The Test

For this review we’re using the latest drivers from both NVIDIA and AMD. NVIDIA’s launch drivers are 334.69, which add support for the GTX 750 series but are otherwise identical to the 334.67 drivers currently available as a public beta for existing cards. The release 334 drivers include a fairly impressive tune up of NVIDIA’s OpenCL stack, so we’re finding that OpenCL performance is significantly improved in some of our benchmarks, which helps to close the gap with AMD. On the other hand these tune-ups have not come bug free (as Ganesh has found), and while our compute benchmarks are fine, Ganesh has run into some issues with some of his OpenCL based video utilities. Other than that, we have not encountered any stability problems with these drivers.

Meanwhile for AMD’s cards we’re using the recently released Catalyst 14.1 beta v1.6 drivers.

CPU: Intel Core i7-4960X @ 4.2GHz
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty X79 Professional
Power Supply: Corsair AX1200i
Hard Disk: Samsung SSD 840 EVO (750GB)
Memory: G.Skill RipjawZ DDR3-1866 4 x 8GB (9-10-9-26)
Case: NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition
Monitor: Asus PQ321
Video Cards: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti
Zotac GeForce GTX 750 Ti
Zotac GeForce GTX 750
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 640
NVIIDA GeForce GTX 550 Ti
AMD Radeon R7 265
AMD Radeon R7 260X
AMD Radeon R7 250
AMD Radeon HD 7750
AMD Radeon HD 5770
Video Drivers: NVIDIA Release 334.67 Beta
NVIDIA Release 334.69 Beta (GTX 750 Series)
AMD Catalyst 14.1 Beta v1.6
OS: Windows 8.1 Pro

 

HTPC Aspects : Miscellaneous Factors Metro: Last Light
Comments Locked

177 Comments

View All Comments

  • Harag - Thursday, March 6, 2014 - link

    Not true at all. The release of the Titan showed they could unlock FP64 performance on a specific architecture. The Titan Black also has amazing FP64 performance. You may also want to look into their Quadro line.
  • kwrzesien - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    Cards are available on Newegg! Check out this EVGA Superclocked (1268MHz) with a dual-fan ACX cooler and 6-pin PCIe power connector: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
  • Frenetic Pony - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    Maxwell is designed for mobile gaming, in which case who cares? Broadwell looks to improve performance per watt at least as much as Maxwell if Intel's initial hints of 30% power improvement for 14nm and 40% improvement for gpu power efficiency pan out. And they were already damned good.

    But Maxwell isn't designed for high end, in which case GCN 1.1 and AMD are already beating them for price for performance. Congrats Nvidia, you're second place in both categories if this card is anything to go by. I hope to hell your Titan 2 or whatever kicks more ass than this card.
  • varad - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    @FreneticPony, statements like "Maxwell is designed for mobile gaming" and "But Maxwell isn't designed for high end" tell us you know precious little. Maxwell is an architecture that will span across all of Nvidia's products [Tegra, GeForce, Quadro and Tesla].
  • Frenetic Pony - Thursday, February 20, 2014 - link

    Err... they intend to produce as such yes. But it's obvious the architecture itself is targeted squarely at mobile. Power constraints don't actually get in the way as much as other constraints do on the high end. Who really cares if it's 150+ tdp if it's gaming? You get constrained by memory latency and other things no matter how high you can clock it up.

    This appears to be Nvidia's version of Haswell, concentrated solely on improving performance per watt rather than performance at all. Which is bad timing as Intel is doing the same, but integrates it's GPUs right onto the chip, making them cheaper and smaller than any dedicated card for a laptop is going to be. Meanwhile AMD is crushing Nvidia in both compute and high end gaming performance on the desktop for performance per $.

    True, this will help mitigate electricity cost. for compute based work. But as others pointed out not by much. Meaning Nvidia stuck itself with the wrong focus at the wrong time. Maybe it will help with their Tegra SOCs, if they're lucky they'll get back into the game, as Qualcomm soundly crushed the Tegra 4 for third party ARM Socs over the last year.

    So, no, it's designed for high end. Doesn't mean they're not going to do it anyway.
  • Frenetic Pony - Thursday, February 20, 2014 - link

    I.E. it really doesn't matter how well they did at what they're doing. Because Intel has done just as well and has built in advantages for its market, what their doing doesn't help that much against AMD in the high end market, and this leaves their only chance for financial success with it being next years Tegra SOCs.
  • ninjaquick - Thursday, February 20, 2014 - link

    Plus, AMD is easily capable of taking Nvidia on at the low end with better hardware across the board, more integrated designs, etc.
  • willis936 - Thursday, February 20, 2014 - link

    Pro tip: you're always TDP limited. Increasing performance per watt IS increasing performance.
  • Harag - Thursday, March 6, 2014 - link

    Broad statements like "AMD is crushing Nvidia..." only proved @Varad correct. you know precious little.
  • HisDivineOrder - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    nVidia fits a lot more performance in a little more space at a lot less power and you think they're doing poorly? This is on the same node.

    Imagine what they'll pack into a smaller node.

    Their focus is probably the right one, given the fact they want to migrate these cores into Tegra.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now