Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
IAmARock

How much faster is Maxwell than Kepler (GK106 (660) v. GM107 (750 ti)

3 posts in this topic

First off, the final conclusion is that Maxwell (GM107) cores are 22% faster than GK106 (660) cores according to TechPowerUps test using the stock 750 ti (link: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_750_Ti/) and the stock 660.

*I believe I did this math right*
First off, the 660 is 23% fast than the 750 ti.
So, for the 750ti to be 23% faster, it would need 23% more cores, or, 787 (640*1.23)
Now, that means that they are equal in speed, so, divide the number of cores in the 660 by the number of cores the 750ti would need to be as fast... 960/787, or 1.22.

From this, we can conclude that a 2560 core GM204 should be approx 8% (2560*1.22 = 3123/2880 = ~8.5%) faster than a GK110 (both fully enabled, clockspeed difference in % the same as between the 660 and the 750 ti).  I should note that the GM204 will likely have a high difference in clockspeeds (stock 750ti ran about 60Mhz over stock 660, for a difference of around 5%).

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did some math, it is better to compare GM107 to GTX 650 Ti (same bus).

 

GM107 needs ~691 CUDAs to reach the same performance as GK106.

 

Any feedback is appreciated. I think card needs at least 10% more cores than predecessor, so even though GTX 880 with 2560 would be as fast as 780 TI, it still needs more cores.

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

640*1.08 = 691 cores.

768/691 = 1.11

Cuda cores are 11% faster in the 750Ti than in the 650 ti boost.

2560*1.11 = 2841... Given that the GM204 has a 5% clockspeed advantage over GK110 it will be the same speed, based on the 750 ti versus the 650 ti boost.

_________________________

table has some problems with it, to match 960 CUDA cores (running 5% faster clockspeed) you need only 787.  I will look closer later... the issue is, all the cards have different % that needs to be calculated differently, plan to do a lot today.

QUESTION: did you use the boost or the base clocks?  Because, the Boost clock is 980 (TPU reported it at 1098 max) and the 750 ti is 1020 base (TPU reported 1150 boost)
Also, the 650 ti boost is 35% faster than the 650 ti.... 

Using those numbers, looking at TPU 750 ti review, the 750 ti comes out 23% (or, the 650 ti is 19% slower) FASTER than the 650 ti... (100/81)
The 750 ti is 23% faster than the 650 ti while running at approx at 24% faster clockspeed.  I am going to presume that running the cores at the same clockspeed would get the 650 and 750ti at the same speed... 768/640.... Which makes the the cores 20% faster.


 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0