New Rig for Leo [R!]
Page 1 of 4 Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sat, 30th Aug 2014 22:23    Post subject: New Rig for Leo [R!]
I feel like it's been so long since I've seriously looked at hardware... Mind Is Full Of Fuck My last serious build was in 2010! In the mean time, I have added more HDDs and a new GPU, but really, the build is 4 years old. Bought it with a scholarship grant I got in the last year of studying. Laughing

I guess this thread will be a work in progress for a long time (several months), until I find what I like, order it, and finally get all components. I will share my thoughts, and would love to hear people commenting and recommending.

So why I want a new PC... I feel like my CPU is holding me back in games. I think it's time to upgrade for the next long period. And since upgrading the CPU means a new system, I want to upgrade it all, finally moving to a water cool system to make it as silent as possible. My case is a mess right now, so that's an additional high priority for me.
At some point I thought replacing my current RAM sticks (3*2GB) to a more modern count, but my motherboard would

I've been liking the Mac Pro form factor. Several concerns I have; I am not sure I really need Xeon CPUs and ECC memory. I do work on the PC, but not so much to require these. Also dislike the Xeon's locked design, meaning little to none overclocking capability. Another concern is the dual workstation-grade AMD GPUs. I am not fan of AMD, workstation GPUs are not optimized for gaming and most importantly, due to the custom design of the form factor, upgrading the GPUs would be nigh to impossible.

So, a custom build it is. I am looking for as much as possible a future proof build. The new Haswell-E stuff looks interesting. A new chipset, DDR4, AVX2, 40 PCIe lanes, eight or six core...

Skylake looks interesting too, but it's far away. The quad core K versions are expected at the outside of 2015, while Skylake-E will probably arrive late 2016. And I do not feel like buying temporary hardware. If Skylake-E keeps the same socket (LGA 2011-3), I could see myself upgrading the CPU.

I am not sure between 5960X and 5930K. 5960X looks interesting, but also a little too expensive. Looking at Intel's history with the E variants, the midrange is very comparable to the previous generation's high-range. So perhaps a 5930K now, and a eight-core 6930K later might be a good move.

I am not really concerned with the likes of "2600k is still better for gaming" and pointing to benchmarks where the 5960X gets three less FPS score, in an obvious GPU-limited test. I do more on my PC than just play, and I would like the expanded multithreaded performance. These CPUs (either 5960X or 5930K), I believe, will give me enough headroom for upgrading the GPU without limiting it for some years ahead. And if Allah Christ is willing, and games start taking advantage of multithreaded performance, it would be a clear win for the E CPUs.

For memory, I guess it is still early? DDR4 seems expensive now and it seems there are no performance chips yet, but probably coming in the upcoming months.

Not sure about a motherboard yet. Don't like Asus, so either Gigabyte or EVGA.

For a case, I have my eye on the Fractal Design Define R4: http://themodzoo.com/forum/index.php?/topic/1291-fractal-design-define-r4a-new-guys-view/


Regarding a PSU, I am really not sure. Any recommendations? I've been out of the PSU game for many years, since the 800W Antec I had from a previous build (2006-2008) worked great on the current build. Well, it started making noise now, and will require replacement. Also, not sure 800W would be sufficient for an Haswell-E, a GPU and all the hard drives I have. Probably a 1000W.

For cooling, I guess the standard H80i or H100i will do, depending on which I can fit in the case.

Please share thoughts and opinions.

Thanks


My IMDb Ratings | Fix NFOHump Cookies | Hide Users / Threads | Embedded Content (Videos/GIFs/Twitter/Reddit) | The Derps Collection

Death smiles at us all; all we can do is smile back.


Last edited by LeoNatan on Fri, 16th Jan 2015 19:56; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sat, 30th Aug 2014 23:06    Post subject:
Back to top
WhiteBarbarian




Posts: 6009
Location: Russia
PostPosted: Sat, 30th Aug 2014 23:53    Post subject:
Check out Phanteks cases

Phanteks Enthoo Primo Enthusiast Full Tower


Phanteks Enthoo Pro


Phanteks Enthoo Luxe


Back to top
ClaudeFTW




Posts: 5074
Location: Bucharest, Romania
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 00:01    Post subject:
The NZXT H440 has great cooling and lacks a drive bay. Also, it comes in a couple of color schemes (out of which tbh the red/black; white/black are the best).

