- Payment Options
- Terms Conditions
- 972-998-0046
- steinfoundationco@gmail.com
By handing over to “Gambling” No. 12/2013 eight -page text on video cards, we naively believed that we will finish testing the latest fee and finally rest. Yeah, now. They just sent everything to the printing house – calls rained down. First, AMD reported on her readiness to send Radeon R9 290, and then NVIDIA suggested testing the new flagship – GTX 780 Ti. There was nowhere to go, they returned everyone back, gathered a stand and rushed into battle.
Did not read our review and did not understand what we were talking about? It doesn’t matter, now we’ll tell you everything. The main topic was as follows: AMD released a new generation of Radeon R video cards. Moreover, she presented not one or two board, as is usually the case, but at once there are seven samples, most of which we got to the editor and compared with competitors from NVIDIA.
In fact, it turned out that part of the new products is the renamed and thoroughly cheaper Radeon HD 7000 series, and there are only two really fresh chips-the top R9 290 and the top-ends and R9 290x. The latter then we tested and made sure that in speed it is close to GTX 780 , But the second did not work out – he arrived a little later, at about the same time with the GTX 780 Ti, the eldest of GeForce, designed to show AMD, who is the host in the house.
We will start with R9 290. In the Radeon hierarchy, she stood a step below R9 290X, retaining all the clan features of the flagship. Inside – a slightly cut crystal Hawaii. The number of stream processors decreased from 2816 to 2560 units, and texture – from 176 to 160 pieces. Falled and frequency of work. Instead of 1000 MHz, the maximum for R9 290 became 947 MHz. The rest remained untouched.
So, the number of rasterization blocks is 64 and, in theory, promises decent FPS in high resolutions. This is also indicated by video memory: 4 GB GDDR5 at 512-bit tire and speed of 5 GHz.
No lagging behind R9 290 and in terms of supported technologies. There is AMD Trueaudio-this is a separate DSP critical that can calculate sound effects in games and operate with such variables as the distance to the sound source and materials of obstacles that are found on the path of obstacles. Immediately, the support of the API Mantle, its own AMD engine, which, while in words, should increase performance in a number of games. Last month, work with Mantle said only Dice , promising an appropriate update for Battlefield 4 , However, by the time of writing these lines, they managed to join it Rebellion Entertainment ( Sniper Elite V3 ), Cloud Imperium Games ( Star Citizen ) And Eidos montreal ( Thief ).
Note that the R9 290 is positioned unusual. Initially, the card was planned to be released in peak GeForce GTX 770 , But after NVIDIA sharply threw off prices for GTX 780, AMD decided to compete with the last. For this, the company slightly rebuilt the algorithms of the operation of energy conservation and cooling systems.
Rumors went about the imminent appearance of the GTX 780 Ti when we still did the last issue of our magazine. Then everyone wondered where Nvidia would put this card, because the difference between the GTX 780 and GTX Titan and so was scanty. It turned out that everything was simple. The novelty did not squeeze "between", but settled "above". Yes, you understand correctly – GTX 780 Ti is older and, clean on paper, faster than GTX Titan.
Our hero is based on a full -fledged chip GK110 With architecture Kepler. And this means 15 SMX blocks, 2880 streaming nuclei and 240 texture processors. For comparison: in the GTX Titan one of the SMX was blocked, the card could boast of 2688 CUDA criteria and 224 TMU. Well, GTX 780 generally lived with a dozen SMX, 2304 computing and 192 texture units.
More fun in 780 Ti and with frequency indicators. Standard for "Stone" – 875 MHz, and in Turbo Boost 2 mode.0 – 928 MHz. Recall that Titan shows 836-876 MHz, respectively, and GTX 780-863-900 MHz.
From memory there is also an increase. GDDR5 GTX 780 Ti functions at an effective frequency of 7000 MHz, not at 6000 MHz, like Titan. True, the latter has 6 GB at this speed, and the GTX 780 Ti has 3 GB.
If we compare a beginner with R9 290X, in many parameters, the AMD creation will be more interesting. So, the volume of GDDR5 in R9 290x-4 GB, and let them work at 5000 MHz, but are tied not to 384-, but to a 512-bit tire. There are more “red” and rasterization blocks responsible for the direct formation of pixels: 64 versus 48 ROP for NVIDIA.
