The King is dead, long live the king. Nvidia ends production of its flagship product – the GTX 780 Ti. Place substitute new and shiny GTX 980, based on the architecture of Maxwell. This is the fastest jednochipowa graphics card, which can be found on the market – so that productivity does not grow significantly over yet powerful Nvidia card. GTX 980 is not a step forward in the field of computer graphics – this ground on exceptionally energy efficient card that offers a slight power boost.
Do not underestimate, however, aspects of energy efficiency. Graphics Cards usually need up to 250 W – when working at full capacity the power consumption results in a gigantic heat emission. And because heat must somehow disperse, leaving only the purchase is sophisticated cooling system, which in turn can generate a lot of noise. TDP for the GTX 980 is only 165 W, and it is not difficult to guess how it reflects on your computer – GTX 980 successfully mount even PCs from a small enclosure.
card that review, have an exclusive metal case a native of GTX Titan – is elegant, industrialna in terms of design and quiet. On the basis of the aesthetic differences are small – for use with older Nvidia cards housing is even tighter. We can also remove the plastic cap, increasing the flow of air, but the biggest changes concern the ports on the back cover: a set of ports, including two DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort replaced with one DVI, one HDMI and DisplayPort three. This set is to facilitate the use of G-Sync (which still needs DisplayPort). It is worth noting that the card uses HDMI 2.0 ports, capable of displaying an image in 4K and 60 frames per second.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 – Specification
Architecture Maxwell debuted at the beginning of the year in excellent budżetówce GTX 750/750 Ti, based on the chip GM107. In turn, the GTX 980 is a “large” Maxwell, addressed to customers interested in high-end hardware. New Maxwell, designated the code name GM204, has about two billion less transistors of the GTX 780 Ti. It features a much narrower memory bus (256 bits versus 384 bits), and it’s a lot smaller (398 mm 2 552 mm versus 2 ). However, it has more RAM, and thanks to efficient design achieves better results than the previous flagship Nvidia cards. But the most impressive is what the card is in the middle – its potential significantly beyond the scope of what suggest low power consumption. The new chip Maxwell achieves more – much more – for less, even though it was based on the same 28-nanometer production technology, as before. GM204 chip is about 28 percent smaller than the Titan / GTX 780 Ti, but about 9 percent. from chip Hawaii, used in the Radeon R9 280x. What’s more, the new card Maxwell uses a relatively narrow, because a 256-bit memory bus – the predecessor features a 384-bit bus, and R9 290x – 512-bit. Nevertheless, the GTX 980 ahead of both of the above mentioned cards in almost all tests. In short, the GTX 980 is cheap to produce. And although the consumer can not count on a discount (to the class of “economic” Nvidia GTX 970 allocated to which closer look at soon), the undeniable advantage of the card is much lower temperature and lower power consumption. Where, then, we should look for this mysterious, miraculous ingredient? Since the release of the GeForce GTX 750 Ti we know that Maxwell architecture provides a twofold increase in performance per watt over the previous technology Nvidia – Kepler. New, larger chip we might as well be called Maxwell 2.0. While retaining all the advantages of its predecessor (a new approach to the use of CUDA cores and increased L2 cache), offers additional features energy savings derived from the work on Tegra chip K1 used in the tablet Shield. And although it might seem that the 256-bit memory bus is too little to ensure high performance, the card designers took care of lossless compression, increasing capacity. This is no doubt an interesting approach, but its effectiveness is limited capacity compression material on which to work – as we shall see in a moment. First let’s see how the GTX 980 can handle a maximum load of the GPU, which is Crysis 3 in 1080p. Turn vertical sync, choose the maximum settings and smoothing SmaA T2X – these settings are struck between performance and quality. We record the game on a PC equipped with a Core i7 3770K, GTX 780 on the first Ti and Radeon R9 290x. we are to achieve the maximum frame rate (vertical sync locks framerate at 60 frames per second) – we want to catch drops of liquidity, appearing in the most demanding scenes. The potential of the card makes itself felt at once: but not here uświadczymy solid 60 frames, it falls are not as clear as in the pages of competing with the GTX 980 good start and that, although it seems that in terms of performance the card offers only a small step forward with respect to the available competition of the highest quality – a qualitative leap ran out of here, what would we expect the new architecture. Analysis of material from Crysis 3 in 1080p at maximum settings proves