780 vs. 970?

[BiG StroOnZ]

970 uses newer technology and 780 is outdated 

 

Most of the features are pretty useless for the majority of the users, aside from DSR, which can be used on the 780 now also. The 780 isn't outdated because a new card comes out (especially when the 970 performs nearly identical to it). The 780 is still more than applicable for most users @ 1080p. Especially considering you can get a 780 for $329 now. You can't even find a decent 970 in stock right now for the most part. So what are people supposed to do, wait one to two months for a card that performs equally as good as the previous gen? When the previous gen is priced similarly and in stock? I dont know about you but I rather have a card that I can buy and use now. Rather than wait one to two months before I can buy a card. Sitting around without a decent graphics card in my rig. Also, as soon as they get back in stock. You are going to see them vanish again a second time. So you pretty much need to be ready to order as soon as they reappear in stock. They will be gone in an instant. So what happens if you miss the second restocking of them? Wait another one to two months?  By then GM200 will be on its way to release.

 

Anyway, good luck getting one.  

[Razzaa]

Good choice on the 970. You wont be disappointed. After all, they discontinued the 780 for a reason.

[Razzaa]

Surely it doesn't:

 

 

 

 

What is the source for these benches. The Bioshock bench looked low to me because i have been playing it a lot last couple of days. Ran a bench on Ultra DX11 and got a significant increase compared to these. Just want to see what clocks they were running on the cards. Stock? Im at 1275 core. Going to do a stock run.

[Guest]

They are probably running it on user setting 2 in the benchmark at 1080p, I have done the same on the MSI 970 and got 116.8fps, the GTX 780 I tested got 115.2fps.

Thats at stock speeds, so if they are cranking them up then it makes sense that they are getting those type of scores.

[CaptainKoda]

They are probably running it on user setting 2 in the benchmark at 1080p, I have done the same on the MSI 970 and got 116.8fps, the GTX 780 I tested got 115.2fps.

Thats at stock speeds, so if they are cranking them up then it makes sense that they are getting those type of scores.

yep

[I/O]

Surely it doesn't:

 

 

 

 

 

To be fair LTT has a Gold Sample silicon lottery winning GTX 780 which was used in these benchmarks. OC for OC the 780 is a bit faster than 970 but stock for stock the 970 is better.

[BiG StroOnZ]

 

What is the source for these benches. The Bioshock bench looked low to me because i have been playing it a lot last couple of days. Ran a bench on Ultra DX11 and got a significant increase compared to these. Just want to see what clocks they were running on the cards. Stock? Im at 1275 core. Going to do a stock run.

 

Source is Linus Tech Tips.

 

 

They are probably running it on user setting 2 in the benchmark at 1080p, I have done the same on the MSI 970 and got 116.8fps, the GTX 780 I tested got 115.2fps.

Thats at stock speeds, so if they are cranking them up then it makes sense that they are getting those type of scores.

 

Doesn't really matter though, the 970 in that benchmark was @ 1450MHz core and 7500MHz memory while the 780 was at 1250MHz core 6000MHz memory. Both cards are overclocked and the 780 surpasses the 970 at lower clocks. Of course you can say if the 970 was at 1550-1600MHz it would surpass the 780 but that's not really an average overclock for these cards. Sure there are people doing those numbers but there isn't a lot of people. Whereas it isn't all that difficult to get a 780 to 1200MHz-1250MHz core. 

 

 

To be fair LTT has a Gold Sample silicon lottery winning GTX 780 which was used in these benchmarks. OC for OC the 780 is a bit faster than 970 but stock for stock the 970 is better.

 

 

Of course stock for stock the 970 is better. Non-reference 970's boost into the 1300MHz range versus a 780's non-reference boosting in 1000MHz range (some of them). If you try to compare a reference 970 it's still boosting into the 1200MHz range and a 780 is boosting into the 900MHz range. OC for OC is the fairest comparison for these cards. 

