Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB Review

Manufacturer: Nvidia
UK price (as reviewed): MSRP £559 (inc VAT)
US price (as reviewed): MSRP $699 (ex Tax)

Announced almost out of nowhere less than a month ago, the Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti is already here. It comes with the bold claim of being the best gaming GPU on the planet, and as you’d expect, such a card comes with a hefty cost; it’s entering the UK market at £559, and the US one at $699. This makes the GTX 780 Ti about £120 more expensive than AMD’s top-end single GPU card, the R9 290X, and £160 more than the GTX 780.

Softening the financial blow a little are free copies of Assassin’s Creed IV: Black Flag, Batman: Arkham Origins and Splinter Cell Blacklist that will be bundled with all GTX 780 Ti purchases, while US customers can also enjoy $100 off the Nvidia Shield.

Click to enlarge
Like the GTX Titan and GTX 780, the GTX 780 Ti is built on Nvidia’s GK110 GPU (which you can read about more in our original GTX Titan review). Built on a 28nm process, this version of the 7.1 billion transistor GPU is the most powerful iteration of GK110 available to consumer customers, as the disabled streaming multiprocessor (SMX) of GTX Titan is no longer inactive for the GTX 780 Ti. As such, all five of its graphics processing clusters (GPCs) sport the full roster of three SMXs. The GTX 780 Ti is thus equipped with 2,880 streaming processors (192 per SMX), which is 25 percent and 7 percent more than the GTX 780 and GTX Titan respectively.

The extra SMX also graces the GTX 780 Ti with an extra tesselation unit over the GTX Titan thanks to the additional polymorph engine, as well as 16 more texture units, for a grand total of 240. The card matches the GTX Titan for rasteriser and ROP counts, which are 5 and 48 respectively.

As ever, Nvidia specifies a base clock for the GTX 780 Ti, which is the minimum speed the card is guaranteed to run at. This is unlike AMD, as clock speeds for the R9 290X and R9 290 are presented as ‘up to’ i.e. the maximum clock users will see given the right conditions. The GTX 780 Ti’s base clock is 876MHz, a modest 40MHz increase over both the GTX 780 and Titan. The boost clock, which represents the sort of frequencies you can expect to hit under load as a result of GPU Boost, is 928MHz, but our sample regularly hit 1GHz at stock speeds.

  Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB GPU Codename GK110 GK110 GK110 GK104 Base Clock 876MHz 836MHz 863MHz 1,006MHz Boost Clock 928MHz 876MHz 900MHz 1,058MHz Stream Processors 2,880 2,688 2,304 1,536 Layout 5 GPCs, 15 SMXs 5 GPCs, 14 SMXs 4 GPCs, 12 SMXs 4 GPCs, 8 SMXs Rasterisers 5 5 4 4 Tesselation Units 15 14 12 8 Texture Units 240 224 194 128 ROPs 48 48 48 32 Transistors 7.1 billion 7.1 billion 7.1 billion 3.54 billion Die Size 533mm2 561mm2 551mm2 294mm2 Process 28nm 28nm 28nm 28nm Memory Amount 3GB GDDR5 6GB GDDR5 3GB GDDR5 2GB GDDR5 Frequency 1.75GHz (7GHz Effective) 1.5GHz (6GHz Effective) 1.5GHz (6GHz Effective) 1.5GHz (6GHz Effective) Interface 384-bit 384-bit 384-bit 256-bit Bandwidth 336GB/sec 288GB/sec 288GB/sec 192GB/sec Card Specifications Power Connectors 1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin PCI-E 1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin PCI-E 1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin PCI-E 2 x 6-pin PCI-E Stock Card Length 267mm 267mm 267mm 257mm TDP 250W 250W 250W 195W Typical Street Price £560 £770 £400 £240

A new power management feature for the GTX 780 Ti related to clock speeds and overclocking in particular is called Power Balancing. A card like the GTX 780 Ti draws power across three rails: the PCI-Express lane and the two additional PCI-E power connections. Power is balanced between the three but can become unbalanced when overclocking and possibly limit your overclocks if you max out one rail while having headroom elsewhere. Power Balancing simply allows the balance to be maintained when overclocking, potentially allowing for higher overclocks than previous GK110 cards, on top of the already higher clock speeds.

