Nvidia Maxwell?

[AlexYoon]

So.. I'm building a computer and I was going to buy Evga gtx 770. But because its over half way to 2014, I am wondering if I should buy gtx 670 and wait for Nvidia's 2014 Maxwell. Should I buy 670 and save money for Maxwell or just buy 770?

[Hans Christian | Teri]

Buy the 770. You wont get anywhere in the world of tech if you always wait for the next generation.

[JamesIsBatman]

Ummm isn't the gtx 770 cheaper or even the same price as 670? Just get the 770

[Opsilon]

Dude if you have money for a 770, buy a HD7970, will suit you much better, the 670 and 770 when both are overclock are not that much different and the "huge" 15% more performance will mean 1-2 FPS... so i would not worry about that, so a 7970 is my recommendation, i have a 670 it's awesome for 1080p and with Nvidia improving drivers you can even get a performance on the same level as a 7970, but i still say 7970 is a great deal, even if an "older" card

[Dravic]

Dude if you have money for a 770, buy a HD7970, will suit you much better, the 670 and 770 when both are overclock are not that much different and the "huge" 15% more performance will mean 1-2 FPS... so i would not worry about that, so a 7970 is my recommendation, i have a 670 it's awesome for 1080p and with Nvidia improving drivers you can even get a performance on the same level as a 7970, but i still say 7970 is a great deal, even if an "older" card

 

I dont think you have any benchmarks backing you up do you? 7Ghz on the memory you say 1fps difference? xD

 

No, 670 is GK104 like 680 but slightly cut off. 770 is 680 on steroids but cheaper... All in all, either get 760 or 770, no reason to grab stuff that is more expensive.

 

And maybe he likes Physx and all the Nvidia goodies?

[Xelithium]

Maxwell can take up to a year to release, even more if Nvidia feels like it. It all depends on how the 700 series do against AMDs upcoming cards. If you need a new graphics card now, then buy it. There is no point waiting because by the time Maxwell is out, there will be rumours about Volta coming.

[Kuzma]

I dont think you have any benchmarks backing you up do you? 7Ghz on the memory you say 1fps difference? xD

 

No, 670 is GK104 like 680 but slightly cut off. 770 is 680 on steroids but cheaper... All in all, either get 760 or 770, no reason to grab stuff that is more expensive.

 

And maybe he likes Physx and all the Nvidia goodies?

Steroids? I think not; something a lot lighter.

The difference between the 680 and 770 is so little :/ everyone is making the 770 out to be some kind of god card when it's really not. Neither is the 7970 but it's a DAMN good card for price -> performance with moar vram.

[Kuzma]

Maxwell can take up to a year to release, even more if Nvidia feels like it. It all depends on how the 700 series do against AMDs upcoming cards. If you need a new graphics card now, then buy it. There is no point waiting because by the time Maxwell is out, there will be rumours about Volta coming.

^+1 , if you wait for the next thing then you'll be waiting forever.

Look at the people who got told DDR4 was coming at sandybridge ....

[Dravic]

^+1 , if you wait for the next thing then you'll be waiting forever.

Look at the people who got told DDR4 was coming at sandybridge ....

 

It's always like this with tech

 

One day you are told wait for something, and two years later it's still not out :D

[YellowDragon]

I dont think you have any benchmarks backing you up do you? 7Ghz on the memory you say 1fps difference? xD

 

No, 670 is GK104 like 680 but slightly cut off. 770 is 680 on steroids but cheaper... All in all, either get 760 or 770, no reason to grab stuff that is more expensive.

 

And maybe he likes Physx and all the Nvidia goodies?

Physx is going away, developers do not like proprietary software. Why do you think all of 2 games actually use it for anything? A proprietary implementation will never dominate the market, so its not going to be implemented in many games. this has been proven time and time again and is exactly why Firewire never really gained traction as Apple kept it locked down, I personally think that Physx is a very poor reason and argument to go for an Nvidia GPU as both Nvidia and AMD always trade blows with every generation. Shadowplay would be a better answer but Physx is so weak of a feature it should not even be considered.

[Opsilon]

I dont think you have any benchmarks backing you up do you? 7Ghz on the memory you say 1fps difference? xD

 

No, 670 is GK104 like 680 but slightly cut off. 770 is 680 on steroids but cheaper... All in all, either get 760 or 770, no reason to grab stuff that is more expensive.

