670 Reviews are up

[lavaheadache]

Do you seriously need me to spell this out for you? Average is what matters as that is over time.

Taking your logic to the extreme, if a card averages 1 watt for an hour but has one spike up to 100 watts for a fraction of a second before settling back down to 1 watt for an hour again, then that card consumes more power than another card that averages 90 watts for an hour with no variation.

No. It doesn't work that way. The first card consumes ~89 watts less than the second card, regardless of any random spikes here or there. I don't care if you don't believe the math. Your electric company surely agrees with my math, and they are who matters.

It's 19w difference average for the cards they measured for the game they measured. Peak only matters to determine what size PSU you need. When comparing power draws, you need to compare averages.

By the way: power draw on average across many many games will be different than what a one-game comparison says. Power draw could be more or less depending on the particular card and binning of the chip, as there isn't even a single "stock" voltage anymore with these newfangled GPUs). See, e.g., HardOCP for how energy usage varies depending on the game: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/03/22/nvidia_kepler_gpu_geforce_gtx_680_video_card_review/13

Commendable job.

My former 7970(1200mhz) rig averaged about 430-450w while gaming peaks in the 465 range. (gtx 285 for physx and 2600k oce'd to 4.4)

My current 680 rig (card swap alone 1216 boost clock) roughly averages 400-405 with peaks of 420+

 

[Silverforce11]

Like I've said before, TPU is more accurate because they use a wide variety of games.

Sites that bench just a few games are very prone to selection bias, one review they could pick games that are popular or just released at that particular moment and its biased towards one or the other. It's something that users need to take into account. [H] typically bench only a few games, whichever are the most popular currently, which is fine.

For an overall comparison, TPU and computerbase.de and even ABT are more accurate.

One thing I'd comment on, NV is faster at optimizing games they perform bad in, ie. Dragon Age series, Shogun 2, Deus Ex, Alan Wake and Anno series etc, a month or so after release NV's next update drivers boost performance a lot. AMD lags behind when it comes to optimizing for games they are poor at (TWIMTBP titles). For this, I have to give credit and admit NV's drivers are better.

 

[zebrax2]

AMD seemed to have overreached with the GPGPU stuff as well as not being aggressive enough with their clock speeds this generation. Their pricing didn't help them as well.

 

[Jaydip]

@LOL_Wut_Axel
I can't take TPU seriously unless they drop stupid resolutions from their test.Also 7970 is still 1% faster than 670 from ur chart

 

[Zebo]

I don't think the 7950 max oc could keep up with a max oc 670.

Newegg just dropped the Asus 7870 to 334.99.

lol are you serious. That card should be $239 tops like 6870 was. AMD is still high in more ways than one.

 

[3DVagabond]

lol are you serious. That card should be $239 tops like 6870 was. AMD is still high in more ways than one.

We'll slowly edge closer to last gen pricing once there's more competition. It looks like nVidia might finally have a card that's not vaporware. :crossedfingers:

As far as "should be $239 tops like 6870", remember that 40nm was much more mature when the 6870 was released and the 7870 uses 2x the GDDR5. Also the 6870 was actually slower than the 5870 (by a tiny bit, but still slower). The 7870 kicks dirt in the face of the 6870 and steals it's lunch money.

 

[Zebo]

I don't care about AMD's problems. nvidia gave 35% for same price with kepler - AMD should have too instead of $150 more for 35%. If 7870 is even 35% faster than 6870.

BTW 35% is very low anyway with new architecture. Usually you get a lot more for same price but not this time with AMD. They gave less than normal and they raped people on price and people wont forget.

 

[3DVagabond]

I don't care about AMD's problems. nvidia gave 35% for same price with kepler - AMD should have too instead of $150 more for 35%. If 7870 is even 35% faster than 6870.

What are AMD's problems I mentioned? I'm talking cost of manufacture and reality in the market place. What nVidia card are you referring to?

 

[Silverforce11]

I don't care about AMD's problems. nvidia gave 35% for same price with kepler - AMD should have too instead of $150 more for 35%. If 7870 is even 35% faster than 6870.