As well as a 1.5MB local L2 cache, the GTX 780 Ti GPU also has access to 3GB of GDDR5 memory, clocked at a speedy 1.75GHz (7 GHz effective). As such, the card features less RAM than the GTX Titan, but has memory chips that are effectively 1GHz faster than both it and the GTX 780. Combined with its six 64-bit memory controllers (384-bit bus), the GTX 780 Ti also has the highest total memory bandwidth of any card on the market, with 336GB/sec.

Click to enlarge
Despite the increased processing power and clock speeds compared to GTX Titan, said card will not be receiving a price cut or going end of life. With its full speed double precision units and 6GB of memory, Nvidia is leaving Titan to researchers and such who value compute power above all else, while positioning the GTX 780 Ti as the best card available from a gaming perspective at a more realistic, although undoubtedly still high, price point.

Other features worth mentioning are ShadowPlay and G-Sync, although these aren’t unique to the GTX 780 Ti. ShadowPlay is a piece of gameplay recording software currently in beta (available through Nvidia’s GeForce Experience program) that utilises the H.264 encoder built into all Kepler GPUs to record your gameplay up to 1080p at 60fps. It supports all DX9 or later games and apparently has less performance impact than other such recorders like FRAPS.

G-Sync, meanwhile, is a new monitor hardware technology designed to eliminate the screen tearing and input lag that results from using displays with fixed refresh rates. We came away thoroughly impressed from the demo we saw, and all Nvidia cards from the GTX 650 Ti Boost upwards support it. You will have to buy a new compatible monitor to take advantage of it, though.

The Card

Unlike with the GTX Titan, Nvidia will be allowing its board partners to produce custom GTX 780 Ti boards, and these will be available in December. However, the 267mm dual slot reference card is, like the GTX Titan and GTX 780 before it, rather gorgeous. The black and silver aluminium casing is made all the more striking by the window and green LED backlit logo along the side. By comparison, the stock models of the R9 290 cards look decidedly bland.

Click to enlarge
The cards outputs are the standard selection of two dual link DVI ports (one DVI-I, one DVI-D) alongside an HDMI connection and full size DisplayPort. This means Nvidia has maintained VGA support (through the DVI-I connection) rather than drop it as AMD has done with the R9 290 cards.

Click to enlarge
Looking at the PCB itself, we see the massive GK110 GPU flanked on three sides by the twelve 256MB memory chips. Unlike the GTX Titan, which has 6GB VRAM, there’s no need for Nvidia to double stack these, so you won’t find any memory chips on the rear side.

Unlike AMD’s new cards, the GTX 780 Ti still relies on external bridges to enable multi-card set-ups, and as such you’ll find two SLI connectors in the usual place as well.

Click to enlarge
The card relies on additional power from its two PCI-E power connections, one 6-pin and one 8-pin, and these are both top-mounted. We also find the GTX 780 Ti using the same power delivery system as the GTX 780 and GTX Titan, namely six main power phases for the GPU and two extra ones just behind them for the memory chips, for a total 6+2 phase power.

Click to enlarge
The radial fan (complete with hub cap) draws cool air into the card over a small heatsink that covers power circuitry, blasts it over the main GPU heatsink and exhausts it out of the rear I/O panel, thus avoiding any heat being dumped into your chassis. The GPU heatsink itself sits atop a vapour chamber, and a metal plate with thermal pads provides cooling for all twelve GDDR5 memory chips and the power phases too.

How We Tested

Our GPU test rig is equipped with the multi-GPU powerhouse that is the Asus Maximus V Extreme, allowing us to run up to 4-card SLI and CrossFire with 8x PCI-E 3.0 lanes per card. The CPU is an Intel Core i5 3570K running at 4.2GHz to raise the CPU headroom, and it’s paired with 8GB of 2,400MHz Corsair Dominator DDR3. Our chassis of choice is NZXT’s Switch 810, a case big enough to house even a pair of Asus’ Ares 2 graphics cards. The Lepa G1600 1600W PSU offers more wattage and 8-pin PCI-E power connectors than we’d ever need.

