The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Review
by Ryan Smith on November 7, 2013 9:01 AM ESTCompany of Heroes 2
Our second benchmark in our benchmark suite is Relic Games’ Company of Heroes 2, the developer’s World War II Eastern Front themed RTS. For Company of Heroes 2 Relic was kind enough to put together a very strenuous built-in benchmark that was captured from one of the most demanding, snow-bound maps in the game, giving us a great look at CoH2’s performance at its worst. Consequently if a card can do well here then it should have no trouble throughout the rest of the game.
Since Company of Heroes 2 is not an AFR friendly game, getting the best performance out of the game requires having the fastest GPU. While the GTX 780 Ti has a clear lead over the 290X across the average of our games, in this specific case it’s going to come up short, as AMD’s performance with this game is simply too high to be overcome without a significant performance advantage. Conversely this means that GTX 780 Ti and 290X are still close enough that NVIDIA won’t be able to sweep every game; in games where AMD still does exceptionally well, they’ll be able to close the gap and surpass the GTX 780 Ti.
Meanwhile, looking at a straight-up NVIDIA comparison, the GTX 780 Ti holds a slightly smaller than normal lead over its counterparts. At 5% faster than GTX Titan and 17% faster than GTX 780 it’s still the fastest of the cards, but it won’t pull ahead in this game by as much as it does elsewhere.
The minimum framerate story is largely the same. GTX 780 Ti is the fastest NVIDIA card, but it will trail the 290X by over 10% in both scenarios.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
302 Comments
View All Comments
A5 - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
BF4 has a built-in benchmark too, but I have no idea how good it is. I'd guess they're waiting on a patch?If nothing else, there will be BF4 results if/when that Mantle update comes out.
IanCutress - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
BF4 has a built in benchmark tool? I can't find any reference to one.Ryan Smith - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
BF3 will ultimately get replaced with BF4 later this month. For the moment with all of the launches in the past few weeks, we haven't yet had the time to sit down and validate BF4, let alone collect all of the necessary data.1Angelreloaded - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
Hell man people run FEAR still as a benchmark because of how brutal it is against GPU/CPU/HDD.Bakes - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
I think it's better to wait until driver performance stabilizes for new applications before basing benchmarks on them. If you don't then early benchmark numbers become useless for comparison sake.TheJian - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
I would argue warhead needs to go. Servers for that game have been EMPTY for ages and ZERO people play it. You can ask to add BF4, but to remove BF3 given warhead is included (while claiming bf3 old) is ridiculous. How old is Warhead? 7-8 years? People still play BF3. A LOT of people. I would argue they need to start benchmarking based on game sales.Starcraft2, Diablo3, World of Warcraft Pandaria, COD Black ops 2, SplinterCell Blacklist, Assassins Creed 3 etc etc... IE, black ops 2 has over 5x the sales of Hitman Absolution. Which one should you be benchmarking?
Warhead...OLD.
Grid 2 .03 total sales for PC says vgchartz
StarCraft 2 5.2.mil units (just PC).
Which do you think should be benchmarked?
Even Crysis 3 only has .27mil units says vgchartz.
Diablo 3? ROFL...3.18mil for PC. So again, 11.5x Crysis 3.
Why are we not benchmarking games that are being sold in the MILLIONS of units?
WOW still has 7 million people playing and it can slow down a lot with tons of people doing raids etc.
TheinsanegamerN - Friday, November 8, 2013 - link
because any halfway decent machine can run WoW? they use the most demanding games to show how powerful the gpu really is. 5760x1080p with 4xMSAA gets 69 FPS with the 780ti.why benchmark hitman over black ops? simple, it is not what we call demanding.
they use demanding games. not the super popular games thatll run on hardware from 3 years ago.
powerarmour - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
Well, that time on the throne for the 290X lasted about as long as Ned Stark...Da W - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
I look at 4K gaming since i play in 3X1 eyefinity (being +/- 3.5K gaming).At these resolution i see an average of 1FPS lead for 780Ti over 290X. For 200$ more.
Power consumption is about the same.
And as far as temperature go, it's temperature AT THE CHIP level. Both cards will heat your room equally if they consume as much power.
The debate is really about the cooler, and Nvidia got an outright lead as far as cooling goes.
JDG1980 - Thursday, November 7, 2013 - link
It seems to me that both Nvidia and AMD are charging too much of a price premium for their top-end cards. The GTX 780 Ti isn't worth $200 more than the standard GTX 780, and the R9 290X isn't worth $150 more than the standard R9 290.For gamers who want a high-end product but don't want to unnecessarily waste money, it seems like the real competition is between the R9 290 ($399) and the GTX 780 ($499). At the moment the R9 290 has noise issues, but once non-reference cards become available (supposedly by the end of this month), AMD should hold a comfortable lead. That said, the Titan Cooler is indeed a really nice piece of industrial design, and I can see someone willing to pay a bit extra for it.