Thursday, March 1st 2012

Kepler Unbeatable: NVIDIA

The tiresome wait for NVIDIA's next-generation GPU is drawing to a close. Or so suggests a Facebook wall post by NVIDIA Italy, which reads (in Italian, of course):
Aspettando Kepler... pazienza, pazienza, pazienza che il momento giusto arriverà, e allora... non ce ne sarà più per nessuno! :-)
That can be translated as "Waiting for Kepler ... patience, patience, patience, the right time will come, and then ... it will be unbeatable (sic)." From various sources we're hearing that there will be hectic activity surrounding the launch of NVIDIA's next-gen GPU in the weeks to come.

Source: XtremeSystems Forums
Add your own comment

165 Comments on Kepler Unbeatable: NVIDIA

#1
Benetanegia
Horrux said:
Like nVidia never paper launches huh?

And when we say Kepler, we mean, ANY card based on the new architecture? Or are we waiting for the top offering? In that case it will be closer to 6 months.
They have specifically said they won't paper launch. It could be true it could be false. If it's false, then we start countinf from Dec 21 and it's 3 months later. If it's true and they do not paper launch, we count from Jan 9 and it's 2 months and a half.

And we are talking about the part that is to compete with HD7970 obviously. GK104.

@claylomax

No I'm not joking, it's 2 months. Or are you talking about the "reaaaaally sloow" thing? Then yes it's irony, but not only necessarily pointing at you. Some people are saying that Kepler comes half a year later, so clearly time passes slowly for them.

EDIT: YOU were joking, using sarcasm, no? I think I get it now. Or not. Whatever it is, I blame british humour.
Posted on Reply
#2
claylomax
Benetanegia said:
They have specifically said they won't paper launch. It could be true it could be false. If it's false, then we start countinf from Dec 21 and it's 3 months later. If it's true and they do not paper launch, we count from Jan 9 and it's 2 months and a half.

And we are talking about the part that is to compete with HD7970 obviously. GK104.

@claylomax

No I'm not joking, it's 2 months. Or are you talking about the "reaaaaally sloow" thing? Then yes it's irony, but not only necessarily pointing at you. Some people are saying that Kepler comes half a year later, so clearly time passes slowly for them.

EDIT: YOU were joking, using sarcasm, no? I think I get it now. Or not.
Yes finally you get it.
But I'm confused, I thought the Kepler high end single gpu was to be launched at the end of the year; so what's coming in April then? A stopgap solution.
Posted on Reply
#3
Benetanegia
claylomax said:
Yes finally you get it.
But I'm confused, I thought the Kepler high end single gpu was to be launched at the end of the year; so what's coming in April then? A stopgap solution.
GK110 is going to release at the end of the year. My theory is GK100 is going to release in April/May/June. Basically a repeat of what happened with Fermi (but high-end and performance positions changed). No one ever heard of GF110 tape out, but considering when it released, it had to tape out around the same time of the year that GK110 did. This time around it would be GK100 the tape out that was missed. GK104 too btw.

And yeah british humour, no one gets it. :D
Posted on Reply
#4
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Unbeatbly tired and yawning at the talks of how great kepler is. Reminds me of how effective the POTUS talks are of spurring the economy which are lies.
Posted on Reply
#5
N3M3515
Benetanegia said:
I don't know in your universe, but in mine 3 months is not half a year.

And no just because you come later, that does not mean that it has to or that you can be faster*. GPUs are designed and manufactured in a process that lasts 3-5 years, and this process ends whenever it ends. And you can't change much either later on on the cycle, in the last 3 months you can change nothing at all, except clocks and fully knowing that changing clocks will affect yields. So GK104 is what Nvidia expected to be at least 2+ years ago, accomodated to the real/final state of 28nm process and maybe slightly adjusting clocks to fine tune where in the performance scale they want to end up. And that's it. According to them such cycle ended up making GK104 "unbeatable" by AMD. I'm sure that means that AMD does not have anything coming soon that will be able to beat it, including a higher clocked HD7980 or something like that.