Click to enlarge
Our benchmarks are a mix of custom in-game time demos and manually-played sections, using FRAPS to record the average and minimum frame rates. We strive to not only record real-world performance you will actually see, but also present the results in a manner that is easy to digest. We test at 1,920 x 1,080 (1080p), 2,560 x 1,600, 5,760 x 1,080 (AMD Eyefinity/Nvidia Surround) and 3,840 x 2,160 (4K)

Test System

• Intel Core i5 3570K (operating at 4.2GHz – 42 x 100MHz)
• Asus Maximus V Extreme motherboard
• 2 x 4GB Corsair 2,400MHz DDR3 memory
• Lepa G1600 1600W PSU
• Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit
• Samsung SSD 830 256GB SSD

AMD graphics cards

• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB (1,000MHz GPU, 5GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.11 beta)
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB (947MHz GPU, 5GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.11 beta)
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB (1,000MHz GPU, 6GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.11 beta)
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB (1,050MHz GPU, 5.6GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.11 beta)
• AMD Radeon R7 260X 2GB (1,100MHz GPU, 6.5GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.11 beta)
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB (1,000MHz GPU, 6GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.5 beta)
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition (1,000-1,050MHz GPU, 6GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.4 WHQL)
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost (875MHz-925MHz GPU, 5GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.4 WHQL)
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB (1,000MHz GPU, 4.8GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.4 WHQL)
• AMD Radeon HD 7850 2GB (860MHz GPU, 4.8GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.4 WHQL)
• AMD Radeon HD 7790 1GB (1,000MHz GPU, 6GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.4 WHQL)
• AMD Radeon HD 7770 1GB (1,000MHz GPU, 4.5GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.4 WHQL)
• AMD Radeon HD 7750 1GB (825MHz GPU, 4.5GHz memory) (Catalyst 13.4 WHQL)

Nvidia graphics cards

• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB (836Mhz GPU, boosting to 876MHz, 6GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB (876MHz GPU, boosting to 928MHz, 7GHz memory) (GeForce 331.70 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB (836Mhz GPU, boosting to 876MHz, 6GHz memory) (Launch Driver – GeForce 320.20 beta)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB (1,046Mhz GPU, boosting to 1,085MHz, 7GHz memory) (Launch Driver – GeForce 320.20 beta)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB (980Mhz GPU, boosting to 1,033MHz, 6GHz memory) (Launch Driver – GeForce 320.39 beta)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB (915MHz GPU, boosting to 1,084MHz, 6GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB (1,006MHz GPU, boosting to 1,110MHz, 6GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB (915MHz GPU, boosting to 1,084MHz, 6GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB (915MHz GPU boosting to 980MHz, 6GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB (980MHz GPU boosting to 1,033MHz, 6GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost 2GB (980MHz GPU boosting to 1,033MHz, 6GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 Ti 1GB (925MHz GPU, 5.4GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 1GB (1,058 MHz GPU, 5GHz memory) (GeForce 314.22 WHQL)

Battlefield 3

Publisher: EA

From our Battlefield 3 review:

‘The infantry combat is responsive and engaging, the vehicles a grin-inducing joy ride. The fact that there are so many game types and that the maps reconfigure depending on player count means there’s a huge amount of variety in BF3’s online offering, and with more unlocks than you can shake a boom-stick at, it’ll take you ages before you’ve seen and done everything. Battle Log and Origin are awkward, but Battle Log is at least functional, making it easy to find servers with free slots or running your favourite maps.

In short, Battlefield 3’s multiplayer is a triumph, and while the single player campaign isn’t the most original, or entertaining shooter, it’s the online modes that will keep us playing for months to come.’

Battlefield 3 has garnered an almost Crysis-esque reputation as a graphical benchmark for PCs. We run the game at its highest ‘Ultra’ settings with the Field of View set to 70. We record the average and minimum frame rates during a ninety second on rails section in the campaign mission ‘Going Hunting’. The benchmark begins the moment one of the NPCs says “plans have changed”.

