GTX680, images from THG review leaked

[sontin]

/edit.

 

[Joseph F]

Saw this on XS.org,

Look at the the 7970 #s

redacting copyright material - Administrator Idontcare

Wow... Tom's hardware has lost all of my respect.

 

[busydude]

Wow... Tom's hardware has lost all of my respect.

Did Tom's leak those graphs? I don't understand why Tom's should be blamed here. Anyone with basic image manipulation skills can change those graphs to their liking.

 

[thilanliyan]

What's with all the timewarp posts on this forum lately lol?

 

[Joseph F]

Did Tom's leak those graphs? I don't understand why Tom's should be blamed here. Anyone with basic image manipulation skills can change those graphs to their liking.

People were saying that they had seen them directly hosted from Tom's before they were taken down.
If this turns out to be true, then I still stand by my previous statement.

 

[Grooveriding]

What's with all the timewarp posts on this forum lately lol?

Dunno, it's weird. Sometimes threads show as if they have another page to view, but when you click on it, it just reloads the second to last page again.

It's voodoo.

 

[chimaxi83]

Does anybody actually use Toms for anything accurate anymore? 10 years ago they were cool, much better choices now though.

Disclaimer: this has to do with the linked picture a few posts above, so please Green team, don't eat my babies.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Really? I thought 1080p was the most common resolution now. If you look at what stores carry nowadays, most are 1080p monitors.

did you read "most" instead of "a lot"? 1080p very well might be the most common, but what resolution range do you think would follow suit? certainly 1680x1050 and less, not the other way up to 1440p and higher. That being said I really wouldn't be surprised if the majority of gamers were still on less than 1080p, granted such gamers wouldn't be likely to buy a $500+ video card.

...who plan to spend $500+ on a new GPU

while they might not be likely to buy such an expensive part, I also wouldn't be surprised if there are more users running less than 1080p monitors who might buy a $500+ GPU than there are 1440/1600p users period. Higher than 1080p is very much a minority.

that being said its not like AMD is completely screwed here, $500+ GPUs really don't stand a chance to saturate the market, and it will be a while before nVidia has mid-range and lower parts with prices to suit.

 

[x3sphere]

because they opted for a 256bit bus, thus excluding 3GB as an option and 4GB would be flat out overkill

also 2GB is more than enough for any retail game now and for the foreseeable future on a single monitor setup - where the 680 looks to be king - and its memory bandwidth would become a limitation for multiple monitors anyway that it really doesn't make sense to go any higher than 2GB.

Umm no... there's a few games that use more than 2GB at 2560x1600. Skyrim with mods for one. Not regretting my 7970 at all after seeing these benches. I've had the same performance for months, albeit at a slightly more expensive price but an extra $50 is nothing when we're up to $500.

 

[Grooveriding]

did you read "most" instead of "a lot"? 1080p very well might be the most common, but what resolution range do you think would follow suit? certainly 1680x1050 and less, not the other way up to 1440p and higher. That being said I really wouldn't be surprised if the majority of gamers were still on less than 1080p, granted such gamers wouldn't be likely to buy a $500+ video card.


while they might not be likely to buy such an expensive part, I also wouldn't be surprised if there are more users running less than 1080p monitors who might buy a $500+ GPU than there are 1440/1600p users period. Higher than 1080p is very much a minority.

that being said its not like AMD is completely screwed here, $500+ GPUs really don't stand a chance to saturate the market, and it will be a while before nVidia has mid-range and lower parts with prices to suit.

+1

$500 GPUs account for maybe 1% and no more than 3% of total discreet card sales. It sort of makes sense that these are the cards you expect to cater to very high resolutions.

 

[SolMiester]

I think you misread the chart. That is memory speed, the card is at stock. I don't think gamers care about GPU compute performance anyway.

oh yeah, but still has 680 at 700mhz, but yes 7970 at 925!

 

[Subyman]

People were saying that they had seen them directly hosted from Tom's before they were taken down.
If this turns out to be true, then I still stand by my previous statement.

They are 99% real slides, the editor-in-chief of HardOCP confirmed by talking to Tom's staff that the slides were taken from Tom's servers.

You can find the statement here:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1681041&page=3

 

[SolMiester]

you'll get no argument from me, it really is only a 680 in name, and really should be the 660 considering their past trends with design sizes and code names. Granted I'd argue its performance, if these slides really are true, is actually good enough to have donned at 670 title when we consider that it actually can best AMD's flagship at all, if not so thoroughly in single monitor scenarios (particularly 1080p), even though this really isn't nVidia's flagship GPU for this generation. The same cannot be said of the GTX560 or 460 vs. the 6970 or 5870, not even close.

