Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Images, Benchmarks and Specifications of AMD's R9-290X Surface

Last response: in News comments
Share
September 23, 2013 6:23:11 PM

Too bad that AvP is a AMD gaming evolved title and known to perform better on AMD GPUs.

That said it is interesting how these benchmarks show it pulling ahead more with AA enabled than without AA enabled. That's a good sign.

Again we must take these with a grain of salt but the PCB design looks just like a standard Sapphire designed card so it might be real.
Score
3
September 23, 2013 6:30:35 PM

It'll be interesting to see where things go with the new cards. The Titan card is a interesting card where its part gaming card part production card. So I'd say if this card is a full gaming card that it may be a bit of a unfair comparison and I'd be more interested in the normal retail cards. That fall in line with the 7970 7950 style rather then the $1k cards or the Dual GPU cards.
Score
-10
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
September 23, 2013 6:32:40 PM

Come on AMD price it so low that Nvidia gets a heart attack. ha ha.
Score
35
September 23, 2013 6:32:54 PM

Let the price wars begin!!

But more seriously...We must keep an open mind, IF these benchmarks are true, coupled with a lower price, more ram, more bandwidth, better opencl performance, better overclockability (if the 7xxx is any indication), the Nvidia 780 and the Titian are effectively crippled.
More benchmarks: View this thread in the forums for the pics, the reply system hates picutures.

Score
8
September 23, 2013 6:36:58 PM

beta212 said:
We must keep an open mind, *IF* these benchmarks are true, coupled with a lower price, more ram, more bandwidth, better opencl performance, better overclockability (if the 7xxx is any indication), the Nvidia 780 and the Titian are effectively crippled.


I remember hearing that when the 680 originally came out that it was org supposed to be the 660Ti. And the 780 is just a lowered down version of the Titan. So I get what you are saying but I have a feeling that AMD/Nvidia both do the holding out game waiting to see what the other person does then one upping them all the time.

THIS is what the CPU wars should be. I mean we can be fan boys over each brand but thsi is what we want form AMD/INTEL.
Score
12
September 23, 2013 6:47:35 PM

In all honesty this card will make Titan/780 owners feel silly supporting what was CLEARLY price gouging by Nvidia. But then again, it should have been obvious from the get go considering an overclocked HD 7970 meets the 780 at half the cost...
Score
26
September 23, 2013 6:49:35 PM

Statements in a Forbes interview by AMD says that they will not price any single GPU near $1000 and all rumors point towards the 290x at $600 or less, $50 or more cheaper then the 780.
Score
13
September 23, 2013 6:59:29 PM

bigshootr8 said:
THIS is what the CPU wars should be. I mean we can be fan boys over each brand but thsi is what we want form AMD/INTEL.

There is no price war nor will there be any on the CPU side any time soon since very little mainstream software can make use of the processing power already available. Until enough mainstream applications start requiring quad-cores to threaten Intel's market share, I would not expect a major market shift for another 5-10 years.

Another possibility is that applications and games with embarrassingly parallel computations will simply shove those onto OpenCL and not really care how fast (or slow) the CPU actually is as long as there are sufficient OpenCL resources available.
Score
-1
September 23, 2013 7:07:29 PM

InvalidError said:
bigshootr8 said:
THIS is what the CPU wars should be. I mean we can be fan boys over each brand but thsi is what we want form AMD/INTEL.

There is no price war nor will there be any on the CPU side any time soon since very little mainstream software can make use of the processing power already available. Until enough mainstream applications start requiring quad-cores to threaten Intel's market share, I would not expect a major market shift for another 5-10 years.

Another possibility is that applications and games with embarrassingly parallel computations will simply shove those onto OpenCL and not really care how fast (or slow) the CPU actually is as long as there are sufficient OpenCL resources available.


I'm just saying that the cpu market right now is very stagnant and a lot of that is because intel doesn't really have anyone to push them.
All I was really saying was that with amd and nvidia really pushing each other it would be nice if AMD had the same ability with their CPU line since they are the only other desktop CPU out.

