Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [PCPer] Frame Rating: GTX 660 vs HD 7870, plus HD 7790, HD 7850, GTX 650 Ti BOOST
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[PCPer] Frame Rating: GTX 660 vs HD 7870, plus HD 7790, HD 7850, GTX 650 Ti BOOST - Page 5

post #41 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastCoast View Post

I'll answer that so others will know.
The so what to all this is that they are removing frame rates from CF determining that CF is providing lower frame rates without providing any visual proof to back up the claim that frame rates are actually that slow. Until it can be confirmed that CF frame rates are actually slower (which it cannot do to higher resolution and IQ with CF) then it's a pretty far fetched notion to believe it to be true simply because it's shown on a chart.

biggrin.gif

First, it's Pcper making those claims, not Nvidia, and second, they've shown screenshots (as have other websites) of the short frames. We can, and should, debate the impact of those short frames, but there isn't much point disputing their existence.
post #42 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaC View Post

I don't know why you keep trying to put words into Karlitos mouth?
All those graphs are stock/ factory OCed speeds.

Also,right now is a bad time to buy AMD because people are either realizing AMD gives better value (hence HD7870 went from $220 to $250 , HD7850 went from $180 to $200, etc). The games included are also released. Meanwhile NVIDIA is slashing prices, GTX 660 went from $230ish to $200ish, GTX 650 Ti dropped from $150ish to $120ish, GTX 650 is about $100 now.


From what prices im looking at right now. 7870's start at 220 and go to around 240. (with the 7870 LE at 250$)
1gb 7850's start at 170-180, 2gb is 180-200.
7790 1gb 150-160, 170 for a 2gb
7770 1gb 110-140, 2gb 150

660's start at 190-220ish
650ti's are 135-150 for 1gb, 150-160 for 2gb, 170-180 for a 650ti boost


prices seem right to me at least? i dont think either company has their cards way too off in the price range
Obligatory Build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-M Pro Sapphire Reference 290 w/ Aquacomputer Kryogeni... Samsung Low Voltage 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Blue PNY XLR8 Swiftech H220 + Swiftech 120mm Rad Acer P216HL Black 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Legend Rosewill Hive 550w Silverstone PS07B-W Mionix Avior 7000 
Mouse Pad
Custom Artscow Mousepad 
  hide details  
Reply
Obligatory Build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-M Pro Sapphire Reference 290 w/ Aquacomputer Kryogeni... Samsung Low Voltage 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Blue PNY XLR8 Swiftech H220 + Swiftech 120mm Rad Acer P216HL Black 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Legend Rosewill Hive 550w Silverstone PS07B-W Mionix Avior 7000 
Mouse Pad
Custom Artscow Mousepad 
  hide details  
Reply
post #43 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastCoast View Post

People need to realize that Fcat (which is the results you see in the OP) is from Nvidia. The terminology used (IE: runt frames, etc) come from Nvidia. If you want to argue for or against the results you do so knowing that it's a benchmark methodology created by one competitor and used for another.

FCAT is an open sourced tool actually. The source code is out there. In fact, if you've even looked into it, PCPer actually had a semi-working FCAT tool of their own. However, its expensive to develop something like that and Nvidia was already working on one, so why would they want to waste more money and time when someone has one developed?

Nvidia or not, you can call the "runt frames" anything you want. Reality is, they are actually runty compared to a fully drawn frame. A "runt" frame is a frame that was pushed out but didn't have enough time to be fully drawn before the next frames come. Like I said, you can name it runt, you can name it semi-fake. You can even name it a midget frame. Its still the same thing.

These conspiracy theories are getting more and more ridiculous. Do you even realize that AMD themselves admit that this is a problem with their cards? They ADMIT it. You also realize that stuff like this helps them get even better because they know they have a problem, and they can take that and fix it. The end user, us, benefits from it. Whether it be increased performance, or actual competition in the GPU market. We end up getting better stuff.
post #44 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinaesthetic View Post

FCAT is an open sourced tool actually. The source code is out there. In fact, if you've even looked into it, PCPer actually had a semi-working FCAT tool of their own. However, its expensive to develop something like that and Nvidia was already working on one, so why would they want to waste more money and time when someone has one developed?

