What REALLY is the difference between FirePro and consumer?

[MacVidCards]

Drivers play a big role, the 7970 Ghz is not the R9 280X, and it's just behind the 780 in some games.

You can't look at old benchmarks, we should all know that!
If we did, we'd all still assume the 7970 is barely faster than a GTX580.
Sure the 7970Ghz isn't butting direct heads against the 780, but it's not all that far behind given the generational gap.

Links or it didn't happen.

 

[spaz8]

Nearly two years old and still holding it's(7970) own against current NVIDIA cards, such as the GTX770, and sometimes the GTX780 in gaming.

In OpenCL it completely devastates them. Still good cards.

I am saddened though that after this time there hasn't been any real massive jumps in performance while keeping power usage and heat output in check.

The R9 290's are fast, I'll give them that. The heat they generate, and power consumption is nasty though.
It's like NVIDIA's Fermi all over again. Hopefully a decent refresh comes out next year, and with it better FirePro cards.

If you're set on a new Mac Pro, I'd would wait for decent reviews, and tear downs. Even then I'd prefer to wait for the second generation of them. Get any and all bugs sorted out, and hopefully move to Hawaii based FirePros, that have hopefully seen some improvements in the power usage, and heat output areas.

Ain't nobody got time for dat.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

Links or it didn't happen.

Linked up for you, check my post again from the big reviewers.

EDIT: incase you don't want to go back a page

Launch reviews of the 7970, barely ahead of the GTX580

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5261/amd-radeon-hd-7970-review/22

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_hd_7970_review,25.html

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...s/49646-amd-radeon-hd-7970-3gb-review-25.html

I don't believe that 7970 can even keep up with 770. Maybe you got model numbers mixed up?

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r7_260x_r9_270x_280x_review_benchmarks,27.html

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7400/the-radeon-r9-280x-review-feat-asus-xfx/19
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7406/the-sapphire-r9-280x-toxic-review/6
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/battlefield_4_vga_graphics_performance_benchmark,7.html

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...s/63522-amd-radeon-r9-280x-3gb-review-13.html

They're still incredibly good cards, especially considering how cheap they are now.
Also note that in the UK, and Ireland getting an OC'd 280X is the same price as reference. In fact I've not even seen a reference card of the 280x near me yet.

 

[MacVidCards]

From your last linked page:

"It does loose handily to the GTX 780 but that was expected considering the price difference between the two cards."

I don't consider "losing handily" to imply they are anywhere near equal.

I see 10-30% below 780, the chart on last page even showed 17% slower, the 280 slower than 7970 and GTX770.

It did win on OpenCl though.

Screen shot from your linked page. Red means "less than"

 

[N19h7m4r3]

It easily competes agains the GTX770, which is what I stated. Despite at Launch being only a tad faster sometimes than the GTX 580. The Drivers have come a long way, and significantly improved performance.

I made a mistake on the GTX780, which is where the R290 is taking action.
10-30% isn't that bad either, especially in the titles the difference is only that 10% for a 2 year old card, at less than half the price.

It still does not show how BAD the 7970/280X is compared to the GTX770.
Hell for a 2 year old card it's still holding its own extremely well, and you can pick them up for really cheap these days.

Also no need to be patronising, I know red means less than....Also an average of 1% less from a 2 year old card compared to the GTX 770 is called still being relevant and competition at an extremely affordable price.

It also shows that the GHZ 7970 is faster on average than the GTX770, something you said it couldn't be. There are also the other reviews, where in some cases the 280X beats the GTX 770, especially at the higher resolutions, and especially at 4K, being only a few FPS on average slower than the GTX 780.

From Anand

Meanwhile we’ll also quickly point out that the 280X Toxic ends up being faster than a stock GTX 770 by several percent for $50 less.

Also at 4K, in the links i Posted but you ignored.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r7_260x_r9_270x_280x_review_benchmarks,26.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r7_260x_r9_270x_280x_review_benchmarks,27.html

 

[MacVidCards]

I made a mistake on the GTX780, which is where the R290 is taking action.
10-30% isn't that bad either, especially in the titles the difference is only that 10% for a 2 year old card, at less than half the price....

