Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 45

Thread: GK104 goes mobile! Bad news for GK106?

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,444
    There are always plans A, B, etc.
    Given how strong the competition pressure is from AMD with 50% faster than NV's last generation top-end, then they couldn't simply afford to launch something so slow.
    7970M is 50% faster than 580M, but 680M is 80% faster than 580M which automatically means mission accomplished.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgiD View Post
    There are always plans A, B, etc.
    Given how strong the competition pressure is from AMD with 50% faster than NV's last generation top-end, then they couldn't simply afford to launch something so slow. 7970M is 50% faster than 580M, but 680M is 80% faster than 580M which automatically means mission accomplished.
    That 80% is Nvidia's number. wait for official reviews of 680m laptops. anandtech has a rough average. 50 - 60% faster

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5914/n...04-goes-mobile

    My guess is GTX 680M will be 10% faster than HD 7970m. But you have to pay USD 280+ for that. AMD can't be beat for price perf.

  3. #13
    How could they make it faster than the HD 7970M, while Pitcairn is more efficient than GK104?
    Could it be because of turbo? Like, meanwhile both have the same TDP, GTX 680m's average power will be higher?

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by raghu78 View Post
    My guess is GTX 680M will be 10% faster than HD 7970m. But you have to pay USD 280+ for that. AMD can't be beat for price perf.
    This obviously is AMDs problem not Nvidia's. Whoever is faster can charge more especially in the enthusiast area. In addition to that customers are willing to pay more for Nvidia than for AMD.

    So i would agree to what has been said before. If G680M is the fastest product in the mobile space, then its mission accomplished for that specific segment (high end / enthusiast mobile).

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    781
    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgiD View Post
    There are always plans A, B, etc.
    Given how strong the competition pressure is from AMD with 50% faster than NV's last generation top-end, then they couldn't simply afford to launch something so slow.
    7970M is 50% faster than 580M, but 680M is 80% faster than 580M which automatically means mission accomplished.
    As Raghu said, let's wait and see for the actual numbers, also on AT it seemed more like it had an average oof 10-15% better than 7970M.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richthofen View Post
    This obviously is AMDs problem not Nvidia's. Whoever is faster can charge more especially in the enthusiast area. In addition to that customers are willing to pay more for Nvidia than for AMD.

    So i would agree to what has been said before. If G680M is the fastest product in the mobile space, then its mission accomplished for that specific segment (high end / enthusiast mobile).
    Yes obviously the highest end product gets to charger a higher price.. But NOT $280! I don't see any problem for AMD, they have a good yielding chip that works well for high end, I don't think nVidia plans on taking much share in the laptop market with that kind of premium.

    Also why do you think people are more willing to pay more for nVidia than AMD? Seems odd tbh.
    Desktop R7 1800X@4.1GHz, MSI X370 Xpower gaming titanium(Bios 1.74), 2x8GB Corsair Vengance LED(Red) DDR4 3200MHz@2933MHz , 2xSamsung 830 256GB & Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD, Sapphire Fury X 1050MHz / 500MHz, Corsair AX1200i.
    Laptop: Lenovo Y700 AMD FX-8800p, R9 M385X, 2x8GB DDR3, 256GB SSD.
    Quote Originally Posted by vain View Post
    From my personal browsing experience, everyone is well endowed.

  6. #16
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Ernest View Post
    How could they make it faster than the HD 7970M, while Pitcairn is more efficient than GK104?
    Could it be because of turbo? Like, meanwhile both have the same TDP, GTX 680m's average power will be higher?
    Thats is because the 680M is 30% bigger than the 7970M. And untill we know the power consumption of both, we can't say much about efficiency.

    As it look nows (anand: 50% faster than the 675M and the 7970M is about 45% faster than the 675M according to notebookreviews)
    Needless to mention the anand average is overspecced because they tested some games twice which affects the average.

    Seems the 7970M and 680M will be relatively close to eachother. I expect less than 10% in performance. Power consumption is unknown and die size is mentionned above.

    Compared to the desktop AMD reverted one disadvantage to an advantage, performance seems to be an advantage for Nvidia (and thats with 1 of the factors still unknown (power)).

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Medallish View Post
    Also why do you think people are more willing to pay more for nVidia than AMD? Seems odd tbh.
    Everyone thinks so, even NV marketing use it for advantage.



    http://www.expreview.com/19768-all.html

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by Richthofen View Post
    This obviously is AMDs problem not Nvidia's. Whoever is faster can charge more especially in the enthusiast area. In addition to that customers are willing to pay more for Nvidia than for AMD.

    So i would agree to what has been said before. If G680M is the fastest product in the mobile space, then its mission accomplished for that specific segment (high end / enthusiast mobile).
    Its the user who decides whether the price perf is worth it. Not Nvidia. GTX 670 rocked the market with its price perf. and here you are contradicting that logic in the mobile graphics market.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    781
    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgiD View Post
    Everyone thinks so, even NV marketing use it for advantage.



    http://www.expreview.com/19768-all.html
    Well he was refering to people being more willing to pay more for nVidia, Advantage also mentions price/performance advantage which they won't have with 680M, no one sane is going to pay $280 more for less than 10% performance increase, pretty sure the 680M isn't supposed to sell, just look good basically.
    Desktop R7 1800X@4.1GHz, MSI X370 Xpower gaming titanium(Bios 1.74), 2x8GB Corsair Vengance LED(Red) DDR4 3200MHz@2933MHz , 2xSamsung 830 256GB & Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD, Sapphire Fury X 1050MHz / 500MHz, Corsair AX1200i.
    Laptop: Lenovo Y700 AMD FX-8800p, R9 M385X, 2x8GB DDR3, 256GB SSD.
    Quote Originally Posted by vain View Post
    From my personal browsing experience, everyone is well endowed.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    5,419
    Quote Originally Posted by raghu78 View Post
    Its the user who decides whether the price perf is worth it. Not Nvidia. GTX 670 rocked the market with its price perf. and here you are contradicting that logic in the mobile graphics market.
    Your user in this case is the OEM. Fwiw
    Specialization is for insects. - Heinlein
    Laugh dammit, life is too damned short not to laugh
    ------------------------
    I don't care if the sub-pixels are so small I need TWO magnifying glasses to see them. I want a phone that has longer battery life.

    -Q

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
WordPress Appliance - Powered by TurnKey Linux