[TylerVieira]

Surely it doesn't:

 

 

 

 

All of these benches for LTT are OC'd to the very edge> not to mention their 780 is an anomaly and OCs much farther than almost anyone else 780 EVER. in aggregate the 970 is better.

[BiG StroOnZ]

All of these benches for LTT are OC'd to the very edge> not to mention their 780 is an anomaly and OCs much farther than almost anyone else 780 EVER. in aggregate the 970 is better.

 

Their 780 is at 1250MHz core, says so in the doc. Not really the very edge as you say when there is plenty people on OC.net that are doing 1300MHz+ core all day long with their 780's. I wouldn't call 1250MHz core an anomaly at all. 

[Razzaa]

Their 780 is at 1250MHz core, says so in the doc. Not really the very edge as you say when there is plenty people on OC.net that are doing 1300MHz+ core all day long with their 780's. I wouldn't call 1250MHz core an anomaly at all.

I am a active member on OCN and i dont see plenty of people getting 1300+ on stock cooling and stock bios.

I do see most people getting 1500+ on the 970. My 970 matches the 980 in those benchmarks you posted. Modded voltage and water for the 970 will make the 970 a clear winner.

[BiG StroOnZ]

I am a active member on OCN and i dont see plenty of people getting 1300+ on stock cooling and stock bios.

 

You are taking what I'm saying out of context. In retrospect 1250MHz core is conservative to what people are able to achieve with these cards.

[Razzaa]

You are taking what I'm saying out of context. In retrospect 1250MHz core is conservative to what people are able to achieve with these cards.

If we are making a fair comparison, air cooling and stock bios i would say that was above average.

[BiG StroOnZ]

If we are making a fair comparison, air cooling and stock bios i would say that was above average.

 

I would say 1200-1220MHz core is pretty average for a 780. So not exactly over the top "above average."

[mattyo1228]

Both are great cards but the 780 outperforms the 970 by a moderate amount.

[Razzaa]

I would say 1200-1220MHz core is pretty average for a 780. So not exactly over the top "above average."

Comparing OC'd cards is flawed anyway. To many variables with cards that are similar. If they had a horrible OC'd 780 and a great OC'd 970 people would be like OMG!!!! I am glad LTT dropped doing benchmarks OC'd. Results vary from card to card. If they had my G1 it would be scoring close to a 980.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Comparing OC'd cards is flawed anyway. To many variables with cards that are similar. If they had a horrible OC'd 780 and a great OC'd 970 people would be like OMG!!!! I am glad LTT dropped doing benchmarks OC'd. Results vary from card to card. If they had my G1 it would be scoring close to a 980.

 

But it's fair to compare a 970 and 980 non-reference card that's boosting into the 1300MHz range and putting it against a reference 780 or 780 Ti that's boosting into the 900MHz range; then claiming that that the newer cards are significantly faster? Sorry, I'll have to disagree with you on that one. Comparing non-reference and reference 970's and 980's at their actual boost clocks is just an unrealistic comparison against reference and non-reference 780's, 780 Ti's, Titan's or Titan Black's at their actual boost clocks. It's a flawed comparison and dissuades people from grasping what is actually going on in the comparison. By overclocking both cards you get a better realization of where performance stands. And most enthusiasts overclock their cards so it gives a better representation of results. If you hang around OC.net like you claim, then you would already be on the OC for OC bandwagon. 

 

You act like the 970 didn't have a good overclock. It was boosting into the 1460MHz range according to the doc. While the 780 was 210MHz under that. Since when is 1460MHz not a good overclock? OMG it wasn't at 1600MHz not a good overclock. Seriously one month ago people didn't even think 1400MHz overclocks were possible without bios modifications and watercooling. NVIDIA suddenly releases highly binned graphics cards from the factory and all of a sudden when the card can't hit almost 1600MHz it's not considered a good overclock? When 1600MHz wasn't even possible without LN2 previously. Seems like people are getting overly optimistic and are just disappointed that the 900 series doesn't scale as well as the 700 series did. 