The PSU you pointed at is the best in its class and the AX series is the best from Corsair so there's nothing wrong with that.




R7 2700x @4GHz / MSI B450 Tomahawk / beQuiet! Dark Rock 4 / 32GB @3000 MHz / MSI RTX 2060 Gaming Z / Samsung 850 EVO 250GB / Western Digital 1TB / Fractal Design Meshify C Dark / SuperFlower Leadex Gold 650W / DELL whatever 27 inch IPS

I usually stream stuff: http://www.twitch.tv/claudeftw
Back to top
dr-nix




Posts: 996
Location: Sweden
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 00:57    Post subject:
I like ASUS when it comes to motherboard but Gigabyte is also a good choice if you don't like them. Also the Define R4 is nice, built several computers using that chassi.


AMD Ryzen 9 5900X | Noctua NH-D15 chromax.black | ASUS Crosshair VIII Dark Hero | 32 GB Trident Z 3600Mhz | Gigabyte Aorus PCIe4 1TB SSD | Corsair MP510 1TB SSD |ASUS RTX 3080 Ti TUF | Fractal Design Define 7 | Seasonic 850W Platinum
Back to top
Interinactive
VIP Member



Posts: 29450

PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 04:27    Post subject:
⁢⁢


Last edited by Interinactive on Tue, 5th Oct 2021 01:49; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Werelds
Special Little Man



Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 12:22    Post subject:
Ignore EVGA motherboards. Price premium for mediocrity. Stick with Gigabyte or MSI. Same components, just without the retarded premium. And I dare say Gigabyte's stuff is better.


As for your GPU choice, now's a bad time anyway, best to revisit that when 20nm (or "16nm" - 20nm with FINFETs) comes around in 2015. Reason Apple went with AMD is because Nvidia sucks with OpenCL. Apple are one of the driving forces behind OpenCL (can't be compared to OpenGL, it has moved much faster) and with 1.2, that got to the same level of performance as CUDA; 2.0 promises to improve performance further and adding some features people have wanted in CUDA for a while now. Adobe have also moved all of their shit to OpenCL and the future of CUDA development within Adobe's suite is unclear. So do keep that in mind, even if you "don't like AMD".


For the PSU:
http://www.seasonicusa.com/NEW_X-series_1050-1250.htm
http://www.seasonicusa.com/Platinum_Series_XP3.htm

The HX1000i might very well prove to get close to these (it's brand new, not reviewed by any meaningful site yet), but these have been out for 3 years and so far the only thing that has proven to match them is Corsair's AX1500i.


Here's the Mac Pro of gaming btw. Cool Face


Join in on the war on LeoSatan


Last edited by Werelds on Sun, 31st Aug 2014 12:39; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
ClaudeFTW




Posts: 5074
Location: Bucharest, Romania
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 12:35    Post subject:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/msi-x99-haswell-e-motherboard,27571.html




R7 2700x @4GHz / MSI B450 Tomahawk / beQuiet! Dark Rock 4 / 32GB @3000 MHz / MSI RTX 2060 Gaming Z / Samsung 850 EVO 250GB / Western Digital 1TB / Fractal Design Meshify C Dark / SuperFlower Leadex Gold 650W / DELL whatever 27 inch IPS

I usually stream stuff: http://www.twitch.tv/claudeftw
Back to top
Interinactive
VIP Member



Posts: 29450

PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 12:40    Post subject:
⁢⁢


Last edited by Interinactive on Tue, 5th Oct 2021 01:49; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Werelds
Special Little Man



Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 12:43    Post subject:
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 13:16    Post subject:
I'm not replacing the GPU yet. I will wait for 980GTX.
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 13:20    Post subject:
Werelds wrote:
Here's the Mac Pro of gaming btw. Cool Face

Terrible form factor. Compare to Apple's elegant design, and your head might explode. Yuck. Alienware has always had retardedly ridiculous design, but damn, they have outdone themselves with each of their last products. Vomit
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 13:23    Post subject:
WhiteBarbarian wrote:
Check out Phanteks cases

Thanks, but they look to me big towers. I think I prefer a smaller and minimalist build, and more importantly, silent.
Back to top
Werelds
Special Little Man



Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 13:25    Post subject:
LeoNatan wrote:
I'm not replacing the GPU yet. I will wait for 980GTX.