 

And maybe he likes Physx and all the Nvidia goodies?

rewatch Linuses 770 and i think 780 benchmarks, you will see a small difference and the 760 is still not a viable option, even a 7950 is faster, the 760 is faster than a 660ti but not 670.

 

Yes physx is awesome, since i am a Nvidia user i know this, but a lot of modern games support CPU based physics and not the nvidia version at all. if i had money when i bought the 670 i would take the 7970, i don't really care about branding, i just take the best i can afford.

 

As for my 1-2 fps reference is when both cards are overclocked, according to Linus there is no huge improvement, so if he can get away with a 300$ 670, why buy a 400$ 770?

The 760 card is a 670 with one disabled SMX unit disabled and if you want to save money the 7950 is still a better option... 

[Dravic]

Physx is going away, developers do not like proprietary software. Why do you think all of 2 games actually use it for anything? A proprietary implementation will never dominate the market, so its not going to be implemented in many games. this has been proven time and time again and is exactly why Firewire never really gained traction as Apple kept it locked down, I personally think that Physx is a very poor reason and argument to go for an Nvidia GPU as both Nvidia and AMD always trade blows with every generation. Shadowplay would be a better answer but Physx is so weak of a feature it should not even be considered.

 

It's a thing that sweetens the deal, not a deal breaker. Witcher 3 will use PhysX. You can disable it with Radeon or enable with good nvidia Gpu. not a big deal but always nice to have better physics ingame. See? =)

 

it may or may not be prioprietary. You seem to be repeating words of that AMD salesman who can't really leverage own products so starts trash talking about products of other firms.

 

I am not really a fanboy of Nvidia, i just LIKE the PhysX and I just LIKE things like Shadowplay/GeForce Experience/GRID/Shield streaming. I also like GREEN of Nvidia and I like the 'premium feel' they got with their high-end cards. That's it.

 

I don't like advertising of AMD (The Fixer where they destroy Nvidia card saying it's worthless... with a hammer. WHAT THE...).

 

Also from what i see PhysX is free to use for developers. If you want it you can have it. the fact it only works with Nvidia (and with CPUs to a small degree traded for performance hit) is just how it is.

[YellowDragon]

It's a thing that sweetens the deal, not a deal breaker. Witcher 3 will use PhysX. You can disable it with Radeon or enable with good nvidia Gpu. not a big deal but always nice to have better physics ingame. See? =)

 

it may or may not be prioprietary. You seem to be repeating words of that AMD salesman who can't really leverage own products so starts trash talking about products of other firms.

 

I am not really a fanboy of Nvidia, i just LIKE the PhysX and I just LIKE things like Shadowplay/GeForce Experience/GRID/Shield streaming. I also like GREEN of Nvidia and I like the 'premium feel' they got with their high-end cards. That's it.

 

I don't like advertising of AMD (The Fixer where they destroy Nvidia card saying it's worthless... with a hammer. WHAT THE...).

 

Also from what i see PhysX is free to use for developers. If you want it you can have it. the fact it only works with Nvidia (and with CPUs to a small degree traded for performance hit) is just how it is.

Im not trying to be the salesman for AMD. I agree I would like to see better solutions when it comes to in game physic, however Nvidias way of doing it is just wrong when its a proprietary solution, developers don't want to use a technology that cuts their userbase in half, lets be honest running Physx on a CPU is a no go.

 

There is no reason why Nvidia cant open the platform up and then developer support would be much better, however it would be far greater and I think many would agree that an open source platform really is the way to go. its been proven time and time again with API that proprietary just does not work vs an open standard. As someone that's interested in game development and game programming I can tell you right now that Physx is really an afterthought to most developers out there as it is seen as wasted resources developing for a proprietary standard which half of the userbase cant use and those man hours are better put elsewhere, the only time you see a semi-decent physx implementation is when the game is directly sponsored by Nvidia, like Hawken or Borderlands and even then it adds very little. 

 

For example I think Tress FX will be more readily adopted because its an open standard and any piece of hardware can use it without restrictions or performance degradation. 

 

You can like Nvidia for other reasons like shadowplay and the look, however I Think recommending Nvidia JUST based on Physx is a poor decision as it has very little support and its going the way of the dodo.

