NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M vs GeForce GTX 980 – 4K gaming showdown and benchmarks. Видеокарта nvidia 980


MSI NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 GAMING 4G 4GB 256 bit GDDR5 Fiyatı

EN YÜKSEK PERFORMANS

MSI GAMING Ekran kartları kutudan çıkar çıkmaz size en üst seviye performansı verir. Daha önceden en uygun frekans için ayarlanmış modellerimiz ve kullanımı kolay hızaşırtma aracımız Gaming App ile oyunlarda yüksek performansın keyfine varırsınız. İçiniz rahat olsun, MSI Gaming App ile yapılan tüm hızaşırtmalar GARANTİ ALTINDADIR. Performansınız en üst seviyede, şimdi hemen satın alın ve kazanmaya başlayın!

İngiltere'nin ünlü donanım sitesi Bit-tech'in yaptığı karşılaştırmalı testte MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G, 100 üzerinden 93 Puan ile diğer tüm rakiplerini geride bırakarak BİRİNCİ olmuştur. İncelemeyi https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2014/09/19/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review/14 adresinde bulabilirsiniz.

Twin Frozr V - DAHA SOĞUK, DAHA SESSİZ, DAHA İYİ OYUN KEYFİ

Her yeni grafik işlemci nesli ile performans bir seviye daha artıyor. Aynı şekilde her yeni Twin Frozr nesli ile size daha sessiz ve daha serin çalışan ekran kartları sunuyoruz. MSI olarak tüm kullanıcıların taleplerini değerlendirdik ve sizin için Twin Frozr V soğutma tasarımımızı geliştirdik. Özel tasarım kanatlara sahip güçlü fanları ile daha sessiz çalışırken ekran kartınızı ve üzerindeki bileşenleri mükemmel bir şekilde soğutur. Dahası LED ışıklı ejderha logosu ile MSI Gaming anakartınız ile harika bir görüntü oluşturur. 18 ay boyunca geliştirdiğimiz ve kalite ve kararlılığını internet kafe gibi yoğun kullanım olan mekanlarda test ettiğimiz Twin Frozr V size ihtiyacınız olan performansı verecek.

 

 

MSI GAMING APP

MSI ekran kartları ile gelen MSI Gaming App ile ekran kartınızın hızını tek tuşa ayarlayabilirsiniz. 3 farklı mod arasında OC modu ile ekran kartınızın limitlerini zorlayabilir, Gaming modu ile oyunların keyfini çıkarabilir, Silent modu ile de geceleri sessizce çalışabilirsiniz. EyeRest bölümü altında bulunan Scenemax teknolojisi ise görüntü kalitesini iyileştirirken gözünüzün yorulmasını engelleyen seçenekler içerir.

OC - Hızaşırtma Modu: GPU ve soğutmayı en üst seviyeye çıkararak ekran kartınızın performansını üst limite çıkarır. Bu ayar ile yapılan hız aşırtmalar GARANTİ altındadır.

Gaming - Oyun Modu (Fabrika ayarı): Oyunların zevkine varabilmeniz için performans ve soğutmayı en ideal dengeye getirir.

Silent - Sesiz Modu: Düşük fan sesi ile sessiz bir ortamda geceleri rahatça çalışmanızı sağlar.

MSI Gaming App EyeRest Özelliği

MSI Gaming App ile gelen EyeRest özelliği görüntüyü ihtiyacınıza göre kolayca ayarlamanızı sağlar. Gaming App üzerindeki göz ikonuna basarak bu bölümü kolayca aktif hale getirebilirsiniz.

Eye Rest (Göz dinlendirme) Modu: Ekranda gözü yoran mavi ışık dengesini azaltarak gözlerinizin daha az yorulmasını sağlar.

Gaming Modu: Kontrastı artırıp renkleri daha canlı hale getirerek oyunu yapımcılarının görmenizi istediği gibi gösterir.

Movie (Film) Modu: Gamma ve kontrast oranlarını otamatik olarak ayarlayarak film ve videoları en ideal çekilde gösterir.

 

 

ÇİFT FANLI SOĞUTMANIN MUCİDİNDEN TWIN FROZR V

Dünyanın ilk çift fanlı ekran kartı soğutucusu olan Twin Frozr, varolduğu günden beri soğutma ve sessizlikte sektöre öncülük etmiştir. Bu özelliğinden ödün vermeyen MSI şimdi sizlere soğutma ve akustik bakımından en gelişmiş termal tasarımı sunuyor.

MSI Twin Frozr V'de bulunan 10 cm çapında iki güçlü Torx fan özel kanatları sayesinde inanılmaz bir hava akımı oluşturur. Bir önceki nesil ile karşılaştırıldığında Twin Frozr V yüzde 5 daha fazla hava akımı sunarken sıcaklığı da 10 °C'ye kadar düşürür.

Bu fanların altında ise fanların üflediği alanı %90 oranında kaplayan dev bir ısıçukuru bulunur. Airflow Control Teknolojisi ise fanlardan gelen hava akımının ısıçukuru ile maksimum temasını sağlayarak soğutma performansını artırır. Isıçukuruna lehimlenmiş ısı borularının GPU ile direkt temasını sağlayan SuperSU mimarisi ısının en hızlı şekilde ekran kartından atılmasını olanak tanır.

TORX FAN

Özel tasarım fan kanatları güçlü ve düzenli bir hava akımı profili oluşturur.

SUPERSU PIPEÖzel tasarım dev ısı boruları ısının GPU ve bileşenlerden hızla uzaklaştırılmasını sağlar.

HYBRID FORZRGPU 50 °C'nin altındayken fanlar durur, sonrasında ise ısıya göre devirlerini ayarlarlar.

AIRFLOW CONTROLFanların ürettiği hava akımının ısıçukuryla temasını artırarak ısıyı hızlıca uzaklaştırır.

 

 

MILITARY CLASS (ASKERİ SINIF) BİLEŞENLER

Performansı belirleyen faktörlerden birisi de kullanılan bileşenlerin kalitesidir. Bu yüzden MSI Gaming serisi ekran kartlarında sadece MIL-STD-810G sertifikasına sahip bileşenler kullanır. ABD ordusu tarafından talep edilen bu sertifika MSI Gaming serisi ekran kartlarındaki bileşenlerin yüksek sıcaklıktan ani şoklara birçok zor koşula dayanıklı olduğunu ispatlar.

Hi-c CAP: Hi-c CAP nükleer reaktör ve uydular gibi yüksek dayanıklılık ve kararlılığa ihtiyaç duyulan alanlarda kullanılan çok küçük fakat çok verimli bir kapasitördür. Yüzde 93 enerji verimliliği sağlarken az yer kaplayarak soğutma için daha geniş bir alan sağlar. Hi-c CAP'leri üst seviye anakartlarında da kullanan MSI pazarda enerji verimliliği en yüksek kartlara sahiptir.

Super Ferrite Chokes: Demir çekirdeğe sahip süper geçirgen Super Ferrite boğumlar rakiplere nazaran 35 °C daha soğuk çalışırken enerji verimliliğini %20 oranında artırır. Böylece ekran kartınızın frekansını çok daha yüksek değerlere hızaşırtabilirsiniz.

Solid CAP: Alüminyum çekideği ile MSI Katı kapasitörler düşük ESR değeri ile yüksek performans sunarken ağır yükte bile 10 seneye kadar kullanım ömrüne sahiptir.

MSI AFTERBURNER

MSI'ın geliştirdiği Afterburner, dünya çapındaki hızaşırtma yarışmalarının en popüler ekran kartı hızaşırtma aracıdır. Gelen talep üzerine MSI'ın marka bağımsız tüm ekran kartı kullanıcılarına açtığı Afterburner ile ekran kartınız ile ilgili bilgilere kolayca erişebilir, hemen hemen tüm ayarlarını kolayca yapabilirsiniz.

TÜRKÇE dahil onlarca dil desteği ile gelen 64 bit uygulamalarla uyumlu Afterburner'ın arayüzünü masaüstünüze uygun bir görsel ile kolayca özelleştirebilirsiniz.

