Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

GTX 980 & 970 Benchmarks!

Given what AMD may or may not be offering for their 3xx series. It isn't too bad for a top tier card no longer being $650/$700+.

Have there been any leaks for the new AMD cards at all?

They're really what I'm waiting for. I'm hoping they're a significant step up.

Though the performance of that 970 is impressive.

Current PC:

Spoiler

CPU: Intel i3 4160 Cooler: Integrated Motherboard: Integrated

RAM: G.Skill RipJaws 16GB DDR3 Storage: Transcend MSA370 128GB GPU: Intel 4400 Graphics

PSU: Integrated Case: Shuttle XPC Slim

Monitor: LG 29WK500 Mouse: G.Skill MX780 Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

Budget Rig 1 - Sold For $750 Profit

Spoiler

CPU: Intel i5 7600k Cooler: CryOrig H7 Motherboard: MSI Z270 M5

RAM: Crucial LPX 16GB DDR4 Storage: Intel S3510 800GB GPU: Nvidia GTX 980

PSU: Corsair CX650M Case: EVGA DG73

Monitor: LG 29WK500 Mouse: G.Skill MX780 Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

OG Gaming Rig - Gone

Spoiler

 

CPU: Intel i5 4690k Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 Motherboard: MSI Z97i AC ITX

RAM: Crucial Ballistix 16GB DDR3 Storage: Kingston Fury 240GB GPU: Asus Strix GTX 970

PSU: Thermaltake TR2 Case: Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ITX

Monitor: Dell P2214H x2 Mouse: Logitech MX Master Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have there been any leaks for the new AMD cards at all?

They're really what I'm waiting for. I'm hoping they're a significant step up.

Though the performance of that 970 is impressive.

Only the cooler "leak" and what we can deduce from 285 performance and power usage. 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

michael_rosen_gif_by_lucy_labrador-d4i5b

 

650€

 

Are they fucking kidding me?

“The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it the more it will contract” -Oliver Wendell Holmes “If it can be destroyed by the truth, it deserves to be destroyed by the truth.” -Carl Sagan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only the cooler "leak" and what we can deduce from 285 performance and power usage. 

Damn. Though the liquid cooling is a definite plus as it should greatly help their past problems.

 

I find it rather funny (sad) that the 980 in SLI still can't beat the 295x2, though as said drivers will hopefully improve upon that.

Current PC:

Spoiler

CPU: Intel i3 4160 Cooler: Integrated Motherboard: Integrated

RAM: G.Skill RipJaws 16GB DDR3 Storage: Transcend MSA370 128GB GPU: Intel 4400 Graphics

PSU: Integrated Case: Shuttle XPC Slim

Monitor: LG 29WK500 Mouse: G.Skill MX780 Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

Budget Rig 1 - Sold For $750 Profit

Spoiler

CPU: Intel i5 7600k Cooler: CryOrig H7 Motherboard: MSI Z270 M5

RAM: Crucial LPX 16GB DDR4 Storage: Intel S3510 800GB GPU: Nvidia GTX 980

PSU: Corsair CX650M Case: EVGA DG73

Monitor: LG 29WK500 Mouse: G.Skill MX780 Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

OG Gaming Rig - Gone

Spoiler

 

CPU: Intel i5 4690k Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 Motherboard: MSI Z97i AC ITX

RAM: Crucial Ballistix 16GB DDR3 Storage: Kingston Fury 240GB GPU: Asus Strix GTX 970

PSU: Thermaltake TR2 Case: Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ITX

Monitor: Dell P2214H x2 Mouse: Logitech MX Master Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn. Though the liquid cooling is a definite plus as it should greatly help their past problems.

 

I find it rather funny (sad) that the 980 in SLI still can't beat the 295x2, though as said drivers will hopefully improve upon that.

With pre-release drivers it got pretty fucking close at least.

 

AMD needs to fix their thermals before moving to a more expensive cooler.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FINALLY 4GB now please increase your bus size, nVidia!!

It's a dual-256 bus due to how expensive a single 512-bit bus is. You should be thanking them for finding a very good engineering workaround. It's not 100% 512-bit performance, but it's not a large hit. When the 20nm/16nm Maxwell refresh happens, you might see a full-blown 512-bit bus. But that's not even the most important thing. Effective total bandwidth and effective RAM speed are better overall measures of performance capability. Nvidia did pretty well with Maxwell 1.1 (1.0 being the 800m and 750TI) given it's aimed at mobile parts and servers where energy usage is a huge concern.