There are also the other reviews, where in some cases the 280X beats the GTX 770, especially at the higher resolutions, and especially at 4K, being only a few FPS on average slower than the GTX 780.

"only a few fps"

Ha, ha

4 fps when there are only 24 to begin with is a 15% loss, same as elsewhere.

I just didn't like you claiming that 7970 and 780 were anywhere near comparable, they aren't. You admitted it was an error, done.

Too bad nMP went with the 2 year old, non-competetive (with high end) card.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

"only a few fps"

Ha, ha

4 fps when there are only 24 to begin with is a 15% loss, same as elsewhere.

I just didn't like you claiming that 7970 and 780 were anywhere near comparable, they aren't. You admitted it was an error, done.

Too bad nMP went with the 2 year old, non-competetive (with high end) card.

Yes 4 FPS difference at less than half the price, despite being 2 years old. That's called being extremely competitive in the market. You can easily get 2 of them for less than a stock GTX 780, and you'll end up with much better performance.

At the moment you're just arguing for the sake of it, despite the card having only gone from strength to strength over 2 years while remaining extremely competitive at at much better price to performance ratio.

15% performance difference at 4K at nearly a 100% price difference.

 

[MacVidCards]

Yes 4 FPS difference at less than half the price, despite being 2 years old. That's called being extremely competitive in the market. You can easily get 2 of them for less than a stock GTX 780, and you'll end up with much better performance.

At the moment you're just arguing for the sake of it, despite the card having only gone from strength to strength over 2 years while remaining extremely competitive at at much better price to performance ratio.

15% performance difference at 4K at nearly a 100% price difference.

You can't state "4 fps" as if it is a small number when it is 4/24.

To put it another way, just add a zero. 240 vs 280. That's a win.

780 retail price is $500, 2 x 300 = 600, so not double.

I didn't want to argue, but you needed to back up:

Nearly two years old and still holding it's(7970) own against current NVIDIA cards, such as the GTX770, and sometimes the GTX780 in gaming.

And you can't.

It doesn't "hold it's own", it loses by 10-30%. That's all I was saying.

Don't get me wrong, I love 7970. The ability to run 2 @ Cinema Displays without adapters is something that Nvidia requires a Quadro for. Too bad R9 290X loses this.

7970 is great OpenCl card. Barely fits into Mac Pro power envelope, but it isn't a current high end card, it is second tier.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

You can't state "4 fps" as if it is a small number when it is 4/24.

To put it another way, just add a zero. 240 vs 280. That's a win.

780 retail price is $500, 2 x 300 = 600, so not double.

I didn't want to argue, but you needed to back up:

It doesn't "hold it's own", it loses by 10-30%. That's all I was saying.

I backed it up with verified reviews from legitimate sources, constantly.
Also adding zero is wrong, and we both know that quite well.

Yes the card IS holding it's own against current NV cards it matches and beats the GTX770 in the majority, and like I said behind the GTX 780, it's shown in 4K benchmarks. Despite being 2 years old.
Something you keep mentioning. It just shows what a good card it is, especially considering its price.

I also stated at NEARLY double the price. Here's the current prices in the UK.
You can get two 280X's ( Overclocked cards, In fact you can't even purchase stock 280x from what I've seen here ) for slightly over the 780, sometimes matching the price,and you'll get better performance. Especially at 4K, and it'll completely trounce the GTX 770 in the majority. If going by your standards of 4FPS being absolutely a massive defining factor for a single card

280X vs GTX 770, ( 280x wins 4 out of 5 tests) at 4K
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/61201-amd-radeon-r9-280x-vs-nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-4k/

Another large 4K benchmark:
http://www.eteknix.com/4k-gaming-showdown-amd-r9-290x-r9-280x-vs-nvidia-gtx-titan-gtx-780/12/

AMD’s R9 280X was also a very interesting proposition showing itself to be only around 10% slower than the GTX 780 at 4K gaming..