But what AMD is noticeably inferior to NVIDIA is in energy efficiency. The consumption of GTX 780 Ti is declared at 250 W, and in R9 290x it is estimated at 290 watts. It would seem a trifle, but for the full day of the game GTX 780 Ti saves kilowatts of energy and five rubles. It is necessary to remember about the cold disposition of NVIDIA GK100. In the work, it heats up to a maximum of 80 ° C and thanks to this under the GPU Boost 2.0 stably holds a frequency of 1000 MHz. Radeon R9 290X These numbers are given at a temperature of 95 ° C and a fan twisted to the maximum.
It's funny, but also AMD Radeon R9 290, and the GeForce GTX 780 Ti outwardly copy their closest relatives. At the Reds, the map is covered with a black casing with strips diverging in a circle, and in NVIDIA – a metal cover with a transparent window. Similar to competitors and cooling systems. Crystals live under powerful radiators with a base in the form of a evaporative chamber. And from active cooling in both – one cylindrical turntable working in the manner of a turbine.
AMD parity with NVIDIA and in terms of connectors. For the output of the image, each of the beginners has a pair of DVI and according to a full -sized HDMI with DisplayPort. Well, for food, the boards were detained 6- and 8-pin sockets.
So as not to be bored, they called the entire existing top to the company. From the side of Nvidia looked at the light GTX Titan , GTX 780 , GTX 770 And double GTX 690. And only from AMD came only Radeon R9 290x.
They fell into a cozy environment – in the insides of a powerful computer Meijin. You can read about it in the insert in the neighborhood, and for now we will explain how it happened at all and where is our own stand. The fact is that just a couple of days before the sharp activation of Nvidia and AMD, our veteran with Core i7-920 on board was sent to a well-deserved pension, and fresh forces did not manage to approach at that time. As a result, I had to strain our connections and cause temporary reinforcement. By the way, in addition to the computer, it also included a new 3DMark , Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0 , Unitine Valley 1.0 , Tomb Raider , Aliens vs. Predator , Hitman: Absolution , Bioshock Infinite , Metro: Last Light And Crysis 3.
The test was divided into two parts. At first, out of an old habit, we drove away all our guests on an ordinary Full HD monitor and … were, to put it mildly, surprised. The new GTX 780 Ti went around the GTX 780 by only 11%, and Titan managed to overtake only 2%. For the board just created, it was unacceptable. Fortunately, the company saved us from writing a devastated outcome IIYAMA , The 27-inch panel sent to the test stand XB2776QS With a resolution of 2560×1440 (you can read about it on the neighboring pages).
Despite the apparent small difference with 1920×1080, the XB2776QS pixels are 1.8 times more, and this is a serious gland blow-almost all our experimental ones sank by about 30-40%. And here it became clear which board is cooler.
It was comfortable to play in 2560×1440 only GTX 780 Ti, GTX Titan, GTX 690 and, of course, Radeon R9 290X. The latter, I must say, generally showed herself well done. After updating the drivers, she learned to work stably at a frequency of 1 GHz and, accordingly, added well in performance, managing not only to overtake the GTX 780, but also approach GTX 780 Ti.
No lagging behind and R9 290. In 1920×1080, it is almost indistinguishable from the GTX 780, and in 2560×1080, thanks to the expanded set of ROP, it even overtakes it by 5%, despite the fact that officially the chip is noticeably cheaper than the competitor and in this parameter is more closer to the GTX 770, which is 15-20% weaker.
Well, as for the most important thing, I gave everyone a double GTX 690. Let it be not much, but it is faster and GTX 780 Ti and R9 290x. GTX 780 Ti went forward in a single -chip competition, the AMD flagship by 7%.
As with tests, the result of our work we will divide into two parts. In the first, say the following. Full HD era for cards manufacturers seemed to end. Permission can no longer load the board, and because of this a very funny situation is formed. That you buy GTX 770 for 11,000 rubles, that you take the GTX 780 Ti for 25,000 – the result is approximately the same: stable 30 FPS provide both chips. Yes, perhaps, the younger representative has to sacrifice the level of anti-aliasing somewhere, but this almost does not affect the final quality.
Another thing is the resolution of a new generation. Here, seriously, in 2560×1440 the games are literally not recognized. And let the picture in the amount of useful information, but the increased density of dots per inch makes itself felt. The image turns out to be incredibly clear: the "ladders" almost completely disappear along the edges of the objects, and the contours look like they were neatly circled with a thin brush. Naturally, to see all this, you have to pay well for iron. And here the issue of choice is much sharper.
