NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Specs Leak
Click here to post a comment for NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Specs Leak on our message forum
Hari_Seldon
The GTX 970 and 980 can compete very well against R9 290 and 290x. If you see the specs (256 bit vs 512 bits bus), that may have been surprising.
Perhaps the same will happen with GTX 960.
Better wait to see real numbers in benchmarks.
narukun
Come on guys, the GTX 280 has 512 bits and that doesn't make it more powerful today, yeah its like 512mb vRAM, but even compared with some of GPUs with 512mb vRAM and 256bits have less performance (hmm like gtx 460 768mb maybe?) idk.. i just dont like the "2gb vram" all games require 4gb now.
Redemption80
Yeah, people get far to fixated on that.
In the last 5-6 years i've went from 448bit (GTX260) to 256bit (GTX460) to 320bit (GTX570) to 256bit (GTX970) and the smallest upgrade by far was 460-570, obviously down to there not being alot of time between those two cards.
I'm still not convinced this card is not underpowered and overpriced though, but i'm not convinced it's crap either.
Dorlor
The 280 has a 384 bit bus, not 512 bit. The gtx 460 is an ancient gpu by now, so that comparison is completely irrelevant.
Redemption80
The GTX280 has 512bit bus.
Both cards are ancient, but it's completely relevant as people are comparing this card to older GPU's.
Goldie
gimped card is gimped.
Noisiv
dude, you have nvidia's High-mid end... whatever, gimped TWICE, and two of them no less
what are you saying.... this card will murder your 760
oh I see you were smart enough to get 4GB, props to you š
anyway, people are right when noticing that x60 is sliding back dangerously close to low-mid end, instead of being true mid-card.
According to Fermi classification this is clearly A Hunter class card, ie GTX 550/Ti
Fox2232
memory bus size 512bit matters little to nothing without knowing clock, memory type, therefore data transfer rate.
mentioned gtx280 had 512bit bus, but ddr3, therefore 142GB/s which is sub par to today's generation.
gddr5 @6GHz with 192bit bus has 144GB/s which even with maxwell compression makes gtx960 memory interface just a bit inferior to gtx280, core here still makes difference. but i would not advice anyone to get 960 for given price.
Redemption80
That's my point though, at least half the posts in this thread are focused on the memory bus and comparing that to cards of old.
It's too early to recommend, or not recommended the card without actual benchmarks and confirmed price.
Nvidia always take the piss with high end cards not mid range, so it would be weird if this was slow and also expensive.
Alexraptor
People are concerned with the memory bus though because VRAM and its performance is much more significant today than ever before, textures alone eating up more memory than ever before.
Bansaku
[QUOTE=Noisiv;4993458
This 128bit card should beat 384bit 7950/R9 280,
How do you figure that?!?! I think you just pulled that statement out of your ass.
:)
I just put together a new 4th gen Intel system with a Geforce 970 for my brother's brother over the weekend, and in REAL WORLD testing my single HD7950 Boost is not that far off.
:banana:
---TK---
Define that that far off.
Fender178
The only thing that gets me is why did Nvidia stick only 2gb of Vram and wait to release a 4gb version at a later time instead of going with 4gb right off the bat? Makes no sense to me. Considering 2gb being enough for today's games at 1080p and beyond on high to max settings is going by the wayside.
Monchis
I think they donĀ“t want to look like idiots by buying loads and loads of gddr5 at a point where the new high density gddr5 just started mass production.
Dorlor
Oh, i thought he meant amd 280, missed the gtx ahead 280... lol
Monchis
Memory badwidth:
Gtx260 111.9 GB/s
Gtx460 115 GB/sec
Gtx660 144/GB/sec
Gtx760 192.2 GB/s
Gtx960 112 GB/s
:heh:
Redemption80
People only care about framerate though, not memory bandwidth.
Do the benchmarks on those slides not show the 960 is nearly twice as fast as the 660?
Dorlor
They do, but they are nvidias slides... and anyone who wasnt born yesterday, will know that nvidia are a bit creative when it comes to the truth about their new Cards performance.
My guess is that it will be 50% faster than a 660 at most, and more likely around 33% faster. BUT it will depend alot on the ingame settings, cause that bandwidth WILL limit AA usability alot... then Again, people using a midrange gpu will most likely use postprocessing AA, as opposed to true AA, so perhaps this will not matter to them - however, the 2gb vram will still greatly limit the Card. A game like unity would be forced to run on lowest settings, due to vram bottleneck.
ViperXtreme
them memory bitrate and bandwidth doesnt matter as long as it can reach its target performance range (mainstream/midrange whatever) let the 970 and 980 do their job in the higher tier. The middle will probably filled with the 965 or Ti whatever anyway.
But yeah, in my GTX 660, games can indeed fill up that 2GB framebufer, and im even using a 1600 x 900 monitor, then again perhaps this time maxwell's memory compression algorithm can make optimizations on its vram usage as well this time
---TK---
Probably because it can't fully utilize 4gb of vram. They will probably release them later. Some people usually fall for the double vram scam anyway.