[Razzaa]

But it's fair to compare a 970 and 980 non-reference card that's boosting into the 1300MHz range and putting it against a reference 780 or 780 Ti that's boosting into the 900MHz range; then claiming that that the newer cards are significantly faster? Sorry, I'll have to disagree with you on that one. Comparing non-reference and reference 970's and 980's at their actual boost clocks is just an unrealistic comparison against reference and non-reference 780's, 780 Ti's, Titan's or Titan Black's at their actual boost clocks. It's a flawed comparison and dissuades people from grasping what is actually going on in the comparison. By overclocking both cards you get a better realization of where performance stands. And most enthusiasts overclock their cards so it gives a better representation of results. If you hang around OC.net like you claim, then you would already be on the OC for OC bandwagon. 

 

You act like the 970 didn't have a goodoverclock. It was boosting into the 1460MHz range according to the doc. While the 780 was 210MHz under that. Since when is 1460MHz not a good overclock? OMG it wasn't at 1600MHz not a good overclock. Seriously one month ago people didn't even think 1400MHz overclocks were possible without bios modifications and watercooling. NVIDIA suddenly releases highly binned graphics cards from the factory and all of a sudden when the card can't hit almost 1600MHz it's not considered a good overclock? When 1600MHz wasn't even possible without LN2 previously. Seems like people are getting overly optimistic and are just disappointed that the 900 series doesn't scale as well as the 700 series did. 

I never made a statement saying 900 series non-reference should be compared against reference 700 series. 

 

1460mhz for 900 series non-reference is below average compared to other 900 series non-reference. Compared to 700 series of course 900 is higher clocked. What did you expect? Anyone that denies the 900 series isnt better tech, is in denial. There is a reason why Nvidia has discontinued the 700 series. The 900 series made them obsolete.

 

So you believe OC to OC is the best way to compare cards? Then you should have no problem saying the 970 is faster than a 780/780ti. I can beat both those cards and have multiple times on HWbot.

[BiG StroOnZ]

I never made a statement saying 900 series non-reference should be compared against reference 700 series. 

 

1460mhz for 900 series non-reference is below average compared to other 900 series non-reference. Compared to 700 series of course 900 is higher clocked. What did you expect? Anyone that denies the 900 series isnt better tech, is in denial. There is a reason why Nvidia has discontinued the 700 series. The 900 series made them obsolete.

 

So you believe OC to OC is the best way to compare cards? Then you should have no problem saying the 970 is faster than a 780/780ti. I can beat both those cards and have multiple times on HWbot.

 

You never made a statement, but you believe they should leave cards stock. Which is basically saying the same thing because that's what every other benchmark basically shows and is doing.

 

The cards are topping out at about 1450-1550MHz on average. Anything above that silicon lottery luck. Below average? More like average. These cards are voltage locked and aren't going to do any better. No body isn't saying it's not a work of art. All I'm saying is the performance isn't ground breaking or earth shattering. The reason why the 700 series is discontinued is because the 900 series was released.  Discontinuing the old model is standard practice and nothing out of the ordinary.

 

Maybe that might be the case, but it looks like the 780 or 780 Ti doesn't have a problem beating you multiple times either:

 

[CaptainKoda]

guys calm down its just a video card...

[BiG StroOnZ]

guys calm down its just a video card...

 

 

[Razzaa]

Surely it doesn't:

 

 

 

 

 

 

You never made a statement, but you believe they should leave cards stock. Which is basically saying the same thing because that's what every other benchmark basically shows and is doing.

 

The cards are topping out at about 1450-1550MHz on average. Anything above that silicon lottery luck. Below average? More like average. These cards are voltage locked and aren't going to do any better. No body isn't saying it's not a work of art. All I'm saying is the performance isn't ground breaking or earth shattering. The reason why the 700 series is discontinued is because the 900 series was released.  Discontinuing the old model is standard practice and nothing out of the ordinary.