It's simply wrong to sate that the because the cards are two year old tech it means they're not competitive.

 

[slughead]

Yes they can't compete against OC'd cards, and in CUDA they're useless, but considering their age there is really Nothing in the current price range that competes against them in overall performance, and especially in OpenCL.

That is not what you said at all. You said the 7970 could "hold its own" in terms of performance to the GTX780 in gaming, which was totally off.

While I agree with you about price/performance, it is not even remotely an issue, as Apple put its wizard hat on and renamed these Tahiti GPUs "D700" and can charge W9000 prices if they want to (and likely will).

So like I said, non-reference GTX780 and titan really are a generation ahead of the 7970 and GTX680 in terms of gaming. Nobody's arguing the 7970 isn't a good card or a good deal, but it is very much behind.

Also, let's not forget the bottom line: We have no idea how much the D700 will cost, which may make it prohibitively expensive to upgrade for users who are only using the GPU for gaming.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

That is not what you said at all. You said the 7970 could "hold its own" in terms of performance to the GTX780 in gaming, which was totally off.

To quote myself

Nearly two years old and still holding it's(7970) own against current NVIDIA cards, such as the GTX770, and sometimes the GTX780 in gaming.

Drivers play a big role, the 7970 Ghz is now the R9 280X, and it's just behind the 780 in some games.

It also clearly competes well against the GTX770, and at a lower price.

While I agree with you about price/performance, it is not even remotely an issue, as Apple put its wizard hat on and renamed these Tahiti GPUs "D700" and can charge W9000 prices if they want to (and likely will).

So like I said, non-reference GTX780 and titan really are a generation ahead of the 7970 and GTX680 in terms of gaming. Nobody's arguing the 7970 isn't a good card or a good deal, but it is very much behind.

Also, let's not forget the bottom line: We have no idea how much the D700 will cost, which may make it prohibitively expensive to upgrade for users who are only using the GPU for gaming.

According to MVC the 7970/280X can't compete against the GT780 because of a 10-30% difference in performance in "regular" resolutions. At 4K the difference is 10-15%. Okay.

So going by that logic the GTX770 cannot compete against a 2 year old, and obsolete 7970/280X in 4K resolutions
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/61201-amd-radeon-r9-280x-vs-nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-4k/

I entirely agree that we don't know the state of the D700's, or how they'll really perform. We do have to take into account though that the nMP is designed to work, and take advantage of 4K resolutions. This is somewhere, along with OpenCL where AMD's cards do really well.

The entire thing stems from the constant statement that AMD's products are 2 years old, and obsolete. Therefore can't compete. This is entirely false.

 

[slughead]

Also at 4K, in the links i Posted but you ignored.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r7_260x_r9_270x_280x_review_benchmarks,26.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r7_260x_r9_270x_280x_review_benchmarks,27.html

Since AMD is clocking its cards so high, and there's no reason to run a GTX780 at reference, perhaps comparing it to NON-REFERENCE GTX 780 would be helpful. (BTW the 7970 is clocked to Ghz edition / 280x speeds in this)

http://youtu.be/3gB9-eIPLzM

----------

To quote myself [, only sometimes does the 7970 keep up with the GTX780]

Fair enough.

It also clearly competes well against the GTX770, and at a lower price.
[...]
So going by that logic the GTX770 cannot compete against a 2 year old, and obsolete 7970/280X in 4K resolutions

770 Uses the same core as the 680 [released 3/2012]... It's not the current generation
http://youtu.be/421DdkA64QI

According to MVC the 7970/280X can't compete against the GT780 because of a 10-30% difference in performance in "regular" resolutions. At 4K the difference is 10-15%. Okay.

The 780 is up to 100% faster at non-reference speeds, actually. Non-reference designs also cool these faster clocks better than the reference cooler cools the reference clocks. Since the 280X is an up-clocked 7970, it's only fair.