* GeForce FX? HD2900? Bulldozer? etc etc Also every AMD card has launched later than Nvidia's in the past years (usually 1-2 months later) except HD5000 and they were never faster. When a card is launched, has nothing to do with how it performs, the physical limits that the manufacturing process imposes is pretty much the only thing that matters (and because of this which die size you choose to go with) and 28 nm will be used now and until 20 nm launches in 2 years or so. neither AMD or Nvidia will be able to make a much better chip than they already did. They can make a bigger one and a slightly better one, but no magic will be made. For example, the best that AMD did 12+ months after Cypress was Cayman, a chip that despite using the VLIW4 advantage over VLIW5 and being ~15% bigger than Cypress, it's only 15% faster. So they achieved what the process allowed them to do.
I said almost half a year, and that's because i've seen, that the gtx580 replacement comes hard launch in late may - june
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-kepler-gk104-geforce-gtx-670ti-arrives-march-2012-performs-gtx-580-hd7950/
(* GeForce FX? HD2900? Bulldozer? etc etc) All of them, exceptions that just proof the rule, and i'm talking about nvidia.
And wtf? 3 months? GK110 comes in april? you sure? i don't think so.

(it's only 15% faster.) Cayman uses the same 40nm, so that was to be expected.

EDIT:(read latest posts), i was talking about GK100, which as you say comes in may - june "almost half a year"
GK104, "gtx680", will be "faster" (not that you can notice it), like 15% more than 7970, so it won't blow it out of the water, that's great because the price won't go up. (i based on the speculations that gtx670ti will be between 7970 and 7950, gtx680 won't be like MUCH faster than its sibling)
And then the question, will gk104 be as good at o/c as hd79XX?, seeing that 7950 can go as high as 1100 Mhz that's 40% give or take.....
For one i would be so much happy to see the gtx670 ti at U$299, and faster than 7950, that would mean hd7870 U$250 atm.
Posted on Reply
#6
Super XP
Benetanegia said:
"Waiting for Kepler ... patience, patience, patience, the right time will come, and then ... it will be unbeatable"

It's not exactly like he is saying that Kepler is out now, considering that in 1 sentence he used 4 different expressions that point out that it's not here yet.
I was being :rolleyes: Obviously NVIDIA will do anything to try and slow down Radeon sales. Hopefully Kepler is fast so AMD will be forced to drop prices :D
Posted on Reply
#7
Munki
Everyone just shut up until we see benchmarks. Damn vultures.
Posted on Reply
#8
Benetanegia
N3M3515 said:
I said almost half a year, and that's because i've seen, that the gtx580 replacement comes hard launch in late may - june
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-kepler-gk104-geforce-gtx-670ti-arrives-march-2012-performs-gtx-580-hd7950/
(* GeForce FX? HD2900? Bulldozer? etc etc) All of them, exceptions that just proof the rule, and i'm talking about nvidia.
And wtf? 3 months? GK110 comes in april? you sure? i don't think so.

(it's only 15% faster.) Cayman uses the same 40nm, so that was to be expected.

EDIT:(read latest posts), i was talking about GK100, which as you say comes in may - june "almost half a year"
GK104, "gtx680", will be "faster" (not that you can notice it), like 15% more than 7970, so it won't blow it out of the water, that's great because the price won't go up. (i based on the speculations that gtx670ti will be between 7970 and 7950, gtx680 won't be like MUCH faster than its sibling)
And then the question, will gk104 be as good at o/c as hd79XX?, seeing that 7950 can go as high as 1100 Mhz that's 40% give or take.....
For one i would be so much happy to see the gtx670 ti at U$299, and faster than 7950, that would mean hd7870 U$250 atm.
I didn't say GK110 in April. I said GK100 in April and that's pure speculation on my part, so don't take it as anything other than that.