İsterseniz Afterburner'ı iOS veya Android telefonunuza yükleyerek CEP TELEFONUNUZDAN HIZAŞIRTMA yapabilir, beraberinde gelen Kombustor benchmark yazılımı ile ekran kartınızın limitlerini test edebilirsiniz.

 

MSI PREDATOR

Afterburner ile beraber gelen Predator yazılımı ile oynadığınız oyunları video veya resim olarak kaydedebilir, daha sonra Youtube, Twitch gibi sosyal medya platformları üzerinden arkadaşlarınıza ne kadar iyi bir oyuncu olduğunuzu gösterebilirsiniz.

EN YENİ NVIDIA TEKNOLOJİLERİ MSI'DA!

NVIDIA Maxwell™NVIDIA'nın inanılmaz performans ve benzersiz güç verimliliği sunan en gelişmiş mimarisidir. Eski oyunların bile grafik kalitesini yükselten Dinamik Süper Çözünürlük gibi ileri teknoloji özellikler sunar.

NVIDIA GPU Boost 2.0Bu yenilikçi teknoloji, oyunculara PC performanslarını hassas kontrollerle maksimum seviyeye çıkarma olanağı sağlar.

NVIDIA Adaptive Vertical SyncAdaptive VSync Yüksek resim karesi hızlarında kopmaları ortadan kaldırmak için VSync'i etkinleştirilir. Düşük resim karesi hızlarında ise takılmaları en aza indirgemek için etkisizleştirilir.

NVIDIA G-SYNC teknolojisiNVIDIA G-SYNC monitörleri, ekran kopmalarını ve Vsync girdi gecikmelerini ortadan kaldıran devrim niteliğindeki NVIDIA teknolojisine sahiptir ve mevcut monitör panellerinin olanaklarını geliştirerek bugüne kadar hiç görülmeyen en akıcı, en hızlı, en hassas oyun deneyimini yaşatır.

NVIDIA GEFORCE EXPERIENCE

GeForce Experience sizi yeni NVIDIA sürücü sürümleri hakkında otomatik olarak bilgilendirir. Sürücüyü masaüstü bilgisayarınızdan ayrılmadan, tek tıklama ile doğrudan güncelleyebilirsiniz.

GeForce Experience, PC'nize göre optimum ayarları sunmak için NVIDIA bulut veri merkezinin gücünü kullanır. Oyununuzun ayarlarını tek bir tıklama ile optimize edin. Veya tercih ettiğiniz çerçeve hızını veya görüntü kalitesini ayarlamak için kaydırma çubuğunu kullanın.

www.hepsiburada.com

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 İncelemesi

NVIDIA’nın Watt başına performans değeri ile çığır açan Maxwell mimarili yeni ekran kartı GTX 980’i inceliyoruz.

GeForce GTX 980 ekran karti incelemesinde, Nvidia’nın en gelişmiş GPU’sunun yeni Maxwell mimarisi ile neler sunduğuna yakından bakıyoruz. Maxwell mimarili ilk incelememiz GeForce GTX 750 Ti modeli ile olmuştu elimize ilk ulaştığında kartın özellikle düşük güç tüketimini mercek altına almış ve kapsamlı bir güç tüketim testi yapmıştık. 750 Ti’dan üç ay sonra elimize ulaşan GTX 980, GTX 900 serisinin tek GPU’lu en üst modeli olma özelliği taşıyor. Burada öncelikle en çok merak edilen konulardan birini cevaplayalım: nVidia neden GTX 800 serisini pas geçti ? Bunun nedeni GTX 800M serisinin dizüstü bilgisayarlara çok daha önceden çıkması ve bu GPU’ların bazısının Kepler, bazısının ise Maxwell olması. Firma bu bağlamda kafa karışıklığına yer vermemek için Tamamen Maxwell GPU’lardan oluşan yeni seriyi GTX 900 olarak adlandırdı. Yine de bu açıklamanın bütün NVIDIA hayranlarını tatmin etmediğini belirtmemizde fayda var. Öte yandan bu isimlendirme, HD7000 serisi ile devam ederken birden Rx 2xx gibi tamamen farklı bir isimlendirmeye geçen AMD’nin stratejisinden daha kolay anlaşılabilir.

  • 00:15 – GTX 800 serisi neden pas geçildi ?
  • 00:50 – Maxwell mimarili en güçlü ekran kartı
  • 01:10 – Watt başına performans oranında artış
  • 01:25 – Tek çekirdekli en güçlü ekran kartı
  • 01:40 – Kartı kutusundan çıkarıyoruz
  • 02:00 – DSR tekno9lojisi: Dynamic Super Resolution
  • 02:35 – VXGI ile daha gelişmiş ışıklandırma ve Hairworks teknolojileri
  • 03:25 – GTX 980’e yakından bakıyoruz ve kutusundan çıkarıyoruz
  • 04:10 – Referans tasarım
  • 04:25 – GTX 980’in arka yüzeyi
  • 04:30 – SLI bağlantı kısmı ile dört adede kadar Dual SLI
  • 04:45 – GTX 980’in üst kısmına bakıyoruz. Çift 6 PIN PCI Express güç portu
  • 05:20 – 1x Dual Link DVI, 3 x DisplayPort 1.2, 1 x HDMI 2.0
  • 06:00 – GTX 980 ve GTX 970 teknik özellikleri
  • 07:15 – Neden 2 x PIN güç bağlantısı ?
  • 07:45 – 5120 x 3200 @ 60Hz çözünürlük desteği
  • 08:05 – GTX 680 ile GTX 980 arasındaki performans farkı: 1080p, 1440p ve 4K çözünürlük
  • 09:40 – MFAA teknolojisi ile daha verimli çalışan bir kenar düzeltme
  • 10:10 – GTX 680, GTX 780 ve GTX 980 arasındaki farklar
  • 10:50 – Maxwell mimarisi ile düşük güç tüketimi: 165 Watt TDP değerine sahip GTX 980
  • 11:25 – Maxwell GPU Die
  • 11:50 – Dynamic Super Resolution ile daha yüksek görüntü kalitesi
  • 12:35 – 1080p ekranda 4K görüntü kalitesi
  • 13:25 – Dark Souls 2 ile Dynamic Super Resolution farkı
  • 14:45 – DSR açık ve DSR kapalı farkı
  • 15:05 – DSR, GeForce Experience’a dahil ediliyor
  • 15:20 – MFAA teknolojisi: MSAA ve MFAA farkı
  • 16:20 – MSAA ve MFAA arasındaki performans farkı: Call of Duty Ghosts, Assassin’s Creed Black Flag, Far Cry 3, Hitman ABsolution, Watch Dogs
  • 16:40 – VXGI ile Apollo sahnesi
  • 17:45 – Voxel Global Illumination
  • 20:10 – Maxwll ile gelen teknolojilerden yararlanacak oyunlar: NVIDIA Gameworks
  • 20:40 – War Thunder, The Crew, Assassin’s Creed: Unity, Batman Arkham, Knight, Warface, Borderlands The Pre-Sequel, The witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Project Cars, Strife
  • 22:15 – Far Cry 4’te kullanılan NVIDIA teknolojileri
  • 23:15 – HBAO+ ışıklandırma teknolojisi
  • 23:40 – PCSS – Percentage closer soft Shadows
  • 24:00 – TXAA – Temporal Anti-Aliasing
  • 24:10 – God Rays
  • 24:25 – NVIDIA Hairworks
  •  24:45 – Test sistemi: PG278Q ROG Swift Monitör, Core i7 3930K, Rampage IV Gene, 16 GB DDR3 bellekler