that the GTX 980 does not offer a quantum leap with respect to competing cards – the yield is higher, which of course should be happy, but it is an evolution, not a revolution. Posiłkując a set of benchmarks, compiled GTX 980 with the other its corresponding power range GPU, starting issued by Nvidia over the last few years, GTX series cards “x80″, but also those which the company will want to break out of your head laurels – prądożernym R9 290x and descending from the market GTX 780 Ti. Tests start from 1080p and maximum settings. It may seem that the test equipment will provide more than enough power for so prosaic resolution as 1080p, but tests carried out on Crysisie 3 brought us to the ground. Second, since the data collected in the service Steam, 95 percent of the players PeCetowych have monitors designed to display video in full HD, our test is fully justified. Nvidia offers a wide range of graphics cards, but regardless of their power and much of that will end attached to a 1080p monitor. Let’s look at obrazkowi above (larger version available by clicking). Where have I seen him – it’s Buzz Aldren descending from the deck of Apollo 11, the lens of the first man on the moon, Neil Armstrong. Except that it’s not a picture, and rendered in real-time scene, which uses VXGI – new, based on voxels global illumination system, introduced by Nvidia. For comparison, authentic picture of Armstrong can find here. Revision prepared by Nvidia looks like a picture x-rayed, but when we saw the material for your own eyes at a recent technology conference Nvidia, the resemblance was striking. Readers will ask themselves, why would serve to restore this key moment for humanity? Well, in the demo Nvidia used based on voxels presented a real-time global illumination technology. This is another stage lighting technologies, a step forward relative to physically-based rendering, used in console games, the likes of Killzone Shadow Fall, Metal Gear Solid 5 and Forza Horizon 2 demo itself is quite impressive – we can watch the scene from any angle and play with exposure. Quite the occasion of refuting conspiracy theories (even claiming a lack of visible stars), according to which the moon landing never happened. A similar system, also based on voxels – SVOGI – built on Unreal Engine 4, However, after some time it has been removed due to significant load on your computer. If you watched a lecture by John Carmack of sparse voxel octrees , it is good to know that here we are dealing with a similar technology. The only problem with using voxels for global illumination computed in real time refers to the fact that the calculations are too complex to be able to use this technique in the games or on the outfits of the present generation. Nvidia believes that managed to solve the problem through implementation VXGI that relieves computer, providing most of the tasks to a dedicated portion of the chip Maxwell. Technology puts just first steps, and although Nvidia is working on integration with Unreal Engine 4, it is difficult to assess how much work they will have to put the developers to take advantage of this technique in games – go to physically based rendering in the titles of the new generation and so it was a huge challenge. Seems more important here is the fact that Nvidia has managed to identify the greatest limitation of current rendering technology used on it and it concentrated its efforts. Though not yet announced games using the new technology, but in a short time, the company should make a demo of the lander. The tests showed 14-percent advantage over R9 290x, barely five percent of the GTX 780 Ti and now robust, because 27 percent over the GTX 780 GTX 680 provides for a material to compare two different generations of equipment – Maxwell and Kepler. In this test the new card advantage gained an impressive 61 percent. GTX 680 and 980 cards are of similar prądożerności, both also equipped with a 256-bit memory bus. In the table we give also the results obtained after overclock the card. Using MSI Afterburner increased power to 125 percent, thereby twisting the GPU clock of 200 MHz, a memory clock of 475 MHz. This allowed us to get a 12.2-percent increase in 1080p, which corresponds to both a 12-percentage increase in power consumption. More radical overclocking the card reduces its stability. As a testing ground for experiments recommend Metro: Last Light. Benchmarks mean little without context. On This video shows what and how we tested, and examined how cards fall juxtaposed. To demonstrate the differences between the GPU and the performance graphs, we used the FCAT from Nvidia (plugged into our tools.) resolution of 2560 × 1440 – or 1440p – the characters begins to give a narrow memory bus GTX 980 Tomb Raider on the new card is a tad slower than the GTX 780 Ti, but the 980-weaves and so retains an advantage in other titles, especially in the fourth Battlefieldzie huge, 512-bit bus used in the R9 290x allows the card to get back in the ring (note the results of the tests in Tomb Raider). The averaged 15-percent advantage, that the GTX 