Originally Posted by Logical
Ive read a few reviews on the HD7970 and have to say considering that it is AMD's 'next gen' GPU i am not impressed at all.
I am in the market for buying a new GPU this year and considered going the AMD route. Thing is i passed up the opportunity to get a GTX580 for £300 a few weeks ago...Holding onto the thought that i would stick to my guns and purchase a next gen card in 2012. I definately will not go AMD route as an average of 7fps in most games just doesn't justify the £480 price tag that comes with it, i would sooner fall back to the GTX580 for £350. I eagerly await Nvidia's flagship card though as i know it's gonna destroy this AMD card in every benchmark...
It's got no choice and has to do it with pretty decent margins since AMD's card launched first, and there's still no solid ETA on when the high end version of kepler will be released, otherwise Nvidia would get roasted in reviews if it's only marginally faster too, but one has to wonder though what are the main priorities for the design on both tahiti and kepler.
Even though we use them primarily as gaming cards, i couldn't help but notice that the biggest performance increase with AMD's tahiti is in GP-GPU, as double precision floating point math got doubled over Cayman and is now twice as high as Fermi, as well as having direct hooks to help with programing likely using OpenCL.
So as much as we want maximum game performance, Nvidia also has to seriously buff up the raw math abilities and acheivable real world performance in GP-GPU, wich has nothing to do with gaming, yet the resources to do that heavy math are shared within the same die as the resources needed to make it a fast gaming card, so it's a delicate balance to make....As much as we're gamers above all else, it isn't just about gaming anymore, it's beyond that too.