BTW 35% is very low anyway with new architecture. Usually you get a lot more for same price but not this time with AMD. They gave less than normal and they raped people on price and people wont forget.

Praise almighty NV, giving 35% increase in a new generation for the same price!!!

Jeez your standard is pretty low if you find that acceptable for a full node shrink.

Also, why is it okay for NV to charge a premium and not AMD? Last time i looked, people are fine with 7970 @ $450.. that's still higher than the 6970 so to you, they are still raping. Srly so meh.

 

[blastingcap]

AMD launch price for 7970 was $550 and did not improve price/perf

NV launch price for 680 was $500 and gave 35% more performance than 580, for the same launch price.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Praise almighty NV, giving 35% increase in a new generation for the same price!!!

Jeez your standard is pretty low if you find that acceptable for a full node shrink.

Also, why is it okay for NV to charge a premium and not AMD? Last time i looked, people are fine with 7970 @ $450.. that's still higher than the 6970 so to you, they are still raping. Srly so meh.

So sweet-spot died?

 

[Zebo]

What are AMD's problems I mentioned? I'm talking cost of manufacture and reality in the market place. What nVidia card are you referring to?

580 was $500 680 is $500 for example. 35% more performance for same price. AMD give 35% for hundreds dollars more down the entire line. AMD is profiteering (or trying) thankfully most wise ppl saw through it and shunned their cards/attempted rape and waited.

You were apologizing for AMD about maturity when I quoted into 40nm pricing. If I said 7870 should be $159 like you can find 6870s for now then youd have a point. All I ask for is same intro pricing.

 

[Zebo]

Praise almighty NV, giving 35% increase in a new generation for the same price!!!

Jeez your standard is pretty low if you find that acceptable for a full node shrink.

Also, why is it okay for NV to charge a premium and not AMD? Last time i looked, people are fine with 7970 @ $450.. that's still higher than the 6970 so to you, they are still raping. Srly so meh.

I dont care about these companies , I care about me, all I want is value aka performance/$ and a good speed upgrade with architecture. AMD strayed far this round compared to 58xx and 69xx. And worse - they lost performance/watt.

 

[3DVagabond]

AMD launch price for 7970 was $550 and did not improve price/perf

NV launch price for 680 was $500 and gave 35% more performance than 580, for the same launch price.

The 680 is not 35% faster overall than the 580. Of course it was also priced against the current competition in the marketplace, like the 7970 was. It's just that the marketplace and competition was different. This is why competition is a good thing. nVidia not able to compete at the time is what made the 7970 cost what it did. AMD being able to compete is what set the price of the 680.

This is May, not January. The marketplace is constantly evolving.

 

[3DVagabond]

580 was $500 680 is $500 for example. 35% more performance for same price. AMD give 35% for hundreds dollars more down the entire line. AMD is profiteering (or trying) thankfully most wise ppl saw through it and shunned their cards/attempted rape and waited.

You were apologizing for AMD about maturity when I quoted into 40nm pricing. If I said 7870 should be $159 like you can find 6870s for now then youd have a point. All I ask for is same intro pricing.

The 680 is not 35% faster than the 580. The 7970 is more than 35% faster than the 6970. Be that as it may, it's not what determines the prices of the current products. Cost to manufacture and conditions in the current marketplace are what determines the prices.

 

[toyota]

Praise almighty NV, giving 35% increase in a new generation for the same price!!!

Jeez your standard is pretty low if you find that acceptable for a full node shrink.

Also, why is it okay for NV to charge a premium and not AMD? Last time i looked, people are fine with 7970 @ $450.. that's still higher than the 6970 so to you, they are still raping. Srly so meh.

way to miss the point. he is not praising them. if anything he would like more performance than just 35% for the same price. what he is saying is that at least we got that 35% for the same price instead of getting zero increase from AMD. hell the 7970 gave less performance per dollar than the previous gens launch price if you want to be technical.

