GeForce GTX 680 review [Guru3D.com] - Page 6

Kohlendioxidus · 03-22-2012, 20:05 | posts: 1,257 | Location: Germany

Quote:

Originally Posted by Major Melchett

As the review states, there is a 4gb version of the card.

Also, the reason a lot are hyped up is because this may actully be the mid range card marked as high end (because it's faster than the 7970), so if this was supposed to be the mid range for nvidia imagine what the true high end will be like

.

I got BIG doubts that this is mid range. ATI will ofcourse hit back hard with 7990 and this is where nvidia would want to conter. If they will succed is still open.

Again, the biggest issue with these cards is the PRICE. I'll get drunk and puke 5 times in a row, before paying <500 EUR on one of these these cards.

If nvidia would have launched the card at 300 EUR range then YES, kudos to them but is not the case..

mR Yellow · 03-22-2012, 20:26 | posts: 495 | Location: South Africa

Thx Hilbert and crew. Great review as always.

Would've been nice to see some benchmarks with the 7970 running at same speed in boost mode. I read that the boost even went to 1100mhz on core? So in fact it's not a true comparison. I know it's new tech but it does give nV an advantage to the non overclocker/noob out there. Food for thought.

Great card btw. Hope to see prices on both sides drop soon.

Era · 03-22-2012, 20:33 | posts: 88 | Location: Sweden

Why do people want to see clock for clock comparisions? It makes no sense when dealing with different ways of doing things.

It's like testing two performance cars, adding a test where you test how fast they are at 2500 rpm on 4th gear and proclaiming that the faster one is doing something better.

alanm · 03-22-2012, 20:37 | posts: 4,958

Heres some tri-monitor benches @ 5760X1080. Surprised that 256bit bus card can do this.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/201...-2gb-review/10

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/201...-2gb-review/11

alanm · 03-22-2012, 20:40 | posts: 4,958

Quote:

Originally Posted by Era

Why do people want to see clock for clock comparisions? It makes no sense when dealing with different ways of doing things.

It's like testing two performance cars, adding a test where you test how fast they are at 2500 rpm on 4th gear and proclaiming that the faster one is doing something better.

Yeah, wondering the same. Clocks are irrelevant with different arches.

Kaleid · 03-22-2012, 20:46 | posts: 2,010 | Location: Sweden

Nvidia won this high-end round, I however will not bother with 200w cards, it needs to be max 120w or something like that.

GPGPU is better on AMD though?

---TK--- · 03-22-2012, 20:47 | posts: 14,685 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Hilbert touches on the mid range issue in the last page.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-680-review/26
I dont think anything is going to beat the full kepler gk110.

Gembel · 03-22-2012, 20:49 | posts: 736 | Location: Indonesia

Great review

Thanks for your hardwork Hilbert

Let's hope a nicer price for later...

mR Yellow · 03-22-2012, 20:58 | posts: 495 | Location: South Africa

Quote:

Originally Posted by Era

Why do people want to see clock for clock comparisions? It makes no sense when dealing with different ways of doing things.

It's like testing two performance cars, adding a test where you test how fast they are at 2500 rpm on 4th gear and proclaiming that the faster one is doing something better.

It is relevant. When ATi ran higher clock the nVidiots screamed "It's running higher clocks". 7970 easily clock to 1250. So yes, it's relevant.

I think 28nm yields need to improve before we see price drops.

morbias · **Memory**: 6GB HyperX @1600 6-7-6-18

Cards are reviewed in their out of the box configuration, I'm pretty sure everyone looking to overclock will look at the overclocking articles that Hilbert does with each major release, and make a decision based on that.

imo I think 28nm is going to have to improve greatly if we're to see the GK110 any time this year, the thing is huge.

Era · 03-22-2012, 21:05 | posts: 88 | Location: Sweden

Quote:

Originally Posted by mR Yellow

It is relevant. When ATi ran higher clock the nVidiots screamed "It's running higher clocks". 7970 easily clock to 1250. So yes, it's relevant.

I think 28nm yields need to improve before we see price drops.

It's relevant to test at stock speeds as that indicates what the cards do out of the box and what most users will experience.

It might also be relevant to test at max overclock as that shows the full potential of the cards (even though different chips of the same type most likely won't overclock exactly the same.)

It might also be relevant to test performance per watt to see which architecture is the most power efficient.

It might be relevant to test at a level where the cards are equally loud or at the same temperature to see which cooler is preferable when it comes to noise levels.

It is however not relevant to test at the same clock speeds when they do not work the same way.