 

For example if an AMD card has better performance vs a Nvidia one and someone picks Nvidia over AMD just for the sole reason of Physx, that is the case that really bugs me as anything in software that is proprietary as a standard always fails or always has low support. If they like it for looks and Shield or shadowplay then yes i can see why they would take the Nvidia card, with just Physx I feel its just a poorly supported feature that will never see the limelight.

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/AMD-PhysX-Nvidia-Gaming-PC,9838.html

[Dravic]

Im not trying to be the salesman for AMD. I agree I would like to see better solutions when it comes to in game physic, however Nvidias way of doing it is just wrong when its a proprietary solution, developers don't want to use a technology that cuts their userbase in half, lets be honest running Physx on a CPU is a no go.

 

There is no reason why Nvidia cant open the platform up and then developer support would be much better, however it would be far greater and I think many would agree that an open source platform really is the way to go. its been proven time and time again with API that proprietary just does not work vs an open standard. As someone that's interested in game development and game programming I can tell you right now that Physx is really an afterthought to most developers out there as it is seen as wasted resources developing for a proprietary standard which half of the userbase cant use and those man hours are better put elsewhere, the only time you see a semi-decent physx implementation is when the game is directly sponsored by Nvidia, like Hawken or Borderlands and even then it adds very little. 

 

For example I think Tress FX will be more readily adopted because its an open standard and any piece of hardware can use it without restrictions or performance degradation. 

 

You can like Nvidia for other reasons like shadowplay and the look, however I Think recommending Nvidia JUST based on Physx is a poor decision as it has very little support and its going the way of the dodo.

For example if an AMD card has better performance vs a Nvidia one and someone picks Nvidia over AMD just for the sole reason of Physx, that is the case that really bugs me as anything in software that is proprietary as a standard always fail or always has low support. If they like it for looks and Shield or shadowplay then yes i can see why they would take the Nvidia card, with just Physx I feel its just a poorly supported feature that will never see the limelight.

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/AMD-PhysX-Nvidia-Gaming-PC,9838.html

 

"AMD said".

 

See?

 

AMD said. Well. I hope CrystalDynamics used TressFX for free and was in no way a 'deal behind closed doors'... -.-

 

You misunderstood. I only said that somebody might like Nvidia for PhsyX availabilty. You won't believe how many people bought GeForce after they saw Borderlands side-by-side comparison with and without PhysX. It's marketing, it ALWAYS is. This is not some open source world of ponies and rainbows man. This is all about money and game developers also work hard to EARN MONEY. If they can earn money by adding a feature they will. But sometimes people use PhysX also just because they like it (it's free to use I think). PhysX is more than just that big logo on some AAA titles, you wouldn't know how many games used some APEX from PhysX for minor stuff. :P

 

Nontheless we only saw TressFX in one game so far and it was terribly optimised and looked shitty (didnt even react to ingame wind direction etc, and didnt touch Lara's body so it looked ridiculous). PhysX isnt perfect but is a nice gimmick. TressFX isnt perfect but is a nice gimmick.

[YellowDragon]

"AMD said".

 

See?

 

AMD said. Well. I hope CrystalDynamics used TressFX for free and was in no way a 'deal behind closed doors'... -.-

 

You misunderstood. I only said that somebody might like Nvidia for PhsyX availabilty. You won't believe how many people bought GeForce after they saw Borderlands side-by-side comparison with and without PhysX. It's marketing, it ALWAYS is. This is not some open source world of ponies and rainbows man. This is all about money and game developers also work hard to EARN MONEY. If they can earn money by adding a feature they will. But sometimes people use PhysX also just because they like it (it's free to use I think). PhysX is more than just that big logo on some AAA titles, you wouldn't know how many games used some APEX from PhysX for minor stuff. :P

 

Nontheless we only saw TressFX in one game so far and it was terribly optimised and looked shitty (didnt even react to ingame wind direction etc, and didnt touch Lara's body so it looked ridiculous). PhysX isnt perfect but is a nice gimmick. TressFX isnt perfect but is a nice gimmick.

Then because its always marketing doing the driving instead of the developers own free will it will not see widescale adoption and will only be utilized in a few scenarios, point is very few games support it and very few in the future will support the closed standard, if its not physx or tressfx I can pretty much say whatever devs do eventually use it will be 100% open source as history will prove me right, in that the closed platform always losses.

