Originally Posted by Ninja Prime
No, I've played your little game, your way, and you still lost. 8800 --> 280 and 285 --> 480 are as major generations as you get, and they were on par with the 7970, which you are crying is not enough. Even more, compared to the figure you quote, 16%, which is against the competition, NVs last two generations fair worse than the card in question. What you don't have some witty viral marketing response already pre-cooked up for you for this one?
It depends! On what site or what type of metrics the sites use. Over-all gauges are clearly not the end-all-be-all but one site, for me, offers a solid gauge and that is ComputerBase.
2560 x 1600 x4 AA -- 8800 Ultra vs 280 GTX 50 percent.
2560 x 1600 x4 AA --- 285 GTX vs GTX 480 67 percent.
2560 x 1600 x4 AA ---- HD 6970 vs HD 7970 42 percent
Considering the move to 28 nm from 40 nm is substantial and significant the performance isn't for the HD 7970 but the performance is still welcomed and respectable. However, since the die is actually smaller, this may be the first time in GPU history that the MSRP percentage increase was actually higher than the performance increase. Execution has its rewards and AMD may be much more of a predator and aggressor this time and simply may take advantage by charging premiums based on the todays pricing of the GTX 580 -- an older -- year old -- 40nm, heavily premium priced sku. The GTX 580 is now the objective barometer of pricing when it was insane to buy one from the value minded, more logical choice that was the HD 6950 and 6970 for some. It seems not only did AMD do a 180 but many of their fans as well.