But GK100/110 is not the chip that will go against HD7970, that one is a lot faster and more heavily oriented for compute, so I don't know why anyone would want to compare them. The competition to Tahiti is GK104 (same die size) and again according to rumors it is significantly faster. 15% is not much? lol then I guess HD7970 is worthless to you and so must be HD7950, but you are apparently praising them, so I'm confused.

Regarding GTX670 or 680, etc. No one is sure of what the name for the highest binned GK104 SKU will be, but that's the one that is suposed to be 45-50% faster than GTX580, not any GK100/110 based card. So "Kepler" as in cards that will compete or beat HD7000 gen of cards will launch in March/April, so definitely NOT 6 months later.
Posted on Reply
#9
leonard_222003
If they are not in a price fixing deal we could expect the new Nvidia monster to make AMD start a price war wich could benefit whoever wants a new card.
Posted on Reply
#11
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Munki said:
Everyone just shut up until we see benchmarks. Damn vultures.
Most reasonable thing that anyone has said in this entire thread. :banghead:
Posted on Reply
#12
Wrigleyvillain
PTFO or GTFO
eidairaman1 said:
Unbeatbly tired and yawning at the talks of how great kepler is. Reminds me of how effective the POTUS talks are of spurring the economy which are lies.
First of all, I guess you haven't been paying attention to any economic news lately. Secondly, no politician-especially the president who cannot even actually make policy-has much effect on the ginormous and complex US economy in the first place. Thirdly, take it to GN.
Posted on Reply
#13
N3M3515
Benetanegia said:
I didn't say GK110 in April. I said GK100 in April and that's pure speculation on my part, so don't take it as anything other than that.

But GK100/110 is not the chip that will go against HD7970, that one is a lot faster and more heavily oriented for compute, so I don't know why anyone would want to compare them. The competition to Tahiti is GK104 (same die size) and again according to rumors it is significantly faster. 15% is not much? lol then I guess HD7970 is worthless to you and so must be HD7950, but you are apparently praising them, so I'm confused.

Regarding GTX670 or 680, etc. No one is sure of what the name for the highest binned GK104 SKU will be, but that's the one that is suposed to be 45-50% faster than GTX580, not any GK100/110 based card. So "Kepler" as in cards that will compete or beat HD7000 gen of cards will launch in March/April, so definitely NOT 6 months later.
Well.. definetly we weren't talking about the same thing :)
GK104, two gpu's gtx670ti and gtx680(read the link) or whatever, do you really think there will be like a 40% distance between them? really?, at the most 30%(very unlikely), and hd7970 being faster(leaked info says gtx670ti is faster than gtx580 and 7950 NOT 7970) than gtx670ti, why would you think gtx680 would be a LOT faster than 7970?.
I'm not "praising" anything, i'm at the side of whoever offers me the best bang for the buck, i've had both.
You think 15% will make a difference? LOL, can you see differences between 30 and 34 fps?
If you take a look at my pc you'll see i have a 2.5 year old card, because i always get something that offers me at least 250% and the same or less price, but for some reason in the last 2.5 years nothing like that has came out.

I so don't care about who beats who, BUT i think you'll agree that they have to be close in order to keep prices in check. If one of the two is too far from the other, then prices skyrocket. no good for anyone of us but for nvidia or amd.

Take a look at this, they compare the highest binned gk104sku(gtx680) against gtx580, 7970 and 7950, guess what? 13.8% "faster"(not that you'll ever notice, but faster nonetheless) than 7970 at 1080p ;), will it widen or shrink at 2560x1536? dunno.
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-kepler-gk104-gaming-performance-figures-exposed-faster-gtx580-hd7900-series/

And if those are nvidia handpicked benchmarks.............go figure.
Posted on Reply
#14
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
N3M3515 said:
Well.. definetly we weren't talking about the same thing :)
GK104, two gpu's gtx670ti and gtx680(read the link) or whatever, do you really think there will be like a 40% distance between them? really?, at the most 30%(very unlikely), and hd7970 being faster(leaked info says gtx670ti is faster than gtx580 and 7950 NOT 7970) than gtx670ti, why would you think gtx680 would be a LOT faster than 7970?.
I'm not "praising" anything, i'm at the side of whoever offers me the best bang for the buck, i've had both.
You think 15% will make a difference? LOL, can you see differences between 30 and 34 fps?
If you take a look at my pc you'll see i have a 2.5 year old card, because i always get something that offers me at least 250% and the same or less price, but for some reason in the last 2.5 years nothing like that has came out.