Time will tell with GPU's exciting to see the advancement with things. Although one has to ask themselves outside a game like star citizen what do we really need the extra power for at the current moment. Any high end AMD chip now or Nvidia chip now can pretty much do w.e it wants with the games that are out now with rare exceptions 3d/4k/and multi screens.
Score
2
September 23, 2013 7:28:40 PM

bigshootr8 said:
It'll be interesting to see where things go with the new cards. The Titan card is a interesting card where its part gaming card part production card. So I'd say if this card is a full gaming card that it may be a bit of a unfair comparison and I'd be more interested in the normal retail cards. That fall in line with the 7970 7950 style rather then the $1k cards or the Dual GPU cards.


The difference is that AMD does not cripple their gaming cards from being able to run production apps.

While the FireGLs are designed with production in mind (top of the crop silicon much like server CPUs), a HD7970 eats a Titan up in OpenCL (hence why AMD is so popular with the various Coin mining types which heavily use Open CL) since NVidia makes their gaming GPUs do pretty poor in OpenCL. NVidia wants you to spend a few $K on their Quadros instead.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-o...

I don't see why AMD will change that now unless they get greedy.
Score
4
September 23, 2013 7:29:38 PM

I would like to see a bit different more efficient design to the stock gpu. Any innovation when it comes to noise and temperature? Come on AMD.
Score
0
September 23, 2013 7:35:59 PM

CaptainTom said:
In all honesty this card will make Titan/780 owners feel silly supporting what was CLEARLY price gouging by Nvidia. But then again, it should have been obvious from the get go considering an overclocked HD 7970 meets the 780 at half the cost...


jimmysmitty said:
bigshootr8 said:
It'll be interesting to see where things go with the new cards. The Titan card is a interesting card where its part gaming card part production card. So I'd say if this card is a full gaming card that it may be a bit of a unfair comparison and I'd be more interested in the normal retail cards. That fall in line with the 7970 7950 style rather then the $1k cards or the Dual GPU cards.


The difference is that AMD does not cripple their gaming cards from being able to run production apps.

While the FireGLs are designed with production in mind (top of the crop silicon much like server CPUs), a HD7970 eats a Titan up in OpenCL (hence why AMD is so popular with the various Coin mining types which heavily use Open CL) since NVidia makes their gaming GPUs do pretty poor in OpenCL. NVidia wants you to spend a few $K on their Quadros instead.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-o...

I don't see why AMD will change that now unless they get greedy.


But you still run into things that are either opencl or cuda favored or this game is favored by this amd card or this nvidia card there isn't a constant.

Look at how things turned out with tomb raider with nvidia cards. upon release the cards had a hard time same could be said for amd cards with metro last light light its not a clear yes or no answer.

Although going back to production work I think you would need to find a production environment where both cuda and opencl could be tested to really give it a go.

Also, saying OpenCL is poorly ran on nvidia cards is really a mute point thats like saying Physx is poorly ran on AMD cards. Both companies utilize different tech. It's fair when you can take a apples to apples comparison Havok versus Physx versus CUDA versus OPEN CL in a application or game that uses it.
Score
-3
September 23, 2013 7:46:26 PM

Nvidia has come across as pretty arrogant in their releases over the past 18 months... I really hope that AMD can lay the smack down on them with this release. We need more competition at the top end.

Hopefully AMD fixes their various driver woes with this launch, as well. If they ever get their software support as good as Nvidia's, consumers will really win big time.
Score
6
September 23, 2013 7:49:29 PM

BigMack70 said:
Nvidia has come across as pretty arrogant in their releases over the past 18 months... I really hope that AMD can lay the smack down on them with this release. We need more competition at the top end.

Hopefully AMD fixes their various driver woes with this launch, as well. If they ever get their software support as good as Nvidia's, consumers will really win big time.


And this wasn't arrogant of AMD? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH6XayaLTw8

Companies only push the envelop when they feel the pressure. AMD needs to push the envelop to survive due to financial reasons. Nvidia has never felt the pressure money wise so they react to the product rather then their internal pressure.
Score
-5
September 23, 2013 8:02:55 PM

I am not referring to the marketing, which is expected to present its side in the most one sided way possible, from either company. That's not arrogance, that's their job.

I am referring primarily to:
-Nvidia releasing and pricing GK104 as if it were a high end card
-Nvidia releasing GK110 absurdly late and launching it with the laughable price of $1000 (Titan)
Score
4
September 23, 2013 8:04:50 PM

And this wasn't arrogant of AMD? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH6XayaLTw8

Companies only push the envelop when they feel the pressure. AMD needs to push the envelop to survive due to financial reasons. Nvidia has never felt the pressure money wise so they react to the product rather then their internal pressure.

