nearly double on frame rates is not "too small of a gap".

Whether it be low, medium, high or ultra settings, the 960 is on the average 30fps ahead of the 750ti.

Maybe from 45-75 fps is not that "big" of a jump.  But from 25 to 55 it is epic.

[MageTank]

Thanks for pointing out the obvious.  You finished jerking off?

A jump of nearly double on frame rates is not "too small of a gap".

Whether it be low, medium, high or ultra settings, the 960 is on the average 30fps ahead of the 750ti.

Maybe from 45-75 fps is not that "big" of a jump.  But from 25 to 55 it is epic.

Someone sure is angry that he is incapable of performing basic math. Time to dissect your post. 

 

 

 

A jump of nearly double on frame rates is not "too small of a gap".

 

Double would imply 100% more performance. Since you have shown that you are terrible at math, i will do that for you too. After all, i also provided the graph's instead of just saying "@ 1080p". on Ultra settings, the GTX 750 Ti averages 33fps. 33fps + 100%= 66FPS. 100% of 33 is 33. For the GTX 960 to double the performance of the 750 Ti, it would need to average 66fps. I see 52, and 54 FPS from the two different 960's on the chart. Not exactly double. BUT WAIT! You said nearly, as i am sure you was going to remind me. What constitutes "nearly" double something? Nearly means "close to, almost". Let's give you the benefit of the doubt, and say 80% would be "nearly double". That sounds fair, right? 33 + 80% = 59.4. Nope, still not "nearly double" the performance. The exact difference in performance is actually 60%. 33+ 60% = 52.8fps. round that to 53fps, and it sits right in between both 52 and 54, which was the reported FPS of both 960's. 60% is not double. In fact, it is closer to 50% than it is to 100%.

 

 

 

Whether it be low, medium, high or ultra settings, the 960 is on the average 30fps ahead of the 750ti.

 

This is a bold claim to make, considering i gave you the charts to look at. On ultra, on average, the 960 was 19 fps higher than the 750 Ti (60% higher FPS, remember my math lesson from the last paragraph?). 19 is not 30. Looking at High details, we see 52 fps on the 750 Ti vs 79 fps on the 960. The GTX 960 has about 50% higher FPS than the 750 Ti at this point, but 79 is still not 30 more than 52. That would be a difference of 27. This further goes against your "960 is nearly double the performance of the 750 Ti) because as quality decreases, the difference in performance of these cards start to change in favor of the 750 Ti.

 

 

 

Maybe from 45-75 fps is not that "big" of a jump.  But from 25 to 55 it is epic.

 Where does this even come from? So far, every increment of measurement you have used has been pulled out of thin air, and does not correlate with any performance benchmarks we have of these two cards. Yeah, at higher details, the stronger card performs better. We all know this. What you have yet to prove is that there is no way to plant a card in the middle of these two and make it sell. If you sell a card stronger than the 750 Ti, and weaker than the 960, you will end up with a card that STILL cant max out a game at 1080p, is STILL slower than a 960, and uses more power than a 750 Ti. It won't have a purpose. 

 

To answer your first question, no, i am not done. I won't be done until i am satisfied 

[Prysin]

If anything, no, they shouldn't. The performance difference between the GTX 750 Ti and the GTX 960 is too small of a gap to warrant a new card. Not only that, every single person on this planet seems to forget that the GTX 750 and GTX 750 Ti are ALREADY Maxwell cards. They were introduced at the end of the 700 series to show off what was to come from maxwell, which was the power efficiency. Therefore, the GTX 750 and 750 Ti are the 50x of both the 700 and 900 series. Treat the 750 as a 750, and the 750 Ti as a 950. There, now you can be happy.

 

As for the claim regarding the 960 Ti, i just don't see it happening. Unless they have been selling current GM206's as the weaker yields this entire time, which seems unlikely. They might make a 950 to please people out of a weaker GM206, but i see no reason for it. If i recall correctly, GM206 was confirmed to have a maximum of 1024 cores, so that means they could only go down from there. 

