GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Nvidia GTX 780 Ti Review: A Powerful GPU With A Price To Match

The GTX 780 Ti just about pushes Nvidia back to the top of the GPU performance pile, but its price is far from competitive.

232 Comments

For the vast majority of PC players, 1080p is the benchmark for performance, and by far the most popular resolution in use for gaming (at least according to the latest Steam Hardware Survey). Games look great at 1080p, monitors are cheap and plentiful, and you don't need to spend a fortune on an insanely powerful GPU to drive them. But if you're running multiple monitors, high resolutions like 1600p or 4K, or if you're simply after some bragging rights, then the likes of a GTX 650 Ti or Radeon 7850 just aren't going to cut it.

Enter the GTX 780 Ti, the latest GPU from Nvidia based on the GK110 chip. That's the same full-fat Kepler chip used in the GTX Titan and GTX 780, both of which are already excellent performers at high-resolutions. The trouble is, they aren't the best performers anymore. AMD's latest R9 290X and R9 290 have benchmarked extremely well, not only taking the performance crown from their rival, but also seriously undercutting it in terms of price. Nvidia's latest round of price cuts evens the playing field somewhat, but there's nothing quite like the prestige of having "the world's fastest graphics card".

No Caption Provided

The 780 Ti, then, has a big job ahead of it. At an RRP of $699 (£559 in the UK), it's still around $100 more expensive than the 290X, so it isn't going to be winning any awards for value. In terms of performance, though, it's very impressive. The 780 Ti is the first GPU to make use of the entire GK110 chip, that is, the full 2880 single precision CUDA cores, 240 texture units, and 48 ROP units. Memory comes in the form of 3GB of extremely fast 7Gbps GDDR5 for 336GB/s of bandwidth, while the base clock speed gets a bump to 845Mhz, and the boost clock speed to 928Mhz. It does lack scientific features like HyperQ and high-end 64 bit performance, but on paper at least, the GTX 780 Ti is the most powerful gaming card Nvidia's released.

GTX 780 Ti GPU SpecsGTX 780 Ti Memory Specs

2880 CUDA Cores
845 Base Clock (MHz)
928 Boost Clock (MHz)
210 GigaTexels/sex Texture Filtering Rate
240 Texture Units
48 ROP units

7.0 Gbps Memory Clock
3072 MB Standard Memory Config
GDDR5 Memory Interface
384-bit GDDR5 Memory Interface Width
336 GB/s Memory Bandwidth
GTX 780 Ti Software SupportGTX 780 Ti Display Support
OpenGL 4.3
PCI Express 3.0
GPU Boost 2.0, 3D Vision, CUDA, DirectX 11, PhysX, TXAA, Adaptive VSync, FXAA, 3D Vision Surround, SLI-ready
Four displays for Multi Monitor
4096x2160 Maximum Digital Resolution
2048x1536 Maximum VGA Resolution
Two Dual Link DVI, One HDMI, One DisplayPort
GTX 780 Ti DimensionsGTX 780 Ti Power Specs
10.5 inches Length
4.3 inches Height
Dual-slot Width
250 W TDP
600 W Recommended Power Supply
One 8-pin and one 6-pin Power Connector

Software

Like all of Nvidia's GPUs, the 780 Ti comes bundled with GeForce Experience (GFE), an application that automatically optimizes the graphics settings of your games based upon your hardware. GFE automatically updates your drivers and scans your games library for supported games, aiming to target settings that achieve 40 to 60 frames per second. Since its release earlier in the year, GFE's performance has improved by leaps and bounds, with many more supported games and optimal settings chosen. Naturally, you'll be able to eke out more performance by diving in and editing things manually, but if you're happy to let GFE do the job for you, the results are impressive.

No Caption Provided

Also part of the 780 Ti software package is ShadowPlay, a gameplay capture system that leverages the H.264 encoder built into Kepler (600, 700 series) GPUs. It automatically records the last 20 minutes of gameplay at up to 1080p60 at 50Mbps in automatic mode, but you can record as much footage as your hard drive allows in manual mode. ShadowPlay's also due to support direct streaming to Twitch.tv, although that feature isn't in the current beta. The advantage of using ShadowPlay over something like Fraps is CPU and memory usage. In our testing we found it affected the frame rate far less than Fraps did, in many cases with a hit of just a few frames per second. The software is still in beta, though, so we experienced a few capturing hiccups and crashes, but hopefully those issues will be ironed out before its full release.

There's also a great games bundle attached to the 780 Ti, with copies of Assassin’s Creed IV: Black Flag, Batman: Arkham Origins and Splinter Cell: Black List coming with every card. That's a sweet deal considering they're such current games, and hey, if you've already got them there's always the joy of gifting or selling on eBay.