 

[hyrule4927]

Dear lord I want one of these. Starting to think I'll just be waiting on the 7xx and 8xxx series cards and then picking up one of these when the price comes down though. This whole generation of GPU's is way out of my price range right now. :$

 

[Zebo]

way to miss the point. he is not praising them. if anything he would like more performance than just 35% for the same price. what he is saying is that at least we got that 35% for the same price instead of getting zero increase from AMD. hell the 7970 gave less performance per dollar than the previous gens launch price if you want to be technical.

Exactly. Honestly I felt a little ripped in the speed dept from GTX 580 to GTX 680 compared to past bumps... however their power profile (about half) made me upgrade.

AMD I wouldn't even look at due to high power, high priced not even as much upgrade, unless I was shopping in $200 range. 7850 is pretty decent when you overclock it. Has no real competition and thus price is reasonable..

 

[dookulooku]

Exactly. Honestly I felt a little ripped in the speed dept from GTX 580 to GTX 680 compared to past bumps... however their power profile (about half) made me upgrade.

AMD I wouldn't even look at due to high power, high priced not even as much upgrade, unless I was shopping in $200 range. 7850 is pretty decent when you overclock it. Has no real competition and thus price is reasonable..

The pricing and product positioning of the GTX 680 was pretty much determined by how it compared to the 7970.

If 7970 was $400 and performed 20% faster, than the GTX 680 would have probably been called the GTX 670 Ti and costed $350.

 

[Zebo]

You really believe that? Then it should have cost $625 since slower, hotter, louder 7970 was $559. No nvidia hooked us up relatively and thank god for em or AMD would still be charging $559 for 7970.

AMD fans should thank nvidia - you may see 7970 price at $350 soon instead of $559 , $350 where it should have been all along.

Unless you were an early adoptor - but it's not like we didnt say you were retarded early adopter back then anyway so you deserve what you got.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Stock vs stock performance and pricing

Gtx 285 to 480
40% increase in performance
Proof http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_480_Fermi/32.html
40% increase in price
Proof http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_480_Fermi/34.html
About the same performance per dollar.
Those days a 460 was as fast as a 285, and in todays's games 285 is nowhere while 460 is still fine for low-med, much better than 285.


When 280 was released after 8800 ultra 1gb
About 5-10% faster and about 15% faster than 8800gtx 768
Proof http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_280_Amp_Edition/25.html
8800gtx 768 was a lot better value for money
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_280_Amp_Edition/25.html

Similar was the case from 5870 to 6970, price increased, performance increased only in a few cases back then, rest w as like a 10-20% increase stock vs stock with worse oc

Considering recent years, both nvidia and amd have done very very well this time. Those who don't think so have no idea how this industry has been in the last few years and where it is going.

 

[amenx]

Exactly. Honestly I felt a little ripped in the speed dept from GTX 580 to GTX 680 compared to past bumps... however their power profile (about half) made me upgrade.

Yeah the 580 > 680 gain wasnt too exciting but the 570 > 670 one certainly is. Usually NVs second card equals last gens top card. With kepler the 670 comfortably leaps ahead of the 580. Havent seen anything like this from NV in a long time (since G80).

 

[aaksheytalwar]

The pricing and product positioning of the GTX 680 was pretty much determined by how it compared to the 7970.

If 7970 was $400 and performed 20% faster, than the GTX 680 would have probably been called the GTX 670 Ti and costed $350.

This! Except then nvidia would be another few months late

 

[Guovssohas]

Really looks like a masterpiece of a card. But what's the point of the 680 now? Imo there's no reason to buy a 680 instead of the 670?

 

[3DVagabond]

You really believe that? Then it should have cost $625 since slower, hotter, louder 7970 was $559. No nvidia hooked us up relatively and thank god for em or AMD would still be charging $559 for 7970.

AMD fans should thank nvidia - you may see 7970 price at $350 soon instead of $559 , $350 where it should have been all along.

Unless you were an early adoptor - but it's not like we didnt say you were retarded early adopter back then anyway so you deserve what you got.

Is this what your rant is all about? It's a video card fan thing.

There are a number of reasons for what nVidia has done so far. None of it was done as a favor that we need to thank them for. You don't seem to be interested in listening to any of them though.