I entirely agree that we don't know the state of the D700's, or how they'll really perform. We do have to take into account though that the nMP is designed to work, and take advantage of 4K resolutions. This is somewhere, along with OpenCL where AMD's cards do really well.

We'll see how well the nMP actually handles 4K in OS X. If MVC's benches of the 7970 are applicable (admittedly they may not be), the current generation of NVidia's are blowing it away out of the gate. [edit: EXCEPT in OpenCL, obviously]

The entire thing stems from the constant statement that AMD's products are 2 years old, and obsolete. Therefore can't compete. This is entirely false.

I don't think anyone said that they're obsolete and can't compete. They clearly have an amazing price/performance ratio. However, they are, in the end, 2 years old in a ridiculously expensive machine.

 

[handsome pete]

I backed it up with verified reviews from legitimate sources, constantly.
Also adding zero is wrong, and we both know that quite well.

He's simply pointing out that 4fps in context to the scale is more significant than you made it out to be. It's 14%.

24fps versus 28fps is the equivalent difference between 240fps and 280fps.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

Since AMD is clocking its cards so high, and there's no reason to run a GTX780 at reference, perhaps comparing it to NON-REFERENCE GTX 780 would be helpful. (BTW the 7970 is clocked to Ghz edition / 280x speeds in this)

The Ghz edition is a Stock card from AMD, it's not an OC'd card from aftermarket members.
The benchmarks I showed at 4k show the Stock 280x 10% slower than the stock GTX 780. Stock being the fabricated card shipped directly from AMD or NVIDIA that just gets a sticker on top form the reseller.

Those are also NOT 4K resolutions, which is what you're comparing it to.
Even then the 280X is well against GTX 770.

770 Uses the same core as the 680... It's not the current generation

It is the Same generation.... It's a Kepler based card. Stating otherwise is factually incorrect. If it was the up coming Maxwell based cards it would be correct.

The 780 is up to 100% faster at non-reference speeds, actually. Non-reference designs also cool these faster clocks better than the reference cooler cools the reference clocks. Since the 280X is an up-clocked 7970, it's only fair.

It's as much an "upclocked" card as the 290X is an up clocked version of the 290.
They're shipped stock at those settings.

He's simply pointing out that 4fps in context to the scale is more significant than you made it out to be. It's 14%.

24fps versus 28fps is the equivalent difference between 240fps and 280fps.

According to MVC the 7970/280X can't compete against the GT780 because of a 10-30% difference in performance in "regular" resolutions. At 4K the difference is 10-15%. Okay.

So going by that logic the GTX770 cannot compete against a 2 year old, and obsolete 7970/280X in 4K resolutions
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/61201-amd-radeon-r9-280x-vs-nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-4k/

 

[slughead]

The Ghz edition is a Stock card from AMD, it's not an OC'd card from aftermarket members.
The benchmarks I showed at 4k show the Stock 280x 10% slower than the stock GTX 780. Stock being the fabricated card shipped directly from AMD or NVIDIA that just gets a sticker on top form the reseller.

That's quite the nitpick. You're saying that a clock set by NVidia is a fair comparison, a clock set by the cooler/card makers is not. That's rather arbitrary and I'm super happy for you that the qualifier seems to work for you. Fine, for reference cards, the GTX780 and 280x are fairly close (though I haven't bothered to double check your benchmarks).

Do I care? No. I run a Superclocked EVGA GTX780 with ACX cooler (overclocked out of the box) that runs incredibly cool and has no stability issues. This blows away any reasonably stable 280X or 7970, even OC over retail clock.

Those are also NOT 4K resolutions, which is what you're comparing it to.
Even then the 280X is well against GTX 770.

If you don't think it's a valid comparison, find some 4K benchmarks with non-reference GTX780.

It was stated by MVC that they're two years old, obsolete and can't compete. It's factually inaccurate to state that she comparing stock cards from AMD or NVIDIA.

Did he really say they were "obsolete"? I'm doing a command+F of the thread and the only person to use that word was you.