Click to enlarge

Battlefield 3

1,920 x 1,080, 4x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB

• • 123

  • 148

• • 121

  • 148

• • 111

  • 131

• • 105

  • 125

• • 94

  • 117

• • 94

  • 111

• • 86

  • 108

• • 76

  • 91

• • 70

  • 83

• • 69

  • 85

• • 68

  • 83

• • 64

  • 76

• • 61

  • 73

• • 58

  • 71

• • 55

  • 66

• • 51

  • 63

• • 47

  • 57

• • 47

  • 58

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Battlefield 3

2,560 x 1,600, 4x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB

• • 72

  • 87

• • 72

  • 85

• • 65

  • 75

• • 61

  • 72

• • 56

  • 70

• • 55

  • 65

• • 52

  • 65

• • 43

  • 52

• • 41

  • 50

• • 41

  • 50

• • 40

  • 48

• • 36

  • 43

• • 34

  • 41

• • 34

  • 42

• • 31

  • 38

• • 30

  • 37

• • 27

  • 32

• • 27

  • 33

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Battlefield 3

5,760 x 1,080, 4x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB

• • 49

  • 59

• • 46

  • 60

• • 43

  • 49

• • 41

  • 46

• • 38

  • 49

• • 37

  • 42

• • 34

  • 46

• • 30

  • 35

• • 28

  • 35

• • 28

  • 33

• • 27

  • 35

• • 24

  • 29

• • 23

  • 28

• • 22

  • 29

• • 20

  • 24

• • 19

  • 26

• • 18

  • 23

• • 17

  • 21

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Battlefield 3

3,840 x 2,160, 4x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB

• • 34

  • 39

• • 30

  • 37

• • 30

  • 35

• • 28

  • 35

• • 26

  • 31

0

10

20

30

40

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Battlefield 4

Publisher: EA

With DICE’s newest GPU crippler having been released this past Friday, we quickly took the opportunity to benchmark the game on AMD’s and Nvidia’s top end cards, which are the most relevant ones for this review. We’ll be adding new data to these charts for all current generation cards soon in our in-depth performance analysis of the game.

We chose to run the game at its most demanding ‘ultra’ preset so as to fully stress the cards in every way possible, except in our 4K test where we disable anti-aliasing as at so sharp a resolution we’ve found it to be almost unnecessary.

We run a 60 second benchmark on the game’s sixth campaign level, Tashgar, during the on rails section at the level’s start. We begin the recording as soon as the subtitle for the first line of dialogue appears on screen. Please note that we may use an alternative benchmark in our full performance analysis, but the excellent repeatability and highly demanding nature of this section of the game makes it suitable for our purposes here.

Click to enlarge

Battlefield 4

1,920 x 1,080, 4x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB

• • 59

  • 71

• • 55

  • 74

• • 55

  • 66

• • 51

  • 69

• • 48

  • 63

• • 42

  • 53

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Battlefield 4

2,560 x 1,600, 4x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB

• • 36

  • 44

• • 34

  • 41

• • 33

  • 45

• • 30

  • 42

• • 28

  • 38

• • 25

  • 32

0

10

20

30

40

50

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Battlefield 4

5,760 x 1,080, 4x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB

• • 25

  • 31

• • 23

  • 29

• • 21

  • 30

• • 19

  • 27

• • 18

  • 25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Battlefield 4

3,840 x 2,160, 0x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB

• • 28

  • 36

• • 27

  • 34

• • 23

  • 36

• • 21

  • 33

• • 19

  • 30

0

10

20

30

40

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

BioShock Infinite

Publisher: 2K

From our Bioshock Infinite review :

“Your character Booker’s trip to Columbia is in the interest of retrieving a girl, Elizabeth, from captivity. It’s imperative that you find her so that you can clear a pile of debts, but it’s increasingly clear as your time in columbia continues that this isn’t a simple hero’s tale. Elizabeth has the power to control “tears in reality” that are popping up all over the city.”

“It’s an adult, thoughtful and compelling work that shames many (if not most) other attempts in the medium. Bioshock Infinite is an incredibly good video game. It might be one of the best.

We use the handy in-built benchmarking tool to run a timedemo from two sections near the start of the game. However, we’ve found the game-generated results to be unreliable, so use FRAPS to record the frame rate over a 40 second sequence of gameplay during the second test. The results taken are an average of three repeated tests.

Click to enlarge

BioShock Infinite

1,920 x 1,080, Ultra Detail w. DOF

• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 Boost 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB

• • 111

  • 128

• • 102

  • 132

• • 96

  • 112

• • 88

  • 105

• • 87

  • 97

• • 82

  • 95

• • 82

  • 92

• • 67

  • 81

• • 66

  • 75

• • 64

  • 74

• • 64

  • 75

• • 58

  • 70

• • 55

  • 63

• • 52

  • 63

• • 51

  • 61

• • 48

  • 54

• • 42

  • 48

• • 42

  • 51

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

BioShock Infinite

2,560 x 1,600, Ultra Detail w. DOF

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 Boost 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB

• • 66

  • 79

• • 64

  • 73

• • 56

  • 64

• • 54

  • 56

• • 51

  • 56

• • 49

  • 56

• • 48

  • 53

• • 39

  • 47

• • 38

  • 43

• • 37

  • 42

• • 36

  • 43

• • 33

  • 40

• • 31

  • 36

• • 30

  • 36

• • 29

  • 34

• • 27

  • 30

• • 24

  • 29

• • 23

  • 26

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

BioShock Infinite

5,760 x 1,080, Ultra Detail w. DOF

• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB

• • 36

  • 45

• • 33

  • 40

• • 32

  • 39

• • 29

  • 36

• • 29

  • 34

• • 27

  • 34

• • 21

  • 27

• • 20

  • 26

• • 17

  • 21

• • 15

  • 28

• • 15

  • 26

• • 14

  • 19

• • 13

  • 24

• • 11

  • 22

• • 11

  • 20

• • 11

  • 17

• • 11

  • 16

• • 7

  • 43

0

10

20

30

40

50

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

BioShock Infinite

3,840 x 2,160, Ultra Detail w. DOF

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB

• • 30

  • 34

• • 27

  • 31

• • 26

  • 30

• • 25

  • 28

• • 23

  • 28

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Crysis 3

Publisher: EA

Mixing the open-world combat of Crysis with the more tightly scripted urban jungle of Crysis 2, Crysis 3 is a smorgasbord of visual effects and polygons galore. With DirectX 11 support, high resolution textures and incredibly detailed characters models, it’s laid down the gauntlet for the next generation of consoles and games alike when it comes to gorgeous graphics

We test using the Very High detail preset and with Very High texture resolution. lens flare and motion blur are both enabled, although due to its heavy performance impact, anti-aliasing is disabled.

As explained earlier, we use a custom macro-driven 60 seconds play-through from the single player mission Red Star Rising. The 60 seconds of gameplay takes place in a large open environment heavy on water and particle effects. Each test is repeated three times, with the average result taken.

Click to enlarge

Crysis 3

1,920 x 1,080, 0x AA, Very High Settings

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB

• • 72

  • 87

• • 71

  • 81

• • 61

  • 73

• • 61

  • 70

• • 58

  • 66

• • 57

  • 64

• • 52

  • 62

• • 48

  • 56

• • 46

  • 52

• • 41

  • 47

• • 40

  • 49

• • 40

  • 49

• • 40

  • 44

• • 37

  • 42

• • 36

  • 43

• • 31

  • 37

• • 29

  • 34

• • 27

  • 32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Crysis 3

2,560 x 1,600, 0x AA, Very High Settings

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB

• • 45

  • 49

• • 42

  • 49

• • 37

  • 42

• • 35

  • 42

• • 33

  • 41

• • 32

  • 37

• • 31

  • 38

• • 28

  • 32

• • 26

  • 30

• • 25

  • 30

• • 25

  • 30

• • 23

  • 26

• • 22

  • 27

• • 21

  • 25

• • 20

  • 24

• • 18

  • 22

• • 17

  • 20

• • 16

  • 19

0

10

20

30

40

50

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Crysis 3

5,760 x 1,080, 0x AA, Very High Settings

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB

• • 27

  • 32

• • 26

  • 32

• • 25

  • 28

• • 24

  • 28

• • 24

  • 28

• • 23

  • 26

• • 22

  • 25

• • 19

  • 21

• • 17

  • 21

• • 17

  • 21

• • 17

  • 20

• • 14

  • 18

• • 14

  • 18

• • 14

  • 17

• • 12

  • 16

• • 12

  • 15

• • 11

  • 13

• • 11

  • 13

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Crysis 3

3,840 x 2,160, 0x AA, Very High Settings

• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB

• • 18

  • 22

• • 18

  • 22

• • 18

  • 21

• • 17

  • 21

• • 15

  • 19

0

5

10

15

20

25

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

Publisher: Bethesda

From our The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim review:

‘It’s like watching Star Wars and genuinely thinking, ‘what about those poor Death Star construction workers?’ You’re missing the point: Skyrim is a huge and engaging world to explore and it treats you with great moments, from your first dragon encounter to finally being able to craft dwarven armour.’

We’ve updated our Skyrim benchmark to include the official high resolution texture pack, available as a free DLC. We set the game to its ‘Ultra’ setting and record a sixty second manual play through just outside the town of Whiterun during a thunderstorm. We use a section where we are able to run forward in a straight line for a minute without being attacked so the benchmark remains consistent, and use the third person camera view.