If you rely on official prices, then AMD products look preferable. R9 290 for 14,000 rubles pulls almost all games in 2560×1440. The only problem is that in our stores this card costs an average of 21,000 rubles, and this is when the GTX 780 is easily taken for 18,500. The same situation with Radeon R9 290x: on paper – 19,990 rubles, in fact – at least 24,000.
Plus, compared to GeForce, AMD creations turned out to be very loud. If the NVIDIA boards are almost inaudible under load, then Radeon sometimes howls so that at least the ears plug it. However, you should not completely write off AMD from accounts. We are sure that in a month or two prices are stabilized, and third-party manufacturers will come up with quiet cooling systems.
Well, as for our hero today – GTX 780 Ti – then we will say the following. This is the new king of graphics that squeezed the GTX Titan throne. And, it's nice, it costs cheaper than the old flagship: 26,000 versus 32,000 rubles. If you are ready to spend so much on a video card – do not hesitate, take.
We have a computer as a test stand Meijin GTX 780 Ti Sli. It is assembled in the well -known body to us Silverstone Fortress FT02B-W USB 3.0 Black with a 90 degree of the motherboard.
The basis for the filling was ASUS P9X79 Pro On the chipset Intel X79 Express. She was inserted into the LGA2011 socket of LGA2011 Intel Core i7-4960x a frequency of 3.6 GHz. Four rally planks helped him Hynix-1 CL11 DDR3-1600 MHz 8 GB each.
All this worked under control Windows 8 Pro 64 Bit , Installed on a solidocurrency Intel 520 with a volume of 240 GB, and was powered by a kilowatte PSU Cooler Master V1000 RS-A00-AFBA-G1-EU.
CPU
Intel Core i7-4960X Extreme Edition (Sandy Bridge-E, Socket LGA2011, 3.6-4 GHz, L3-Cash 15 MB)
Cooling
Scythe SCMG-3PCGH MUGEN 3
Motherboard
ASUS P9X79 PRO (ATX, Intel X79 Express, Socket LGA2011, 8x DDR3-1066/1333/1600/1800/2400 MHz to 64 GB, 4x PCIe 3.0 x16, 2x PCIE 2.0 x1, 4x SATA Rev. 3, 4x SATA 2, RAID 0, 1, 5, 10; 4x USB 3.0, 6x USB 2.0, 2X Esata Rev. 3, Lan, Bluetooth, S/PDIF-OUT, Audio)
Memory
4x 8 GB CL11 DDR3-1600 MHz Hynix-1 CL11
Solid -state drive
240 GB Intel 520 (reading – 550 MB/s, recording – 520 MB/s)
Hard drive
3 TB Seagate ST3000DM001 (SATA Rev. 3, 7200 rpm, 64 MB)
Optical drive
ASUS BW-16D1HT (SATA, CD-ROM/RW, DVD-ROM/RAM, DVD ± RW, DL, BD-ROM/R/RE, DL)
Sound card
Asus Xonar Phoebus
power unit
Cooler Master V1000 RS-A00-AFBA-G1-EU, 1000 W
Frame
Silverstone Fortress FT02B-W USB 3.0 Black
Additionally
Windows 8 Pro 64 Bit, cardrider, Video Catch Poem AverMedia Live Gamer HD
NVIDIA drivers
331.65/331.70
AMD drivers
Catalyst 13.11 beta9
Graphics
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
5114
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
4925
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
5733
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
4520
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
3588
AMD Radeon R9 290x
4 899
AMD Radeon R9 290
4 702
Physics
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
16 038
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
16 041
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
15 881
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
16 029
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
16 025
AMD Radeon R9 290x
13 896
AMD Radeon R9 290
13 838
Score
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
4986
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
4808
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
5306
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
4455
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
3492
AMD Radeon R9 290x
5 058
AMD Radeon R9 290
4 587
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
96%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
106%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
89%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
70%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
101%
AMD Radeon R9 290
92%
Fps
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
58.4
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
53.2
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
64.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
51.4
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
37.2
AMD Radeon R9 290x
53.6
AMD Radeon R9 290
50.3
Scores
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
1471
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
1339
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
1626
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
1294
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
938
AMD Radeon R9 290x
1351
AMD Radeon R9 290
1266
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
91%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
111%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
88%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
64%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
92%
AMD Radeon R9 290
86%
Fps
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
66.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
63.8
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
77.7
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
60.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
46.4
AMD Radeon R9 290x
59.8
AMD Radeon R9 290
56.9
Scores
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
2786
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
2669
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
3250
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
2536
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
1928
AMD Radeon R9 290x
2502
AMD Radeon R9 290
2380
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
96%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
117%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
91%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
69%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
90%
AMD Radeon R9 290
85%
Veryhigh, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AA 2X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
113.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
108.4
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
138.3
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
101.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
80.8
AMD Radeon R9 290x
114.6
AMD Radeon R9 290
107.4
Veryhigh, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AA 4X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
98.8
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
89.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
112.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
86.5
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
64.9
AMD Radeon R9 290x
105.8
AMD Radeon R9 290
95.1
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
93%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
118%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
88%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
69%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
104%
AMD Radeon R9 290
95%
Veryhigh, 2560×1440, AF 16X, AA 2X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
71.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
66.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
83.3
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
60.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
48.6
AMD Radeon R9 290x
74.1
AMD Radeon R9 290
67.2
Veryhigh, 2560×1440, AF 16X, AA 4X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
61.2
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
56
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
69.4
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
53
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
39.5
AMD Radeon R9 290x
66.2
AMD Radeon R9 290
60.5
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
93%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