980 has obtained over the competition in 1080p at higher resolutions suddenly shrinks to five percent. Charter Nvidia GTX manages to overtake 780 (talking about the version without the “Ti”). Once again, we see a performance boost relative to its predecessor GTX 980 – GTX 680 indomitable When displaying images at higher resolutions greater importance begins to play memory bandwidth. Older, 256-bit card has the serious problems, especially in the incredibly demanding straight Metro: Last Light enabled super-samplings . According to the indications of benchmarks, the GTX 980 deftly handles at higher resolutions, and the overclock is gaining an average of 14.8 percent on performance. With the remodeling architecture CUDA cores and compression system, the new card is eligible for heavier weight class than the raw data would indicate, but the results obtained in the Tomb Raider suggest that the performance of the card varies depending on the game. In 2560 × 1440 compression technology catches the light shortness of breath – in some cases, the GTX 780 Ti is gaining a slight advantage over the GTX 980. 4K monitor Because you can buy for okokoło 2500 zł (and even cheaper if we limit ourselves to 30 Hz), there is an opportunity to ask how the GTX 980 copes with the standard ultra-HD. But the truth is that in order to display the image in 4K, on the highest settings need two high-end GPU. Trying to precisely monitor reviews Asus “Swift” PG278Q, who recently went to the editor Digital Foundry – this is the first monitor that supports 2560 × 1440 and G-Sync. G-Sync eliminates the effect of tearingu and minimizes stutter Affiliate vertical sync when the game is not displayed in a fixed number of frames. End of the dictates of the monitor and the addiction to the screen refresh rate – thanks to G-Syncowi takes control of the situation GPU. We have combined a pair of GTX 980 with G-Synciem and fired up Crysis 3 on maximum settings at native resolution of the monitor, or 1440p. Animation holds the threshold of 30-40 frames per second – is the extent to which the G-Sync does not have a chance to prove. We are lowering a few settings to the level of “very high” and the animation starts to go beyond the 40 frames. The use of G-Sync makes sense – the technology allows for smoother and nicer picture than was the case with the standard 30 frames on the console. After lowering the settings from very high to high GTX 980 displays the game in the range of 50-60 frames. It’s the perfect training ground for the G-Sync. Rendering time frame varies between 16-20 ms, and the gameplay is very difficult to catch judder – unless we start seeking him. Jobs in editorial Digital Foundry is a daily skirmishes with frame-pacingiem , troubles with the performance and unsightly picture tearingiem . G-Sync is not an ideal solution, but it is the best technology we currently have, and only depends on the player, or decide to change the settings enough to give the G-Sync room to maneuver. Adaptive Vertical Sync , launched by G-Sync is the future of monitors. This view is also competition Nvidia – AMD signed a contract with companies Mstar, Novatek and Realtek, for the implementation of their own solutions – FreeSync. It’s just that it will be some time before the market will go monitors using the technologist, and Nvidia already has proven the effectiveness of its solutions, and is available on store shelves. We advise you to convince yourself of its benefits. For the benchmark slightly stonowaliśmy options – Tomb Raider in the “ultimate” to “ultra” (the greatest difference does off TressFX) and Battlefieldzie 4 instead ” ultra “choose” high “without MSAA. Most pulls away to Metro: Last Light – here we reduce the quality of a “very high” to “high” for both the overall image quality and tessellation, and turn off the super-sampling antiialiasing (SSAA). Crysis 3 and BioShock Infinite fall to appropriately “high” and “ultra”. In these settings, the card does well with displaying the image in 30 frames, but truth be told, it willingly we replace higher resolution for an additional 30 FPS at 1440p. The monitor displays images in 1440p with G-Synciem both the GTX 980 and 780 Ti possible to achieve very satisfactory results. The good results obtained in Battlefieldzie 4 and BioShocku GTX 980 gave 10-percent lead over R9 290x, but in Crysis 3 and Tomb Raider already performs worse. The same applies to the 780 Ti, but relative to the GTX 780 Nvidia’s new card pops up a significant lead – so that both play some 4K only 30 cages and on medium settings. The results of the card in 4K gain after overclocking – we’re talking about a jump of 12.2 percent. to 14.8 percent. and 17.5 per cent. after switching the resolution from 1080p to 1440p and finally 4K. GTX 980 copes well with a resolution of 4K, but in tests Tomb Raider completes both the GTX 780 Ti and R9 290x. After lowering the graphics quality a notch most of the titles – BioShock Infinite aside – will be displayed in the vicinity of 30 frames. Finally, let’s look at the maximum input power of each of the tested cards based on