Click to enlarge

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

1,920 x 1,080, 8x AA 16x AF, w/ high res texture packs, DirectX 9

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB

• • 111

  • 175

• • 109

  • 160

• • 106

  • 141

• • 105

  • 154

• • 105

  • 145

• • 102

  • 133

• • 97

  • 147

• • 87

  • 120

• • 87

  • 106

• • 85

  • 103

• • 84

  • 113

• • 83

  • 106

• • 77

  • 94

• • 74

  • 99

• • 74

  • 90

• • 69

  • 90

• • 66

  • 84

• • 62

  • 79

0

50

100

150

200

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

2,560 x 1,600, 8x AA 16x AF, w/ high res texture packs, DirectX 9

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB

• • 99

  • 142

• • 91

  • 117

• • 89

  • 131

• • 85

  • 113

• • 84

  • 107

• • 81

  • 105

• • 80

  • 100

• • 63

  • 78

• • 62

  • 83

• • 62

  • 76

• • 61

  • 78

• • 59

  • 75

• • 56

  • 68

• • 55

  • 70

• • 51

  • 64

• • 47

  • 61

• • 46

  • 60

• • 43

  • 55

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

5,760 x 1,080, 8x AA 16x AF, w/ high res texture packs, DirectX 9

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB

• • 55

  • 67

• • 51

  • 65

• • 48

  • 59

• • 47

  • 60

• • 46

  • 72

• • 46

  • 72

• • 44

  • 56

• • 37

  • 45

• • 36

  • 43

• • 35

  • 42

• • 34

  • 42

• • 32

  • 41

• • 30

  • 38

• • 30

  • 37

• • 25

  • 35

• • 24

  • 32

• • 24

  • 30

• • 23

  • 32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

3,840 x 2,160, 8x AA 16x AF, w/ high res texture packs, DirectX 9

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB

• • 56

  • 71

• • 54

  • 69

• • 50

  • 68

• • 50

  • 65

• • 50

  • 64

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Unigine Valley 1.0 Benchmark

Publisher: Unigine

We’ve also updated our testing to include Unigine’s free Valley 1.0 benchmarking tool. It works well as a graphics benchmark as it is GPU limited and is thus incredibly taxing on the GPU whilst placing the CPU under very little stress. It should therefore be repeatable for most users running half decent systems.

We run the full benchmark at 2,560 x 1,600,with Ultra detail.

Unigine Valley 1.0 Benchmark

2,560 x 1,600, Ultra Detail

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB

• • 3134

• • 2655

• • 2587

• • 2544

• • 2298

• • 2157

• • 1989

• • 1934

• • 1772

• • 1636

• • 1590

• • 1546

• • 1492

• • 1407

• • 1347

• • 1146

• • 1142

• • 1073

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Score (higher is better)

• Score

Power Consumption (Idle and Gaming)

In order to get an idea of a GPU’s real world power draw, we run our Crysis 3 2,560 x 1,600 benchmark, which is currently our toughest single screen GPU test. We use a watt meter to measure the maximum total system power draw during the test, and also take an idle reading at the Windows desktop (2,560 x 1,600).

Power consumption (idle)

Windows 7 Aero Desktop

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB

• 103

• 106

• 107

• 108

• 108

• 108

• 109

• 110

• 110

• 110

• 111

• 111

• 111

• 112

• 114

• 114

• 122

• 127

0

25

50

75

100

125

System Power Consumption in Watts

Power consumption (load)

Crysis 3 (2,560 x 1,600, 0x AA, Very High Settings)

• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 280X 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB

• 243

• 244

• 260

• 266

• 277

• 295

• 300

• 314

• 333

• 344

• 350

• 352

• 356

• 402

• 415

• 418

• 426

• 470

0

100

200

300

400

500

System Power Consumption in Watts

Thermal Performance (Idle and Gaming)

Thermal output is measured using Unigine’s free Heaven 3.0 benchmark, as its DirectX 11 features will stress all parts of a modern GPU. We leave all GPU fan profiles and settings as they come. We use the default Unigine settings with a resolution of 2,560 x 1,600 and leave the benchmark running for ten minutes so that temperatures plateau. We record the peak GPU temperature using GPU-Z, and present the data as the delta T (the difference between the GPU temperature and the ambient temperature in our labs). We also take an idle reading at the Windows desktop (2,560 x 1,600).