Oyun Testleri

  • 26:30 – Far Cry 3 Testi
  • 30:10 – Dynamic Super Resolution ile Counter-Strike Global Offensive testi
  • 33:55 – GeForce Experience içinden Süper çözünürlük ayarı
  • 34:45 – 1080p Battlefield 4 testi
  • 35:50 – 1440p Battlefield 4 testi
  • 36:50 – 1080p Crysis 3 testi
  • 38:00 – 1440p Crysis 3 testi
  • 38:50 – 5120 x 2880 çözünürlükte DSR Diablo 3 testi
  • 42:10 – 5K çözünürlükte StarCraft II testi
  • 45:50 – CUDA işlem kabiliyeti ile Premiere Pro’da render performansı

Sonuç Değerlendirme

  • 47:05 – GTX 980 ile daha fazla oyun testleri olacak
  • 47:45 – NVIDIA 344 sürücüsü ile test edilmiştir, sürücüler güncelleştikçe performans artacaktır
  • 48:30 – Çift GPU’lu GTX 990 çıkacak mı?
  • 48:50 – GTX 780 ve GTX 780 Ti sahipleri GTX 980’e geçmeli mi ?
  • 50:45 – DSR sayesinde eski oyunları daha yüksek grafik kalitesi ile oynama
  • 51:35 – Watt başına çok daha yüksek performans
  • 52:20 – GTX 980 referans kart önerilen satış fiyatı 1729 TL
  • 53:30 – NVIDIA rekabetçi bir giriş yapıyor GTX 980 Maxwell ile
  • 54:30 – GTX 970 incelemesi çok yakında!

GTX 900 serisi ilk etapta GTX 980 ve GTX 970 modelleri ile piyasaya giriş yapıyor. GTX 980, GTX 780 Ti’ı dahi gride bırakırken GTX 970 de GTX 780 ile benzer performansı çok daha düşük güç tüketimi ile sunuyor. Here iki kartın teknik özellikleri de şu şekilde:

5 Teraflop işlemci gücü gerçekten inanılmaz. 4 adet GTX 980’i bir sistemde kullandığınızda toplamda 20 teraflop işlem gücüne erişiyorsunuz. Bu bir süper bilgisayar demek. Karşılaştırma açısından PS4’ün 1.84 Teraflop işlem gücü olduğunu belirtelim. Her ne kadar John Carmack’a göre PS4 gücünü PC’de elde etmek için 3.68 Teraflop işlem gücü gerekse de bu durum yakında aramızda olacak olan ve GTX 900 serisinden GTX 400 serisine kadar bütün kartların destek sunduğu DirectX 12 ile değişecek.

Tabloda dikkat çeken bir başka nokta da GTX 900 serisi ile birlikte gelen HDMI 2.0 desteği. Kartın üzerinde bir adet HDMI 2.0 portu, 3 adet DisplayPort 1.2 portu ve 1 adet de Dual Link DVI portu var. GTX 900 serisi, NVIDIA’nın 5K çözünürlüğe çıkan ilk son tüketiciye yönelik ekran kartı. Burada görüntü çıkışlarının yanında dikkat çeken bir başka olgu da güç girişleri. GTX 980 sadece iki adet 6 PIN PCI Express güç girişine sahip. Bu da kartın rakiplerine göre daha düşük güç tükettiğinin bir başka göstergesi. Son olarak kartın 4 GB 256 Bit GDDR5 bellekler ile gelmesi, özellikle de 4K oyun ve DSR teknolojisinde epey fark yaratıyor.

4K oyun demişken, GTX 980’in 4K çözünürlükte en azından 20 FPS üstüne rahatlıkla çıkabildiğini belirtelim. Daha önce 4K oyun deneyimi için çift GPU’lu çözümlere yöneliyorduk. Fakat performansın artması ile birlikte tek bir ekran kartı ve tek GPU ile 4K performansına daha da yaklaşıyoruz.

Üstteki tabloda GTX 680 ile GTX 980, 1080p’den 4K’ya kadar farklı çözünürlüklerde karşılaştırılıyorlar. GTX 680, 1440p’ye kadar idare ediyor. Ama 4K’ya geçildiğinde havlu atmak zorunda kalıyor. GTX 980 ise AA kapalı iken 4K’da 40 FPS sunabiliyor. Ama ayarları biraz artırdğınızda FPS  23’e kadar düşüyor ki bu değerde akıcı bir oyun deneyimi söz konusu değil. Fakat firmanın bunun için de bir çözümü mevcut: MFAA!

Multi-Frame Sampled AA olarak adlandırılan bu teknoloji sayesinde NVIDIA mühendisleri, 4xAA performansı ile 8xAA kalitesi sunmayı başarmışlar. Bu sayede özellikle yüksek çözünürlüklerde AA açıldığında düşen FPS oranı büyük oranda iyileştirilmiş oluyor. Sonuç olarak 4K çözünürlükte bile kullanıcılar AA açabilir hale geliyorlar:

Yine de MFAA teknolojisinin her oyunda olmadığını belirtelim. Çoğu oyun bu desteği güncellemeler ile alacak. Bazı oyunlarda ise bu destek olmasa dahi Nvidia kontrol panelinden MFAA devreye sokulabilecek. MFAA teknolojisi halen daha geliştirme aşamasında.

NVIDIA, GTX 980 serisi ile yukarıda da belirttiğimiz gibi halihazırda GTX 600 ve öncesi ekran kartlarına sahip kullanıcıları hedefliyor. Yakın zamanda GTX 700 serisi ekran kartı satın almış kullanıcıların bu yeni seriye geçmeleri için devasa sebepleri yok. Ama GTX 680 kullanan bir kullanıcı, GTX 980’e terfi ettiğinde iki katı performansa çok daha düşük bir güç tüketimi ile kavuşacak.

NVIDIA Dynamic Super Resolution

Downsampling aslında oyuncular tarafından daha önce de kullanılan bir yöntem idi. NVIDIA, GTX 900 serisi ile birlikte bu özelliği artık doğrudan GeForce Experience içine yerleştiriyor. Öncelikle şunu belirtelim, bu teknoloji GTX 900 serisine özel değil. Fakat firmanın belirttiği üzere Maxwell bu yükün altından en iyi kalkan GPU. Peki nedir bu DSR ? DSR özelliği, ekran kartının oyunu yüksek çözünürlükte renderlayıp bunu daha sonra ekran çözünürlüğüne uygun hale getirmesi işlemine deniyor. NVIDIA’nın burada getirdiği fark, 13-tap Gauss filtresi kullanarak downsampling esnasında oluşan kenar kırılmalarını ortadan kaldırması.

Yukarıdaki örnekte Dark Souls 2, solda 1080p ve sağda DSR ile 4K renderlanıp 1080p’ye downsample edilmiş halde gözükmekte. Çimenlerdeki farkı bariz bir biçimde görebiliyoruz.

Yukarıda da görüldüğü gibi bu özellik GeForce Experience içerisinde Süper Çözünürlük olarak geçmekte.

NVIDIA Gameworks

AMD gibi NVIDIA da oyun geliştiriciler ile anlaşıp GPU’lardaki teknolojilerden yararlanmaları için gerekli araçları stüdyolara sağlamakta. Böylece oyun yapımcıları farklı teknolojilere oyunlarında yer verebilmekte. Halihazırda NVIDIA teknolojileri kullanan ve yakında çıkacak ve NVIDIA teknolojileri barındıracak olan oyunlar ise şu şekilde:

Far Cry 4

Far Cry 4, NVIDIA Gameworks dahilinde geliştirilen oyunlardan biri. Oyunda HBAO+, PCSS, TXAA, God Rays, Fur ve gelişmiş 4K desteği yer alıyor. Oyunun içinden ekran görüntüleri için tıklayın.