Nvidia or not, you can call the "runt frames" anything you want. Reality is, they are actually runty compared to a fully drawn frame. A "runt" frame is a frame that was pushed out but didn't have enough time to be fully drawn before the next frames come. Like I said, you can name it runt, you can name it semi-fake. You can even name it a midget frame. Its still the same thing.

These conspiracy theories are getting more and more ridiculous. Do you even realize that AMD themselves admit that this is a problem with their cards? They ADMIT it. You also realize that stuff like this helps them get even better because they know they have a problem, and they can take that and fix it. The end user, us, benefits from it. Whether it be increased performance, or actual competition in the GPU market. We end up getting better stuff.

Sorry..... on their cards??? You mean on CrossFire setups ONLY.

With single, triple and quad GPUs, its fine.




We all know they will release a fix soon. So I don't know why we should turn our back to AMD and screw up the market. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that 90% of the customers don't have more than one card.


Who do you think help funds this new tool (FCAT)?? Remington??


Edited by KaRLiToS - 4/6/13 at 4:51pm
Quad Damage
(24 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 4930k @ 4.6Ghz Asus Rampage IV Extreme (Koolance Full WB) 2 x GTX 1080ti FE in SLI (EK WATERBLOCK) Corsair Dominator GT 2133 MHz (16GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3 TB Seagate OCZ Vertex 4 256GB Crucial M4 128GB ADATA SX900 128GB 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
RIVE Koolance Waterblock (VRM and PCH) Feser X-Changer 360 Feser X-Changer 240 Feser X-Changer 480 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
WaterCool MoRA3 Pro with Gentle Typhoon 3 x MCP 655 pumps (With EK top...all serial) 2 x EK FC 1080ti Blocks Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus ROG Swift PG348Q (3440x1440 @100hz) CrossOver 27Q Led-P Logitech G15 EVGA SuperNova 1600T2 (Titanium) 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Obsidian Heavily Modded Logitech G700 RocketFish Speed/Control M-audio AV-40 (Logitech G-35) 
  hide details  
Reply
Quad Damage
(24 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 4930k @ 4.6Ghz Asus Rampage IV Extreme (Koolance Full WB) 2 x GTX 1080ti FE in SLI (EK WATERBLOCK) Corsair Dominator GT 2133 MHz (16GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3 TB Seagate OCZ Vertex 4 256GB Crucial M4 128GB ADATA SX900 128GB 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
RIVE Koolance Waterblock (VRM and PCH) Feser X-Changer 360 Feser X-Changer 240 Feser X-Changer 480 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
WaterCool MoRA3 Pro with Gentle Typhoon 3 x MCP 655 pumps (With EK top...all serial) 2 x EK FC 1080ti Blocks Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus ROG Swift PG348Q (3440x1440 @100hz) CrossOver 27Q Led-P Logitech G15 EVGA SuperNova 1600T2 (Titanium) 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Obsidian Heavily Modded Logitech G700 RocketFish Speed/Control M-audio AV-40 (Logitech G-35) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #45 of 182
Have there been any triple and quad tests done with FCAT? Would be interesting to see.
post #46 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dudewitbow View Post

From what prices im looking at right now. 7870's start at 220 and go to around 240. (with the 7870 LE at 250$)
1gb 7850's start at 170-180, 2gb is 180-200.
7790 1gb 150-160, 170 for a 2gb
7770 1gb 110-140, 2gb 150

660's start at 190-220ish
650ti's are 135-150 for 1gb, 150-160 for 2gb, 170-180 for a 650ti boost


prices seem right to me at least? i dont think either company has their cards way too off in the price range
7870XT is actually around $240 before any codes,$10 OFF your order over $100 w/code: HOLEN1, ends 04/08/2013 http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?p=AT-7870XT2
It ranged from $210 to $230 before. This is a case of supply and demand, the demand is higher than supply.

The Powercolor HD7870 Tahiti LE was going for $210 on Newegg less than a month ago.