Software Engineer for Suncorp (Australia), Computer Tech Enthusiast, Miami University Graduate, Nerd

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see an actual graphics card with a beautiful matte black powder coating on it like the render, too bad they probably wont :S

-Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope that that pricing is true, it makes the 970 very appealing

Perfect for duel wield!

Someone told Luke and Linus at CES 2017 to "Unban the legend known as Jerakl" and that's about all I've got going for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn. Though the liquid cooling is a definite plus as it should greatly help their past problems.

 

I find it rather funny (sad) that the 980 in SLI still can't beat the 295x2, though as said drivers will hopefully improve upon that.

Nvdia's most energy-efficient architecture ever vs. the power hog that is GCN 1.1/1.2... Maxwell crushes in perf/watt, which is why the AMD FirePro will be exiting stage left from the 2015 Mac Pro, to be replaced by the Maxwell Tesla models. This is also why AMD's FirePro is not doing well among server/supercomputer builders either.

 

Don't get me wrong, a $1000 295x2 is a beastly gaming card, but that's all it's good for.

Software Engineer for Suncorp (Australia), Computer Tech Enthusiast, Miami University Graduate, Nerd

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to see them do LED's on the cooler on the lower tier cards, and not just the 5-700 dollar cards.

 

That, and I want to see the reference cooler for these cards damnit.

Ketchup is better than mustard.

GUI is better than Command Line Interface.

Dubs are better than subs

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to see them do LED's on the cooler on the lower tier cards, and not just the 5-700 dollar cards.

 

That, and I want to see the reference cooler for these cards damnit.

Giant glowing middle finger... yey

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nvdia's most energy-efficient architecture ever vs. the power hog that is GCN 1.1/1.2... Maxwell crushes in perf/watt, which is why the AMD FirePro will be exiting stage left from the 2015 Mac Pro, to be replaced by the Maxwell Tesla models. This is also why AMD's FirePro is not doing well among server/supercomputer builders either.

 

Don't get me wrong, a $1000 295x2 is a beastly gaming card, but that's all it's good for.

I get the feeling the 295x2 was aimed directly at gamers. Hence the liquid cooling. So they nailed their intended market there.

Personally I couldn't care less about performance per watt, if it performs better it performs better. And that's the one I'll go for.

If AMD pushes out something that gobbles up 350w but bests an Nvidia GPU at 200w, it's a no brainer for me.

Current PC:

Spoiler

CPU: Intel i3 4160 Cooler: Integrated Motherboard: Integrated

RAM: G.Skill RipJaws 16GB DDR3 Storage: Transcend MSA370 128GB GPU: Intel 4400 Graphics

PSU: Integrated Case: Shuttle XPC Slim

Monitor: LG 29WK500 Mouse: G.Skill MX780 Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

Budget Rig 1 - Sold For $750 Profit

Spoiler

CPU: Intel i5 7600k Cooler: CryOrig H7 Motherboard: MSI Z270 M5

RAM: Crucial LPX 16GB DDR4 Storage: Intel S3510 800GB GPU: Nvidia GTX 980

PSU: Corsair CX650M Case: EVGA DG73

Monitor: LG 29WK500 Mouse: G.Skill MX780 Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

OG Gaming Rig - Gone

Spoiler

 

CPU: Intel i5 4690k Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 Motherboard: MSI Z97i AC ITX

RAM: Crucial Ballistix 16GB DDR3 Storage: Kingston Fury 240GB GPU: Asus Strix GTX 970

PSU: Thermaltake TR2 Case: Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ITX

Monitor: Dell P2214H x2 Mouse: Logitech MX Master Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to see them do LED's on the cooler on the lower tier cards, and not just the 5-700 dollar cards.

 

That, and I want to see the reference cooler for these cards damnit.

I don't know about you but I like my cards to be performance beasts, doubt many of us would sacrifice performance + lower temperature for some fancy leds and reference coolers. I wouldn't. I ain't staring 24/7 at my case, I rather stare at the game and it's pretty pixels.