 

The thing is Nvidia has to PAY people to even use it in their games, thats a clear indication that it will never catch, as soon as that money dries up no dev is going to care, you want an API in which devs WANT to use the new system, you never should force them.

 

Thats the point im trying to make, im not advocating for AMD or Nvidia im advocating for an Open platform, yes the world is all ponys and rainbows when it comes to software developments as the software that is well liked stays around and the one that isn't fades into oblivion, you want a platform that is self sustaining by people willing to use it. I can guarantee as soon as Nvidia stops marketing for Physx it will die as its too much work to use it for only slightly marginal gains in game engines that can only be utilized by 1/2 of the graphics market. Its part Programmers and part Bussiness is why Physx will never have its own staying power. Now do you understand what im getting at, there hasn't been a game out there that the developers WILLINGLY did physx support without being pushed from Nvidias pocket book. Nvidia throws money out there to them because they know it has no staying power in the market without the hand that feeds.

[Dravic]

Then because its always marketing doing the driving instead of the developers own free will it will not see widescale adoption and will only be utilized in a few scenarios, point is very few games support it and very few in the future will support the closed standard, if its not physx or tressfx I can pretty much say whatever devs do eventually use it will be 100% open source as history will prove me right, in that the closed platform always losses.

 

The thing is Nvidia has to PAY people to even use it in their games, thats a clear indication that it will never catch, as soon as that money dries up no dev is going to care, you want an API in which devs WANT to use the new system, you never should force them.

 

Thats the point im trying to make, im not advocating for AMD or Nvidia im advocating for an Open platform, yes the world is all ponys and rainbows when it comes to software developments as the software that is well liked stays around and the one that isn't fades into oblivion, you want a platform that is self sustaining by people willing to use it. I can guarantee as soon as Nvidia stops marketing for Physx it will die as its too much work to use it for only slightly marginal gains in game engines that can only be utilized by 1/2 of the graphics market. Its part Programmers and part Bussiness is why Physx will never have its own staying power. Now do you understand what im getting at, there hasn't been a game out there that the developers WILLINGLY did physx support without being pushed from Nvidias pocket book. Nvidia throws money out there to them because they know it has no staying power in the market without the hand that feeds.

 

Lol you still don't understand. Physx has been around for a couple of years now. Why? Because it's something to advertise with and Nvidia uses it. Apparently it works as a good advertising tool for them even if they have to pay for it to be implemented. End user shouldn't care. Bottom line, do you like it or not? if you like it go GeForce if not, go for the card with more RAW power (Radeon or Geforce).

 

It's just marketing tool.

 

Also i'd like to mention that closed platform is not what loses. Stuff that isnt advertised loses, for our world spins thanks to money.

 

Examples:

 

- Closed consoles vs PC

- Windows vs Linux

- DirectX vs OpenGL

 

Yes i know that physx isnt future-proof or something. as i already said it's a gimmick that Nvidia uses to attract customers. It's completely fine and will stay with us in some blockbuster titles as long as people will be happy to buy GeForce just to see it. MARKETING and only MARKETING.

When Nvidia market analysis folks see that PhysX doesn't attract customers anymore, they will stop maintaining it and instead develop something new. Remember that Ageia was bought by Nvidia just to get their tech so it will be supported and they saw it as a good income source.

 

How many games? DOESNT MATTER for the customer.

 

A guy sees physx in Borderlands 2 trailer compared to no PhysX, thinks "well it's looking very cool" and next time he buys a new card to get playable framerates in Borderlands 2 he just purchased, he will go with Nvidia. He doesnt care about companies wars for he's just average customer. He wants to play and that's it.

[YellowDragon]

Lol you still don't understand. Physx has been around for a couple of years now. Why? Because it's something to advertise with and Nvidia uses it. Apparently it works as a good advertising tool for them even if they have to pay for it to be implemented. End user shouldn't care. Bottom line, do you like it or not? if you like it go GeForce if not, go for the card with more RAW power (Radeon or Geforce).

 

It's just marketing tool.

 

Also i'd like to mention that closed platform is not what loses. Stuff that isnt advertised loses, for our world spins thanks to money.