Heat (idle)

Windows 7 Aero Desktop

• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHz Edition
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB

• 6

• 7

• 8

• 9

• 10

• 10

• 10

• 10

• 11

• 11

• 11

• 11

• 12

• 14

• 16

• 19

• 25

0

5

10

15

20

25

Delta T in °C

Heat (load)

Unigine Heaven Benchmark (2,560 x 1,600, default settings)

• AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti
• AMD Radeon R9 270X 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB with Boost
• AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GHZ Editon
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB

• 40

• 41

• 43

• 50

• 50

• 54

• 54

• 54

• 55

• 55

• 57

• 59

• 59

• 59

• 63

• 71

• 72

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Delta T in °C

*As there is no stock model of the AMD Radeon HD 7850 2GB, and we do not have stock samples of the AMD Radeon HD 7790 1GB or AMD Radeon R9 280X, they cannot be included in the thermal performance graphs

Overclocking

To push the GTX 780 Ti to its limits, we fired up EVGA Precision X, our favourite tool for the job when it comes to Nvidia cards. As ever, we began by raising the power and thermal thresholds to the maximum allowed, which are 106 percent and 95°C respectively.

We eventually managed to add 224MHz to the base clock, taking it to an absolutely massive 1,100MHz. The boost clock at this level was 1,152Mhz, but we regularly witnessed it hitting a whopping 1,230Mhz. This base clock gain is a whole 26 percent, one of the largest we’ve seen for a very long time. How much of this is down to Nvidia’s Power Balancing feature and how much is down to sheer sample luck (or selection, if you’re the cynical type), we simply can’t be sure right now. We also added a respectable 11 percent to the memory clock, taking it to 1.95GHz (7.8GHz effective) for a new total memory bandwidth of 374.4GB/sec.

During our testing, we couldn’t quite believe how far we were able to push this new iteration of the GK110 GPU, but the card remained stable at these clocks for extended stress tests. We pumped an extra 75mV through it, the maximum allowed in Precision X, but saw no real increase in temperature. Fan noise did become much more noticeable, but it was still within the realms of tolerable, much more so than the R9 290X in Uber Mode.

As you can see, the results are pretty phenomenal. As well as extending its lead on GTX Titan and the R9 290X, the GTX 780 Ti even begins to surpass the dual GPU GTX 690 and HD 7990 cards.

Overclocking – Battlefield 3

2,560 x 1,600, 4x AA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB (OC)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB

• • 76

  • 88

• • 72

  • 85

• • 72

  • 87

• • 65

  • 75

• • 61

  • 72

• • 56

  • 70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Overclocking – Crysis 3

2,560 x 1,600, 0x AA, Very High Settings

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB (OC)
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB

• • 45

  • 49

• • 42

  • 50

• • 42

  • 49

• • 37

  • 42

• • 35

  • 42

• • 33

  • 41

0

10

20

30

40

50

Frames Per Second

• Minimum
• Average

Overclocking – Unigine Valley 1.0 Benchmark

2,560 x 1,600, Ultra Detail

• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB (OC)
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB
• GeForce GTX Titan 6GB
• AMD Radeon HD 7990 6GB
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3GB
• AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB

• • 3153

• • 3134

• • 2655

• • 2587

• • 2544

• • 2298

• • 2157

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Score (higher is better)

• Score

Performance Analysis

The GTX 780 Ti gets off to a great start in the tried and tested Battlefield 3 benchmark as it’s at least 5 percent quicker than the GTX Titan in every test and a whole 13 percent quicker at 4K. All results for the R9 290X are in its high performance Uber Mode, yet even here the GTX 780 Ti is almost in another league, outperforming it on minimum frame rates by 13 percent or more. The two are a closer match on averages, but the upper hand is still with the GTX 780 Ti.

Our current Battlefield 4 benchmark causes a drop in minimum frame rates for Nvidia cards, so both the R9 290 and R9 290X emerge victorious here. This means the R9 290X doesn’t slow down to what we’d consider unplayable in the 5,760 x 1,080 or 4K tests whereas the GTX 780 Ti does. That said, the average frame rates show that the GTX 780 Ti is typically able to keep pace with AMD’s cards, and even nudges ahead.

Click to enlarge
The GTX 780 Ti is the fastest single GPU in BioShock Infinite too, again beating both the GTX Titan and R9 290X. Compared to the latter, its minimum frame rates are 10 percent higher at 1080p and 2,560 x 1,600, and this lead actually improves once you make the jump to the higher resolutions of three screen Eyefinity/Surround or 4K, with the new card performing particularly well again at the latter resolution.