Now just show us where the prize money is at, Asus and EVGA, show yourselves!

CPU: i7-4770K  Cooler: NZXT X60  GPU: Asus GTX 770 2GB  MB: Asus Maximus VI Hero  RAM: Corsair Vengeance 16GB 1600MHz  PSU: Be Quiet! 630 Watt  Case: NZXT H440 

       Storage: 120GB Samsung 840 Evo + 1TB Seagate HDD  KeyboardCorsair K70 RGB  MouseG502 Proteus Spectrum  HeadphoneSennheiser HD598  Mic: Blue Snowball Ice

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the feeling the 295x2 was aimed directly at gamers. Hence the liquid cooling. So they nailed their intended market there.

Personally I couldn't care less about performance per watt, if it performs better it performs better. And that's the one I'll go for.

If AMD pushes out something that gobbles up 350w but bests an Nvidia GPU at 200w, it's a no brainer for me.

Which would be fine if gamers alone could keep AMD afloat, which is far from the case. AMD ignored enthusiasts in pursuit of HSA for a reason: server/supercomputer people have far deeper pockets and order in far larger volumes than any gaming community ever will. If you want AMD to succeed and excel to be able to compete against Nvidia and Intel, you should be willing to endure slow performance climbs in favor of power efficiency, because without it, AMD will soon be swallowed whole by Intel's own heterogeneous architecture on Skylake in addition to its ever more powerful integrated graphics solutions (2 TFlops on Broadwell's top SKUs vs. Carrizo's lousy projected 930 GFlops, and that's not even accounting for the fact Intel's floating point units were already the fastest in the industry and they just got 40% faster at doing multiplication and division).

 

Anyone who cares about AMD's future should be pushing them to beat Nvidia's Maxwell at its own game.

Software Engineer for Suncorp (Australia), Computer Tech Enthusiast, Miami University Graduate, Nerd

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about you but I like my cards to be performance beasts, doubt many of us would sacrifice performance + lower temperature for some fancy leds and reference coolers. I wouldn't. I ain't staring 24/7 at my case, I rather stare at the game and it's pretty pixels.

Now just show us where the prize money is at, Asus and EVGA, show yourselves!

If Gigabyte's Windforce cooler is done well for the Maxwell, there may be no reason to go with Asus, and all EVGA can do beyond that is liquid cool, and frankly I'd prefer to buy reference and put an EK block on it, if not for EVGA's damned internal binning (freaking overpriced hydrocoppers...).

Software Engineer for Suncorp (Australia), Computer Tech Enthusiast, Miami University Graduate, Nerd

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the feeling the 295x2 was aimed directly at gamers. Hence the liquid cooling. So they nailed their intended market there.

Personally I couldn't care less about performance per watt, if it performs better it performs better. And that's the one I'll go for.

If AMD pushes out something that gobbles up 350w but bests an Nvidia GPU at 200w, it's a no brainer for me.

Just because you don't find it important you don't get to dismiss it.

“The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it the more it will contract” -Oliver Wendell Holmes “If it can be destroyed by the truth, it deserves to be destroyed by the truth.” -Carl Sagan

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the feeling the 295x2 was aimed directly at gamers. Hence the liquid cooling. So they nailed their intended market there.

Personally I couldn't care less about performance per watt, if it performs better it performs better. And that's the one I'll go for.

If AMD pushes out something that gobbles up 350w but bests an Nvidia GPU at 200w, it's a no brainer for me.

Yeah but there's a reason Nvidia can kick them in the nuts repeatedly over performance. Nvidia has a higher thermal threshold to put more power in to the chip.

 

The only reason AMD has a liquid cooled card is because they can't control their temperatures.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which would be fine if gamers alone could keep AMD afloat, which is far from the case. AMD ignored enthusiasts in pursuit of HSA for a reason: server/supercomputer people have far deeper pockets and order in far larger volumes than any gaming community ever will. If you want AMD to succeed and excel to be able to compete against Nvidia and Intel, you should be willing to endure slow performance climbs in favor of power efficiency, because without it, AMD will soon be swallowed whole by Intel's own heterogeneous architecture on Skylake in addition to its ever more powerful integrated graphics solutions (2 TFlops on Broadwell's top SKUs vs. Carrizo's lousy projected 930 GFlops, and that's not even accounting for the fact Intel's floating point units were already the fastest in the industry and they just got 40% faster at doing multiplication and division).