So what your saying is that because of said
Score
-4
September 23, 2013 8:09:44 PM

... "Nvidia price gouging" along with clever marketing gimmicks, Nvidia never felt the sting of financial troubles, while AMD looks out for the consumer with more realistic pricing, and offers atypical of most companies just to stay afloat in the graphics fad known as Nvidia?
Score
-2
September 23, 2013 8:35:05 PM

I Switched to AMD already(previously I am all-Nvidia user), because Nvidia thinks I am a ATM machine by charging $1000 on TITAN, luckily i never fall into that trick. GCN is also the future with console are GCN optimized.
Score
3
September 23, 2013 8:46:44 PM

bigshootr8 said:
it would be nice if AMD had the same ability with their CPU line since they are the only other desktop CPU out.

The biggest problem for CPUs is the lack of mainstream software that actually needs more processing power than is already available from both AMD and Intel. Right now, the only things that require that much processing power are professional-oriented suites and the highest-end games that cater mostly to twitch-gamers.

Without CPU-intensive mainstream applications to make most people wish they had faster CPUs the same way we did 10 years ago when we still had to wait for word processors to complete page formatting changes or spreadsheets to re-calculate after updating cells, there is little low/mid-range market demand to justify increasing processing power offer in those segments at the expense of more profitable higher-end segments.

If a mainstream killer app that cannot be OpenCL'd and requires the equivalent of an i7-4770 or FX-8350 to be somewhat usable comes out, things might shuffle quickly to accommodate that. But at this point in time, I cannot imagine anything that would require that much processing power while being a nearly universal must-have like h264 is - with nearly everyone using Youtube, Netflix and other video streaming services on a regular basis, most people wouldn't put up with a computer or tablet that lacks sufficient processing power to handle h264 for long. h265 and 4k might be the next biggest mainstream processing time sink on the horizon but by the time they become mainstream, most IGPs will decode that in hardware and make it a non-issue.

So, personally, I blame software for the stagnation between AMD and Intel: without CPU-intensive mainstream software to force average users to demand or desire faster CPUs, most of them will settle low-end CPUs that are already more than enough for most of their other everyday tasks and the gap between low-end and high-end will only continue to grow wider both on prices and performance: price pressure at the low-end and price inflation at the high-end due to marginalization and hollowing out of the mid-range segments.

If you want a "CPU war," first you need to create demand for such processing power.
Score
3
September 23, 2013 8:56:09 PM

tomfreak said:
I Switched to AMD already(previously I am all-Nvidia user), because Nvidia thinks I am a ATM machine by charging $1000 on TITAN, luckily i never fall into that trick. GCN is also the future with console are GCN optimized.


Why do people think this? I am all for consoles finally moving to PC hardware but there are still factors that will limit the optimizations of the consoles moving over to the PC.

One will be the software. The PS4 is going to have proprietary software and probably will mainly use OpenGL. That means the majority of optimizations, unless most devs go OpenGL, will be very limited. The XB1 will use the Windows 8 kernel and will be DX11 but still wont quite be Windows.

Second is the hardware. While it is PC based (x86/DX11/OGL4.2+ etc) it is still designed for just those consoles. That means that unless you have a configuration just like them, which is impossible since they have their own set of hardware and drivers that wont be released to the public (such as the EDRAM on the XB1) it still will require further optimizations.

What it really means is that it will be easier for devs to develop titles and release them without the need to port so much. Its kinda funny as most every game is developed on the PC and ported to console then ported back to PC if it comes to PC.

As I said, this should make that easier but since there is Intel/AMD/NVidia the combination of hardware will make it neigh impossible to optimize for. Intel has the CPU performance and its a back and forth between AMD/NVidia with NVidia being top right now and possibly AMD soon.

I just want my HD7970 to feel some pressure from some games soon. Its capable of such amazing feats but help back by current gen consoles.
Score
0
September 23, 2013 9:03:28 PM

36ish more hours we will see it.
Score
-2
September 23, 2013 10:40:50 PM

Quote:
In all honesty this card will make Titan/780 owners feel silly supporting what was CLEARLY price gouging by Nvidia. But then again, it should have been obvious from the get go considering an overclocked HD 7970 meets the 780 at half the cost...