 

Examples:

 

- Closed consoles vs PC

- Windows vs Linux

- DirectX vs OpenGL

 

Yes i know that physx isnt future-proof or something. as i already said it's a gimmick that Nvidia uses to attract customers. It's completely fine and will stay with us in some blockbuster titles as long as people will be happy to buy GeForce just to see it. MARKETING and only MARKETING.

When Nvidia market analysis folks see that PhysX doesn't attract customers anymore, they will stop maintaining it and instead develop something new. Remember that Ageia was bought by Nvidia just to get their tech so it will be supported and they saw it as a good income source.

You repeated exactly what I have been saying, and acknowledge that Physx is only around because of Nvidia throwing money at it. 

 

your examples are not very good as with consoles vs Pc there is a barrier to entry, being that the high cost of a gaming PC from oems and the stigma to the general consumer that computers are complex (which they arnt, its people you need a manual for). last I checked all games are created using a PC, the console is a simpler platform for a simpler consumer or for the consumer that does not have the money or expertise to build their own PC. With Physx its a developer piece of software so you have a much more focused professional user base, the consoles are only popular for their ease of use and no frills design, I bet if someone made a console that ran off linux and could play any game thrown in it I guarantee people would buy it in a heartbeat. However that wont happen because there would be lawsuits up the ass.

 

Windows Vs Linux, another barrier to entry, because of the many types of linux its alot harder for end consumers to use, especially non tech savvy. I mean how many gradmas go out to the store to buy a raspberry pi and say I want to run Arch linux on this?. However given that the majority of the server world runs off linux over other forms of software I believe this is testament enough that open platforms win. Windows is the majority for end consumers because its easy to use and it has to be as not everyone can be a programmer.

 

-Direct x Vs OpenGL ....varies based on the application in question, sure Direct X is more popular but that is only because like I said with the above section Windows is easier for end consumers and Direct X has seamless integration, if you are a game developer you have to reach your target market and if the majority of your market runs windows then you have to support it or risk having no business. Open GL has its place because its open source. 

 

If the market dictates that it likes a closed platform without being forced the developer will support it, however in turn if a closed platform is not readily accepted willingly by a market developer will not support it beause they could reach a larger market with an open platform, not everything is black and white, in general with propietary platforms unless the market willingly accepts it it will not gain traction and will always go in favor of the open platform. Even if you had all the money in the world to throw at Physx sure develops would do it for the extra cash, however if they decide that they want Physx to be self sustaining it just wont happen even if it is free to use because your limited even more in an already limited market with only Nvidia Gpus able to run it.

[Leonard]

I would buy the 770 as it performs almost like a 680 and it is only $30 - $50 more than a 670.

[TechFan@ic]

Honestly I would get a brand new 7950 which performs pretty much like a 670 at stock and outperforms it when both are overclocked, generally speaking 7950s overclock incredibly well & you get 3GB of VRAM so you can safely max everything out & mod games to your heat's content.

Otherwise I'd get a used DCUII 670 "like new" from amazon, means it was pretty much never used, and you can get one right now for less than $250, that should play everything you want it to play until the new generation of cards arrive from AMD at October and from Nvidia in Q1 2014.
 

[Opsilon]

Like i stated earlier i have a 670 and can recommend it, but i would not go so far and say 7950 is faster, i have seen nvidia drivers been improving if you look at the graphs carefully you could see that Linuses 670 can sometimes be slower than a 660ti but you will never see a 7970 be slower than a 7950, i still say that 670 is broken or is thermal throttling, not to mention that i read quite a few people on this forum can't OC their 7950's past 1050 mhz or in that neighbourhood, so i would not buy a 7950 i would go for a 7970 instead, because if the 7950 is as good as a lot of people claim it is there would be no need to get a 7970 at all, and the best card in 2012 was the 7970.

 

Bottom line: If you can't afford at least a 780, wait for Maxwell or buy a 7970

I don't really like buying used products that can overclock so i would stay away from any high end GPU, unless i had a friend to buy from that has never overclocked his product

[Lil Chillbil]

There is a reason that people built ivy bridge systems 3 weeks before haswell came to be. Because life is short and you can't spend all day waiting because eventually you will run out of time...

 

 

its time to start living like larry

[GoodBytes]

Ok, what do you have now? I am sure you survive just fine until early next year when Maxwell will be released.

Unless you have a GeForce 6000 series on AGP.. then that would be a different story.