 

 

Yeni nesil hakkında daha fazla bilgi edinmek için Technopat Video İncelemelerini İzleyebilirsiniz:

www.technopat.net

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M - NotebookCheck.net Tech

Notebook reviews with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M graphics card

Acer Predator 15 G9-591-74ZV: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.6 kg  Review » Acer Predator 15 Notebook Review

Acer Predator 17 G9-792-71EF: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.1 kg  Review » Acer Predator 17 (i7-6700HQ, GTX 980M) Notebook Review

Alienware 15 R2 (Skylake): Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.1 kg  Review » Alienware 15 R2 Notebook Review

Alienware 17 R2: Intel Core i7-4980HQ, 17.3", 3.7 kg  Review » Alienware 17 R2 Notebook Review

Alienware 17 R3 (A17-9935): Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 3.7 kg  Review » Alienware 17 R3 Notebook Review

Aorus X5S v5: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 2.5 kg  Review » Aorus X5S v5 Notebook Review

Asus G751JY: Intel Core i7-4720HQ, 17.3", 4.2 kg  Review » Asus G751JY G-Sync Notebook Review

Asus G751JY-T7009H: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 4.2 kg  Review » Asus G751JY-T7009H Notebook Review

Asus G752VY-RH71: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.5 kg  Review » Xotic PC Asus G752VY Notebook Review

Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 2.6 kg  Review » Asus ROG Strix GL502VY-DS71 Notebook Review

DogHouse Systems Mobius SS: Intel Core i7-6700K, 17.3", 3.8 kg  Review » DogHouse Systems Mobius SS (Clevo P770DM) Notebook Review

Eurocom P5 Pro Extreme: Intel Core i7-4790K, 15.6", 3.4 kg  Review » Eurocom P5 Pro Extreme (Clevo P750ZM) Notebook Review

Eurocom P7 Pro: Intel Core i7-5775C, 17.3", 3.9 kg  Review » Eurocom P7 Pro (Clevo P770ZM) Notebook Review

EVGA SC17: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 4 kg  Review » EVGA SC17 Xotic PC Edition Notebook Review

Gigabyte P35X v3: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 15.6", 2.5 kg  Review » Gigabyte P35X v3 Notebook Review

Gigabyte P35X v5: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 2.6 kg  Review » Gigabyte P35X v5 Notebook Review

Gigabyte P37X: Intel Core i7-4720HQ, 17.3", 3 kg  Review » Gigabyte P37X Notebook Review

Gigabyte P37X v5: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 2.9 kg  Review » Gigabyte P37X v5 Notebook Review

Ibuypower GT72 Dominator: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  Review » iBuyPower GT72 Dominator Notebook Review Update

Lenovo IdeaPad Y900: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 4.4 kg  Review » Lenovo IdeaPad Y900 17ISK Notebook Review

MSI GT72-2QE16SR21BW: Intel Core i7-5700HQ, 17.3", 3.7 kg  Review » MSI GT72 (Broadwell) Notebook Review

MSI GT72-2QE32SR311BW: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  Review » MSI GT72 (GTX 980M) Notebook Review Update

MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  Review » MSI GT72S 6QE Dominator Pro G Notebook Review

One K73-5N: Intel Core i7-4790K, 17.3", 3.9 kg  Review » One K73-5N (Clevo P771ZM) Notebook Review

Schenker XMG P505 PRO: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 15.6", 2.7 kg  Review » Schenker XMG P505 PRO (Clevo P651SG) Notebook Review

Schenker XMG P506 PRO: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 15.6", 2.8 kg  Review » Schenker XMG P506 PRO (Clevo P651RG) Notebook Review

Schenker XMG P706: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.3 kg  Review » Schenker XMG P706 (Clevo P671RG) Notebook Review

Schenker XMG U506: Intel Core i5-6600K, 15.6", 3.5 kg  Review » Schenker XMG U506 (Clevo P751DM) Notebook Review

Schenker XMG U706: Intel Core i7-6700K, 17.3", 3.9 kg  Review » Schenker XMG U706 (Clevo P771DM) Notebook Review

Acer Predator 15 G9-591-70F6: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 5.5 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 15 G9-591-70F6

Acer Predator 15 G9-591-713C: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.6 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 15 G9-591-713C

Acer Predator 15 G9-591-71L2: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.6 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 15 G9-591-71L2

Acer Predator 15 G9-591-72L8: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.4 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 15 G9-591-72L8

Acer Predator 15 G9-591-74KN: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.6 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 15 G9-591-74KN

Acer Predator 15 G9-591-74ZV: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.6 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 15 G9-591-74ZV

Acer Predator 15 G9-592-77ZU: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.5 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 15 G9-592-77ZU

Acer Predator 17 G9-791-718D: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.1 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 17 G9-791-718D

Acer Predator 17 G9-791-72VU: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 17 G9-791-72VU

Acer Predator 17 G9-791-730K: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.1 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 17 G9-791-730K

Acer Predator 17 G9-791-73EX: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 17 G9-791-73EX

Acer Predator 17 G9-792-736Q: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.1 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 17 G9-792-736Q

Acer Predator 17 G9-792-74TT: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.1 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 17 G9-792-74TT

Acer Predator 17X GX-791-750T: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 4.2 kg  External Review » Acer Predator 17X GX-791-750T

Alienware 15 R2 (Skylake): Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 3.1 kg  External Review » Alienware 15 R2 (Skylake)

Alienware 17 R2: Intel Core i7-4980HQ, 17.3", 3.7 kg  External Review » Alienware 17 R2

Alienware 17 R3 (A17-9935): Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 3.7 kg  External Review » Alienware 17 R3 (A17-9935)

Alienware 17 R3 A17-9942: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » Alienware 17 R3 A17-9942

Alienware 17-A17-9942: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » Alienware 17-A17-9942

Aorus X5S v5: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 2.5 kg  External Review » Aorus X5S v5

Aorus X5S v5 Camo: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 2.5 kg  External Review » Aorus X5S v5 Camo

Asus G751J-DH71: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 4.8 kg  External Review » Asus G751J-DH71

Asus G751JT-T7033H: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 4.8 kg  External Review » Asus G751JT-T7033H

Asus G751JY: Intel Core i7-4720HQ, 17.3", 4.2 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY

Asus G751JY-DB72: Intel Core i7-4720HQ, 17.3", 4.8 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-DB72

Asus G751JY-DH71: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-DH71

Asus G751JY-DH72X: Intel Core i7-4860HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-DH72X

Asus G751JY-T7009H: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 4.2 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-T7009H

Asus G751JY-T7012H: Intel Core i7-4860HQ, 17.3", 4.8 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-T7012H

Asus G751JY-T7058H: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 4.5 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-T7058H

Asus G751JY-T7065D: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 4.8 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-T7065D

Asus G751JY-T7303H: Intel Core i7-4870HQ, 17.3", 4.8 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-T7303H

Asus G751JY-T7378H: Intel Core i7-4720HQ, 17.3", 4.2 kg  External Review » Asus G751JY-T7378H

Asus G752VY-DH78K: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 4 kg  External Review » Asus G752VY-DH78K

Asus G752VY-GC087T: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.5 kg  External Review » Asus G752VY-GC087T

Asus G752VY-GC174T: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.3 kg  External Review » Asus G752VY-GC174T

Asus G752VY-GC263T: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.3 kg  External Review » Asus G752VY-GC263T

Asus G752VY-GC304T: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.4 kg  External Review » Asus G752VY-GC304T

Asus G752VY-RH71: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.5 kg  External Review » Asus G752VY-RH71

Asus G752VY-T7003T: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.3 kg  External Review » Asus G752VY-T7003T

Asus GX700VO-GC009T: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.6 kg  External Review » Asus GX700VO-GC009T

Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 2.6 kg  External Review » Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71

AVADirect Avant P870DM-G: Intel Core i7-6700K, 17.3", 4.8 kg  External Review » AVADirect Avant P870DM-G

AVADirect Menace 17: Intel Core i7-4790K, 17.3", 3.9 kg  External Review » AVADirect Menace 17

Clevo P375Sm: Intel Core i7-4910MQ, 17.3", 4.3 kg  External Review » Clevo P375Sm

Eurocom P5 Pro Extreme: Intel Core i7-4790K, 15.6", 3.4 kg  External Review » Eurocom P5 Pro Extreme

Eurocom P7 Pro: Intel Core i7-5775C, 17.3", 3.9 kg  External Review » Eurocom P7 Pro

EVGA SC17: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 4 kg  External Review » EVGA SC17

Falcon Northwest TLX: Intel Core i7-4910MQ, 15.6", 3.2 kg  External Review » Falcon Northwest TLX

Gigabyte P35X v3: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 15.6", 2.5 kg  External Review » Gigabyte P35X v3

Gigabyte P35X v4: Intel Core i7-5700HQ, 15.6", 2.3 kg  External Review » Gigabyte P35X v4

Gigabyte P35X v5: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 15.6", 2.6 kg  External Review » Gigabyte P35X v5

Gigabyte P37X: Intel Core i7-4720HQ, 17.3", 3 kg  External Review » Gigabyte P37X

Gigabyte P37x v4: Intel Core i7-5700HQ, 17.3", 2.8 kg  External Review » Gigabyte P37x v4

Gigabyte P37X v5: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 2.9 kg  External Review » Gigabyte P37X v5

Lenovo IdeaPad Y900: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 4.4 kg  External Review » Lenovo IdeaPad Y900

Lenovo IdeaPad Y900-17ISK- 80Q1006GRA: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 4.6 kg  External Review » Lenovo IdeaPad Y900-17ISK- 80Q1006GRA

Lenovo IdeaPad Y900-17ISK-80Q1000BGE: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 4.4 kg  External Review » Lenovo IdeaPad Y900-17ISK-80Q1000BGE

Lenovo IdeaPad Y900-17ISK-80Q1004QGE: Intel Core i7-6820HQ, 17.3", 4.6 kg  External Review » Lenovo IdeaPad Y900-17ISK-80Q1004QGE

Medion Erazer X7843-MD9957: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 3.5 kg  External Review » Medion Erazer X7843-MD9957

Medion Erazer X7843-MD99997: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.5 kg  External Review » Medion Erazer X7843-MD99997

Microsoft Surface Studio 45U-00005: Intel Core i7-6820HQ, 28", 9.6 kg  External Review » Microsoft Surface Studio 45U-00005

MSI GT60 2QE-1223UK: Intel Core i7-4710MQ, 15.6", 3.5 kg  External Review » MSI GT60 2QE-1223UK

MSI GT72 2QE-207UK: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72 2QE-207UK

MSI GT72 2QE-258Fr: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72 2QE-258Fr

MSI GT72 2QE-259FR DOMINATOR PRO: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72 2QE-259FR DOMINATOR PRO

MSI GT72-2QE16SR21BW: Intel Core i7-5700HQ, 17.3", 3.7 kg  External Review » MSI GT72-2QE16SR21BW

MSI GT72-2QE32SR311BW: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72-2QE32SR311BW

MSI GT72-2QE8M16SR21BW: Intel Core i7-5700HQ, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72-2QE8M16SR21BW

MSI GT72S 6QE-072RU: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S 6QE-072RU

MSI GT72S 6QE-1012N: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S 6QE-1012N

MSI GT72S 6QE-208CZ: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S 6QE-208CZ

MSI GT72S 6QE-827RU Dominator Pro G: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S 6QE-827RU Dominator Pro G

MSI GT72S 6QE-858FR : Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S 6QE-858FR

MSI GT72S 6QF-036FR: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.9 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S 6QF-036FR

MSI GT72S-6QE-084FR : Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 3.9 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S-6QE-084FR

MSI GT72S-6QE-265UK: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S-6QE-265UK

MSI GT72S-6QE32SR42BW Tobii: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S-6QE32SR42BW Tobii

MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW: Intel Core i7-6820HK, 17.3", 3.8 kg  External Review » MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW

Origin PC EON15-S 2015: Intel Core i7-4720HQ, 15.6", 2.5 kg  External Review » Origin PC EON15-S 2015

Origin PC EON15-X: Intel Core i7-4790K, 15.6", 3.2 kg  External Review » Origin PC EON15-X

Origin PC EON17-S, GTX 980M: Intel Core i7-4910MQ, 17.3", 3.9 kg  External Review » Origin PC EON17-S, GTX 980M

Sager NP9870-S: Intel Core i7-6700K, 17.3", 4.8 kg  External Review » Sager NP9870-S

Schenker XMG P505 PRO: Intel Core i7-4710HQ, 15.6", 2.7 kg  External Review » Schenker XMG P505 PRO

Schenker XMG P706, Intel Core i7-6700HQ: Intel Core i7-6700HQ, 17.3", 3.2 kg  External Review » Schenker XMG P706, Intel Core i7-6700HQ

Schenker XMG U505, GTX 980: Intel Core i7-4790S, 15.6", 3.4 kg  External Review » Schenker XMG U505, GTX 980

Schenker XMG U706: Intel Core i7-6700K, 17.3", 3.9 kg  External Review » Schenker XMG U706

www.notebookcheck.net

Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 review • Eurogamer.net

The King is dead. Long live the King. Nvidia has discontinued its flagship GTX 780 Ti, replacing it with the brand-new GTX 980, powered by its new Maxwell architecture. It's the fastest single-chip graphics card money can buy - but the takeaway for many will be that there's no revelatory performance increase over Nvidia's existing top-end hardware. This is a refined, ultra-power efficient replacement with a relatively small performance bump, as opposed to the next big new thing in graphics technology.

Maxwell's power efficiency shouldn't be so readily discounted though. Performance graphics cards typically consume an absolute maximum of 250W - at full-pelt, that translates into an awfully large amount of heat. Hot chips need cooling, in turn requiring elaborate cooling assemblies, which can produce unwanted noise. The GTX 980's TDP limit is a mere 165W, so the implications here are obvious - the GTX 980 is capable of being deployed in a much larger variety of PCs: living-room small form factor units being the obvious example.

Our review card features the premium metallic chassis introduced with the GTX Titan - clean, industrial, cool and quiet. From an aesthetic standpoint, differences are relatively minor - the PCB backing of the older Nvidia cards has given way to a plastic shroud that more fully encloses the components. A plastic tab on the rear of the unit can be removed in order to facilitate better airflow, but the major differences come on the back-plate: Nvidia's established line-up of dual DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort gives way to a new arrangement: one DVI, one HDMI and three DisplayPorts. The new array of ports has been designed to facilitate easier set-up of surround G-Sync - which still requires DisplayPort to function. Also of interest is that the HDMI port is based on the 2.0 standard, meaning support for 4K resolution at 60Hz.

Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 specs

Nvidia's Maxwell architecture debuted in the rather splendid GTX 750/750 Ti budget card released earlier this year, based on the GM107 chip. The GTX 980 reveals the debut of the 'big' Maxwell aimed at the high-end enthusiast.

  • CUDA Cores: 2048
  • Base Clock: 1126MHz
  • Boost Clock: 1216MHz
  • Memory: 4GB GDDR5
  • Memory Clock: 7000MHz
  • Memory Bandwidth: 224GB/s
  • Texture Mapping Units 128
  • ROPs: 64
  • L2 Cache Size: 2048MB
  • TDP: 165W
  • Die Size: 398mm2
  • Manufacturing Process: 28nm

Codenamed GM204, the new Maxwell has two billion fewer transistors than the top-end GTX 780 Ti, and features a much narrower memory bus (256-bit vs 384-bit) and is physically a much smaller chip (398mm2 vs 552mm2). However, it carries more RAM and a much more efficient design actually sees it pull ahead of the prior Nvidia flagship.

It's on the inside where the GTX 980 really impresses - its efficiency goes far beyond its meagre power consumption alone. The new Maxwell chip achieves more - a lot more - with a lot less, despite using the same 28nm chip technology as its predecessor. The GM204 chip is around 72 per cent the size of the Titan/GTX 780 Ti processor, and around 91 per cent of the area of the Radeon R9 290X's Hawaii chip. What's more, the new Maxwell card utilises a relatively narrow 256-bit memory bus up against the 384-bit interface of its predecessor and the whopping great 512-bit bus of the R9 290X. Despite this, the GTX 980 powers ahead of both those cards in almost all of the tests we put it through. Put simply - the GTX 980 is cheaper for Nvidia to produce, and while you don't get any pricing benefits as a consumer (the new GTX 970 is Nvidia's value play - we'll review that soon), you do benefit from a much cooler, less expensive card to run.

So what's the secret sauce here? Well, from the GeForce GTX 750 Ti we already know that the Maxwell architecture offers a 2x performance per watt boost compared to Nvidia's last tech, codenamed Kepler. This new, larger chip could almost be considered a Maxwell 2.0 part - it retains all the advantages of its predecessor (a revised approach to its CUDA cores, a big boost to L2 cache) but it also features power-saving features culled from Nvidia's work on the Tegra K1 mobile part found in the Shield tablet. And while the 256-bit memory interface may seem rather narrow for a high-end performance part, lossless compression is utilised on the bus to get higher throughput. It's an interesting approach, but its effectiveness will be limited by the 'compressability' of the material it has to work with - as you'll see later.

But to begin with, let's see how the GTX 980 copes with that most intensive of GPU workouts - the 1080p Crysis 3 gameplay challenge. Here we stack up all settings to the max, turn on v-sync, and utilise SMAA T2X anti-aliasing - the game's best balance between performance and quality. To make things more interesting, we compare the action with two similar playthroughs on the same Core i7 3770K PC running the GTX 780 Ti and the Radeon R9 290X.

This test isn't about maximum frame-rates (v-sync caps that at 60fps), it's about the deviation from the 60Hz update in the most challenging areas. Immediately, we get a sense of this card's potential - there is no 60fps lock as such, but instead the drops are less pronounced than they are on the GTX 980's immediate rivals. It's a good start, but the feeling we're getting is that the card only offers an incremental increase in performance compared to existing high-end parts as opposed to the kind of revelatory leap you might hope for from a new architecture.

The 1080p Crysis 3 max settings challenge reveals that the GTX 980 has no relevatory performance upgrades compared to its immediate competitors - performance is clearly higher and that's obviously a good thing, but we're looking at evolution, not revolution.

Order these alternative top-tier graphics cards with free shipping:

Ploughing on into our benchmark suite, we evaluate the GTX 980 against a range of comparable GPUs, kicking off with the other GTX 'x80' cards Nvidia has released in the last couple of years, along with the products the firm really needs to comprehensively beat - the power-hungry R9 290X and the outgoing GTX 780 Ti. To begin with, we test at 1080p on max settings. Some might consider the GPU tech we're using here as overkill for a meagre 1080p resolution, but the prior Crysis 3 test suggests otherwise. Not only that, but 95 per cent of the PC audience use full HD monitors, according to the Steam hardware survey, so it's a viable test - Nvidia shifts a lot of graphics cards and regardless of power, most of them are utilised on 1080p displays.

VXGI: real-time global illumination

Check out the picture above. Click on it, if you will, for a closer look. Of course, you've probably seen it before - it's an image of Buzz Aldrin descending from the Apollo 11 lunar module, taken by the first man to walk on the Moon, Neil Armstrong. Only it isn't actually a photo, it's a real-time render generated using VXGI, Nvidia's new voxel-based global illumination system. But for reference, the actual Armstrong image is here.

Nvidia's version looks like it has been over-exposed a touch, but when we saw the demo running in real-time at a recent Nvidia tech conference, the match was uncanny. So why replicate this pivotal moment in history? Well, Nvidia's demo is operating a fully real-time voxel-based global illumination system: it's the next phase in lighting technology, one step beyond the physically-based rendering seen in console titles like Killzone: Shadow Fall, Metal Gear Solid 5 and Forza Horizon 2. This demo does rather cool things - the scene can be viewed from any angle, elements like exposure can be adjusted, and in the process, just about every moon landing conspiracy theory (lack of stars in the sky, for example) can be blown out of the water.

A similar voxel-based system - dubbed SVOGI - was initially added to Unreal Engine 4, but was removed because it was just too computationally expensive to be viable. If you've heard John Carmack talk about sparse voxel octrees, this is very similar technology. Voxels are where it's at when it comes to real-time GI - the only problem is that the performance hit is just too hard to deploy it in video games on current-gen hardware.

Nvidia reckons that it's cracked the problem with its own VXGI implementation, which offloads a lot of the workload to dedicated hardware within the Maxwell processor. Obviously it's early days, and although Nvidia has Unreal Engine 4 integration in the works, it's unclear how much work it will be for developers to support it - certainly the move to physically based rendering for next-gen console was an enormous challenge. Perhaps what's most important though is that Nvidia has identified a key limitation in current rendering technology, and has sought to address it. While no game implementation has been announced as of yet, the demo itself should be released fairly soon.

We see an average 14 per cent boost over the R9 290X, a mere 5 per cent increase over the GTX 780 Ti and a more handsome 27 per cent uplift compared to the GTX 780. It's the old GTX 680 that provides a like-for-like comparison of the Maxwell vs Kepler generational leap, and here we see the new card lock in a remarkable 61 per cent jump in performance. Both GTX 680 and 980 offer similar levels of power consumption, and both have the 256-bit memory bus.

We've also included overclocking results. Using MSI Afterburner, we ramped out maximum power consumption to 125 per cent of the norm, and achieved a 200MHz boost to the GPU core, and a 475MHz increase to the memory clock. This produces an averaged 12.2 per cent increase in performance at 1080p, perfectly in line with an additional 12 per cent in peak power consumption we measured. Pushing higher on either memory or core clocks produces unwelcome instability, with Metro Last Light's benchmarking run a good proving ground for testing the durability of your overclock.

To our mind, benchmarks mean little without context. This video showcases exactly what we tested and how, and reveals how the hardware we test compares on a frame-by-frame basis. We use Nvidia's FCAT (incorporated within our own tools) to show relative performance between GPUs along with consistency metrics.

1920x1080 (1080p) GTX 980 GTX 980 (OC) GTX 780 Ti R9 290X GTX 780 GTX 680 BioShock Infinite, DX11 Ultra DDOF Tomb Raider, Ultimate, FXAA Battlefield 4, Ultra Metro: Last Light, Very High, SSAA Crysis 3, Very High
121.6 130.9 116.5 93.0 99.5 79.7
91.1 104.1 90.9 85.1 71.3 56.2
87.2 98.3 78.0 70.1 65.2 50.6
52.0 59.2 51.0 47.4 40.9 31.4
77.0 86.7 71.9 68.6 60.9 50.7

At 2560x1440 - or 1440p if you prefer - the narrow memory bus of the GTX 980 starts to make an impact compared to its nearest rivals. Tomb Raider actually runs marginally slower on the new card compared to the GTX 780 Ti, though the 980 still manages to stay comfortably ahead on other titles, especially on Battlefield 4. The massive 512-bit interface of the R9 290X also brings it back into contention, especially on Tomb Raider. Indeed, the 15 per cent average uplift the GTX 980 enjoys at 1080p shrinks to just five per cent at the higher resolution.

Nvidia's new card still manages to comfortably outstrip the non-Ti GTX 780 and once again we are seeing a substantial boost in performance compared to the GTX 980's technological predecessor - the stalwart GTX 680. Memory bandwidth is clearly important at much higher resolutions, and the 256-bit interface on the older card clearly struggles, particularly on the insanely demanding Metro Last Light with its super-sampling preset engaged.

Overall, the benchmarks here suggest that the GTX 980 is a worthy performer at the higher resolution, with our overclock adding a 14.8 per cent boost to the results on average. The combination of Maxwell's refined CUDA core architecture in combination with the compression system in place on the memory bus allows the new card to punch above its weight, but the Tomb Raider result suggests that performance might vary on a game by game basis.

At 2560x1440, it seems that the memory compression technology struggles just a little bit - in certain scenarios, the outgoing GTX 780 Ti commands a minor advantage over the new GTX 980.