 

So, there we have it. If a GTX 960 Ti were to exist, it can't be with GM206. It will have to be with GM204 which would come from crippled 970's, which is already a crippled 980. There really is no room to fit a 950 Ti in here, as the 750 Ti delivers amazing performance at 65w. To get closer to the 960, they would need to throw a 6 pin on it and lose out on the biggest selling point of the 750 Ti. It would do more harm than good, as the 750 Ti sits very comfortably in the budget market as is. 

 

I am quoting you on it because you are correct. So HA. Get quoted on.

oh oh oh, i know what Nvidia gonna do.

 

Increase core clock by 100Mhz

increase memory to 3GB

then rebrand the 750TI to 950 and call it a day

[MageTank]

oh oh oh, i know what Nvidia gonna do.

 

Increase core clock by 100Mhz

increase memory to 3GB

then rebrand the 750TI to 950 and call it a day

I understand you were making a joke, because it would totally be something they would do. Sadly, it won't happen either. The reference 960 ships with 2GB of Vram. Making a 950 ship with more Vram, yet still have that slow memory bandwidth would not be helpful. If a 950 is made, it will be from a cutdown GM206. That would mean it would have the same memory bandwidth as the 960, but have less cores. Essentially being a weaker 960 that uses more power than a 750 Ti (GM107). The GTX 960 has a 120w TDP, and the GTX 750 Ti has a 65w TDP. I can't see them making a 950 that can run faster than a 750 Ti without them raising the power requirements of that card, effectively killing off one of the 750 Ti's main appealing features. Regardless of how it plays out, the 960 has an 85% higher TDP, but does not offer 85% more performance than the GTX 750 Ti in most cases. To fit a card between these two is just too difficult to do. The cost branding and marketing would be more than what the card itself would be worth. That, and i can't see yields on the 960 being that bad considering how tame it is.

[xMishax]

I understand you were making a joke, because it would totally be something they would do. Sadly, it won't happen either. The reference 960 ships with 2GB of Vram. Making a 950 ship with more Vram, yet still have that slow memory bandwidth would not be helpful. If a 950 is made, it will be from a cutdown GM206. That would mean it would have the same memory bandwidth as the 960, but have less cores. Essentially being a weaker 960 that uses more power than a 750 Ti (GM107). The GTX 960 has a 120w TDP, and the GTX 750 Ti has a 65w TDP. I can't see them making a 950 that can run faster than a 750 Ti without them raising the power requirements of that card, effectively killing off one of the 750 Ti's main appealing features. Regardless of how it plays out, the 960 has an 85% higher TDP, but does not offer 85% more performance than the GTX 750 Ti in most cases. To fit a card between these two is just too difficult to do. The cost branding and marketing would be more than what the card itself would be worth. That, and i can't see yields on the 960 being that bad considering how tame it is.

Ok I see you are on a rough discussion about nvidia but whats about amd side

It seems that r9 380 is cutdown tonga (antigua) chip and there is might be something to show

[MageTank]

Ok I see you are on a rough discussion about nvidia but whats about amd side

It seems that r9 380 is cutdown tonga (antigua) chip and there is might be something to show

I am not trying to be rough on Nvidia, i just do not think a GTX 960 Ti can exist based on the information we have. It would have to be from a cut down 970, but the 970's are cut down 980's already. That would mean a 980 would have to fail big time for it to become a 960 Ti, and we have no information on if the yields have ever gotten that bad. I highly doubt Nvidia is going to make a completely new chip to fill that gap. Even if they do, what is its target audience? The 970 is a 1440p gaming card. The 960 is a 1080p card. Where can you make a card that falls directly in the middle? The 970 barely maxes out 1440p games (it fails to do even that on the more demanding titles) and going any lower in performance will no longer qualify it for that resolution. You would just be making a stronger 1080p card that can sometimes do 1440p depending on the title.