If these numbers are true it would make a lot of the rumors of nvidia's dual GPU card being powered by two GK104s, or that they might not even produce a dual GPU card if GK100/110 (or whatever their ~500+mm^2 design might be) turns out to be just as proportionally beastly as GK104

I agree with this also..It should of been named 660, but I think NV is just being greedy as they know its equal in performance to the 7970....The margins on this will be huge!

I guess we wont have a Kepler mid-range card then, as they will just use up the 5xx series cards....

 

[blastingcap]

They are 99% real slides, the editor-in-chief of HardOCP confirmed by talking to Tom's staff that the slides were taken from Tom's servers.

You can find the statement here:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1681041&page=3

We know this already (read this thread). But we also know that at least two of the slides are faulty (price/perf and the Dirt 3 bench). They can real slides but have errors in them anyway.

 

[Silverforce11]

You know I find this very funny, this generation, AMD focuses on HPC and DP output to "catch up" to NV, then NV suddenly takes a 180 flip and do an AMD and go balls to wall gaming performance while castrating all HPC and DP performance.

And the thing here is NV will win, because when gk110 is out, that will be the true Kepler with amazing HPC/DP and still great gaming, but just at a huge power use penalty. AMD has nothing bigger than Tahiti for the meantime.

I will have to concur with others, NV did an amazing job with the architecture. 1080p, go with the gtx580. 1600p and multi monitor, go with 7970 for more "proofing" with 3gb vram and bandwidth. Can't wait to see the OC potential.

Also, 28nm: Getting mid-range GPUs for enthusiast prices. IMO, both companies FAIL.

 

[Mopetar]

Trading PS3 and chipset business for HPC might not be so bad after all, if NVDA hits its projections for Tesla for FY12. Would have been nice to power the PS4, though, that's got to hurt.

I think it would be good for nVidia to be powering at least one of the consoles. We're already seeing a lot of consolization of PC games, and if AMD has their hardware in all of the consoles it could lead to better optimization for their GPUs in general, or at least companies not putting as much effort into optimizing for nVidia.

It may not be such a big deal if the consoles mostly use AMD's older architectures. The next Nintendo console is rumored to use a GPU based on R700, which is pretty old at this point. Microsoft won't launch until next year, so there's no clue what they'll be using and Sony hasn't even talked about their next console yet. It's possible that one or both of those companies could use GPUs based on GCN.

It may not be the biggest deal in the world, but there's definitely strategic value in getting hardware into a console.

 

[Vesku]

Wonder how CUDA/GPGPU supporters are feeling about the reported trade offs the 680 is making to hit this level of gaming efficiency?

 

[Mopetar]

I guess we wont have a Kepler mid-range card then, as they will just use up the 5xx series cards....

It would be pretty foolish of nVidia not to have anything at $300. Perhaps we can assume that GK106 or some other die will fill that void, but I haven't heard too many rumors about that yet. Another possibility is that role will be filled with binned GK104 parts that have lower clocks or disabled hardware. They were making statements about having issues with the process so it does make some amount of sense.

 

[Grooveriding]

I really hope there is some information in the reviews on if GK110 is real, is a single chip and is coming before Santa.

 

[OCGuy]

Looks to be a great card and architecture from nVidia (Once again).

 

[sontin]

Wonder how CUDA/GPGPU supporters are feeling about the reported trade offs the 680 is making to hit this level of gaming efficiency?

I think i can life with it:

redacting copyright material - Administrator Idontcare

:thumbsup:

 

[SolMiester]

Dunno, it's weird. Sometimes threads show as if they have another page to view, but when you click on it, it just reloads the second to last page again.

It's voodoo.

I was noticing this yesterday too!

 

[chimaxi83]

I think i can life with it:

redacting copyright material - Administrator Idontcare

:thumbsup:

I wonder if the quality is atrocious as shown in the Quicksync review on AT. I use Quicksync, and while it isn't omg end all be all amazing, it works great. Fast and great quality, same can't be said for GPU encoding.

 

[blastingcap]

Looks to be a great card and architecture from nVidia (Once again).

Yes, they learned their lesson w/ Fermi and appear to have forked development of their GPUs into a gamer-centric version and a HPC-centric version. I suspect GK104 is the gamer-centric one whereas GK110 will have all the bells and whistles and probably lose a bit of perf/watt, but also be faster and have better DP performance, among other HPC-centric things.

 

[Silverforce11]

So gtx680 = gtx580 +10-20% (1600p/1080p)?