Yeah, 750tis take a lot of space, even if they're slightly better, which is why I never bought any. I'm currently using 970s. 980s are just a waste of money as they're too expensive for the little bit extra performance they offers (much like the 290 vs 290x back in the day).
I did a hash/price(cad) comparison and the 970 is definitely in the sweet spot Table below). The hash rate
seems to scale linearly with the number of cuda cores, even between the sm 5.0 750ti and the sm 5.2 9xx
series cards. I would have expected the 9xx cards to provide more hash at lower power and I have no
clue why the 750ti is more power efficient. Maybe cuda 7 will show more improvement in sm 5.2.
Consider the time it would take to burn enough power to equal the cost of a card with the 750ti
and 50 watts as an example. The card goes for around CAD 180 and I'll assume CAD 0.10 /KWH
for electricity. $180 would pay for 1800 KWH (1800000 WH).
At 50 W the 750ti would have to run for 1800000/50 hours, or 98 years to spend the same on power
as the cost of the card. Even including the power for a rig with just 1 750ti, about 400 W, would have
to run for 12 years for the power burned to equal the card's cost.
I've never really understood why there is so much attention paid to power consumption when the
cost of the equipment is so much more significant. The only time the GPU cost isn't a factor is for
gamers who already have the HW. Serious miners don't have another use for their HW.
Just my thoughts on the subject.
Here's the full comparison:
980 = 25.7 Kh/s/$
970 = 39.7
960 = 36.0
750ti = 33.3
TitanX = 22.5
I won't be buying a TitanX anytime soon.