I so don't care about who beats who, BUT i think you'll agree that they have to be close in order to keep prices in check. If one of the two is too far from the other, then prices skyrocket. no good for anyone of us but for nvidia or amd.

Take a look at this, they compare the highest binned gk104sku(gtx680) against gtx580, 7970 and 7950, guess what? 13.8% "faster"(not that you'll ever notice, but faster nonetheless) than 7970 at 1080p ;), will it widen or shrink at 2560x1536? dunno.
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-kepler-gk104-gaming-performance-figures-exposed-faster-gtx580-hd7900-series/

And if those are nvidia handpicked benchmarks.............go figure.
When you say "leaked information" you mean some nVidia fan boy who lives in their mother's basement in China? Please site your source.

Oh, let me cite your source for you...
http://we.pcinlife.com/thread-1831876-1-1.html
Do you really trust a person posting on a forum without a source? I call shenanigans.
Posted on Reply
#15
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Wrigleyvillain said:
First of all, I guess you haven't been paying attention to any economic news lately. Secondly, no politician-especially the president who cannot even actually make policy-has much effect on the ginormous and complex US economy in the first place. Thirdly, take it to GN.
The economy is in a better place than when Obama took office. I think we need to focus on the topic at hand...
Posted on Reply
#16
N3M3515
Aquinus said:
When you say "leaked information" you mean some nVidia fan boy who lives in their mother's basement in China? Please site your source.

Oh, let me cite your source for you...
http://we.pcinlife.com/thread-1831876-1-1.html
Do you really trust a person posting on a forum without a source? I call shenanigans.
Seems legit! lol

Anyway, based on the rumors of the 670ti performance, it seems, 680, will be slightly faster than 7970.
Why is it so many people want one of the to brands to be so superior to the other?
Don't you see that'll only benefit those companies? ffs....
Posted on Reply
#17
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
N3M3515 said:
Seems legit! lol

Anyway, based on the rumors of the 670ti performance, it seems, 680, will be slightly faster than 7970.
Why is it so many people want one of the to brands to be so superior to the other?
Don't you see that'll only benefit those companies? ffs....
I like basing my assumptions on factual information with real sources and as so many people have been kind enough to point out, nVidia hasn't released any information about it. :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#18
radrok
N3M3515 said:
Why is it so many people want one of the to brands to be so superior to the other?
Fanboys want it so badly, don't ask me why but they exist.
Posted on Reply
#19
Benetanegia
N3M3515 said:
Well.. definetly we weren't talking about the same thing :)
GK104, two gpu's gtx670ti and gtx680(read the link) or whatever, do you really think there will be like a 40% distance between them? really?, at the most 30%(very unlikely), and hd7970 being faster(leaked info says gtx670ti is faster than gtx580 and 7950 NOT 7970) than gtx670ti, why would you think gtx680 would be a LOT faster than 7970?.
I'm not "praising" anything, i'm at the side of whoever offers me the best bang for the buck, i've had both.
You think 15% will make a difference? LOL, can you see differences between 30 and 34 fps?
If you take a look at my pc you'll see i have a 2.5 year old card, because i always get something that offers me at least 250% and the same or less price, but for some reason in the last 2.5 years nothing like that has came out.

I so don't care about who beats who, BUT i think you'll agree that they have to be close in order to keep prices in check. If one of the two is too far from the other, then prices skyrocket. no good for anyone of us but for nvidia or amd.