115%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
86%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
67%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
106%
AMD Radeon R9 290
97%
High, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AA 2X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
56.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
60.8
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
77.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
55.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
43.9
AMD Radeon R9 290x
54.4
AMD Radeon R9 290
52.3
High, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AA 4X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
51.2
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
48.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
62
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
44.8
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
36.1
AMD Radeon R9 290x
46.5
AMD Radeon R9 290
32.9
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
101%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
130%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
93%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
75%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
94%
AMD Radeon R9 290
79%
High, 2560×1440, AF 16X, AA 2X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
44.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
37.7
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
36.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
AMD Radeon R9 290x
37.4
AMD Radeon R9 290
33.9
High, 2560×1440, AF 16X, AA 4X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
34.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
29.4
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
28.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
AMD Radeon R9 290x
29.9
AMD Radeon R9 290
26.8
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
85%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
83%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
AMD Radeon R9 290x
85%
AMD Radeon R9 290
77%
Ultra, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AA 4X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
67.8
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
64.2
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
79.5
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
61.2
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
48.1
AMD Radeon R9 290x
75.2
AMD Radeon R9 290
71.8
Ultra, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AA 8x
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
49.2
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
45.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
54.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
43.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
31.8
AMD Radeon R9 290x
54.1
AMD Radeon R9 290
52.5
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
94%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
94%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
115%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
90%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
68%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
111%
AMD Radeon R9 290
106%
Ultra, 2560×1440, AF 16X, AA 4X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
46
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
43.7
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
52
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
40.5
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
30.9
AMD Radeon R9 290x
52.9
AMD Radeon R9 290
50.1
Ultra, 2560×1440, AF 16X, AA 8x
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
48.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
27.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
33.5
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
26.7
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
18.8
AMD Radeon R9 290x
39.5
AMD Radeon R9 290
35.6
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
76%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
91%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
71%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
53%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
98%
AMD Radeon R9 290
91%
Ultradx11, 1920×1080, AF 16X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
105.8
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
104
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
112.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
96.2
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
81.4
AMD Radeon R9 290x
91.1
AMD Radeon R9 290
87.5
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
98%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
107%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
91%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
77%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
86%
AMD Radeon R9 290
83%
Ultradx11, 2560×1440, AF 16X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
72.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
69.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
83.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
62.7
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
49.8
AMD Radeon R9 290x
60.6
AMD Radeon R9 290
58.4
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
95%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
114%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
86%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
69%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
83%
AMD Radeon R9 290
80%
Veryhight, 1920×1080, AF 16X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
47.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
44
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
49
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
41
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
32
AMD Radeon R9 290x
45
AMD Radeon R9 290
42
Veryhigh, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AdV. Physx
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
42.4
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
37
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
41
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
35
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
28
AMD Radeon R9 290x
29
AMD Radeon R9 290
27
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
90%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
84%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
66%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
82%
AMD Radeon R9 290
76%
Veryhigh, 2560×1440, AF 16X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
31
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
27
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
32
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
25
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
20
AMD Radeon R9 290x
29
AMD Radeon R9 290
26
Veryhigh, 2560×1440, AF 16X, ADV. Physx
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
27
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
25
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
29
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
22
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
19
AMD Radeon R9 290x
20
AMD Radeon R9 290
18
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
90%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
105%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
81%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
67%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
84%
AMD Radeon R9 290
76%
Max, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AA 4X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
53.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
51.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
60.8
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
47.5