 

Maybe that might be the case, but it looks like the 780 or 780 Ti doesn't have a problem beating you multiple times either:

 

Yes the 7oo series does better in a benchmark that looks pretty and isn't included in HWbot lol. Valley doesn't count towards anything. I favor points and gaming performance over Valley.. Here i ran the exact same Bioshock Infinite bench as Linus. Exact same clocks. I didnt even OC the mem.

[Razzaa]

You never made a statement, but you believe they should leave cards stock. Which is basically saying the same thing because that's what every other benchmark basically shows and is doing.

 

The cards are topping out at about 1450-1550MHz on average. Anything above that silicon lottery luck. Below average? More like average. These cards are voltage locked and aren't going to do any better. No body isn't saying it's not a work of art. All I'm saying is the performance isn't ground breaking or earth shattering. The reason why the 700 series is discontinued is because the 900 series was released.  Discontinuing the old model is standard practice and nothing out of the ordinary.

 

Maybe that might be the case, but it looks like the 780 or 780 Ti doesn't have a problem beating you multiple times either:

 

My point is this. You cant link a single example of 1 benchmark and say look, the 780 is faster. For every example you give, i can give another to show you the opposite. The fact remains there is no reason to buy a 780 over a 970. None what so ever.

[Samfisher]

Their 780 is at 1250MHz core, says so in the doc. Not really the very edge as you say when there is plenty people on OC.net that are doing 1300MHz+ core all day long with their 780's. I wouldn't call 1250MHz core an anomaly at all. 

 

 

Except on Anandtech and a ton of other websites, a 970 beats the 780 hands down.

 

 

 

And a ton of other graphs I'm not gonna post here.

 

Sources : http://anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_970_and_980_reference_review,12.html

[DirtySHISNO]

 

See my name in picture!

 

780s are a lot cheaper than 970s at teh moment where i am.

[BiG StroOnZ]

 

 

 

Yes the 7oo series does better in a benchmark that looks pretty and isn't included in HWbot lol. Valley doesn't count towards anything. I favor points and gaming performance over Valley.. Here i ran the exact same Bioshock Infinite bench as Linus. Exact same clocks. I didnt even OC the mem.

 

 

The results would be the same for Heaven Benchmark, which is included in HWBot and you know that is true. Anyway somehow you gained 7.7 fps, are you sure you ran the same settings he did? Seems kind of odd and peculiar that you would gain 7.7fps at the same clocks. That's quite a percentage increase. 

 

My point is this. You cant link a single example of 1 benchmark and say look, the 780 is faster. For every example you give, i can give another to show you the opposite. The fact remains there is no reason to buy a 780 over a 970. None what so ever.

 

Then we can at least agree that they are on par with each other and trade blows. The only reason you would buy a 780 over a 970 is if you couldn't get a 970 since they are not in stock. They aren't obsolete cards by any means. The performance between the two cards is nearly identical. 

 

Except on Anandtech and a ton of other websites, a 970 beats the 780 hands down.

 

 

 

And a ton of other graphs I'm not gonna post here.

 

Sources : http://anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_970_and_980_reference_review,12.html

 

First problem with those graphs is they have a 280x beating a 780 in the second graph. So I automatically will not believe those specific results at all. Secondly, read through the thread before you try to get involved. The argument here is that OC for OC the 970 does not out perform the 780 as much as they like to display in these stock benchmarks. Because all these benchmarks you are going to find are stock vs stock. Which is an unfair comparison. Here you have an EVGA GeForce GTX 970 FTW boosting to 1367MHz stock, put up against a reference 780 that boosts to 900MHz. Obviously the 970 is going to outperform the 780. It's not an apples to apples comparison. Again, in the Guru3D article the 970 and 980 are both reference, these reference cards are boosting into the 1200MHz range. Compared to 780 and 780 Ti reference cards that boost into the 900MHz range. Again this is not a fair comparison by any means. 

 

Match the cards to the same exact clocks and see who comes out on top. That's apples to apples. None of this 900MHz vs 1400MHz nonsense.