HD 7850 1GB is running about $160 after rebates http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=AT-7850_1G , http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202004
Previously it was 140ish

Right now the AMD prices are inflated (possibly due to demand)
Edited by AlphaC - 4/6/13 at 5:19pm
Workstation stuff
(407 photos)
SpecViewperf 12.0.1
(158 photos)
 
Reply
Workstation stuff
(407 photos)
SpecViewperf 12.0.1
(158 photos)
 
Reply
post #47 of 182
I think this situation is symptomatic
old reviews were focused on fps and maximum scaling and gave ratings on the basis of these results

users with three or four cards are a tiny part... they don't expect huge scaling because in many scenarios, also at high resolutions, gpu's are limited by the cpu... so it's obvious that it works better in terms of latency ...no need to push hard trying to squeeze the last frame

users willing to buy two cards are much more ...AMD offers a worse multigpu technology and trying to cover the gap with these tricks ... most of the people, according to the logic of the old reviews, want to see double number of fps in crossfire ... conditioned people asked and AMD has given them
I refuse to believe that they were not aware of the contraindications of this approach although said the opposite (seem like an amateur is better than cheater)
this is an overplayed marketing gimmick unfortunately for them has been debunked ...fortunately for the customers this will help make better the next series
Edited by XbeaTX - 4/6/13 at 5:09pm
My System
(13 items)
 
  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
Reply
post #48 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaC View Post

7870XT is actually around $240 before any codes,$10 OFF your order over $100 w/code: HOLEN1, ends 04/08/2013 http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?p=AT-7870XT2
It ranged from $210 to $230 before. This is a case of supply and demand, the demand is higher than supply.

The Powercolor HD7870 Tahiti LE was going for $210 on Newegg less than a month ago.

HD 7850 1GB is running about $160 after rebates http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=AT-7850_1G
Previously it was 140ish

Right now the AMD prices are inflated (possibly due to demand)

yeah i know you can get the XT for cheaper, I was just using relative non sale prices to fix the pricing to be stable. its the stable prices of the majority of the cards in that area sans sales.
Obligatory Build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-M Pro Sapphire Reference 290 w/ Aquacomputer Kryogeni... Samsung Low Voltage 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Blue PNY XLR8 Swiftech H220 + Swiftech 120mm Rad Acer P216HL Black 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Legend Rosewill Hive 550w Silverstone PS07B-W Mionix Avior 7000 
Mouse Pad
Custom Artscow Mousepad 
  hide details  
Reply
Obligatory Build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-M Pro Sapphire Reference 290 w/ Aquacomputer Kryogeni... Samsung Low Voltage 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Blue PNY XLR8 Swiftech H220 + Swiftech 120mm Rad Acer P216HL Black 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Legend Rosewill Hive 550w Silverstone PS07B-W Mionix Avior 7000 
Mouse Pad
Custom Artscow Mousepad 
  hide details  
Reply
post #49 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by XbeaTX View Post

I think this situation is symptomatic
old reviews were focused on fps and maximum scaling and gave ratings on the basis of these results

users with three or four cards are a tiny part... they don't expect huge scaling because in many scenarios, also at high resolutions, gpu's are limited by the cpu... so it's obvious that it works better in terms of latency ...no need to push hard trying to squeeze the last frame

users willing to buy two cards are much more ...AMD offers a worse multigpu technology and trying to cover the gap with these tricks ... most of the people, according to the logic of the old reviews, want to see double number of fps in crossfire ... conditioned people asked and AMD has given them
I refuse to believe that they were not aware of the contraindications of this approach although said the opposite (seem like an amateur is better than cheater)
this is an overplayed marketing gimmick unfortunately for them has been debunked ...fortunately for the customers this will help make better the next series

Not sure if AMD shouldn't be trusted when they say they thought OS is doing the job for them. But now when I think about that, yes, they were probably laying.

But one other thing bothers me, if AMD really sucks @ CF, why didn't nVidia point it out by now?! They knew it for sure since they did such a nice job with Sli. All this time they let AMD get away with it?!
post #50 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ha-Nocri View Post

But one other thing bothers me, if AMD really sucks @ CF, why didn't nVidia point it out by now?! They knew it for sure since they did such a nice job with Sli. All this time they let AMD get away with it?!

Probably because they couldn't show it, and because until Kepler Nvidia was in pretty much the same position. I remember the guys at [H] talking about something like this more than a year ago, so I'm sure it's taken quite a while to develop the tools. Didn't the article mention that they've been working on this for more than a year?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [PCPer] Frame Rating: GTX 660 vs HD 7870, plus HD 7790, HD 7850, GTX 650 Ti BOOST