Palit GTX 780 Super JetStream: Titan-like performance for less

By on July 12, 2013, 1:52 AM

Traditionally, AMD and Nvidia board partners have boosted the performance of most GPUs by 5-10% via overclocking, so we fully expected one of them to take a stab at closing the meager 14% gap separating the GTX 780 and Titan. Palit has answered the bell with its GTX 780 Super JetStream, which is clocked 14% higher than usual at 980MHz with a 1033MHz boost, up from 863MHz and 902MHz.

We've only previously seen water-cooled GTX 780 cards pushed this far, while most air-cooled solutions have maxed out at around 960MHz, at least as far as factory overclocking has been concerned. However the GTX 780 Super JetStream is no ordinary graphics card, as its massive heatsink and three large fans keep its core cool when under stress -- a solution that allows the card to outpace the Titan, Palit says.

Read the complete review.




User Comments: 26

Got something to say? Post a comment
1 person liked this | Xtreme gamer said:

Good review. Love the 5760x + testing.

Would like to see in future 3 sizes per game: 1920x1080, 2560x1600, 5760x1200

Guest said:

We have seen the SLI TDP but we haven't seen the SLI temperatures. It would also be nice to have some pictures of these bad boys running in SLI

Nobina Nobina said:

Awesome card, was there a review of HD 7990 cause I didn't even know that card exists . It's a beast.

Guest said:

Is it the titan performance or just look alike ?

GhostRyder GhostRyder said:

Wow, its a nice cooler on a GTX 780, kinda reminds me of a slightly bigger gigabyte cooler. I wonder how the two would compare in cooling and overclocking. Though at a 3 slot design limits the SLI capabilities especially considering that many boards only have two PCIE lanes. But seeing this card pretty much be a titan without costing a titans price is kick ass.

1 person liked this | Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Is it the titan performance or just look alike ?

What?! What on earth does "look alike" even mean? this performs better than a stock Titan, simple as that, I'm confused how something can perform to "look alike" another product?

grvalderrama said:

Damn it... It's huge compared to that Asrock motherboard!

howzz1854 said:

That extra camel hump in the middle is going to cause a lot of problems in a lot of people's cases. upon inspecting it, looks like they don't really need it. the heatsink itself is straight across. they might loose a few customers there for people with side intake case fans.

JC713 JC713 said:

Wow. This is a great card. Looks cool and performs great.

Under testing methodolgy there is an error though. The AMD Catalyst driver should be listed as "13.6 Beta", not just "13.6"

Guest said:

I paid $650 on Amazon for the EVGA OC GTX780 with reference cooler. Through provided software, you can easily beat these numbers with it and kick in the fan to higher speeds as you see fit. I'm at 1010, 1100 and have bumped memory well beyond that. In other words you can OC these yourself no problem. I only went with the OC because the price was the same. Also, the reference cooler expels air out the back of your case, this looks to keep it inside, so you better have good cooling.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

That extra camel hump in the middle is going to cause a lot of problems in a lot of people's cases. upon inspecting it, looks like they don't really need it. the heatsink itself is straight across. they might loose a few customers there for people with side intake case fans.

Anyone plunking down $650+ on a card is likely aware of the width of it and the clearance required- although I'd note that many enthusiast chassis designs are shying away from side fans in any case. EVGA (amongst others) have had wider than the standard (112mm) cards for some time. Notably the GTX 580 Classified. Asus's entire range of enthusiast DCII cards are close to an inch wider than "normal" (along with Sapphire's Vapor-X and MSI's Lightning range), while the Matrix series are wider again at 140mm ...somewhat wider than the Palit card.

Anyhow, thanks for another concise and extensive review Steve.

cmbjive said:

Unfortunately this card is not available in the States. I had gone to their website and it looks like it is only sold overseas. The cheapest place so far is from Australia, which sells the card for $714 at today's conversion rates.

How does this card compare to the ones available from American manufacturers?

Staff
Steve Steve said:

Unfortunately this card is not available in the States. I had gone to their website and it looks like it is only sold overseas. The cheapest place so far is from Australia, which sells the card for $714 at today's conversion rates.

How does this card compare to the ones available from American manufacturers?

The cheapest you can get a GTX 780 in Australia for is $760 AUD, so about $690 US.

That extra camel hump in the middle is going to cause a lot of problems in a lot of people's cases. upon inspecting it, looks like they don't really need it. the heatsink itself is straight across. they might loose a few customers there for people with side intake case fans.

Honestly cannot imagine this being an issue for anyone.

Awesome card, was there a review of HD 7990 cause I didn't even know that card exists . It's a beast.

There was a review, we were not that impressed and recommended using a pair of 7970 GHz Edition cards instead when two slots are available.

Good review. Love the 5760x + testing.

Would like to see in future 3 sizes per game: 1920x1080, 2560x1600, 5760x1200

If we add another resolution we would have to test less games, especially if its a triple monitor resolution. Typically the margins you see at 2560x1600 are going to be the same at 5760x1200.

soldier1969 soldier1969 said:

This card is not even available in the US and won't be so why bother..Better off with the EVGA ACX version anyway.