 

I am not hating on Nvidia, i still use a GTX 770. I am just looking at it from a market standpoint. It just would not be financially viable for them to make such a card. 

 

As for AMD, the R9 380 is a rebrand of the R9 285. It is almost an exact clone, besides the higher memory configuration. From a business standpoint, these make little sense to me as well. They are not exactly upgrade cards, as someone that already has a 280x, 285, or 290, will not want to upgrade to a 380 as it would not help at all. Lets look at a benchmark of Metro Last Light, which will show us how well these cards do at different resolutions.

 

 

As you can see, at 1080p, the 380 sits right alongside the 285 and 280x. Sits slightly above the 960 too. However, this is just 1080p. Surely the extra 2gb of VRAM will make a difference in higher resolutions, right?

 

Apparently not. According to these benchmarks, the extra 2GB of VRAM did not make even the slightest difference in this rebrand. Considering these benchmarks came from a review posted on June 18th, i want to believe it is driver issues skewing these results, but i cannot find any other benchmarks of these cards to compare it to. 

 

Seeing as these cards are performing exactly the same as their previous ancestors, i would say that they were unnecessary, and that the R9 2xx series was doing just fine. I would have rather seen AMD take their time and give the market something different, instead of re-releasing the same performance items at a slightly reduced price tag. Nvidia and AMD have entirely different market strategies, so do not expect them to do the same thing here. Nvidia tends to do a 2 year pattern of locked, then unlocked architectures. AMD has had to improve upon existing architectures slowly, due to the nature of their strict financial situation. For example:

 

Nvidia released Kepler (600 series) then released the 700 series (also kepler) which featured the fully unlocked kepler chips. The same thing happened to Maxwell. You got GM107 in the 750's, you then got the 960, 970 and 980. Then they released the full GM200 at the end. This year however, they rushed the full release of GM200, for reasons i still question.

 

To answer your question, i do not think anything interesting will come from AMD or Nvidia themselves. I am more interested in what the board partners will do. If you can remember as far back as the GTX 400 series, EVGA made their own GTX 465, and added more Vram to it (It was a cut down GTX 470). While it was not officially dubbed the 465 until AFTER EVGA made it, they still managed to push that card into existence. That being said, there is still hope that some exotic in-between cards will happen. ASUS tends to make ROG cards that feature dual GPU's on them, so we might see a dual 960 on a single GPU like the ROG MARS from a couple years ago. 

[xMishax]

SNIP

A lot of nice argumentation there I approve that!

But what I wanted to ask is what do you think about possible r9 380x, as I said above r9 380 is cut tonga (antigua chip) and somewhere on anandtech I saw that this chip can have 384bit bus instead of 256bit bus. So there might be it.

[MageTank]

A lot of nice argumentation there I approve that!

But what I wanted to ask is what do you think about possible r9 380x, as I said above r9 380 is cut tonga (antigua chip) and somewhere on anandtech I saw that this chip can have 384bit bus instead of 256bit bus. So there might be it.

After seeing what AMD just re-released, i would say anything is possible. It was just announced that a rumored 950 Ti will come from a cut down GM206 (GTX 960) so anything is possible. I think it will be very likely that a 380x will exist, given AMD's track record. They are probably just waiting to see how the market pans out before they figure out which price bracket it will compete in.

[xMishax]

After seeing what AMD just re-released, i would say anything is possible. It was just announced that a rumored 950 Ti will come from a cut down GM206 (GTX 960) so anything is possible. I think it will be very likely that a 380x will exist, given AMD's track record. They are probably just waiting to see how the market pans out before they figure out which price bracket it will compete in.

Yeah, Ive also just seen that thread about gtx 950Ti. Actually I dont know where it will fit but talking about r9 380x again - I remember in some interview some time ago when asked about r9 285x AMD said that they dont see it fitting anywhere so maybe they saved it till now, who knows. If AMD released r9 380x it would make sense for nvidia to release something with same performance to compete within that price bracket