Take a look at this, they compare the highest binned gk104sku(gtx680) against gtx580, 7970 and 7950, guess what? 13.8% "faster"(not that you'll ever notice, but faster nonetheless) than 7970 at 1080p ;), will it widen or shrink at 2560x1536? dunno.
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-kepler-gk104-gaming-performance-figures-exposed-faster-gtx580-hd7900-series/

And if those are nvidia handpicked benchmarks.............go figure.
We are talkng about a different thing. I'm not saying GTX580 < GTX670 Ti < HD7970 < GTX680. Basically 670 Ti == 680. Highest GK104 SKU will be either of those (both are not going to exist at the same time) and that one is said to be much faster than HD7970. I'm just going by recent rumours, not that I know anything myself.

Also you are using very very old info for your performance figures, and those charts are suposed to have been demostrated fake. I'm going by the recent news appearing here in TPU in the last couple days and a comment by Kyle Bennet from [H] who said it's (up to) 45-50% faster than GTX580. I had a hard time believing that it is so much faster, at first, but it's not imposible considering the specs (2x the Tflops, 2x the texturing power, etc.) so that's why I included that info in my post.

There's been so many rumours that at this point GK104 could be slower than HD7800 or up to 50% faster than GTX580. Since rumors tend to be more accurate as we come close to release, I'm going with the latest info, and that's 50% faster, but bear in mind I do not personally believe that's the case, although I made my calculations based on specs some time ago and it's within the upper range of what's posible.

PS: And yes I notice a massive difference between 30 and 34 fps. At low fps every single one of them improves the experience incredibly. Every extra frame is a blessing. And by your logic AMD shouldn't have bothered with HD7970 or HD7950 because they're "only" ~15% faster that GTX580 and HD6970, respectively. That's why I made that comment about praising them. In the end you'll always find a card that is 10-15% apart from one another, so by your logic, if you don't see a difference between 30 and 34 fps, you'd see any between 27 and 30? And what about 25 and 27? How low can we go (where do you draw the line)? Oh but maybe someone (many actually) can't bare anything below 40, 50, 60... and it's going to be different with every game too, so what's enough? Basically what I'm saying is that a card that is 15% faster than another one, it's 15% faster always (on average) and it has it's place.
Posted on Reply
#20
erocker
Senior Moderator
I think both companies should take a break for a year or so, so I can enjoy my console ports.
Posted on Reply
#21
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Wrigleyvillain said:
First of all, I guess you haven't been paying attention to any economic news lately. Secondly, no politician-especially the president who cannot even actually make policy-has much effect on the ginormous and complex US economy in the first place. Thirdly, take it to GN.
cry me a river dude.:slap:
Posted on Reply
#22
Horrux
Benetanegia said:
We are talkng about a different thing. I'm not saying GTX580 < GTX670 Ti < HD7970 < GTX680. Basically 670 Ti == 680. Highest GK104 SKU will be either of those (both are not going to exist at the same time) and that one is said to be much faster than HD7970. I'm just going by recent rumours, not that I know anything myself.

Also you are using very very old info for your performance figures, and those charts are suposed to have been demostrated fake. I'm going by the recent news appearing here in TPU in the last couple days and a comment by Kyle Bennet from [H] who said it's (up to) 45-50% faster than GTX580. I had a hard time believing that it is so much faster, at first, but it's not imposible considering the specs (2x the Tflops, 2x the texturing power, etc.) so that's why I included that info in my post.

There's been so many rumours that at this point GK104 could be slower than HD7800 or up to 50% faster than GTX580. Since rumors tend to be more accurate as we come close to release, I'm going with the latest info, and that's 50% faster, but bear in mind I do not personally believe that's the case, although I made my calculations based on specs some time ago and it's within the upper range of what's posible.