#1: GTX 980 plz, GTX has been a prefix for almost 6 bloody years now Laughing

#2: if the "rumours" are to be believed, that's still not the card you want. If the rumours are to be believed it'll be:
- GM204 (mid-size chip)
- 28nm

Like I said, wait until the next node comes around. I'll poke you when it does; ignore the delusional people thinking Nvidia or AMD can pull off some magic trick on 28nm. And Nvidia's mid-size chips aren't what you want. You do realise that your 680 now is actually pretty shit when it comes to GPGPU right? Shit to the point where a GF100 card (470/480, 570/580) handily beats the shit out of it. And AMD's Tahiti (7970) runs circles around it too; where Fermi ran circles around Cypress (most of the time, mining excluded), the roles are 100% reversed now. Much has changed in GPGPU since you last took a good look. If you're set on sticking with Nvidia, do not look at the card's model number. Look at the chip. AMD's card numbers still follow the same pattern as the last decade or so, Nvidia has done weird things with Kepler and the rumours say the same's gonna happen with Maxwell.

Edit: "shit" being relative of course; there are cases where GK104 does just fine, it's just not what the card model number would indicate because it's simply not the successor to the 580.


Join in on the war on LeoSatan


Last edited by Werelds on Sun, 31st Aug 2014 13:48; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Werelds
Special Little Man



Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 13:26    Post subject:
LeoNatan wrote:
Werelds wrote:
Here's the Mac Pro of gaming btw. Cool Face

Terrible form factor. Compare to Apple's elegant design, and your head might explode. Yuck. Alienware has always had retardedly ridiculous design, but damn, they have outdone themselves with each of their last products. Vomit

Matter of opinion.

I think they're both shit. There's nothing elegant about Apple's external design either in my opinion. Internals are fantastic, really clever use of the space. But on the outside, no. Not a fan.
Back to top
sabin1981
Mostly Cursed



Posts: 87805

PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 14:32    Post subject:
Just as an aside, is there any reason you're aiming for uber 1000W PSUs? As you know, as tech improves so does the power draw, so power requirements actually lowered - relatively - as time went on. I'm running a TX650 and it's powering a hell of a lot of components including two high-draw cards. If you're not looking at dual GPU setups then there's really not much need for anything above 800W. Definitely stick with Corsair or Seasonic, though anything in the TX or AX series are using Seasonic components so it's the same deal really.

The Haswell-E chips are hungry, drawing up to 140w, but even adding half a dozen HDDs (SSDs draw less than mechanicals, obviously), X99 mobo, a shitton of other components and a high-end nV card (not Titan-Z - though even that draws less than 295x Laughing) would be far less than 800W.
Back to top
JBeckman
VIP Member



Posts: 34983
Location: Sweden
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 15:26    Post subject:
DDR4 doesn't seem to be that expensive so a x99 and a 5930 or a full 5960 if you need that should be OK.
(Timings are a bit so-so I guess but the price seems good aside from a few named brands in 32GB kits.)

Though that's me comparing to the initial DDR3 memories I bought which had a pretty hefty cost, still functional though and still amongst the better timings albeit as a first-gen DDR3 or what to call them the voltage is pretty poor.
(Gave my old PC to my sister when I upgraded since hers was ancient - voodoo GPU for example - those ram modules were - overpriced Razz - OCZ 18000 or what they were called, timings of 8-8-8-24 and a voltage of 1.9 but I ran them at 7-7-7-21 at 16000 and a voltage of 2.0, still perfectly functional though newer kits can do much higher speeds and still retain 1.5v )
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 19:23    Post subject:
Yeah, I don't see great sticks yet for DDR4. Will wait a month or so to see what is on offer then.

sabin1981 wrote:
Just as an aside, is there any reason you're aiming for uber 1000W PSUs? As you know, as tech improves so does the power draw, so power requirements actually lowered - relatively - as time went on. I'm running a TX650 and it's powering a hell of a lot of components including two high-draw cards. If you're not looking at dual GPU setups then there's really not much need for anything above 800W. Definitely stick with Corsair or Seasonic, though anything in the TX or AX series are using Seasonic components so it's the same deal really.