 

[beaker7]

If you guys really wanna nitpick, the only card manufactured by nVidia is the Tesla line.

Not sure on AMD, don't really pay attention since they are kind of irrelevant in the DCC space i work in.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

That's quite the nitpick. You're saying that a clock set by NVidia is a fair comparison, a clock set by the cooler/card makers is not. That's rather arbitrary and I'm super happy for you that the qualifier seems to work for you. Fine, for reference cards, the GTX780 and 280x are fairly close (though I haven't bothered to double check your benchmarks).

How can it be a nit pick? It's a stated fact. Stock is Stock.
Aftermarket over clocking is different, which is why those cards cost more and come with different coolers, and often Bios's.

Do I care? No. I run a Superclocked EVGA GTX780 with ACX cooler (overclocked out of the box) that runs incredibly cool and has no stability issues. This blows away any reasonably stable 280X or 7970, even OC over retail clock.

Sure, I understand that. And my claims of the 7970 remaining competitive against the GTX 770, and behind behind the GTX 780 stays.

Also please show me the GTX780 completely blowing away the FirePro W9000 in everything, especially OpenCL which is what the new Mac Pro is being made for.

Going by price the 290 is there to take on the GTX 780, and it's still substantially cheaper.

If you don't think it's a valid comparison, find some 4K benchmarks with non-reference GTX780.

How is 1440 the same as 4K?! Cards are compared the majority of the time at Stock frequencies because they're a better indicator of performance over all.
Not all cards clock the same, and you'll never see an "over clocked" after market Workstation card being sold. Not from a reputable reseller if they care about Workstation warranties.

Given that the 7970/280X is two years old, it's doing damn well at 4K being only 10-15% slower than a card that costs a whole lot more.

Did he really say they were "obsolete"? I'm doing a command+F of the thread and the only person to use that word was you.

He did not, yourself and him will constantly say that it's two years old, and that the new mac Pro is shipping with old and outdated hardware. FirePro line is current and up to date, and its performance is still competitive, and comparable to current NVIDIA Offerings. Especially when it comes to the Quadro range.

 

[slughead]

How can it be a nit pick? It's a stated fact. Stock is Stock.
Aftermarket over clocking is different, which is why those cards cost more and come with different coolers, and often Bios's.

As beaker7 pointed out, NVidia only makes tesla cards, the rest are aftermarket. Doesn't that mean all clocking is aftermarket?

Sure, I understand that. And my claims of the 7970 remaining competitive against the GTX 770, and behind behind the GTX 780 stays.

I really don't think I argued anything else

Also please show me the GTX780 completely blowing away the FirePro W9000 in everything, especially OpenCL which is what the new Mac Pro is being made for.

I always said AMD beats NVidia at OpenCL. Nobody ever disputed that, or that the nMP is targeted at OpenCL tasks (and, it seems, no other tasks). I thought we were talking about gaming, if we're talking about all things video cards are used for... How's that CUDA performance?

Going by price the 290 is there to take on the GTX 780, and it's still substantially cheaper.

Again, really didn't say otherwise. If we're talking about gaming in the nMP Vs Nvidia options, we should be talking about the price/performance of the Dx00's, which I don't think you'd argue is anything but abysmal for gaming.

How is 1440 the same as 4K?! Cards are compared the majority of the time at Stock frequencies because they're a better indicator of performance over all.

I couldn't find any 4K gaming benchmarks of non-reference GTX780 apart from this one.

edit:

How is a slower clock a better indicator of performance? Because it suits your purposes? I think the best indicator of performance is a cool, stable clock.

Given that the 7970/280X is two years old, it's doing damn well at 4K being only 10-15% slower than a card that costs a whole lot more.

Anything's possible when you cherry-pick your data. Again, find some non-reference benchmarks and see what happens.

He did not, yourself and him will constantly say that it's two years old, and that the new mac Pro is shipping with old and outdated hardware. FirePro line is current and up to date, and its performance is still competitive, and comparable to current NVIDIA Offerings. Especially when it comes to the Quadro range.