PS: And yes I notice a massive difference between 30 and 34 fps. At low fps every single one of them improves the experience incredibly. Every extra frame is a blessing. And by your logic AMD shouldn't have bothered with HD7970 or HD7950 because they're "only" ~15% faster that GTX580 and HD6970, respectively. That's why I made that comment about praising them. In the end you'll always find a card that is 10-15% apart from one another, so by your logic, if you don't see a difference between 30 and 34 fps, you'd see any between 27 and 30? And what about 25 and 27? How low can we go (where do you draw the line)? Oh but maybe someone (many actually) can't bare anything below 40, 50, 60... and it's going to be different with every game too, so what's enough? Basically what I'm saying is that a card that is 15% faster than another one, it's 15% faster always (on average) and it has it's place.
The difference between 30 and 34 fps is not massive. It is there, but it is relatively subtle. Now between 30 and 45 fps, that's another matter. I consider anyone who will pay $500 to go from 30 to 34 fps in most of his games an utter fool, or someone with just lots and lots of money to waste.
Posted on Reply
#23
xenocide
Horrux said:
The difference between 30 and 34 fps is not massive. It is there, but it is relatively subtle. Now between 30 and 45 fps, that's another matter. I consider anyone who will pay $500 to go from 30 to 34 fps in most of his games an utter fool, or someone with just lots and lots of money to waste.
My thoughts exactly. I could have upgraded to like an HD6950 or a 560Ti, but it never seemed worth it coming from an HD5850. I don't really care for upgrades unless they give me upwards of a 20% performance gain, and if I'm gonna spend $400-500, it better be like a 50% gain.
Posted on Reply
#24
magibeg
xenocide said:
My thoughts exactly. I could have upgraded to like an HD6950 or a 560Ti, but it never seemed worth it coming from an HD5850. I don't really care for upgrades unless they give me upwards of a 20% performance gain, and if I'm gonna spend $400-500, it better be like a 50% gain.
I personally follow the *atleast double* path myself. Currently have a 4890 so it would seem it's about time.
Posted on Reply
#25
Benetanegia
Horrux said:
The difference between 30 and 34 fps is not massive. It is there, but it is relatively subtle. Now between 30 and 45 fps, that's another matter. I consider anyone who will pay $500 to go from 30 to 34 fps in most of his games an utter fool, or someone with just lots and lots of money to waste.
Maybe you don't see a difference but there is a difference and for me it's massive. It's the line between a slideshow and a somewhat bearable experience. Now between 50 and 60 that's another thing. Anyway you don't pay $500 for 4 fps and never said that. But paying an extra $50-100 or so would be totally worth it if you are paying $450 (say HD7950) in the frst place. 15% more $ for 15% more fps is OK.

Personally I don't spend that much, far from it, but even in my price range I'd pay x% more for x% more performance. IMO your case is a falacy, like I said because there's no card that will give you 30-34 fps in all games. On some games, a particular card might be enough, in others it won't and let's not start talking about settings. So like I said a card that s faster it's faster and always will. It's not my bussiness or your bussiness to decide if those extra $100 are worth it for the people who are willing to pay $400++ for a card.

When you say "anyone who will pay $500 to go from 30 to 34 fps in most of his games an utter fool" you are calling a fool to ALL enthusiasts, because that's what you get. A 15% increment no matter if it's at 30 fps or at 200, its a substantial difference and worth paying for some people. At 30 fps is going to be ever more important than at 200 plain and simple.

According to your logic overclocking is useless, because you'll never achieve much more than 15% more actual performance and the best you would do is obtain those extra 3-4 fps.

xenocide said:
My thoughts exactly. I could have upgraded to like an HD6950 or a 560Ti, but it never seemed worth it coming from an HD5850. I don't really care for upgrades unless they give me upwards of a 20% performance gain, and if I'm gonna spend $400-500, it better be like a 50% gain.
And this and what I'm saying are not mutually exclusive either. I'd do the same, but that does not mean that a 15% difference is meaningless. If you have to choose between HD7970 and GTX580 for the exact same price (and you can pay that price) you'll go with the Radeon. If the difference is 15% or less, much of the same.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment