http://www.hwcompare.com/18245/geforce-gtx-980-vs-geforce-gtx-690/
It's a more powerful card hand's down.
Tom's Hardware is showing it as a tier above the 980:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html
The 690 outperforms the 980 in at least half of the games during this test where they are on the same system:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan_X/1.html
And in Anandtech's own review of the Titan-X, the 690 is shown beating the 980 in multiple sections, often coming within a handful of frames when it doesn't.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review
Due to the newer architecture, there are areas where the 980 performs better than the 690, but comparing $375-425 to $550-600 means the 690 is punching much higher than it's current available price-range.
Some things to note: Many reviews put the 2GB version of the 690 on the board when comparing to newer cards to make them look especially favorable, and sometimes even then the 690 is behind by only a small margin. Also, while the reference to reference the 690 wins against the 980, the super/overclocked versions of the 980 generally beat it by a noticeable margin.
-- Examples --
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph9059/72511.png
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan_X/images/dai_1920_1080.gif
http://www.game-debate.com/blog/index.php?b_id=14440&author=Pip&blog=GeForce GTX 980 Special Editions Added
--- /Examples ---
True. While hardware to hardware, the 690 has about 30-40% more to work with, the disadvantages of SLI and Architecture years makes the two cards on par with each other, depending on the situation. I still maintain that it's a steal if you can find one for under $400 (which isn't difficult in the current market).
Last edited:
After AMDs new flagship is out (comes with 8GB), Nvidia will most probably counter with a 6-8 GB card (depending on the width of the memory interface), so you'll have to wait for a bit more until adequate choices are out.
amd 300 will only come late this year if it does. only rumours so far, nothing official so these "benchmarks" are all false and based on simple speculation.
nvidia pascal architecture only comes in 2016 as that Huang said on GTX 2015.
There could be a chance for a 6-8gb GTX 980Ti which could be a downgraded( partly disabled gm 200 chip) but i wouldn't wait for it .. all modern games are optimised to play on ultra with less than 4GB vram required on 1080p. you only need more than 4gb if you want to use more than 2 gpu buffered frames, DSR, or higher resolution native monitor.
nvidia pascal architecture only comes in 2016 as that Huang said on GTX 2015.
There could be a chance for a 6-8gb GTX 980Ti which could be a downgraded( partly disabled gm 200 chip) but i wouldn't wait for it .. all modern games are optimised to play on ultra with less than 4GB vram required on 1080p. you only need more than 4gb if you want to use more than 2 gpu buffered frames, DSR, or higher resolution native monitor.
which new chip you mean? amd chip? can you show official source for this?
Of course not, since there are no official sources for unannounced products as you surely know.
Nevertheless, multiple sources have heard from AMD, off the record (at GDC and Cebit), that their new flagship-GPU Fiji will be released in June.
Besides, there are performance values of Fiji engineering samples floating around in the Sisoft Sandra database (a regular source for unannounced CPUs and GPUs) for several months now, plus the appearance of Fiji GPUs and testing PCBs on cargo manifests going from Asia to Canada (where AMDs GPU department, former ATI, is located).
There is no doubt that the new cards will be out before too long.
Nevertheless, multiple sources have heard from AMD, off the record (at GDC and Cebit), that their new flagship-GPU Fiji will be released in June.
Besides, there are performance values of Fiji engineering samples floating around in the Sisoft Sandra database (a regular source for unannounced CPUs and GPUs) for several months now, plus the appearance of Fiji GPUs and testing PCBs on cargo manifests going from Asia to Canada (where AMDs GPU department, former ATI, is located).
There is no doubt that the new cards will be out before too long.
Last edited:
Dying to know.
Hey guys. A huge fan of the Witcher i loved both games, played each one over and over and cant wait for Witcher 3. But im dying to know, thus the title, if i can run the game >.<
Currently i been told i can run it High, which is fine im keen on high but i guess best place to ease my mind is the official forums of the game.
I have, FX 8350, Dual-x 280x and 8g ram. I mean to take ubersampling off , obviously a no brainer and little to no AA.
Cheers for any help xD
Hey guys. A huge fan of the Witcher i loved both games, played each one over and over and cant wait for Witcher 3. But im dying to know, thus the title, if i can run the game >.<
Currently i been told i can run it High, which is fine im keen on high but i guess best place to ease my mind is the official forums of the game.
I have, FX 8350, Dual-x 280x and 8g ram. I mean to take ubersampling off , obviously a no brainer and little to no AA.
Cheers for any help xD
Last edited:
I've read here http://www.pcgamer.com/new-witcher-3-details-ciri-cities-real-time-beard-growth/ that for a fluid gameplay on 1080p with everything on maximum +nvidia hairworks we need a GTX 980, well, f**k
Is there anything strange about that..?
of course for maxing the game you'll require a top GPU, how would they sell them otherwise?
i find strange that we need the most powerful gpu in the world to get the game on maximumIs there anything strange about that..?
But it's not the most powerful gpu in the world.i find strange that we need the most powerful gpu in the world to get the game on maximum
which is the most powerful gpu?But it's not the most powerful gpu in the world.
The TitanX:
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
Of course it's also the most pricey, and perhaps not the best in terms of performance/$. Just wanted to point out that the 980 is not the most powerful anymore.
ok, so we need the second most powerful gpu to max the game out, great
I do not understand. Why in Turing's name would you field a game that did not take full advantage of the most powerful technology available? If the game performed no better on a 980 than, say, a 760, CDPR would be a corporate developer playing it safe, not a first-class developer pushing the envelope of what is possible in computer graphics.
You may want to read this if you're judging the games performance at max settings and thinking it's automatically unoptimized garbage or something along those lines. The sarcastic tone of your post is telling enough.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=885444
If the game is pushing crazy technology at max settings all the while being an open world, then yea, it is great that something like a 980 can max it at 60fps. Doesn't say anything about optimization or it being bad.
i never, ever, said the game is unoptimized garbage, besides, i'm sure that the gam is perfectly optimized, 'im just saying, that a gtx 980 to max the game out is a bit high, ( i bought a new pc for this game a few weeks ago)
does every person in this forum have that gpu? i don't, i'm just worried because i won't get the game to run on max settings, thats all,
sorry about sarcasm i didn't mean anything aginst the game or it's optimization