 

Anyone who cares about AMD's future should be pushing them to beat Nvidia's Maxwell at its own game.

Actually gamers do help keep AMD afloat. Their performance increase in the last quarter was hugely a result of the current generation consoles.

In relation to AMD, their professional graphics solutions don't account for most of their revenue, but they do account for greater profit; ~5% of the pie for ~30% of the profit.

Way better margins, but you can't deny that regular consumers are undoubtedly a driving force.

Nvidia has more of a stranglehold on professional graphics solutions, well exceeding 70% of their revenue, making them a powerhouse in that sector.

 

small_GPU-revenue.png

AMD's professional vs consumer sales.

 

Just because you don't find it important you don't get to dismiss it.

Actually, I can, because I personally don't find it of great importance.

Current PC:

Spoiler

CPU: Intel i3 4160 Cooler: Integrated Motherboard: Integrated

RAM: G.Skill RipJaws 16GB DDR3 Storage: Transcend MSA370 128GB GPU: Intel 4400 Graphics

PSU: Integrated Case: Shuttle XPC Slim

Monitor: LG 29WK500 Mouse: G.Skill MX780 Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

Budget Rig 1 - Sold For $750 Profit

Spoiler

CPU: Intel i5 7600k Cooler: CryOrig H7 Motherboard: MSI Z270 M5

RAM: Crucial LPX 16GB DDR4 Storage: Intel S3510 800GB GPU: Nvidia GTX 980

PSU: Corsair CX650M Case: EVGA DG73

Monitor: LG 29WK500 Mouse: G.Skill MX780 Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

OG Gaming Rig - Gone

Spoiler

 

CPU: Intel i5 4690k Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 Motherboard: MSI Z97i AC ITX

RAM: Crucial Ballistix 16GB DDR3 Storage: Kingston Fury 240GB GPU: Asus Strix GTX 970

PSU: Thermaltake TR2 Case: Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ITX

Monitor: Dell P2214H x2 Mouse: Logitech MX Master Keyboard: G.Skill KM780 Cherry MX Red

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still don't care, since it's a rumor.

Hi I'm a trash can and I like getting warning points by a passive-aggressive mod for being passive-aggressive. Nice to meet you!

Also, the PSU tier list + cultists are a joke that nobody should actually take seriously

Main rig on profile

Zephyrus - Windows 7 side rig

Spoiler

AMD Athlon II X2 260 (undervolted to 1.225v w/ CM 212 EVO), 2x2GB 1333MHz CL7 HyperX, Asus M4A77TD, 120GB 840 EVO, 250GB Seagate Momentus 5400.6, EVGA GTX 960 SC, Enthoo Pro, Corsair CX750M, Gigabyte GC-WB867D-I w/ Centrino 6300, Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit

Consoles: Softmodded 1.4 Xbox w/ 500GB HDD, Xbox 360 Elite 120GB (Falcon w/ busted laser), XB1X 1TB, PS1 1001, PS2 Slim 70000 w/ FreeMcBoot, PS4 Pro 7015B 1TB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually gamers do help keep AMD afloat. Their performance increase in the last quarter was hugely a result of the current generation consoles.

In relation to AMD, their professional graphics solutions don't account for most of their revenue, but they do account for greater profit; ~5% of the pie for ~30% of the profit.

Way better margins, but you can't deny that regular consumers are undoubtedly a driving force.

Nvidia has more of a stranglehold on professional graphics solutions, well exceeding 70% of their revenue, making them a powerhouse in that sector.

 

 

AMD's professional vs consumer sales.

 

Actually, I can, because I personally don't find it of great importance.

The consoles were built on APUs, not enthusiast hardware. It's a great win for HSA, but let's be honest: consoles are going to die out before the decade is done. Virtualization is so good on both Intel and AMD hardware that PROPERLY MADE emulators run faster than the console with 3-year-old GPUs.

 

PC gamers can't keep AMD alive. They need more revenue streams, which is why they're pursuing the server world, ARM, and reskinned RAM&SSDs. Nvidia makes money hand over fist compared to AMD which is why AMD can barely compete! They should be pursuing phones with an ARM version of Carrizo, and they should be putting their own ARM chips into wireless routers instead of letting Qualcomm be the monopoly it is. AMD can't rely on gamers anymore. There's not ENOUGH money there to keep them competitive.