Performance

Our trusty Ivy Bridge PC backed the GTX 780 Ti, although this time we overclocked the CPU to 4.2Ghz for a little extra oomph. A 1080p monitor would have been a waste for such a card, so we went with Asus' PQ321Q 4K monitor to really test its pixel-pushing power. With the exception of Crysis 3, all games were run at maximum settings and where possible we used FXAA for a performance boost. Call Of Duty: Ghosts was run at a lower resolution of 2560x1600, due to a current lack of 4K support.

MotherboardAsus P8Z68-V Motherboard
ProcessorIntel Core i5 3570k @ 4.2Ghz
RAM16GB 1600Mhz DDR3 Corsair Vengeance RAM
Hard DriveCorsair Force GT/Samsung Spinpoint F3 1 TB
Power SupplyCorsair HX850 PSU
DisplayAsus PQ321Q @ 3840x2160/Dell 3007WFP-HC @ 2560x1600

Battlefield 4 (2x MSAA @ 3840x2160)

No Caption Provided
Average FPSMinimum FPSMaximum FPS
GTX 780 Ti322444
GTX Titan292140
GTX 780261336

Crysis 3 (High Settings, FXAA @ 3840x2160)

No Caption Provided
Average FPSMinimum FPSMaximum FPS
GTX 780 Ti302444
GTX Titan272234
GTX 780252037

Call Of Duty: Ghosts (HBAO+, FXAA @ 2560x1600)

No Caption Provided
Average FPSMinimum FPSMaximum FPS
GTX 780 Ti7528107
GTX Titan7647104
GTX 780543783

Bioshock Infinite (Ultra @ 3840x2160)

No Caption Provided
Average FPSMinimum FPSMaximum FPS
GTX 780 Ti503467
GTX Titan403361
GTX 780302561

Tomb Raider (Ultra @ 3840x2160)

No Caption Provided
Average FPSMinimum FPSMaximum FPS
GTX 780 Ti302343
GTX Titan292139
GTX 780281637

Metro: Last Light (Ultra @ 3840x2160)

No Caption Provided
Average FPSMinimum FPSMaximum FPS
GTX 780 Ti332749
GTX Titan292537
GTX 780252040

A Pricey Performer

As expected with such killer specs, the GTX 780 Ti screams through the likes of Battlefield 4 and Call Of Duty: Ghosts, even at 4K, easily beating the GTX 780 and even the $1000 Titan. It's an impressive showing for a card based on an architecture that's now well over a year and a half old, and represents the peak of Kepler's rendering abilities. While we unfortunately didn't have an AMD R9 290X on hand to make a direct comparison, judging by the benchmarks out there, the 780 Ti is a comparable card and once again places Nvidia within striking distance of, if not back at the top of GPU performance.

Such performance comes at a price, though. At over $100 more than the R9 290X and nearly $300 more than the similarly performing R9 290, the 780 Ti is an expensive choice. It's also $100 more expensive than the GTX 780, a GPU that's hardly a slouch when it comes to high-resolution performance. Yes, the 780 Ti is far more power-efficient than AMD's latest, and yes, it's a very quiet card in operation too, and we experienced none of the power throttling issues that are currently plaguing the R9 290.

Whether that's worth the extra cash, though, is debatable. No doubt about it, the GTX 780 Ti is a brilliant GPU backed by some brilliant software, but you can do a lot with that $100 saving (or even $300 if you plump for the R9 290). AMD's aggressive pricing has taken the shine off the GTX 780 Ti, but if you're all in for team green and have the high-res setup to do it justice, it's the absolute best you can get from Nvidia, and one of the best GPUs (a lot) of money can buy.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 232 comments about this story
232 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for CUDGEdave
CUDGEdave

2597

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

Nice to see something PC instead of all this bloody PS4/Xbox one dullness.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for SpLiTMaN
SpLiTMaN

36

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

unless your playing on a specialized 30 inch monitor or a giant 90 inch tv resolutions over 1080 is pointless....so ill stay at 1080 with my gtx 660 OC and with everything maxed i lock 60 frame for everything..including the last crap games that came out...id need a crysis 4 just to see if my pc is still fit cuz no game actualy comes close to chalanging it...so thx but...NO!!!!!! maybe next year..

