Just curious, is your GTX 780 running at stock or overclocked speeds?

Coming from my previous 780 AMP! to the 970, I can see that there is improvements in terms of the Graphics Score for 3DMark, however in Unigine it doesn't perform as well.

Yup, perhaps the GM204 doesn't handle Unigine very well. CPU all running at stock speeds, monitor 1080p.

GTX 780 (clockspeed 1006MHz) - FPS 58.5, Score 1473

GTX 970 (clockspeed 1152MHz) - FPS 55.2, Score 1391

Ermm..I think the data they are trying to present is still interpretable. You are referring to the overclocker's dream slide right? Biasalah manufacturers sure wanna put a certain base value to show how "high" their clock speed can be right? If put "0" how does it relate in terms of the chart scale?

I personally feel the 960 isn't the worthy successor to GTX 760. The performance gain is measly, just like how GTX 560 compared to the GTX 460 last time. Which is sad really, because the *60 cards always brings the best-bang-for-buck factor to the table. Again the high local prices would pretty much hamper any good alternative this card would have brought. I would rather fork out a little more and go with the massively superior GTX 970. The power consumption is pretty impressive though.

I foresee Nvidia is going to harvest GM204 cores that doesn't make the cut into 970, and use it for the so-called GTX 960 Ti.

What resolution you're gaming at? Are you playing multiplayer games?

If they would have come clean in the first place, I am sure all of us would not even have an issue to begin with. From my personal point of view; small issue made big. And biasalah, people sometimes still carry this mob mentality with them. Don't fully understand the issue, just jump in and join the bandwagon. Awhile ago all everyone so happily praising the 970, suddenly with this RAM-gate fiasco, all cry foul. You can see for yourself, some of those that complain in our forum are those that read from forums/websites and don't even have this dreaded 970 to begin with. I for one hardly have any issue with this 970 playing on 1080p. Most (if not all) of my games are optimized by Geforce Experience. Even with a fully enabled fast memory buffer of 4GB on the 970, I doubt it would have made much of an impact on higher resolutions (particularly 4K). To churn out such amount of pixels would require significant GPU processing power, not just memory buffer alone. Suddenly, all wanna jump ship and go for 290X with humongous 8GB VRAM, as if that would really made much of a difference.

HD 3850 still working, since 2007.

Ayam confused. How come 128-bit still on par with some 256-bit and 384-bit cards?

http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/reviews/..._Gaming/28.html

Details pls. Else don't generalize everything to be similar with GTX 970. Different GPU, different configuration. Mana sama?

Thank you. This is exactly the confirmation that I am looking at, rather than a generalization that lower memory bit means poorer performance. Comparing memory bus width alone for a graphic card's performance is indeed incomplete and does not tell an overall picture, as some pointed out above.

Precisely. I think the new GM206 and Tonga GPU feature new memory compression techniques, effectively making them comparable in terms of available memory bandwidth compared to some older cards with larger physical memory bus width. The thing I cannot understand is some people just look at the physical bus width and then conclude that it is a lousy card with low memory bus width and therefore poor graphical performance.

Glad to see that there are still rational people irregardless which side of the fence we're on. Anyway this is Nvidia discussion thread, not Nvidia fanboy thread so good constructive discussion is always welcomed. Cheers everyone.

But it is true that GTX 960 don't quite make the hype compared to the 760 (or even 460) last time. Perhaps the performance improvement wasn't quite big enough to get people interested. I've talked to the owner of a local PC shop recently and he lamented in the poor sales of the 960 and despite the fiasco, the 970 is still the better selling card. Lucky thing there are now reference 960 for sale at around RM769 (Leadtek/Zotac), else I don't know how they are going to sell compared to more attractively priced R9 280/285.

What brand? Yes I heard the price will be marked up, again.

Definitely go for GTX 960, newer architecture and slightly faster than GTX 760. Even thought it has a narrower memory bus width of 128-bit compared to 256-bit of the GTX 760, it employs a new memory compression technique, making it effectively having a higher theoretical memory bandwidth.

LOL. GM206 features a fully fledged core bro. No reduced ROP, L2 cache etc.

Palit Jetstream is pretty decent. I've owned one before. Yes the load temps are the highest among the other 970s that I have owned, Asus Strix and Gigabyte G1 Gaming included. It maxes out at 75C but the fans are very quiet and you will unlikely hear it over your other casing fans. No issue going for one.

I think the Gainward and Leadtek versions do not have the 0-dB feature, in which fans does not spin when GPU usage is low. In terms of clock speed, both Gainward and Palit have higher factory overclocked speeds compared to Leadtek.

Galax is pretty decent too. It has a backplate.

The GPU employs an improved memory compression technique, it effectively has more theoretical memory bandwidth despite having only 128-bit bus width. Go and check out the reviews, it is faster compared to 760.

What new model for Nvidia? From what I know, there was some rumors regarding GTX 980 Ti.

GTX 960 is 128-bit with fully enabled 2GB/4GB memory buffer.