 

Luckily Reed understands this, though his statements about keeping 28nm around for a while are troubling.

Software Engineer for Suncorp (Australia), Computer Tech Enthusiast, Miami University Graduate, Nerd

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey peeps, I'm a news editor at Hardware.Info and I thought I could clarify the guess of the clock speeds. It isn't based on the listings that appeared in the Netherlands (which were nice spots from my colleagues btw), but on the 3DMark scores Videocardz discovered earlier. We've found them (not that difficult, if you know how to use Google :)) and here they are:

1x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2717498

1x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2719375

1x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2701047

1x GTX 980, 1,178 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2723031

2x GTX 980, 540 MHz, 3,505 MHz (wrong readings?) - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2697465

2x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2742971

2x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2737384

2x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2726183

2x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - down, but Google Cache saved it: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Awww.3dmark.com%2Ffs%2F2736781

3x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2737965

 

Since 1,127 MHz/1,753 MHz are clearly the most common frequencies and it's rather time consuming to get the same OC working on three cards, at least these samples are likely to operate at those clocks by default. However, in less than a week we'll likely know much more :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey peeps, I'm a news editor at Hardware.Info and I thought I could clarify the guess of the clock speeds. It isn't based on the listings that appeared in the Netherlands (which were nice spots from my colleagues btw), but on the 3DMark scores Videocardz discovered earlier. We've found them (not that difficult, if you know how to use Google :)) and here they are:

1x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2717498

1x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2719375

1x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2701047

1x GTX 980, 1,178 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2723031

2x GTX 980, 540 MHz, 3,505 MHz (wrong readings?) - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2697465

2x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2742971

2x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2737384

2x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2726183

2x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - down, but Google Cache saved it: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Awww.3dmark.com%2Ffs%2F2736781

3x GTX 980, 1,127 MHz, 1,753 MHz - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2737965

 

Since 1,127 MHz/1,753 MHz are clearly the most common frequencies and it's rather time consuming to get the same OC working on three cards, at least these samples are likely to operate at those clocks by default. However, in less than a week we'll likely know much more :)

Do something useful and dig up/make benchmarks of the Broadwell iGPU ;) 

 

GAWD, press/reporters are such freaking invasive parasites!!!

 

Welcome to Linus Tech Tips though!

Software Engineer for Suncorp (Australia), Computer Tech Enthusiast, Miami University Graduate, Nerd

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the feeling the 295x2 was aimed directly at gamers. Hence the liquid cooling. So they nailed their intended market there.

Personally I couldn't care less about performance per watt, if it performs better it performs better. And that's the one I'll go for.

If AMD pushes out something that gobbles up 350w but bests an Nvidia GPU at 200w, it's a no brainer for me.

 

pretty much this ^, although GK110 and Hawaii are basically a few watts apart anyway. Considering how dense an AMD gpu die is packed, its a wonder that they have managed to keep up with Nvidia's Kepler Architecture for power consumption. the difficulty to remove the heat because of the higher density means more leakage, and ultimately more power consumption, and yet watts are still fairly close between the two brands. Worse still, a lot of the initial comparisons are done with the craptastic AMD reference cooler, which causes even more leakage and thus more power consumption than 3rd party vendor cards....  :rolleyes:

 

I hope with Maxwell that the power consumption arguments against AMD will be real for once, instead of being exaggerated. 

R9 3900XT | Tomahawk B550 | Ventus OC RTX 3090 | Photon 1050W | 32GB DDR4 | TUF GT501 Case | Vizio 4K 50'' HDR

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, we already did ;)

How about something that isn't an Intel-managed benchmark? I was messing with you before, but now the gloves come off. Don't try to sell BS to me or any of the real enthusiasts on this board. We've seen the specs and the 3DMark/Cinebench scores. Those were on an Intel-built platform under unknown power settings, unknown heatspreader/backplate, and under unknown clock rates. 

 

Let's see some real independent reviews. 

Software Engineer for Suncorp (Australia), Computer Tech Enthusiast, Miami University Graduate, Nerd

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×