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
37.9
AMD Radeon R9 290x
47.6
AMD Radeon R9 290
41.5
Max, 1920×1080, AF 16X, AA 8x
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
44.6
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
40.5
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
49.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
37.3
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
29.5
AMD Radeon R9 290x
36.2
AMD Radeon R9 290
31.6
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
93%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
112%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
86%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
68%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
85%
AMD Radeon R9 290
74%
Max, 2560×1440, AF 16X, AA 4X
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
33.5
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
31.3
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
38.9
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
29
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
23.4
AMD Radeon R9 290x
33.7
AMD Radeon R9 290
29.1
Max, 2560×1440, AF 16X, AA 8x
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
26.4
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
23.1
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
24.3
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
11.2
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
15.1
AMD Radeon R9 290x
26.4
AMD Radeon R9 290
22.4
%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
91%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
106%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
67%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
64%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
100%
AMD Radeon R9 290
86%
Performance (1920×1080)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
95%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
113%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
89%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
71%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
94%
AMD Radeon R9 290
86%
Performance (2560×1440)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
88%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
106%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
79%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
64%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
93%
AMD Radeon R9 290
84%
Price (retail)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
100%
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
135%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
131%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
71%
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
48%
AMD Radeon R9 290x
92%
AMD Radeon R9 290
81%
The core
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
GK110
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
GK110
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
2x GK104
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
GK110
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
GK104
AMD Radeon R9 290x
Hawaii
AMD Radeon R9 290
Hawaii
The number of transistors
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
7.1 billion
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
7.1 billion
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
2x 3.54 billion
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
7.1 billion
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
3.54 billion
AMD Radeon R9 290x
6.2 billion
AMD Radeon R9 290
6.2 billion
Process process
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
28 Nm
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
28 Nm
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
28 Nm
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
28 Nm
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
28 Nm
AMD Radeon R9 290x
28 Nm
AMD Radeon R9 290
28 Nm
The number of stream processors
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
2880 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
2688 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
2x 1536 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
2304 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
1536 pcs.
AMD Radeon R9 290x
2816 pcs.
AMD Radeon R9 290
2560 pcs.
The frequency of the graphic nucleus
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
875-928 MHz
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
836-876 MHz
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
915-1019 MHz
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
863-900 MHz
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
1046-1085 MHz
AMD Radeon R9 290x
up to 1000 MHz
AMD Radeon R9 290
up to 947 MHz
Type, memory volume
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
GDDR5, 3 GB
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
GDDR5, 6 GB
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
GDRR5, 4 GB
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
GDDR5, 3 GB
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
GDDR5, 2/4 GB
AMD Radeon R9 290x
GDDR5, 4 GB
AMD Radeon R9 290
GDDR5, 4 GB
Memory frequency
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
7000 MHz
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
6008 MHz
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
6008 MHz
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
6008 MHz
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
7000 MHz
AMD Radeon R9 290x
5000 MHz
AMD Radeon R9 290
5000 MHz
Data tire
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
384 bits
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
384 bits
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
2x 256 bits
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
384 bits
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
256 bits
AMD Radeon R9 290x
512 bits
AMD Radeon R9 290
512 bits
The number of texture blocks
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
240 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
224 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
2x 128 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
192 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
128 pcs.
AMD Radeon R9 290x
176 pcs.
AMD Radeon R9 290
160 pcs.
The number of rasterization blocks
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
48 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
48 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
280 mm
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
48 pcs.
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
32 pcs.
AMD Radeon R9 290x
64 pcs.
AMD Radeon R9 290
64 pcs.
Energy consumption
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
250 watts
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
250 watts
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
300 watts
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
250 watts
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
230 watts
AMD Radeon R9 290x
AMD Radeon R9 290
Interface
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
PCIE X16 3.0
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
PCIE X16 3.0
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
PCIE 3.0 x16
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
PCIE X16 3.0
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
PCIE 3.0 x16
AMD Radeon R9 290x
PCIE X16 3.0
AMD Radeon R9 290
PCIE X16 3.0
Price for December 2013 (retail)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
26,000 rubles
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
35,000 rubles
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690
34,000 rubles
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780
18 500 rubles
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
12 500 rubles
AMD Radeon R9 290x
24,000 rubles
AMD Radeon R9 290
21,000 rubles
Leave a Reply