2 people like this |
Staff
Steve Steve said:

This card is not even available in the US and won't be so why bother..Better off with the EVGA ACX version anyway.

It might come as a shock to you but not everyone lives in the US. So that being the case there is a very real reason to bother. The EVGA ACX is a nice card, it is not better.

GhostRyder GhostRyder said:

This card is not even available in the US and won't be so why bother..Better off with the EVGA ACX version anyway.

Because the card exists and it has an amazing cooler maybe? That new ACX card is nice for sure, im actually curious how well it performs overclocking wise, now I feel like looking that up.

Although Steve, I would like to see the next card be available to all if you could get one like that, the last three have not been available all around, maybe one of those Asus Direct CU II cards?

On the same related note, has anyone seen that new looking Asus direct CU card, that thing just looks amazing!

Last note, I just was looking at the cooler on the Palit card, does the middle fan spin different directions that the other two, the blades on the center fan are facing a different direction. Quite odd, im curious on the way the air moves on the card.

baN893 baN893 said:

This card is not even available in the US and won't be so why bother..

I find this mind set very irritating... Great review Steve! Already checking my piggy bank for some extra pennies :P

Adhmuz Adhmuz, TechSpot Paladin, said:

"For whatever it's worth, at the slightly lower but still extreme 5670x1200 resolution, it was possible to enjoy highly playable performance in most of the games tested." Honestly these results are worth more than the 7680x1600 resolution, its far more feasible to have 3x1920x1080 these days as that's the (unfortunate) golden standard of screens, heck you could get three 24" screens for under $500 which is less than the video card your driving them with.

Staff
Steve Steve said:

"For whatever it's worth, at the slightly lower but still extreme 5670x1200 resolution, it was possible to enjoy highly playable performance in most of the games tested." Honestly these results are worth more than the 7680x1600 resolution, its far more feasible to have 3x1920x1080 these days as that's the (unfortunate) golden standard of screens, heck you could get three 24" screens for under $500 which is less than the video card your driving them with.

But that's my point, if you are going to invest $1300+ in GPU's would you cheap out and spend $500 on the monitors? I wouldn't as they are the most important component in my opinion.

cmbjive said:

It might come as a shock to you but not everyone lives in the US. So that being the case there is a very real reason to bother. The EVGA ACX is a nice card, it is not better.

I have no problems importing anything. I've paid premiums to get stuff that will never come over to our shores.

Adhmuz Adhmuz, TechSpot Paladin, said:

But that's my point, if you are going to invest $1300+ in GPU's would you cheap out and spend $500 on the monitors? I wouldn't as they are the most important component in my opinion.

Sorry, my eyes are pretty broken, I couldn't justify spending more than $200 on a monitor, they all look they same, the only difference to me is the resolution, which again they're almost all the same. Not like it matters, because even with two of these cards your barely getting playable frame rate at said ultra high resolution. Don't take this the wrong way, but your point is to spend $1300+ on video cards, then $500 a screen times three just to get barely playable frame rate? The idea just hurts my head.

3 people like this |
Staff
Steve Steve said:

Sorry, my eyes are pretty broken, I couldn't justify spending more than $200 on a monitor, they all look they same, the only difference to me is the resolution, which again they're almost all the same. Not like it matters, because even with two of these cards your barely getting playable frame rate at said ultra high resolution. Don't take this the wrong way, but your point is to spend $1300+ on video cards, then $500 a screen times three just to get barely playable frame rate? The idea just hurts my head.

Either you are right, your eyes are broken or you have simply never used a high quality display before. There is a massive difference between the high quality displays Dell puts out for example and the cheap $200 models. I assume by that logic you have found that all TV's whether they are cheap, expensive, Plasma, LCD and LED all look the same?

Honestly I wish you could get the 30" models for $500 each, what I paid might cause your head to explode

I can certainly understand you not wanting to spend a lot of money on a monitor and I would never tell you to. However if you spend as much time sitting in front of a monitor as I do, spending over $1000 on it doesn't really seem like much, even if you buy three or more.

Boilerhog146 Boilerhog146 said:

Honestly I wish you could get the 30? models for $500 each, what I paid might cause your head to explode

@ steve got my 30" Dell 3007 WFP-HC seems like years now ,hey, it is about 6 now, ,ya, just over 1500.00 cdn on sale..

vince1987 vince1987 said:

Yes it is as I have got palit gtx 780 jetstream in SLI and it destroys any game.

Is it the titan performance or just look alike ?

Guest said:

Is available on Amazon! at 727$ free shipping. Comes from Germany, if that matters.

vince1987 vince1987 said:

Yes it is as I have got palit gtx 780 jetstream in SLI and it destroys any game.

Guest - In dual SLI, it's a lot better than the titan and on its own its not far off the titan performance, but considerably cheaper.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.