680 cards really the 660

This is dragams solution

 

Dude, you really are the most daft **** ive come across...

Why are you linking 560 vs 680 ? It has zeeeeero to do with this discussion. What is relevant is:

580 vs 680 (former top single gpu vs the surposed current top single gpu)
480 vs 280 (top models vs each other, from last time there was a change in achitecture)
460 vs 280 (680 is basically like the 460 - new achitecture, so faster than the previous previous top model, despite being a smaller gpu, with less rop, smx and bus bit)

And the results are:

680 : somewhat faster due to new better architecture and faster clockspeeds, despite being a smaller gpu, with half the smx, lower rop units and lower bus bit.

480 : ALOT faster, due to being a new achitecture and faster clockspeeds like the 680, but unlike the 680, it doesnt get lowered its smx and rop units.

460 : same story as wit the 680 card - somewhat faster due to new better architecture and faster clockspeeds, despite being a smaller gpu, with half the smx, lower rop units and lower bus bit.

 

Please do quote the exact part where i cant count.

 

short story folks. dragam is mad his parents bought him 2 680s, and nvidia waited to release titans and his parents wont buy them for him

 

Don't bother, people will buy whatever they can afford.

The same people who raged that the GK104 was a rip-off still bought them.

Why? Because it was still an improvement over the GTX 580.

Anyways Nvidia doesn't care, they're making bank off of their marketing decisions.

 

If you have nothing constructive to contribute with, then take a hike...

 

Man, you really dont know what you have written.
I'll quote post #1, the one you started this troll off with.

So you cant understand basic mathematics, cant read basic sentences, cant remember information given to you, cant count, cant remember what you have written, cant understand what you have written...

lol

 

Sadly, what you are saying is very true.

I was in the unfortunate position that my old 295 quad sli setup had died, so i had no option but to upgrade.

But looking in the rearview mirror, i sure do regret continuing down the nvidia road...

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragam
Dude, you really are the most daft **** ive come across...

Why are you linking 560 vs 680 ? It has zeeeeero to do with this discussion. What is relevant is:

580 vs 680 (former top single gpu vs the surposed current top single gpu)
480 vs 280 (top models vs each other, from last time there was a change in achitecture)
460 vs 280 (680 is basically like the 460 - new achitecture, so faster than the previous previous top model, despite being a smaller gpu, with less rop, smx and bus bit)

And the results are:

680 : somewhat faster due to new better architecture and faster clockspeeds, despite being a smaller gpu, with half the smx, lower rop units and lower bus bit.

480 : ALOT faster, due to being a new achitecture and faster clockspeeds like the 680, but unlike the 680, it doesnt get lowered its smx and rop units.

460 : same story as wit the 680 card - somewhat faster due to new better architecture and faster clockspeeds, despite being a smaller gpu, with half the smx, lower rop units and lower bus bit.

Man, you really dont know what you have written.
I'll quote post #1, the one you started this troll off with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragam
The 680 is an obvious contiuation of the 560, with same watt, same amount of rof units, same amount of multistreaming processors... where as the titan is obviously the continuation of the 580 card.

Honestly it pisses me off that nvidia are screwing over the consumers, by selling a mid card at a premium price.

So you cant understand basic mathematics, cant read basic sentences, cant remember information given to you, cant count, cant remember what you have written, cant understand what you have written...

lol



Huge /facepalm at you.

"460 : same story as with the 680 card - somewhat faster due to new better architecture and faster clockspeeds, despite being a smaller gpu, with half the smx, lower rop units and lower bus bit."

460, 560 and 680 all share the amount or rop units, smx and bus bit... hence in that sense the 680 a continuation of the 560. Had it been a contination of the 580, it would have retained the same amount of smx, rop units and bus bit as the 480, 580 and titan has.

Bottom line : 680 is a midend gpu sold as a highend gpu.

And you still havent provided a quote that shows my lack of ability to count - id very much like to see it.

 

hehe

You only quoted part of the specs, the Cuda cores are wildly different for example.
The performance is wildly different also.
Very basic maths dude.

You cant even do basic comparisons.
The benchmarks show a very large performance gap, I already showed you this.
The GTX680 is not a mid range GPU.

Yet despite your knowing this, you cant equate them to the decent performance increase.

I showed you the performance figures from just one benchmark so far, I can show you many more if you like.
They showed perfomance increases of 85% and 75.6%.
Hardly subjective.
If you knew how to count you would have realised this

 

Oh c'mon guys. Everybody knows that 680 GTX was not designed to be the single gpu nvidia flagship. That argument with the amount of cuda cores is a bull****. The NGTX 580 remains the king in cuda apps even it has fewer cuda cores than the NGTX 680.

 

lol, now you've shown how you cant quote.
The feature is quite simple, you press the quote button, it does the work for you.
You can add in extra quotes if needed.

 

Yeah, everyone knows it, but they are just trying to flame me, cause of an argument i had with TK the other day.

 

Its not about that.
He claims that we are being ripped off because the GTX680 is a mid range card.

 

I havent seen any argument with TK.
Paranoid as well lol.
The problem is what you posted in this thread.

 

And this is where it gets pathetic... you cant even manage to stay on topic, as you know you arent correct, and instead start shooting at whatever you can.

You lost, now please leave.

 

LOL!


Sounds like it's true though.

Dragam, I think it would be easier to just deal with it and be happy that you have 680s in SLI.

 

Says the man who flames wildly with incorrect statements lol.

Start reading dude.
Its probably better to leave this kind of discussion for when you have finished school though.
Its beyond you at the moment.

 

Nah - what is true, is that i wish i had spent my money on 7970 crossfire instead.

 

I agree with you. The 680 is a mid-range card. I knew this the second nvidia released the 680M/680MX. I've also had 680 desktop cards in SLi, they are still quite nice.

Tesla K20 was lingering around for the longest time...
6970 --> 7970 big jump
580 --> 680 small jump
680M = 670 underclocked
680MX = 680 underclocked
7970M = 7870 underclocked