2560x1440 (1440p) GTX 980 GTX 980 (OC) GTX 780 Ti R9 290X GTX 780 GTX 680 BioShock Infinite, DX11 Ultra DDOF Tomb Raider, Ultimate, FXAA Battlefield 4, Ultra Metro: Last Light, Very High, SSAA Crysis 3, Very High
83.3 94.0 77.2 61.7 65.4 50.9
60.9 69.7 62.2 58.5 49.0 36.6
58.0 65.5 52.0 47.3 44.2 33.4
32.6 37.9 32.2 29.7 25.8 18.8
47.8 56.2 45.0 45.1 37.4 30.5

With 4K monitors now available at the 500 mark (cheaper if you're prepared to stick with a 30Hz refresh), enthusiasts may be wondering how well the GTX 980 holds up when moving up to the ultra-HD standard. Well, the truth is that ideally, you're still looking at two high-end GPUs working parallel to deliver the kind of power required in sustaining 4K on modern games at demanding settings.

G-Sync revisited

We're looking to review an Asus 'Swift' PG278Q recently delivered to the Digital Foundry office - the first 2560x1440 monitor to support G-Sync. If you've not read our review of this new tech, we encourage you to do so - G-Sync completely eliminates screen-tear while at the same time minimising the stutter brought about when v-sync is engaged in a variable frame-rate scenario. No longer is the game experience dictated by the refresh rate of the monitor - G-Sync puts the GPU firmly in control.

We put the GTX 980 to the test with G-Sync engaged by re-running our maxed-out Crysis 3 test, this time at the monitor's native 1440p resolution. Frame-rates persisted in 30-40fps territory - not really an area where G-Sync can make a difference. Dialling back a couple of the advanced settings from very high to high, frame-rates settled just north of 40fps, and at this point, G-Sync starts to make sense, offering a smoother refresh that's definitely a cut above the console standard 30fps experience.

Dropping all presets down from very high to high, the GTX 980 mostly renders the game at a variable frame-rate between 50-60fps. In our experience, this is the ideal window that G-Sync operates in. Frame persistence varies between 16-20ms, and it's really difficult to discern any judder during gameplay unless you set out to look for it.

Our day-to-day work on Digital Foundry sees us struggling with frame-pacing issues, often sub-optimal performance and unsightly screen-tear. G-Sync isn't the complete solution, but it's the best possible hardware for the job, and it's down to the user to tweak settings in order to move gameplay frame-rates into the 'window' in which G-Sync works best.

Adaptive v-sync refresh as pioneered by G-Sync is the way forward for display technology and rival AMD agrees. It has just signed deals with scaler manufacturers MStar, Novatek and Realtek to implement its own open standard - FreeSync - but it's clearly still early days before we see FreeSync displays on the shelves while Nvidia has a proven technology that is available now. Try it out if and when you can - the experience is in a class of its own.

For our benchmarks, we drop back the quality presets a single notch - Tomb Raider drops down from ultimate to ultra (TressFX's removal being the major difference), while Battlefield 4's high setting without MSAA is utilised instead of the top-end ultra. It's Metro Last Light that is cut back the most - we drop down from very high to high settings on both overall quality and tessellation, and we turn off super-sampling anti-aliasing (SSAA). Crysis 3 and BioShock Infinite drop to high and ultra respectively. With these settings in place we see that the card is capable of a good experience at 30fps, but in truth, we'd trade that extra resolution for something approaching 60fps at 1440p. Coupled with a 1440p G-Sync monitor, you can get exceptional results here with both the GTX 980 and the outgoing 780 Ti.

Good results on Battlefield 4 and BioShock give the GTX 980 a good 10 per cent average lead over the R9 290X, but in actual fact, it performs worse on both Crysis 3 and Tomb Raider. It's a similar story with the 780 Ti, in fact, but the GTX 980 still manages to comfortably beat the GTX 780 and GTX 680 - but to be honest, neither of those cards should really be considered for 4K gaming on anything other than medium settings at 30fps. With the overclock in place, we actually see our biggest gain in performance at 4K - our cumulative average rises from a 12.2 per cent boost to 14.8 per cent to 17.5 per cent as we move from 1080p to 1440p to 4K.

The GTX 980 remains competitive at 4K, though the weakness in Tomb Raider remains with both the GTX 780 Ti and R9 290X beating the new card. Here we've dropped down one quality preset compared to the previous tests, but BioShock Infinite aside, we're still firmly in 30fps territory on most titles.

3840x2160 (4K) GTX 980 GTX 980 (OC) GTX 780 Ti R9 290X GTX 780 GTX 680 BioShock Infinite, DX11 Ultra Tomb Raider, Ultra, FXAA Battlefield 4, High Metro: Last Light, High, AAA Crysis 3, High
57.4 66.8 50.7 43.7 39.9 31.8
39.5 45.6 43.3 40.1 34.1 26.0
46.2 53.7 41.9 38.9 35.8 26.8
36.4 42.7 33.1 30.4 27.6 19.3
34.2 41.9 33.4 35.2 28.1 23.5

Finally, let's take a look at peak power draw, extracted from the same PC running the Metro Last Light benchmark on each of our tested graphics card. There may be some disappointment at the relatively small increase in performance compared to the GTX 780 Ti in particular, but the power consumption metrics speak for themselves. The GTX 980's peak power draw is a colossal 80W lower than the outgoing 780 Ti, and almost 100W (!) lower than AMD's R9 290X. Even overclocked, it is more energy efficient than the Titan-lite GTX 780 - a stunning result.

Perhaps the most intriguing comparison is with the veteran GTX 680, a board that the new Maxwell offering has much in common with in terms of chip size and the memory bus. We see a seven per cent increase in peak power consumption on the new board in exchange for an average 65 per cent boost in performance.

That's the kind of generational leap we like to see - it's just a bit of a shame that Nvidia didn't really push the boat out and give enthusiasts a real upgrade in terms of performance compared to its existing flagship parts. What if the firm had retained the 384-bit memory interface for GTX 980? What if it had made a chip as large as the GK110 silicon found in the GTX 780, 780 Ti and Titan? A prospective GM210 would have been staggeringly good - perhaps Nvidia is looking to save that particular behemoth for the 20nm fabrication process, allowing for a cooler, quieter product.

GTX 980 GTX 980 (OC) GTX 780 Ti R9 290X GTX 780 GTX 680 Peak System Power Draw
265W 299W 345W 363W 312W 248W

Nvidia is keen to point out that the new range of graphics cards isn't just about the hardware - new features have been added software-side too. One new enhancement is MFAA (multi-frame anti-aliasing), which uses a 2x MSAA base in combination with temporal AA to produce an effect that the company reckons is comparable with 4x MSAA. From a performance standpoint, the hit is said to be the same as standard 2x multi-sampling. The demos we saw at a recent Nvidia tech conference are intriguing, but the technology was not available for testing in the GTX 970/980 launch driver. [UPDATE 19/9/14 8:51am:This Nvidia product video suggests that MFAA can also provide 2x MSAA quality with just a tiny performance hit - skip to around 1:30 for an explanation.]

Since the advent of deferred rendering, MSAA has been on the endangered list. It's no surprise that developers working with console in mind are looking to increase the effectiveness of post-process anti-aliasing, using a similar temporal component to Nvidia's MFAA technology. But cards like the GTX 980 may well have the bandwidth and fill-rate to accommodate MSAA, so we'll be interested to see how good it looks and what the performance hit actually is in demanding titles like Crysis 3 and Watch Dogs.

What we can test is DSR - dynamic super resolution - a new feature added to Maxwell, which should (hopefully) filter down eventually to existing Nvidia GPUs. Activated via GeForce experience, DSR is targeted at those using 1080p displays, effectively allowing you to access much higher resolutions (up to 4x native resolution), which are then downscaled down to 1080p - super-sampling, effectively. The idea is that if you're running a game with less demanding requirements on the GPU, you can re-deploy the power of the graphics card in order to produce extraordinarily good anti-aliasing.