In all honesty. You're probably wrong. Titan will have been out for about 8 months if these AMD cards are released in a month. There is always going to be something faster in development around the corner. Anyone dropping $1000 on a video isn't shopping for bargains and has been enjoying the best of the best for half a year.

As for the 2nd part. It baffles me how often the idiotic comparison in the format of, product "x" overclocked to the limit is just as fast as product "y" running at stock speeds, so why would any moron buy product "y", is made. Unless product "y" is clock locked, which is an extremely rare occurrence in these comparisons, then it is a meaningless comparison.

I own a 7970GE card and it will not compete with an OC'd GTX 780. The 780 has a significant advantage in efficiency, and when comparing multi-GPU setups it turns into a laugher for the 780/Titan setup. I saved quite a bit of money going with the 7970, but I'm not blind to the fact that the Nvidia cards that cost more are superior in almost all aspects except cost.
Score
1
September 23, 2013 11:18:04 PM

With such a huge 512-bit memory interface I doubt they'll be able to price it very low...
Score
-2
September 24, 2013 12:25:03 AM

$600
this is what everyone is saying, but no, we will say $1000, right. Right. So you read it people. Tom's Hardware says the price will be $1000, so don't stop buying Titan's at that ridiculous price, or 780s.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 2:40:38 AM

If it's a new generation, it can't possibly be even NEAR the price of Titan. Usually top GPUs from new generations launch to the 450-550 range.
Score
-1
September 24, 2013 2:54:34 AM

Does anyone understand this naming scheme? It looks like the R9 is Radeon 9000 series and the 290 is the model so I think R9-280 would be the next lower card in the series.
Score
1
September 24, 2013 3:21:14 AM

If the Rx signifies generation, and the whole reason for going to a new naming scheme was because they're running out of generations with the current naming scheme, why did they start on 9? This makes absolutely no sense.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 3:56:19 AM

Titan will not be so lonely anymore on the Graphics Card Hierarchy Chart...
Score
1
September 24, 2013 4:46:31 AM

"There was no word on what the card would cost, though we can either expect it to be priced in-line or slightly above the GTX Titan."

Almost every other tech site is expecting this GPU to be priced around $650. Where did you get "in-line or slightly above the GTX Titan."?

These look like the same benches posted on Legit Reviews yesterday morning.
Score
1
September 24, 2013 4:47:35 AM

"There was no word on what the card would cost, though we can either expect it to be priced in-line or slightly above the GTX Titan."

Almost every other tech site is expecting this GPU to be priced around $650. Where did you get "in-line or slightly above the GTX Titan."?

These look like the same benches posted on Legit Reviews yesterday morning.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 5:49:45 AM

Why oh why is everything named 'Surface' all of a sudden? It's like everything in the world was 'Turbo' back in the 80's...
Score
1
September 24, 2013 8:26:39 AM

if its under 600 bucks, totally worth it, and you could expect many pc gamers to take notice. if its priced in line with 780 or Titan, only those with money to burn will consider it. I guess it depends on how badly AMD wants people to use their products.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 10:03:28 AM

$550 game changer. I hope they price this low so nvidia is forced to drop their inflated prices in the high end.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 11:02:09 AM

To be honest - I was pretty angry when Nvidia priced the Titan at $1,000. Looking back at my video card upgrades, one of the best cards (and best value) was a 5870 that I picked up in October 2009. That card was a game changer and was $379. Meanwhile, Nvidia was pushing their what, 280 for $500? There are folks still using a 5870 and it's still a good card. I am currently running a 680 which I picked up in April 2012 for $499. While it was a game changer of sorts, it does not match the value of my old 5870. If this new AMD card is in the $500 range, and is at or near the Titan performance, it will be time for a shift back to AMD.
Score
1
September 24, 2013 12:26:54 PM

i will definitely buy one if:
1-doesn't heat up like an oven
2-doesn't consume too much power ( i mean a 600 W be enough for 1 card)
3-price being between 500$-700$
that would be pretty Jaw Smashing!it can out shine 780 and TITAN+a price like i said=Happy shopping time!.to me noise doesn't matter at all asi use headsets and driver will get better and better by time so no need to worry about that...
Score
1
September 24, 2013 12:55:38 PM

wanderer11 said:
Does anyone understand this naming scheme? It looks like the R9 is Radeon 9000 series and the 290 is the model so I think R9-280 would be the next lower card in the series.


