due to popular nvidia opinion, i thought the performance per

>>56569958
That is overall power consumption. Look at how much better each of those cards performs compared to its predecessor, then look at AMD's cards. They won't be anywhere near the NVidia offerings in terms of performance per watt.

>>56569968
also near predictable performance growth over the years as well.

steady performance growth with chaotic performance per watt.

>>56569958
That's power consumption not performance per Watt you mong

>I thought it would be of interest to see how power consumption has changed over the past 6 years. Back in 2010 we find the GTX 480, a very power hungry GPU that pushed our test system up to 319 watts. Nvidia refined the 480 design slightly with the 580 to save a little power while delivering more performance.

>Nvidia made huge inroads with their Kepler architecture in 2012 reducing power consumption considerably with the GTX 680 while still improving performance.

>Efficiency was mostly put on hold for the next few years while Nvidia squeezed what they could out of Kepler with the more complex and naturally power hungry GTX 780 and GTX 780 Ti. Then in 2014 the GTX 980 arrived and Nvidia’s new radically improved Maxwell architecture saw power consumption drop back down to GTX 680 levels while delivering around 70% more performance.

>However, by squeezing in 38% more CUDA cores with the GTX 980 Ti power consumption did climb back up to GTX 780 Ti levels. Now with the GTX 1080 we are almost back down to GTX 980 and GTX 680 levels of power consumption.

http://www.techspot.com/article/1191-nvidia-geforce-six-generations-tested/page5.html

700 series and the 980 ti were house fires.

>I thought it would be of interest to see how power consumption has changed over the past 6 years. Back in 2010 we find the GTX 480, a very power hungry GPU that pushed our test system up to 319 watts. Nvidia refined the 480 design slightly with the 580 to save a little power while delivering more performance.

>Nvidia made huge inroads with their Kepler architecture in 2012 reducing power consumption considerably with the GTX 680 while still improving performance.

>Efficiency was mostly put on hold for the next few years while Nvidia squeezed what they could out of Kepler with the more complex and naturally power hungry GTX 780 and GTX 780 Ti. Then in 2014 the GTX 980 arrived and Nvidia’s new radically improved Maxwell architecture saw power consumption drop back down to GTX 680 levels while delivering around 70% more performance.

>However, by squeezing in 38% more CUDA cores with the GTX 980 Ti power consumption did climb back up to GTX 780 Ti levels. Now with the GTX 1080 we are almost back down to GTX 980 and GTX 680 levels of power consumption.

http://www.techspot.com/article/1191-nvidia-geforce-six-generations-tested/page5.html

700 series and 980 ti where house fires.

>>56569958
>>56570019
>>56570058
the core codenames tell it all

480: GF100
580: GF110
680: GK104
780/Ti: GK110
980: GM204
980 Ti: GM200
1080: GP104
Titty X Pascal: GP102 (GP100 will never be consumer due to HBM troubles)

if it ends in a 0 or 2, the GPU uses around 250 watts; if it ends in a 4 the GPU uses around 200