Nvidia provided some examples in the zoomer gallery above (Assassin's Creed 4, Watch Dogs), but we've added a couple more based on our testing of the technology. If you've got the GPU time to spare, you can achieve some superb results here, but the application on newer titles will be limited - with DSR maxed, you're effectively asking the GPU to render 4K, and as you can see from the performance table above, that's too much of an undertaking for most modern games. However, there is clearly an application worth considering here for less demanding titles like Dark Souls 2 and BioShock Infinite. These titles shipped with post-process anti-aliasing only, and super-sampling makes a big difference.

www.eurogamer.net

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M vs GeForce GTX 980 – 4K gaming showdown and benchmarks

For some time now, high-end hardware is perfectly capable of handling Full HD gaming and we are actually on the verge of the so-called 4K gaming. To double your resolution though, you will need not only high-density monitor, but also GPU which would be able to handle those extra pixels. So in this short article you will find benchmark tests and 4K gaming tests from the most powerful gaming GPUs out there – GTX 980 and the GTX 980M.

The GTX 980 is the flagship of gaming GPUs in NVIDIA’s portfolio and its one of the first desktop graphic cards to be part of the Maxwell family. On the other side of the “corner” is the GTX 980M, which is also the flagship of gaming mobile GPUs and it’s featured in some serious gaming notebooks such as the new ASUS ROG G751. However, we managed to run some tests on both GPUs and see how they stand against each other. The GTX 980M was tested on the ASUS ROG G751 and the GTX 980 ran on ASUS ROG G20AJ desktop. For the record, NVIDIA claims that with the new Maxwell family, mobile GPUs will be able to reach as much as 80% of the performance of their desktop variants.

ASUS ROG G751
Processor RAM Graphics card HDD/SSD Display Optical drive Connectivity Other features Battery Thickness Weight Power supply weight
Intel Core i7-4860HQ (4-core, 2.40 – 3.60 GHz, 6MB cache)
8GB (1x 8192MB) – DDR3, 1600MHz
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (4GB GDDR5)
1TB HDD – 7200 rpm / 120GB SSD Samsung 840 EVO
17.3-inch (43.94 cm.) – 1920×1080 (Full HD), IPS matte
DVD
LAN 10/100/1000 Мбит/сек, Wi-Fi 802.11ac – Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 4.0
Card reader (SD, MMC), LED backlight keyboard, Kensington Lock, 4x USB 3.0 ports, HD web cam, HDMI, VGA Mini Display Port, stereo speakers + subwoofer, backpack
6000 mAh (8-cell)
53.00 mm
4,053 kg (with battery)
963 grams
ASUS ROG G20AJ
Processor Motherboard RAM Graphics card HDD/SSD Connectivity Other features
Intel Core i7-4790 (4-core, 3.60 – 4.00 GHz, 8MB cache)
ASUS
16GB (2x 8192MB) – DDR3, 1600MHz
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (4GB, GDDR5)
1256GB SSHD (256GB SSD + 1TB HDD)
LAN 10/100/1000 Мбит/сек, Wi-Fi 802.11ac, Bluetooth 4.0
    • 2x USB 3.0 (front panel)
    • 1x headphone jack (front panel)
    • 1x microphone jack (front panel)
    • 2x USB 3.0 (back panel)
    • 4x USB 2.0 (back panel)
    • HDMI
    • RJ-45
    • Kensington Lock

Dimensions:

  • 10.4 x 35.8 x 34 cm
  • 6.38 kg
GTX 980

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 is a top-tier graphics card, part of the Maxwell family GPUs. It features 4GB of GDDR5 VRAM on a 256-bit bus with 224GB/s memory bandwidth. The GTX 980 relies on 2048 shading units or the so-called CUDA cores from NVIDIA. The base GPU clock is 1126MHz with boost up to 1216MHz. It connects to the motherboard via PCI Express 3.0 and supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096 x 2160 (aka real UHD or 4K resolution). However, the maximum supported analog resolution is 2048 x 1536 with VGA port. It also has HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.2.

Maximum operating temperature is 98 degrees Celsius and maximum TDP of 165W, although you will need 500W power supply for your desktop set up.

GTX 980M

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 is a high-end mobile graphics card, which is part of the Maxwell family GPUs. It can go up to 8GB of VRAM, but in this case we have 4GB GDDR5. The GPU is GM204 with 1536 shading units (NVIDIA CUDA cores). Base clock of the GPU is 1038MHz and it can go up to 1127MHz thanks to GPU Boost 2.0 technology from NVIDIA. Memory bus is 256-bit and it supports DirectX 11.2, Pixel Shader 5.0, Optimus, SLI, PhysX, OpenCL 1.1, OpenGL 4.4, DirectCompute, CUDA, Blu-Ray 3D and 3D Vision technologies. The operating memory can go as fast as 160GB/s.

Maximum supported analog resolution is 2048 x 1536, while the digital one is 3840 x 2160.

Spec sheet
Technical specifications GeForce GTX 980 GeForce GTX 980M Family Manufacturing process GPU base clock GPU maximum clock Memory Memory speed Memory bus width Memory bandwidth Shading units (CUDA Cores) Texture units ROPs
Maxwell Maxwell
28nm 28nm
1126MHz 1038MHz
1216MHz 1127MHz
4GB GDDR5 4GB GDDR5
1753MHz 1253MHz
256-bit 256-bit
224.4 GB/s 160 GB/s
2048 1536
128 96
64 64
Benchmarks

Below you will find benchmark results from both GPUs and keep in mind that we used only graphic card’s score to measure the performance.

3DMark Cloud Gate

Cloud Gate is used to determine the overall performance of mainstream desktop and notebook PCs. However, we use it only to test the GPU using DirectX 10 or newer versions.

3DMark Fire Strike

Fire Strike is another 3DMark test but takes a lot more GPU power. It uses all of the DirectX 11 capabilities and it’s mostly suitable for high-end graphics or SLI and CrossFire set ups.

3DMark 11

3DMark 11 is the most popular benchmark from FutureMark for DirectX 11 testing and rendering.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This benchmark uses the well developed UNiGiNE engine to determine the performance of the GPU using DirectX 11 and OpenGL 4.0. Graphics settings are API: DirectX 11 | Tessellation: Normal | Shaders: High | Anisotropy: 16x | Stereo 3D: Disabled | Anti-aliasing: 8x | Resolution: 1365 x 768.

As you can see from the charts above, the difference in overall performance is surprisingly small. We are pleased to see that NVIDIA isn’t just using impressive numbers to consider the new Maxwell GPUs. The average performance of the GTX 980M is around 78-83% of the desktop variant and the only test that indicates bigger gap between two graphics card is the Unigine Heaven 3.0, where we have around 42% difference.

UHD gaming tests

As we expected, both GPUs handle UHD performance pretty well with low or medium presets, but with high settings things go downhill. So, we consider 40 FPS and above for flawless gaming and smooth animations, thus medium presets will be good enough for a casual gamer. Also, you can not benefit from FPS over 60, simply because there aren’t any 4K monitors with refresh rate over 60Hz due to port limitations. Same goes for the external display of the ROG G751, which can support 60Hz at FHD and only 30Hz at UHD, again due to HDMI 2.0 port limitations. Even casual gamers will notice the much lower FPS on their gaming notebook, despite the GPU being able to handle more than 30 FPS. However, we ran the tests to measure the real performance of both cards and compare.

GTX 980

GTX 980M

With a medium graphic presets GTX 980M has around 21% lower performance compared to the desktop GTX 980, while at high preset the difference is 23%.

Conclusion

Clearly NVIDIA’s new Maxwell GPUs close the gap between desktop and mobile graphics cards even more, at least according to the benchmarks and real-life gaming tests. We are also very happy with the 4K gaming test results, which exceed our expectations.

It seems that NVIDIA has put up relatively real benchmark results and the 20% performance gap between desktop and mobile GPUs is delivered, but there is still room for improvement. It will be long before we see powerful desktop GPUs in our notebooks, but it’s good to know that vendors are working on it. As for us, we are eager to test the upcoming high-end graphics from AMD to see if they show better overall performance, although it will be hard to keep with these results.

laptopmedia.com


Смотрите также