The 690 is much stronger it's dual gpu and for most games that support sli technology it's one of the best cards out there.
Unless you'll take two 980's you'll downgrade not upgrade.
And again I have nothing against efficiency or how fast they release their cards I'm just saying it's not justified the leap forward from 700 series to 900 series.
It's like Apple would've released the new Iphone 6 with a little bit better life battery or less overheating device..
It's like Apple would've released the new Iphone 6 with a little bit better life battery or less overheating device..
lol, I thought that was exactly what they did the last 3 version numbers? Oh, new feature with the iPhone 6?! Now 70% more bendy! See because that's what the phones are doing right now. Crap upgrades to squeeze another $500+ out of their customers over nothing but a seriously FLAWED product. That's not what Nvidia is doing at all though.
Same to slightly better performance over previous gen but with much better efficiency? Look at this way, you buy one now for something like $550 or whatever, and you'll see that back and more on your POWER BILL in the next year, hell not even a year. More like over the summer months (at increased rates) if you spend a lot of time gaming and at high draw.
Innovation isn't *always* more power.
Everyone has their own opinion, it's still an improvement. I don't see how a 690 is better than a 980. First, I don't SLI, second the 980 has a 25% higher clock speed. The 980 also has a better floating point and pixel rate. 72+ GPixels vs only 58, you also have 5600+ GFlops vs only 4600. A single 980 over a 690 is not only a difference, but the MFAA is handled for crap in 600 series cards. One of my computers uses the 680 4Gb card, if it wasn't for all that on board memory I'd be screwed.
I agree with you, people need to tone down the hype, but it's not as if it's not worth the release of the card.
In theory it's much powerful at most of the aspects: Link
In reality it's about x2 more powerful with sli games, see the benchmarks all over the web.
And they both still cant handle 4k gaming proper.
[Edited by kingkob, 9/28/2014 3:48:21 PM]
You see now this is your opinion it's not a fact, about the difference between the 5 and the 5s or the 4 and 4s yes I can agree and this is exactly what Nvidia does and much worse, the new 980 should've been the new 780 or even maybe the 780s..
[Edited by kingkob, 9/28/2014 3:59:15 PM]
Well actually the stats on that page in numerous amounts are in fact wrong. If you check the nvidia page and other pages such as gpuboss or even nvidia's manuf. prints page you'll see just one of the 7 errors I counted is that the shader units aren't listed right, which (take it from a developer) is very important in graphics processing; 2048 vs only 1500+. Both core and memory clock are noticeably higher than what's listed on hwcompare. Even the 50% increase on transistors, which help with the internal memory matter on the 980.
I'm sorry to say that my opinion is in fact, fact; and the facts you're relying on are opinions of people who probably early tested the board and have incorrect information. The only serious difference is the bus width, which since the 980 can handle the new MFAA technology and the 600 series can't do very well (or at all in some card-cases), doesn't really matter especially since most computers won't notice the difference.
I feel like you're moving into opinion yourself, with a biased, so I'll skip this thread. Might wanna google a bit more.
You see now this is your opinion it's not a fact, about the difference between the 5 and the 5s or the 4 and 4s yes I can agree and this is exactly what Nvidia does and much worse, the new 980 should've been the new 780 or even maybe the 780s..
[Edited by kingkob, 9/28/2014 3:59:15 PM]
Well actually the stats on that page in numerous amounts are in fact wrong. If you check the nvidia page and other pages such as gpuboss or even nvidia's manuf. prints page you'll see just one of the 7 errors I counted is that the shader units aren't listed right, which (take it from a developer) is very important in graphics processing; 2048 vs only 1500+. Both core and memory clock are noticeably higher than what's listed on hwcompare. Even the 50% increase on transistors, which help with the internal memory matter on the 980.
I'm sorry to say that my opinion is in fact, fact; and the facts you're relying on are opinions of people who probably early tested the board and have incorrect information. The only serious difference is the bus width, which since the 980 can handle the new MFAA technology and the 600 series can't do very well (or at all in some card-cases), doesn't really matter especially since most computers won't notice the difference.
I feel like you're moving into opinion yourself, with a biased, so I'll skip this thread. Might wanna google a bit more.
Gpuboss says about the same: Link
"No winner declared
Too close to call"
And I dont really need to google at all to prove to myself what I already know, I'm a 780 ti owner and my friend just "upgraded" from 780 ti to 980 just to say he has the latest gpu in the market, a decision which he regrets deeply, we both have pretty much the same hardware no bottlenecks what so ever.
The difference between the two cards is negligible and certainly dont justify the "upgrade".
The 980 is slight better at 4k resolutions 5-15 fps imporvment and the 780 ti is still the king for 1920x1080 also by 5-15 fps.
The gtx 690 destroys them both with sli games(which most aaa games are) and on those resolutions but it's much worse on 4k resolutions.
But again they all cant handle 4k gaming proper even the "Titan Z" which it's designation is 4k gaming isnt really strong enough to handle top notch games on ultra settings with 4k resolutions.
Important Board Topics
Trending Topics