benchmark Metro: Last Light. The relatively small increase in performance of the new Nvidia cards can be disappointing – especially if you compare it with the GTX 780 Ti – but prądożerności results speak for themselves. In the case of the GTX 980 the maximum power consumption is 80 watts lower than the 780 Ti and nearly 100 watts (!) Lower than the R9 AMD 290x. Even after overclocking, the card turns out to be more economical from Titan in the lite version, that our GTX 780 amazing achievement. I think the most interesting does it compare with veteran market, namely GTX 680, which-reviewed card has a lot to do on a plane the size of the chip and memory bandwidth. Siedmioprocentowemu increase the power consumption of the new card is accompanied by a 65-percent jump in productivity. That such changes expected – just a little shame that Nvidia did not go all the way and did not increase or performance of your new product. What would happen if it was decided to keep the 384-bit bus with a GTX 980? Or if created GK110 chip size of the GTX 780, 780 Ti and Titan? Such GM210 will rzucałoby on his knees – but maybe Nvidia plans to introduce such a monster on the market when the cards start production at 20 nm and give into the hands of the consumer product better advised to deal with the issue of heat and noise. Nvidia stresses that the new line of cards also means new features. One of them is the MFAA ( multi-frame anti-aliasing ) that – combining 2x MSAA and temporal AA – creates an effect comparable to – according to the assurances of the company – with 4x MSAA . In terms of performance, this technique is as resource intensive as 2x MSAA. Demos that we had an opportunity to see at a recent event Nvidia fact represent intriguing, but the driver is available with the release of the GTX 980/980 does not provide even the possibility of handwritten test the new technology. Nvidia material implies that the MFAA can provide results comparable with 2x MSAA, only slightly increasing the load on your computer – the explanation appears in the 1:30 video. Since I entered the stage deferred rendering , MSAA was on the list of endangered technologies. There is no wonder that developers are working on consoles, seeking to maximize the effectiveness of anti-aliasing in post-processing, using technology similar to MSAA from NVidia. But the likes of GTX 980 cards have both the capacity and the fill rate (this is the rate at which processes card points screen) allowing the use of MSAA, so eager to see how this technology works in practice and how to use will affect the performance of your computer in a more demanding games the likes of Crysis 3 or Watch Dogs. But we can test the DSR ( dynamic scaling resolution ) – a new feature of Maxwell, which – as we hope – will also to older models of GPUs from Nvidia. DSR turn on the GeForce Experience. This function is designed to help users of monitors displaying the image in 1080p, as it allows the scaling resolution up to four times higher than native – that acts as super-sampling . If our game does not hog resources of the GPU, we can divert them to the needs of high-quality anti-aliasing. Some parts of the above categories provided us with Nvidia (screenshots of Assassin’s Creed 4 and Watch Dogs), but enriched it too with pictures own tests. GPU with available resources can achieve fantastic results, but the technology is of limited use in recent titles – after turning DSR bid GPU to render images in 4K and – as you can see it clearly on the table performance – for most new games will be too big a challenge. This does not change the fact that the technology will check in less demanding titles – like Dark Souls 2 and BioShock Infinite. Both games offer only smoothing in post-processing, and super-sampling significantly improves the reception of these titles.
VXGI: global illumination in real-time
1920 × 1080 (1080p) GTX 980 GTX 980 (OC) GTX 780 Ti 290x R9 GTX 780 GTX 680 BioShock Infinite, DX11 Ultra DDOF 121.6 130.9 116.5 93.0 99.5 79.7 Tomb Raider, Ultimate, FXAA 91.1 104.1 90.9 85.1 71.3 56.2 Battlefield 4, Ultra 87.2 98.3 78.0 70.1 65.2 50.6 Metro: Last Light, Very High, SSAA 52.0 59.2 51.0 47.4 40.9 31.4 Crysis 3, Very High 77.0 86.7 71.9 68.6 60.9 50.7
2560 × 1440 (1440p) GTX 980 GTX 980 ( OC) GTX 780 Ti 290x R9 GTX 780 GTX 680 BioShock Infinite, DX11 Ultra DDOF 83.3 94.0 77.2 61.7 65.4 50.9 Tomb Raider, Ultimate , FXAA 60.9 69.7 62.2 58.5 49 0 36.6 Battlefield 4, Ultra 58.0 65.5 52.0 47.3 44.2 33.4 Metro: Last Light, Very High, SSAA 32.6 37.9 32.2 29.7 25.8 18.8 Crysis 3, Very High 47.8 56.2 45.0 45.1 37.4 30.5
Back G-Sync
3840 × 2160 (4K) GTX 980 GTX 980 (OC) GTX 780 Ti 290x R9 GTX 780 GTX 680 BioShock Infinite, DX11 Ultra 57.4 66.8 50.7 43.7 39.9 31.8 Tomb Raider, Ultra, FXAA 39.5 45.6 43.3 40.1 34.1 26.0 Battlefield 4, High 46.2 53.7 41.9 38.9 35.8 26.8 Metro: Last Light, High, AAA 36.4 42.7 33.1 30.4 27.6 19.3 Crysis 3, High 34.2 41.9 33.4 35.2 28.1 23.5
GTX 980 GTX 980 (OC) GTX 780 Ti 290x R9 GTX 780 GTX 680 Peak power consumption 265 W 299 W 345 W 363 W 312 W 248 W 
No comments:
Post a Comment