The Haswell-E chips are hungry, drawing up to 140w, but even adding half a dozen HDDs (SSDs draw less than mechanicals, obviously), X99 mobo, a shitton of other components and a high-end nV card (not Titan-Z - though even that draws less than 295x Laughing) would be far less than 800W.

I've been with a 800W PSU for ~8-9 years. It held well. But since the CPU+overclock, a GPU with the possibility of SLI, 5HDDs I have (4 mechanical), USB devices (Rift, for example), etc. I don't feel comfortable with the 800W at this point. Could be supersticion. But the higher quality PSUs are pretty efficient these days, so just because a CPU is rated for up to 1KW, does not mean it will use 1KW at idle.

Werelds wrote:
LeoNatan wrote:
I'm not replacing the GPU yet. I will wait for 980GTX.

#1: GTX 980 plz, GTX has been a prefix for almost 6 bloody years now Laughing

#2: if the "rumours" are to be believed, that's still not the card you want. If the rumours are to be believed it'll be:
- GM204 (mid-size chip)
- 28nm

Like I said, wait until the next node comes around. I'll poke you when it does; ignore the delusional people thinking Nvidia or AMD can pull off some magic trick on 28nm. And Nvidia's mid-size chips aren't what you want. You do realise that your 680 now is actually pretty shit when it comes to GPGPU right? Shit to the point where a GF100 card (470/480, 570/580) handily beats the shit out of it. And AMD's Tahiti (7970) runs circles around it too; where Fermi ran circles around Cypress (most of the time, mining excluded), the roles are 100% reversed now. Much has changed in GPGPU since you last took a good look. If you're set on sticking with Nvidia, do not look at the card's model number. Look at the chip. AMD's card numbers still follow the same pattern as the last decade or so, Nvidia has done weird things with Kepler and the rumours say the same's gonna happen with Maxwell.

Edit: "shit" being relative of course; there are cases where GK104 does just fine, it's just not what the card model number would indicate because it's simply not the successor to the 580.

I've exotroped at the 290, but nope, I don't like AMD. Nope. Laughing
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 19:27    Post subject:
Werelds wrote:
If you're set on sticking with Nvidia, do not look at the card's model number.

The problem is, nVidia puts artificial limits on the better chips to have them slower than the "flagship" product, which is not the best chip. By the time there is a comparable flagship, it's a 6~9 months later. It was like that with 680 as well.
Back to top
sabin1981
Mostly Cursed



Posts: 87805

PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 19:42    Post subject:
It's definitely superstition and I'm surprised Paul The PSU Master®, hasn't said anything about it either Smile USB is USB, so you're looking at less than 8w, proc is 140w, high end GPUs sit around 250w, mobo 100w maybe? Mechanical HDDs are around 6-7w *at most* and SSDs are down in the 1-2w range -- if you drew more than 600w from the wall I would be very, very surprised. For instance;

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-TITAN-Z-Review/Test-Setup
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-TITAN-Z-Review/3DMark-Power-Sound-and-Conclusions

Titan-Z. Sandy Bridge-E with a single SSD; 530w (624 for the 780ti SLi and 676 for the less efficient 295x) from the wall. So add four mechanicals, let's just be generous and round up to 10w each and call that 40w for the HDDs, a 9w high-draw USB device (more than generous since the Rift only requires 600mA and at 5v USB spec that's less than 4w if my math isn't hilariously wrong, though powering the Rift via USB requires a hack to increase to 600mA) and you can less than 700w *total* - a solid Seasonic/Corsair 800 would have no trouble and, as hardware progresses, power efficiency improves even further.

I'm not trying to dissuade you, just offering a different reasoning Smile If you're okay with the cost and efficiency of 1000w+ PSUs (bearing in mind you'll be running at less than 70% utilisation at full draw) then ignore the shit out of me and go for it Very Happy
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 20:15    Post subject:
Don't forget cooling as well. May look for less than 1KW, I'll see.