So it's a straw man, is it? I guess if you're only going to look at OpenCL, you'd be right, but for those of us who don't cherry pick our data, things are a little more complicated. I was only talking about gaming in this thread, you keep bringing up OpenCL which isn't even a point I was arguing.

 

[ActionableMango]

Image

A GTX 690 is half the speed of a GTX 680? Even if SLI is not working, the GTX 690 should equal the 680, shouldn't it? The 690 is two 680's SLI'd together.

 

[slughead]

A GTX 690 is half the speed of a GTX 680? Even if SLI is not working, the GTX 690 should equal the 680, shouldn't it? The 690 is two 680's SLI'd together.

I suspect a lot of it is in the drivers, as I suspect much of of the performance weirdness in pro apps are.

What's really interesting is how many are not multithreaded. It seems like such a waste.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

I couldn't find any 4K gaming benchmarks of non-reference GTX780 apart from this one.

edit: Image

How is a slower clock a better indicator of performance? Because it suits your purposes? I think the best indicator of performance is a cool, stable clock.

It's better because it's the standard field, aftermarket over clocked cards are minuscule market in general, which run above the manufacturer Stock specifications. That's why they're called After-market Overclocked cards.
Not factory stock cards.

The graph you posted also clearly shows the GTX 780 is over clocked ( OC ), and even then the 2 year old 7970 isn't that far behind. 6 FPS, in ONE benchmark of Crysis 3.

So an overclocked GTX 780 is 6FPS faster than a Stock 7970 Ghz card from AMD.
So how would it then hold up against a NON-OC'd standard GTX 780, which still costs significantly more than the 7970/280x

Or If these same tests are then ran with that OC'd GTX 780 vs an OC'd 280X, would that not mean the 280X OC matches, it? Possibly beating it?

Anything's possible when you cherry-pick your data. Again, find some non-reference benchmarks and see what happens.

Interesting that you are cherry picking. Stock benchmarks are the resounding standard for all measurements.
Yet in the graph you posted there's a 6FPS difference between the STOCK 7970Ghz with an Overclocked GTX 780.

Shows the 7970 is competing I'd say, despite running at stock speeds.

So it's a straw man, is it? I guess if you're only going to look at OpenCL, you'd be right, but for those of us who don't cherry pick our data, things are a little more complicated. I was only talking about gaming in this thread, you keep bringing up OpenCL which isn't even a point I was arguing.

So at gaming then the benchmarks from all reputable sources shows the 7970/280x still competing against current NVIDIA offerings, and at 4k beating the GTX 770 in most, and just slightly being behind the GTX 780, some times an over clocked GTX 780 as you showed in that Hexus 4K display review.

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/61201-amd-radeon-r9-280x-vs-nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-4k/

I mean if 4-6FPS is such a huge difference to all, well I guess the GTX770 just can't compete against the 2 year old 7970/280x

 

[handsome pete]

So at gaming then the benchmarks from all reputable sources shows the 7970/280x still competing against current NVIDIA offerings, and at 4k beating the GTX 770 in most, and just slightly being behind the GTX 780, some times an over clocked GTX 780 as you showed in that Hexus 4K display review.

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/61201-amd-radeon-r9-280x-vs-nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-4k/

I mean if 4-6FPS is such a huge difference to all, well I guess the GTX770 just can't compete against the 2 year old 7970/280x

To be fair, the results for both those cards at 4K is crap.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

To be fair, the results for both those cards at 4K is crap.

Yes, and my entire point from the start was that despite the 7970 being nearly 2 years old, it still competes against current NVIDIA offerings. Which it does, and at 4K it punches well above it's class, and price point. Which still shows that the card despite its age, competes. So as the resolution increases above standard ones, it's performance actually scales extremely well.

So the issue of it being 2 year old tech is entirely moot given it's performance envelope, and especially when you look at it's Price to Performance ratio.

