NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 Review: The $400 Fight
by Ryan Smith on May 30, 2013 9:00 AM ESTSynthetics
As always we’ll also take a quick look at synthetic performance, though as GTX 780 is just another GK110 card, there shouldn't be any surprises here. These tests are mostly for comparing cards from within a manufacturer, as opposed to directly comparing AMD and NVIDIA cards. We’ll start with 3DMark Vantage’s Pixel Fill test.
Thanks to the combination of core clock and memory clock increases, GTX 770 doesn’t just pass GTX 680, but even GTX 780. This is a bit paradoxical at first, but it’s worth keeping in mind that this is a pixel throughput test, and GTX 770’s ROPs are clocked a good 200MHz+ higher than GTX 780’s. In real games GTX 780 is still going to have the edge, but in edge cases having such a clockspeed gap can lead to some unusual outcomes.
Moving on, we have our 3DMark Vantage texture fillrate test, which does for texels and texture mapping units what the previous test does for ROPs.
Texel throughput on the other hand is all about the core clocks; the improvement over the GTX 680 is barely at 3%, and GTX 770 is well behind GTX 780.
Finally we’ll take a quick look at tessellation performance with TessMark.
GTX 770 pulls ahead in TessMark by more than we would expect given the fact that this test should be largely GPU limited. This may be a case of GTX 770 squeezing out a bit more performance due to GPU Boost 2.0.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
117 Comments
View All Comments
chizow - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
They are both overpriced relative to their historical cost/pricing, as a result you see Nvidia has posted record margins last quarter, and will probably do similarly well again.Razorbak86 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
Cool! I'm both a customer and a shareholder, but my shares are worth a hell of a lot more than my SLi cards. :)antef - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
I'm not happy that NVIDIA threw power efficiency to the wind this generation. What is with these GPU manufacturers that they can't seem to CONSISTENTLY focus on power efficiency? It's always...."Oh don't worry, next gen will be better we promise," then it finally does get better, then next gen sucks, then again it's "don't worry, next gen we'll get power consumption down, we mean it this time." How about CONTINUING to focus on it? Imagine any other product segment where a 35%! power increase would be considered acceptable, there is none. That makes a 10 or whatever FPS jump not impressive in the slightest. I have a 660 Ti which I feel has an amazing speed to power efficiency ratio, looks like this generation definitely needs to be sat out.jwcalla - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
It's going to be hard to get a performance increase without sacrificing some power while using the same architecture. You pretty much need a new architecture to get both.jasonelmore - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
or a die shrinkBlibbax - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
As these cards have configurable TDP, you get to choose your own priorities.coldpower27 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
There isn't much you can really do when your working with the same process node and same architecture, the best you can hope for is a slight bump in efficiency at the same performance level but if you increase performance past the sweet spot, you sacrifice efficiency.In past generation you had half node shrinks. GTX 280 -> GTX 285 65nm to 55nm and hence reduced power consumption.
Now we don't, we have jumped straight from 55nm -> 40nm -> 28nm, with the next 20nm node still aways out. There just isn't very much you can do right now for performance.
JDG1980 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
Yes, this is really TSMC's fault. They've been sitting on their ass for too long.tynopik - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
maybe a shade of NVIDIA green for the 770 in the charts instead of AMD red?joel4565 - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link
Looks like an interesting part. If for no other reason that to put pressure on AMD's 7950 Ghz card. I imagine that card will be dropping to 400ish very soon.I am not sure what card to pick up this summer. I want to buy my first 2560x1440 monitor (leaning towards Dell 2713hm) this summer, but that means I need a new video card too as my AMD 6950 is not going to have the muscle for 1440p. It looks like both the Nvida 770 and AMD 7950 Ghz are borderline for 1440p depending on the game, but there is a big price jump to go to the Nvidia 780.
I am also not a huge fan of crossfire/sli although I do have a compatible motherboard. Also to preempt the 2560/1440 vs 2560/1600 debate, yes i would of course prefer more pixels, but most of the 2560x1600 monitors I have seen are wide gamut which I don't need and cost 300-400 more. 160 vertical pixels are not worth 300-400 bucks and dealing with the Wide gamut issues for programs that aren't compatible.