BTW, apparently I can run one of these in my X58 motherboard... Laughing

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-2-66-GHz-Six-Core-SLBV3-Processor-Grade-A-/121250737445?pt=US_Server_CPUs_Processors&hash=item1c3b1b6d25
Back to top
paxsali
Banned



Posts: 18352

PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 20:18    Post subject:
⁢⁢


Last edited by paxsali on Thu, 4th Jul 2024 21:58; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
paxsali
Banned



Posts: 18352

PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 20:24    Post subject:
⁢⁢


Last edited by paxsali on Thu, 4th Jul 2024 21:58; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 20:29    Post subject:
Just spamming unrelated stuff?
Back to top
paxsali
Banned



Posts: 18352

PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 20:34    Post subject:
⁢⁢


Last edited by paxsali on Thu, 4th Jul 2024 21:58; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Werelds
Special Little Man



Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 21:37    Post subject:
LeoNatan wrote:
I've been with a 800W PSU for ~8-9 years. It held well. But since the CPU+overclock, a GPU with the possibility of SLI, 5HDDs I have (4 mechanical), USB devices (Rift, for example), etc. I don't feel comfortable with the 800W at this point. Could be supersticion. But the higher quality PSUs are pretty efficient these days, so just because a CPU is rated for up to 1KW, does not mean it will use 1KW at idle.

Definitely superstition and misunderstanding. HDDs, USB devices are all negligible when it comes to power draw. A bad HDD will draw 7W, 8W under full load; generally speaking it's under 5W for most HDDs in the last decade, under 2 for new hard drives and practically nothing when idling.

As opposed to a high-end motherboard, which can pull some 60-70W Wink

The reason GPUs come with such inflated "xxx W PSU required" numbers is because they assume some $20 "600W" unit, which can only really sustain 300W. Realistically speaking, unless you're planning on SLI (which I know you're not), a 1 KW unit will always be overkill. Moreover, because you generally have it at less than 20% of its rated power, where the efficiency curve is terrible, you'll have it running a lot hotter than necessary (and thus noisier and thus drawing more power) Smile


@sabin1981 Didn't say anything because I know who I'm talking to Wink

If he wants 1000W, I'll just advise him on better choices Razz

Werelds wrote:
I've exotroped at the 290, but nope, I don't like AMD. Nope. Laughing

The 290 is a strange card Smile

It's AMD stepping outside of what they do best. Like I said, there's no point in looking at anything right now, 28nm has overstayed its welcome already.

LeoNatan wrote:
The problem is, nVidia puts artificial limits on the better chips to have them slower than the "flagship" product, which is not the best chip. By the time there is a comparable flagship, it's a 6~9 months later. It was like that with 680 as well.

Ah, but that's not the case here. Allow me to explain. It'll explain my remark about the 290 above as well.

Both Nvidia and ATI used to basically do three types of chips: a giant monolithic powerhouse, a rebalanced mid-sized chip and a small efficient variant. The mid-size and small ones are the ones that typically went into mobile solutions as well. ATI decided to stop doing the monolithic monsters back in 2007, to focus on what they consider the sweet spot in terms of profitability, which is the mid-size chips. As a result, starting with GT200 and RV670/RV770 (GTX 200 series and HD 3800/4800 series) there's been a gigantic discrepancy in chip size between the two. ATI's (and now AMD's) flagships have always been a magnitude smaller than Nvidia's.

GT200 (GTX 280) was 576mm^2 and the 4870 was just 256mm^2.

Since then:
- GF100 (GTX 480) = 529mm^2, Cypress (5870) = 334mm^2
- GF110 (GTX 580) = 520mm^2, Cayman (6970) = 389mm^2
- GK110 (GTX 780) = 561mm^2, Tahiti (7970) = 352mm^2

You'll notice that I left out both Hawaiï (R9 290) and the GK104 (680), and hopefully that there is no GK100 mentioned. That's because Hawaiï is AMD being forced to go bigger (438mm^2) because 20nm wasn't ready yet, which it should've been. Nvidia and ATI/AMD have also always followed a tick-tock scheme like Intel. A tick being a new architecture, a tock being that architecture on a new node. So the 8800 was a new architecture for example, the 9800 was what we call a refresh on a smaller node; making the chip smaller, less power hungry etcetera. Unfortunately the last few nodes have been slower, so with both Fermi (GF100) and Kepler (GK100) Nvidia introduced a new architecture and a new node at the same time. And again, historically speaking, Nvidia suck when it comes to new nodes. ATI/AMD have always been the first ones to run something on a smaller node successfully, Nvidia usually lagging 6 months behind.