Larry Bob said:
If the Rx signifies generation, and the whole reason for going to a new naming scheme was because they're running out of generations with the current naming scheme, why did they start on 9? This makes absolutely no sense.


R9 means the gategory (the third number in the old naming system). So r9 will allways be the "best" possible GPU R8 the second best R7 the third and so on. Very much like intel i7, i5 and i3.
So the first part means the gategory or GPU used in the card.
The second number in the generation so if the best card now is R9 290x the next generation will be R9 390x (in old numbering system the first number).
The last two nubers are for the situation within the gategory so R9 290x and R9 270 use propably (this has not been confirmed) the same GPU core, but the later is a cut down version or has lower clockspeed (like 7970 and 7950 are now) (so the same as with the old system).
All in all this makes it very easy to recognise the GPUs. R9 will allways mean the flagship GPU core and last two the relative situation within that gategory or GPU core.

If I change the old AMD CPU number to this new system it would mean something like this:
7970 = R9 170
7950 = R9 150
7870 = R8 170
7850 = R8 150
7790 = R7 190
7770 = R7 170
7750 = R7 150
and so on...
if we think that 7970 is considered the first generatio on GCN. it is actually sensible why they release the new cards to directly RX 2XX (so second generation). It could allso mean that they will rename some of these old cards to the new naming scheme! So if you see in the shop r9 170 you know that it is just old 7970 renamed and not the new r9 270 (if there will be any card that is named like that when 290 seems to be the new flagship...)
Score
0
September 24, 2013 12:56:31 PM

If they priced this at $600, I would actually buy one.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 12:59:53 PM

No one is going to pay $1000 to meet-or-beat Titan. A $650 GTX 780 beats Titan when overclocked. You have a show on your hands if this new card is $650 or less.
Score
2
September 24, 2013 3:08:23 PM

hannibal said:
wanderer11 said:
Does anyone understand this naming scheme? It looks like the R9 is Radeon 9000 series and the 290 is the model so I think R9-280 would be the next lower card in the series.


Larry Bob said:
If the Rx signifies generation, and the whole reason for going to a new naming scheme was because they're running out of generations with the current naming scheme, why did they start on 9? This makes absolutely no sense.


R9 means the gategory (the third number in the old naming system). So r9 will allways be the "best" possible GPU R8 the second best R7 the third and so on. Very much like intel i7, i5 and i3.
So the first part means the gategory or GPU used in the card.
The second number in the generation so if the best card now is R9 290x the next generation will be R9 390x (in old numbering system the first number).
The last two nubers are for the situation within the gategory so R9 290x and R9 270 use propably (this has not been confirmed) the same GPU core, but the later is a cut down version or has lower clockspeed (like 7970 and 7950 are now) (so the same as with the old system).
All in all this makes it very easy to recognise the GPUs. R9 will allways mean the flagship GPU core and last two the relative situation within that gategory or GPU core.

If I change the old AMD CPU number to this new system it would mean something like this:
7970 = R9 170
7950 = R9 150
7870 = R8 170
7850 = R8 150
7790 = R7 190
7770 = R7 170
7750 = R7 150
and so on...
if we think that 7970 is considered the first generatio on GCN. it is actually sensible why they release the new cards to directly RX 2XX (so second generation). It could allso mean that they will rename some of these old cards to the new naming scheme! So if you see in the shop r9 170 you know that it is just old 7970 renamed and not the new r9 270 (if there will be any card that is named like that when 290 seems to be the new flagship...)


According to the LegitReviews leak the 7870 equivalent (Curacao XT) is called the R9-260/70.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 3:20:30 PM

kinggremlin said:
Quote:
In all honesty this card will make Titan/780 owners feel silly supporting what was CLEARLY price gouging by Nvidia. But then again, it should have been obvious from the get go considering an overclocked HD 7970 meets the 780 at half the cost...


In all honesty. You're probably wrong. Titan will have been out for about 8 months if these AMD cards are released in a month. There is always going to be something faster in development around the corner. Anyone dropping $1000 on a video isn't shopping for bargains and has been enjoying the best of the best for half a year.