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DeanoFantasy
DeanoFantasy

186

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

It would be nice to PC game at this level, just this is just why console gaming is more beneficial to just for gaming in general, im happily set up for £350 for the next 5 or 6 years now with the PS4, no essential need to be spending so much unnecessary time and money on something to make it look that bit better than a console version, I used to love PC gaming in the 90's I just don't think It would do me a favor anymore.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for simon1812
simon1812

428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

$699? with that much couldn't I just buy a PS4, a year PSN subscription,and BF4 with premium included?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for gufberg
gufberg

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> For the best price/performance you should be looking at the R9 280X (preferably the Asus TOP edition) It performs better than its GTX 770 competitor and is much cheaper. Also there'll be some never settle bundle stuff attached to it retroactively at some point (or so has AMD indicated)

Another option, if you feel like you can hold out, is to wait for the next generation a 1-1,5 years down the line. A 280x is essentially just a reskinned 7970 afterall and in the next generation we'll see AMD put their new architecture used in the 290x to use on more sensibly priced GPUs.

so yeah tl;dr: If you need an upgrade now go r9 280X (Asus edition preferably)

additionally, if you want to look at some easily digestible performance comparisons AnandTech has a great benchmark comparison tools so you can see how different cards stacks up against each other. I dont think they've added the 280x but its essentially a 7970 so you can use that for reference if you're looking for benchmarks.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for faddish
faddish

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> I just got a 7950 for $189 before a $30 rebate. Overclocked it a bit runs a heavily modded Skyrim @ a consistent 60fps 1080p. If they're are any priced like that go for it. GTX 760 are priced well as well.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DIGN
DIGN

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

All I'm going to say is, if you buy a 780 Ti, Titan, or pretty much any recent high-end Nvidia card over the R9 290X you're an idiot and should hand all of your money to someone who will use it properly. There's being a fanboy and then there's being just plain dumb.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for johnners2981
johnners2981

243

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Do gamespot do AMD gpu reviews, why not? It seems a bit biased to only review one companies hardware and not it's competitors.


And Mark, the 780ti is $150 more expensive than AMD's 290x, not $100.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for focuspuller
focuspuller

57

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

That price will drop. AMD is giving them a serious run for the money.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for StellOverdrive
StellOverdrive

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Maybe if you're only going to play current-gen games at 1080p 60Hz for the next 5 years—but then you're not who this card is targeted at. Some people game on multi-monitor setups or at 1440p+ and will want to get 120 fps if they have a 120Hz capable monitor (which DOES look noticeably smoother than 60 fps) and may buy this card to keep taking full advantage of their hardware for the next few years of game releases. If you think it's only about increasing frame rates at the same hardware and settings, then you completely miss the point.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Evildantheman
Evildantheman

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

S @Mark Butler £180 quid dearer than a ps4 and from the table above its only running bf4 at 44 FPS. I'll stick to consoles i think. there worth the money you pay compared to pcs.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for scarred_fox
scarred_fox

583

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

<< LINK REMOVED >> you can build a PC that is at the same price range as the next-gen consoles and still out perform those consoles, of course you will need to research the parts if you're going to stay on budget. this card is made specifically for 4k, hi-res and multiple monitors.

I've currently played all the games listed a @1920x1080 using a 580GTX. The single card is still doing its job at full settings

Upvote • 
Avatar image for BlackBaldwin
BlackBaldwin

1245

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

@Jim Corleone

Maybe you didn't hear but ps3 sold 80million units on its own xbox360 isn't too far behind that so saying 65million steam users disagree isn't that impressive...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for bbq_R0ADK1LL
bbq_R0ADK1LL

1609

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

There is no point in testing these cards at 4K if they can't even touch 60fps in most of the games you test. Also it would have been useful to see an R9 290 in the mix for comparison.

What I have learnt: anyone who thinks they can game at 4K with a single GPU is dreaming.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Supabul
Supabul

4266

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >>

They where tested on a 4k monitor

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dr_jashugan
dr_jashugan

2665

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

More than this or than that? Give us the total price, GS! 8-\

Upvote • 
Avatar image for SKaREO
SKaREO

3161

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

So for nearly the price of both next-gen consoles, I could buy a single video card. Did anyone notice we are about to go into the largest depression the Western world has ever seen? Time to wake up, nobody can afford this crap.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tionmedon
tionmedon

468

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

my 690gtx will do till 890gtx shows up...


Upvote • 
Avatar image for aeterna789
aeterna789

252

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

A little message to pc gamers who think this card is too expensive or console gamers who think PC gaming is too expensive.

