Read the entire post before leaving a remark. postive or negative
The 7990 will never be released. No market for a $1000 gaming card.
Nvidia and AMD both creeped the high end single GPU card prices to $600 ea. My GTX295 was only $600, now we got a GTX690 for $1000.
The real kicker is dual GPU cards were never top-end GPUs both rather more mid range GPUs on 1 Board. AMD screwed us when they released the 6990 with 2 6970s on 1 board, nvidia at that point freaked out and couldn't release a GTX590 because of heat issues.
Nvidia came around with the 600 series and released the GTX680 and they slapped AMD in the face with a GTX690. for what cost? $1000 freaking dollars.
Personally, I won't do it. It's not the money but more so the cooling. I rather have 2 videocards "GTX680s" blowing out of the back of my case than 1 card "GTX690" blowing inn heat from 1 GPU and out from the other GPU. The GTX690 should be a watercooled card only and for that price the people buying them and using them are most likely watercooling anyways.
AMD will just have the pull the white knight out "HD8000 series" and give Nvidia yet another war.
now realisticly a GTX680 or HD7970 can both play BF3 maxed out @ 1920x1200 @ 60 FPS, granted the dumb dumb who build the computer didn't cheap out on a CPU. Memory bottlenecks and CPU bottlenecks tend to be a problem more so that people think. I'm not talking about the real big dumb dumbs who game with 16GB of ram, I want to see some 2200Ghz+ ram setups when pushing a GTX680 or HD7970.
This isn't a flame post both either sides. I work with both and both IMO are great at this point. I'm just burnt out of questions from customers on the forums or when they come into my shop about the HD7990
1). as advertisement: as we have seen, the 690 has generated a lot of hype for the entire Kepler series as well as Nvidia, the fact that Nvidia only makes a few of these and uses really top-notch components to build the card further supports this point. the 690 is there for making headlines and getting people to buy the "cheaper" Kepler cards because people will be in the mindset of "Nvidia GTX 600 series are the best!!!".
2). for really rich builders, the 690 is the only realistic way to quad-fire four 680 chips for high-res 3D gaming (triple monitor 3D or beyond). even with water cooling and some of the best socket 2011 mobos, quad SLI still cannot be efficiently supported and scaling is often terrible going from the 3rd to the 4th card. you avoid this by only running two PCIe 3.0x16 dual chip cards, avoiding all the extra overhead on the mobo-end of running four PCIe lanes for graphics
for these reasons, I think it's worthwhile for AMD to make a 7990 if they can beat 690's performance
there is definitely a market for these cards... I'm going to buy the 7990 as soon as it releases... I would of bought the 690 but I like the way AMD handles multi monitor setups... I'm running 3 27" monitors for dirt 2 with the logitech g27 racing wheel, and for bf3 or whatever else I want to play.... multi monitor was totally worth it, the gaming experience is quite a bit better with it, especially simulation games like race cars and jets....
I'm not a "rich builder" either... But computers are my hobby, computers and fishing.... So i spend thousands per year on computer systems, video games, and fishing lures and rods/reels...
i don't mind spending 1k on a graphics card if it delivers well beyond anything below it... but i don't want to pay 1k for a card that is only 5 percent faster than something thats 500 dollars.