As for the 2nd part. It baffles me how often the idiotic comparison in the format of, product "x" overclocked to the limit is just as fast as product "y" running at stock speeds, so why would any moron buy product "y", is made. Unless product "y" is clock locked, which is an extremely rare occurrence in these comparisons, then it is a meaningless comparison.

I own a 7970GE card and it will not compete with an OC'd GTX 780. The 780 has a significant advantage in efficiency, and when comparing multi-GPU setups it turns into a laugher for the 780/Titan setup. I saved quite a bit of money going with the 7970, but I'm not blind to the fact that the Nvidia cards that cost more are superior in almost all aspects except cost.


I got the lulz when I noticed you were trying to demean someone elses comparison and stating the the 7970 is demolished by a OC 780 when the 7970 was released nearly 2 years ago.

I would sincerely hope, as a Fan of AMD, that the 780 would be able to compete with a product that was released even a year prior. Strictly for the sake of competition.

The price for both competitors have been pretty close +/- $50 for the most part. Nvidia's latest offerings have a far more efficient cooling as part of what people have complained about the most, which raises costs quite a bit. I can only hope AMD put some more time into their Graphics cards HSF as they said they would.

To suggest that the nvidia card is superior because its more expensive kinda gives me a view of yourself stuffing a foot in your mouth with a tattoo stating "Idiotic" just for the fact that you truly believe that.
Score
1
September 24, 2013 3:26:27 PM

cmi86 said:
$550 game changer. I hope they price this low so nvidia is forced to drop their inflated prices in the high end.


This.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 3:27:31 PM

twztechman said:
To be honest - I was pretty angry when Nvidia priced the Titan at $1,000. Looking back at my video card upgrades, one of the best cards (and best value) was a 5870 that I picked up in October 2009. That card was a game changer and was $379. Meanwhile, Nvidia was pushing their what, 280 for $500? There are folks still using a 5870 and it's still a good card. I am currently running a 680 which I picked up in April 2012 for $499. While it was a game changer of sorts, it does not match the value of my old 5870. If this new AMD card is in the $500 range, and is at or near the Titan performance, it will be time for a shift back to AMD.


non reference 5850 purchased in 2010 and still goin strong.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 5:04:20 PM

Geforce Titan released 7 months ago... congrats ATI/AMD on FINALLY making a product that gets +2 fps more than the Titan on a game title that was originally DESIGNED to be played with ATI/AMD hardware.
Score
0
September 24, 2013 5:38:59 PM

AMD, I promise I'll buy two of these if you fix the drivers for SLI/Eyefinity configurations! At this point I can only go with overpriced nVidia!
Score
1
September 24, 2013 6:44:55 PM

If they price a die that large LOW, they will just lose more money. People are dumb. They are currently making ZERO, and NV is making 2/3 what they did in 2007. Nobody is gouging any of you or they would be making more than the last 6yrs right? They are far below the 800mil/year they made ~2007. You can say NV is gouging you when they make MORE MONEY, not LESS MONEY. How dumb are people these days?

Meanwhile, AMD makes...wait for it...ZERO. Because why? They don't charge enough, give price cuts and keep feeding you fools free games...LOL. Just keep asking for free stuff, AMD just keeps getting weaker and weaker. They've only LOST 6Bil in the last 10yrs total...Not bad I guess. That's a great way to stay in business...ROFL
/sarcasm
Score
-1
September 24, 2013 8:52:46 PM

Guarantee you the price will be in line with the rest of the pricing for the previous 2-3 generations of cards(4-6 years), or right around $450-600 for the top two tier cards. There is just no reason to price new generation cards any higher without seriously hurting your sales in the short 1-2 year life span these cards will populate modern computers.

Besides the gtx760, nvidia is price gouging every card above it, especially the 780 and titan, they shouldve been around $450 and $550 respectively. I got my 7950 for $260 on black friday of 2012, just 6 months after it was released at $450. For the life of me, i flat out cannot understand how anyone is buying 7xx series cards at all right now when amd hasn't even released their cards and black friday merely a few months away and you can have the cards for near half price.
Score
0
September 25, 2013 12:31:28 AM

This is why I like to wait 6 months before my next build. If this card comes out @ $600, the cost of the 780 and Titan will be very much in range of the average gamer. In a way, I pity those that splashed down so much for these cards early on. As always with PCs, today's Titan, is tomorrow's Joe.
Score
0
!