With GF100, that went horribly wrong. There was never a fully enabled GF100 (the GTX 480 had 1 disabled cluster); even after the 6 month delay, they didn't manage to fix it. They only managed that with the refresh, GF110 (GTX 580). On top of that, it had some serious leakage issues, which is why it ran so hot.

With GK100, most likely the same thing happened. Nvidia will never admit it, but there has to have been a GK100; GK104 is 294mm^2, which isn't the big monolithic chip. One can also see this in the chip numbers: GF100 -> GF110; GF104 (460) -> GF114 (560). GK110 is a refresh. GK104 (680) is the mid-size variant of GK100; they have not brought out a GK114 either. These chip numbers have been consistent throughout their 20-something year history. The chip number says everything about what chip it is - it has never gone up a rank for the larger chip; the larger chip always has a lower number. And with the exception of Kepler, that die size has always come back in the price as well. The 500+mm^2 chips are $600+, the 300mm^2 ones are $400-$549.

So while there has been a GTX 680, it is _not_ the successor to the 580 nor is the 780 the successor to the 680. The 770 is also just a 680, there's nothing different about it other than the firmware. Technically, the 580 isn't a refresh of the 480 either, because the 480 used defective chips (literally, that's why a cluster was disabled), but for the sake of it, we'll consider that the successor (same goes for the 780/780 Ti technically). That makes the proper order of succession:
- 260 -> 460 -> 560 -> 680/770
- 280 -> 480 -> 580 -> 780

What you want is the successor to the big chips. The mid-size chips aren't castrated for the sake of avoiding competition with their enterprise endeavours, they're slower simply because they can't fit it all in that die-size. It's the big chips that have historically been castrated (mostly in their FP64 performance though). Moreover, again historically speaking, the big chips release FIRST, not LAST like this time.

And this is also why I'm saying you shouldn't dismiss AMD so quickly. Tahiti (7970) absolutely destroys the 680/770 when it comes to GPGPU work. And in fact, because AMD aren't such assholes, there are many applications where it outperforms even a 780 Ti - and yet, it has a similar size to the 680/770. See http://www.anandtech.com/show/7492/the-geforce-gtx-780-ti-review/14 for a few examples, but a quick search around the web will show you that AMD no longer is the underdog in GPGPU. There are cases where Nvidia has a clear advantage. Especially with more stuff now using OpenCL 1.2, which Nvidia still doesn't support for the record, AMD definitely is not a choice to dismiss like a few years ago.
Back to top
paxsali
Banned



Posts: 18352

PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 21:50    Post subject:
⁢⁢


Last edited by paxsali on Thu, 4th Jul 2024 21:58; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 22:16    Post subject:
So basically, what you are saying is I was conned at buying a 680 GTX as a premium card. Very Happy It wasn't a bad card in its time, still isn't - for games.
GF104 also has advantages over GF100, since they were newer. They had much better hardware acceleration support, something that was missing from 480 GTX.

But the reason I squint at the 290 is because it's a reminder of an era where AMD attempted to compete in the high end market, while still having a competitive price. Shitty drivers be damned.

BTW, using "defective" chips is a strategy everyone does. Intel does it with Xeon -> Extreme (but interestingly, not Haswell-E), AMD does it in their CPUs. I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing.

Quote:
Hawa

Nope. Either one ' ï ' or two ' i '.
Back to top
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢



Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 22:20    Post subject:
Werelds wrote:
@sabin1981 Didn't say anything because I know who I'm talking to Wink

If he wants 1000W, I'll just advise him on better choices Razz

Fuck you asshole. I am not DV2. Laughing
Back to top
Przepraszam
VIP Member



Posts: 14497
Location: Poland. New York.
PostPosted: Sun, 31st Aug 2014 22:23    Post subject:
LeoNatan wrote:
Werelds wrote:
@sabin1981 Didn't say anything because I know who I'm talking to Wink

If he wants 1000W, I'll just advise him on better choices Razz

Fuck you asshole. I am not DV2. Laughing


Ouch. Laughing Laughing Laughing

That's low!


Back to top
Page 1 of 4 All times are GMT + 1 Hour
NFOHump.com Forum Index - Hardware Zone Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)  


Display posts from previous:   

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group