About what? There are three aspects in my quote you referenced. Two already graphically addressed, one easily interpreted from the spec sheet + PR bumpf + any quick Google of the two architectures The compute functionality AMD jammed into the games? Why not try AMD's own benchmark guides The compute functionality of the GK110 in relation to the GK104 ? Well, all the compute functionality culled from GK104 to prioritize general gaming, die size, thermal/power usage that Nvidia didn't spotlight with the GK104 launch, is pretty much front and centre in Nvidia's GK110 marketing : "Nvidia believes that traditional graphic APIs such as directx and OpenGL have stalled, which opens the way to new techniques and post-processing shader graph running on GPGPU APIs like CUDA, DirectCompute (part of DirectX 11 and above) and OpenCL as deferred shading techniques, global and interactive illumination, indirect illumination (octres and voxels) used in the game Battlefield 3 and Unreal Engine 3" About the lack of compute functionality in GK104 ? Well, if you had problems parsing the previous chart- and the TS review it obviously came from, I'm not sure if showing you a heap of others is going to make things clearer- but as Ray Lewis said; I'll take a stab at it. [source] Note the relationship in the chart between the GTX 680 and the card it replaced in the product stack. I'd suggest reading through the review, as well as any others that utilize benchmarks which require compute shader input.