Texter · 03-22-2012, 21:05 | posts: 2,147 | Location: Netherlands

Quote:

Originally Posted by ---TK---

I dont think anything is going to beat the full kepler gk110.

We'll probably find ourselves in the strange situation that it'll run Metro 2033 at 60 fps and Portal 2 at 500 fps at 1080p (using that 7 GHz i7 3770 lol) and wonder about the state of PC graphics.

Kaleid · 03-22-2012, 21:21 | posts: 2,010 | Location: Sweden

Excellent power consumption chart:

It's in ultra high-res that the Nvidia is mostly more efficient:

Source:
http://www.nordichardware.se/test-la...art=22#content

New vsync is mostly interesting for me as well as FXAA.

Denial · 03-22-2012, 21:23 | posts: 6,348 | Location: Above Earth in a Big Rocket Ship

Quote:

Originally Posted by mR Yellow

It is relevant. When ATi ran higher clock the nVidiots screamed "It's running higher clocks". 7970 easily clock to 1250. So yes, it's relevant.

I think 28nm yields need to improve before we see price drops.

No it's not relevant because the nvidia people that said that then and the ATI people that want it now are both retarded.

---TK--- · 03-22-2012, 21:28 | posts: 14,685 | Location: New Jersey, USA

yeah sounds a bit idiotic

Aura89 · 03-22-2012, 21:34 | posts: 4,825 | Location: Washington State, USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by Passion Fruit

I hate the way they do this. If this was meant to be the mid range product then why not just release it as such.

Releasing a better performing high end product soon after would completely scare AMD and get a lot of their customers over to the mid range parts also... Delaying the high end and naming this in it's place is just illogical, except of course they're charging £450 for a so called "mid range" part.

Except...you know...for the fact that...they'll make more money this way?

Perfectly understandable to release a lower-cost card for more money when your competition allows it, though i would rather this be a mid-range card and have the high end card released, it makes perfect sense why they wouldn't. AMD/ATI really screwed this one up

CronoGraal · 03-22-2012, 21:51 | posts: 3,421 | Location: Sweden

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaleid

Excellent power consumption chart:

this is also interesting regarding power consumption:

in swedish but we all get it.

morbias · **Memory**: 6GB HyperX @1600 6-7-6-18

I'd say that AMD played it perfectly from a business stand point. They can now drop their prices, I'm sure they've made a good profit for the time they've been at the top of the tree. But now they can drop their prices to what we all really feel they should have been in the first place, and still compete well with the 680.

CronoGraal · 03-22-2012, 21:54 | posts: 3,421 | Location: Sweden

Quote:

Originally Posted by morbias

I'd say that AMD played it perfectly from a business stand point. They can now drop their prices, I'm sure they've made a good profit for the time they've been at the top of the tree. But now they can drop their prices to what we all really feel they should have been in the first place, and still compete well with the 680.

do you think nvidia could also follow up AMD's price drops with one of their own?

Xzibit · 03-22-2012, 21:55 | posts: 4,383 | Location: Europe

Quote:

Originally Posted by CronoGraal

do you think nvidia could also follow up AMD's price drops with one of their own?

Would be great. I'll buy 2. But this won't happen. Well untill new series

hallryu · 03-22-2012, 21:56 | posts: 10,837 | Location: England

Quote:

Originally Posted by CronoGraal

do you think nvidia could also follow up AMD's price drops with one of their own?

Not while demand is high and they have the top card.

morbias · **Memory**: 6GB HyperX @1600 6-7-6-18

I wouldn't think they'd have to or really could, afterall they have to pay for the R&D of the new generation, but that's just my personal opinion. People will always pay a premium for the highest performing card, even if it's marginal.

Until yields go up I don't see Nvidia needing to sell the cards at a price where demand outstrips supply.

---TK--- · 03-22-2012, 21:59 | posts: 14,685 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by hallryu

Not while demand is high and they have the top card.

qft but the 7970 price will have to drop

hallryu · 03-22-2012, 22:01 | posts: 10,837 | Location: England

Quote:

Originally Posted by ---TK---

qft but the 7970 price will have to drop

Hopefully second hand prices too. *wonders if wife will scream*

Darren Hodgson · 03-22-2012, 22:06 | posts: 9,656 | Location: England

The HD 7970 might not be the fastest single GPU card anymore but it has 50% more memory than the GTX 680. I'm kind of puzzled why people are saying that it has to be cheaper than the GTX 680 to remain competitive. Why? With that amount of memory, it is probably a better buy for multi-monitor gaming. That extra cost is justified by the extra RAM IMO.