A PC (gaming or work), are investments. You don't have to upgrade every time a new model comes out specially if you can't afford it. Buying the proper model GPU should last you at least 4 years (or more). This is enough time to save up money on your next purchase in the future.I my self have skipped several Nvidia Series cards. When I started PC gaming, my first video card was a GeForce 6600 GT, then the 8800 GT, followed by a 275 until my current GTX 670 (which still performs perfectly). =)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jarten
Jarten

247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I think I'll stick with my recently acquired 760. The price tag was at least in a manageable place with my low income. I think it has at least 3-4 years minimum left in it before I'll start considering getting a new upgrade. At least that's the plan anyways unless something big happens to change everything.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for loverpc4ever
LOVERPC4EVER

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

i didn't know about 780 TI i just bought 780 is there a big deference

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tachsniper
tachsniper

1542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

im fine with my 2 660ti's in SLI, haven't seen a game yet they can't keep at 60 FPS in 1080p

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ZombieGuyGeorge
ZombieGuyGeorge

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

how many frames per second is tekken tag 2 running on a pc?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for SKaREO
SKaREO

3161

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> Yeah, or how many frames does it get with GTA V? Actually, I think the framerates are 0 and 0 respectively, because they don't even come out for the PC. Two of the best games ever made and they aren't even on a PC. PC gaming is a joke.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Sour_Wafflez
Sour_Wafflez

28

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The minimum FPS on COD: Ghosts is kind of weird, but I guess that'll be fixed with a driver update. Seems like a great card for anyone with 1440p, or 1600p who has $700 to drop. 4K obviously needs an SLI, and ton of money lol

Upvote • 
Avatar image for blobby-blobby
Blobby-blobby

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Them framerates look pretty shit

Upvote • 
Avatar image for blackace
blackace

23576

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> They are running at 2X - 1080P resolution. So just double the FPS and that's what it would run like on next-gen consoles. lol!!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Snakepond1
Snakepond1

44

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Damn. That's expensive.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tomservo51
tomservo51

698

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> 780, it's a higher number.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for aeterna789
aeterna789

252

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> He should get the GTX 8800. It's 8020 numbers higher.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Daian
Daian

2901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> lol, that's not exactly how it works, but yeah, it's better.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fedetaco
fedetaco

104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I Know Pc gaming is more powerful, but I think that I buy consoles because I can take them to whatever place I want and because of some franchises I grew up....maybe that's the main reason, I played some games on my PC but the experience was not the same, There is still something in my mind that tells me that computers are used to program and work in the office and consoles are for entertainment. Games will always look better in Pc....

Upvote • 
Avatar image for JURGMANDR
JURGMANDR

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> you can take a laptop with you wherever you want too, just don't expect to play games with anywhere near the same settings as on a good desktop.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for xand3rro
xand3rro

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >>

Your practical, non-aggressive take on things is not welcome on this site.

7 • 
Avatar image for gamefreak215jd
gamefreak215jd

361

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

I'd really like to know more about mid-range GPU's for next gen.But what if 660 will end up being a mid range GPU for next gen games?Besides this is only the beginning and there's no telling how good will games look as the nextgen progresses.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for gamefreak215jd
gamefreak215jd

361

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

And just wondering,would a 650ti boost be enough to handle nextgen games?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Daian
Daian

2901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> depends on the resolution.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tomservo51
tomservo51

698

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> Yes, but you won't be running them with all the bells and whistles.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for blackace
blackace

23576

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> That's the thing. If they used just the bells and whistle that next-gen console are using, the FPS would easily be a lot faster.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for wexorian
wexorian

3228

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 263

User Lists: 0

I'l stick to my 660, I'm fine with 1080p with small monitor for desk is enough for me, This gpu is just best for High end cool monitors

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5d9e7b16c132a
deactivated-5d9e7b16c132a

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> This typpe of resolution is best for desktop screens. It needs to be at a closer distance to your eye in order for you to notice the really small details. More or less 25" is perfect.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for SlaviksG
SlaviksG

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Its 500$ :/ i would buy a console.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for push88
push88

143

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >> That's exactly why there are more console gamers then PC gamers.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for meatz666
meatz666

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> Who plays in 3840x2160? To match the next gen, you need a simple $200 card.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for meatz666
meatz666

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> Your computer can't output at 1080p, with graphics on medium? It's impossible to have equivalent of Xbox. There's a lot of proprietary architecture there.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for blobby-blobby
Blobby-blobby

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

<< LINK REMOVED >>

I own the equivalent hardware to the X1 but my PC won't run games as good. Atm my rig can only run BF4 on medium smooth with 3 higher settings. Set me back £400 a year or so back.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DeusGladiorum
DeusGladiorum

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> Not even. Cards equivalent to next-gen consoles are around $120 - $160. PC gaming has come a long way considering that the card the Xbox 360 used was equivalent to a $500 PC card when it first came out. PC gaming by generation 9 (Xbox Two, PS5) will be far cheaper than consoles considering the trend. Hell, I'll bet that by 2015 it'll be cheaper to build a PC than it will be to buy a console.

Upvote •