 

[tuxon86]

It's better because it's the standard field, aftermarket over clocked cards are minuscule market in general, which run above the manufacturer Stock specifications. That's why they're called After-market Overclocked cards.
Not factory stock cards.

The graph you posted also clearly shows the GTX 780 is over clocked ( OC ), and even then the 2 year old 7970 isn't that far behind. 6 FPS, in ONE benchmark of Crysis 3.

So an overclocked GTX 780 is 6FPS faster than a Stock 7970 Ghz card from AMD.
So how would it then hold up against a NON-OC'd standard GTX 780, which still costs significantly more than the 7970/280x

Or If these same tests are then ran with that OC'd GTX 780 vs an OC'd 280X, would that not mean the 280X OC matches, it? Possibly beating it?

Image



Interesting that you are cherry picking. Stock benchmarks are the resounding standard for all measurements.
Yet in the graph you posted there's a 6FPS difference between the STOCK 7970Ghz with an Overclocked GTX 780.

Shows the 7970 is competing I'd say, despite running at stock speeds.




So at gaming then the benchmarks from all reputable sources shows the 7970/280x still competing against current NVIDIA offerings, and at 4k beating the GTX 770 in most, and just slightly being behind the GTX 780, some times an over clocked GTX 780 as you showed in that Hexus 4K display review.

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/61201-amd-radeon-r9-280x-vs-nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-4k/

I mean if 4-6FPS is such a huge difference to all, well I guess the GTX770 just can't compete against the 2 year old 7970/280x

NVidia doesn't sell any video card period. They sell their design to third parties who build the videocard, like ASUS, MSI, EVGA ect... While AMD does sell their own videocard, some of them are OC'd.

4k is far to be the standard in gaming... 4k display cost an arm and a leg. And like TV they don't really offer all that much beside bragging right. Beside most game don't even offer 4k textures.

Also the GTX770 is just the GTX680 rebranded, so you can stop trying to pretend that it is being beaten by an older card since both are about the same.

And the fact remain, that you'll be paying mucho $$$ to Apple for a gpu that you could have had in a PC a year and a half ago... Give it a rest already. If you want to game then take the money for that nMP and buy yourself a more performing gaming PC for a third to half the money.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

NVidia doesn't sell any video card period. They sell their design to third parties who build the videocard, like ASUS, MSI, EVGA ect... While AMD does sell their own videocard, some of them are OC'd.

Both NV, and AMD sell their designs. The stock/ reference cards are the basic design from both NV, and AMD.
After market cards have different coolers, and are marked as being overlocked.

This is because they're not stock/reference cards, as they have deviated from the original stock/reference design. Reference cards being made exactly to the Referenced/original design of AMD and NVIDIA.

4k is far to be the standard in gaming... 4k display cost an arm and a leg. And like TV they don't really offer all that much beside bragging right.

Yet people here are buying over clocked GTX 780's, and Titans, which also cost an arm and a leg.
I guess they're also just for bragging rights?
Why not buy 2 7970/280x's? Or two R9 290s? It'll be cheaper and offer even better performance.
Even two cheap reference/stock GTX 770's will be better overall.

Also the GTX770 is just the GTX680 rebranded, so you can stop trying to pretend that it is being beaten by an older card since both are about the same.

Yes because referenced sources and benchmarks are now 'pretend'.

The GTX 770 might essentially be a rebrand to some extent, but it's a better reference design from NVIDIA in general. Not just having better overall clocks, but a much high TDP. It launched 30th of May 2013.

It's also still current offering by NVIDIA from this year.

And the fact remain, that you'll be paying mucho $$$ to Apple for a gpu that you could have had in a PC a year and a half ago... Give it a rest already. If you want to game then take the money for that nMP and buy yourself a more performing gaming PC for a third to half the money.

Granted a dedicated gaming PC will be cheaper overall, that still doesn't change anything about the 7970 still competing against current NVIDIA offerings.

We also are not sure if the Dxx cards in the new Mac Pro will be the same as the old 7xxx series. We'll have to wait until the machine ships.