System Specs -
CPU - i5 2500k @ 5ghz | CPU Cooler - RASA RX240 | Motherboard - Asus Maximus IV Gene-Z/Gen3| GPU - Nvidia GTX 590|
SSD - Crucial M4 128GB | RAM - 8GB Corsair Vengeance | PSU - Corsair TX850M | Case - CoolerMaster HAF 922
| Monitor - Crossover 27Q (2560x1440) | Sidewinder X4 Keyboard |
Gaming on 1440p is only a different experience in some games. This is good and bad. For example, in D3, the cursor does NOT scale up, so losing it in the heat of battle is very easy and as your face will get eaten by zombies unless you're on your toes about finding the cursor again. BF3 though, you seem to get a slightly better FoV in jets and such. SC2 you seem to get some extra clarity around the edge of units.
Text, while "physically smaller", seems to be much clearer on 1440p. It's true advantage lies in multitasking and creative tasks. 1080p for gaming and movies until we get to 4K (where the clarity really steps up), and 1440p or 1600p for creativity and management.
As for the topic at hand (GTX 780), i said just a few days ago that if they try to up the clock speeds but don't increase voltage, then i'd expect us to be in for yet another GTX580 stability fiasco (not everyone experienced problems, but mine were so bad it almost put me off of NVIDIA completely, until i settled on the 670 and everything was all sparkly and colourful again). If they do create a stable card with those specs, it'll truly be something else. Crazy texture performance (already a strong point), plenty of cores to handle particle effects (an area where NVIDIA traditionally struggled compared to ATI), shader performance like no other, and enough memory to easily handle 1440p, maybe even 1600p, gaming.
Sure, the tech to create the "ultimate GPU" has existed for years (and no, i don't refer to natural advancement in technology), but it makes sense they want to exploit the market and potential as much as possible until a silicon alternative becomes easy to work with. Pacing it in such a way and pitching cards to all levels of consumers is much better for everyone.
I remember the 7800GTX from yester-year. I never personally owned one (i had a 7600GT from that series of cards), but i recall it being the new hotness for BF2 at that time. It took what was then an extremely heavy game, and made it go down smooth. Seeing a similar name and then seeing the specs of it brings back that sort of feeling, except for the current top-end titles (Crysis 3 as an example, though not yet released, looks to be very heavy on the GPU and it looks like they've avoided doing a direct console port so that they can build DX11 and HD textures in as base options).
We'll see more details as we close in on a release and no doubt NDA leaks will happen (as they always do if you look in the right places).
JS full stack dev: MongoDB, JQuery, Nodejs, ES5 + ES6, Phaserjs, Electron | Projects in development: VTemp
Bottem line, manufacturing issues were the reason they didnt make/sell it. Or that is what i think what happened.
iirc GK 110 wasn't released as gtx 680 because it was deemed to powerfull for the market. (so they made used it in new quadro series i believe)
and by powerfull also comes cost,production etc (it just likely wouldn't be worthwhile from a marketing perspective)
but as gamers/enthusiasts alike i think it would have been; "moar power gimme!"
Could be something of both.
Manufacturing issues, so less chips to sell. Consumers are used to a 500-600 dollar/euro max on high end GPU's (Or there about for single ones). So to get out of the costs they might have sold it for way more than that.
They found out it would be way to powerfull to compete with AMD (or something like that). Combine that with the high cost of making it. And making it a quadro only card is not that far fetched. That side of market makes up way more of their profit anyway. The consumer market for these cards is way smaller
But this is all speculation on my side of course :P
probably kepler refresh
If those GK 110's are essentially the 7xx series, they'll probably just fine tune it and resolve any issues with mass producing it in the next 6 months, then fire it out all over the place. Again I'd basically expect it to be aimed at making x1080 doable on any game at 120fps, with max settings, AA topped out, etc and they'll also push for x1440/1600 being playable at 60fps constant, with a single card, with maxed out settings, which at the moment (for most games) requires an SLI setup. No doubt it'll be able to run 5760x1080 solo, though at less than 60fps constant. I'd suggest they'll aim to make tri-monitor setups a standard using 2 card SLI along with paired monitors at x1440/1600. Which is again where I'd expect a 790 to be aimed.
Whether it be heat-issues, voltage issues or the likes, I would be more inclined to believe that the GK110 was simply not ready to be released on the market to begin with, hence the GK104 being released as the full line-up.
im likely skipping the 7xx unless their price gets really interesting or my current 670 isn't keeping up with games. (which i doubt for a while for now ^^)
Heres hoping that big kepler is worth an upgrade from the 680 lightnings. Performance and feature wise.
At this point im starting to lean towards the 89xx series from amd or if next gen isnt worth it ill just wait for 99xx or the 880.
Last edited by EllishaPally; 2012-11-21 at 07:46 PM.
Should give the Ti an SLI twin. Bypass the 6xx family wholesale.