Crysis 3 actually gives the GTX Titan the upper hand in our benchmark, although only by a tiny margin. Meanwhile, the R9 290X finds itself again outpaced at the lower resolutions, although this time only by about 5 or 6 percent. Across three screens and at 4K, the two cards are neck and neck, but the GTX 780 Ti stays significantly quieter than the R9 290X at this level of performance.

All high end cards can now make easy work out of Skyrim, even at 4K, but the GTX 780 Ti is again the single GPU victor here. In fact, its single GPU nature works in its favour too, as its minimum frame rates are evidently more stable than the dual GPU counterparts, that tend to suffer from stuttering, as the 5,760 x 1,080 test demonstrates.

Click to enlarge
Our synthetic benchmark, Unigine Valley, places the card just 3 percent ahead of GTX Titan but a whole 16 percent ahead of the GTX 780 and even more so over the AMD Radeon R9 290X.

Power consumption is higher than we’re used to seeing from Nvidia, with the extra processing power and higher clock speeds taking our system’s power consumption to over 400W and adding 50W to the result with GTX Titan. Nevertheless, it’s still a lower figure than both the AMD Hawaii cards, despite easily being able to outperform both.

Thermal performance is exactly in line with both other GK110 cards, the GTX 780 and GTX Titan, and as such the GTX 780 Ti achieves a delta T results that’s 12°C less than the R9 290X, which targets 95°C by default and becomes slower or noisier (or both) if you decrease this target.

Conclusion

With the GTX 780 Ti, Nvidia has once again taken the single GPU performance crown. While the card undoubtedly demands a high investment, it’s not priced as ludicrously as the GTX Titan first was (and still is). One thing is very clear about GTX Titan now, and that’s that it should only ever be considered by those who require its high speed compute performance. For gamers, the GTX 780 Ti is the new king.

There’s no doubt that you get a lot of performance from the GTX 780 Ti, but whether that performance is akin to the £130-£160 premium the card commands over the GTX 780 and R9 290X is another matter. In the case of the former, the answer is certainly no, as the GTX 780 Ti is approximately 40 percent more expensive but only about 20 percent faster, and performance is pretty much the only thing that separates them. Compared to the R9 290X, however, investing in the GTX 780 Ti also sees you investing in a card that’s not just faster, but more efficient, cooler, quieter and also better built. Its overclocking potential is fantastic too, although it’s too early to say if our experience will be close to the norm or a rare exception.

Click to enlarge
You also have to consider the ecosystem that you’re buying into. Nvidia has its GeForce Experience software, while AMD now has its own answer in the form of Raptr. Both companies now also offer compelling game bundles too, so the key distinction for most people is likely to be AMD’s Mantle API and TrueAudio DSP versus Nvidia’s G-Sync. We’ve seen the latter already, and it does look impressive, while AMD’s Mantle is soon to be demoed at the AMD Developer Summit next week.

Mantle is aimed at boosting performance, but it comes with the catch of requiring developer support. However, with DICE already onboard and other developers also recently pledging support, there’s at least a chance that the technology could take off well. TrueAudio is also not proven at this point, but again does have a handful of developers backing it.

G-Sync, on the other hand, doesn’t improve game performance but rather seeks to improve the general gaming experience. It comes with the need to invest in new monitors, but this is something we can see people willing to do given that the advantages G-Sync brings are not game-specific, but universal. For many facing this choice, it’s likely to be a case of wait and see.

Click to enlarge
In the end, the GTX 780 Ti is something of a dream card for gamers, as it excels in practically every way you’d want it to. Sadly, its price means that for most of us it will remain a dream, as even for those currently shopping around £400 mark it’s likely to be too big a step up. Instead, many high-end shoppers are eagerly awaiting custom cooled variants of the R9 290X (and R9 290), to see whether AMD’s board partners can better tame the Hawaii GPU and make it a more convincing purchase over the GTX 780.

For a lucky few, however, the kind of performance the GTX 780 Ti is capable of right now will be enough to warrant an upgrade immediately.

More on Bit-Tech:
AMD Radeon R9 290X Review
Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan Review
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Review
AMD Radeon R9 290 Review
Is the R9 290X too hot?

SOURCE:http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2013/11/07/nvidia-gtx-780-ti-3gb-review/1