NVIDIA nForce 680i

[Gary Key]

Here is the first official picture. We are under NDA at this time so additional pictures or final specifications are not possible. However, we will have more coverage on this board late next week. This board is manufactured by eVGA.

NVIDIA 680i

p.s. Performance = Dual G80s on it = :thumbsup:

 

[Elfear]

Monster cooling. Looks sweet. Too bad no Crossfire though.

 

[myocardia]

...

 

[Shimmishim]

Originally posted by: myocardia
Now, if only nVidia has figured out how to raise an Intel fsb above stock, that'll probably be a good board.

QFT

seriously.

more than the cpu being the limiting case these days with C2D's, it appears to be the mobo.

i have yet to hear of a 975x chipset board run more than about 410 fsb orthos blend test stable (stable = 8+ hours).

 

[Gary Key]

Originally posted by: myocardia
Now, if only nVidia has figured out how to raise an Intel fsb above stock, that'll probably be a good board.

Unless something changes between now and next week, it should surprise you.

 

[swtethan]

:Q 3 x16 slots?

 

[aka1nas]

Is this an Intel-only chipset or is a new AM2 nforce chipset coming out oo?

 

[lopri]

Sexy. So is NV launching the chipset first? (We know the G80 will debut on 11/8) When should we expect the retail boards?

 

[lopri]

I also like the fact the board seems to be legacy-free. Well, they're probably supported via PCI brackets but I won't use them anyway, so it's one less clutter and more useful goodies. Are those 2 ports next to Firewire eSATA?

P.S. Gary: Like I said, as an AT editor you should post more than just a photo. I can't even go elsewhere and tell people about this embarassing post.

 

[bobsmith1492]

Originally posted by: lopri
I also like the fact the board seems to be legacy-free. Well, they're probably supported via PCI brackets but I won't use them anyway, so it's one less clutter and more useful goodies. Are those 2 ports next to Firewire eSATA?

P.S. Gary: Like I said, as an AT editor you should post more than just a photo. I can't even go elsewhere and tell people about this embarassing post.

Booo.... some people need legacy ports. Why do you have to be a hater?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: lopri
I also like the fact the board seems to be legacy-free. Well, they're probably supported via PCI brackets but I won't use them anyway, so it's one less clutter and more useful goodies. Are those 2 ports next to Firewire eSATA?

P.S. Gary: Like I said, as an AT editor you should post more than just a photo. I can't even go elsewhere and tell people about this embarassing post.

I sort of agree. There's nothing but a picture which doesn't say much. How can I get excited over that? I can't, and I can't link it to people who may be inetrested because they would say "ok but what does it do/have on it?"

How come people on xtremeforums.com get ES boards and can post behcnmarks and overclock results?

 

[Matt2]

The board itself looks effin sweet.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

How come people on xtremeforums.com get ES boards and can post behcnmarks and overclock results?

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: swtethan
:Q 3 x16 slots?

SLI + PhysiX I assume.

 

[theteamaqua]

Originally posted by: Shimmishim

Originally posted by: myocardia
Now, if only nVidia has figured out how to raise an Intel fsb above stock, that'll probably be a good board.

QFT

seriously.

more than the cpu being the limiting case these days with C2D's, it appears to be the mobo.

i have yet to hear of a 975x chipset board run more than about 410 fsb orthos blend test stable (stable = 8+ hours).

check my sig
http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/4307/shot0026mc7.jpg

as for 8 hours, well i only run it when i gone to bed then i need to use comp when i wake up , so ...


to be honest i havet got BSOD or hang or windows crash since i built this comp 3 months ago...

 

[Gary Key]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

How come people on xtremeforums.com get ES boards and can post behcnmarks and overclock results?

They get them directly through the supplier or other means and are not under NDA. It is sometimes frustrating for us as we usually have the board long before you see it on XS. I really wish we could provide more information on this board and the RD600 but the NDAs are iron clad. You would not believe what it took to get a picture out first today and even then it had to be a one for all photo. We are trying to get the manufacturers to loosen up a little in providing information ahead of time, it will take some time but I think they are coming around now. At least it is a picture of a eVGA retail board and not an engineering mule. If you put two and two together about retail boards being ready then it is not to hard to imagine a release date.

 

[lopri]

 

[Madellga]

Are these mobos Quad Core compatible?

 

[mobutu]

Originally posted by: Madellga
Are these mobos Quad Core compatible?

The launch is just arround the corner ... it would be stupid if these boards are not quad core compatible.
I'll bet all my money that they are.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Gary Key

Originally posted by: myocardia
Now, if only nVidia has figured out how to raise an Intel fsb above stock, that'll probably be a good board.

Unless something changes between now and next week, it should surprise you.

Im sure the new C55 chip for intel allows for OCes up to 510~mhz FSB...

 

[m21s]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: swtethan
:Q 3 x16 slots?

SLI + PhysiX I assume.

Which to me is a total waste of time and money.
SLI - Yes
PhysiX card -NO

Just get developers to put Physics on your idle 2nd 3rd 4th core just sitting there :disgust:

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: m21s

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: swtethan
:Q 3 x16 slots?

SLI + PhysiX I assume.

Which to me is a total waste of time and money.
SLI - Yes
PhysiX card -NO

Just get developers to put Physics on your idle 2nd 3rd 4th core just sitting there :disgust:

It wouldn't be for PhysX, there isn't even a PCI-E physics card and both ATI and Nvidia are competing with them. This might be for a Nvidia's triple video card solution, where one video card does physics and the others do SLI.

 

[bobsmith1492]

Originally posted by: m21s

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: swtethan
:Q 3 x16 slots?

SLI + PhysiX I assume.

Which to me is a total waste of time and money.
SLI - Yes
PhysiX card -NO

Just get developers to put Physics on your idle 2nd 3rd 4th core just sitting there :disgust:

If physics calculations work like graphical ones (multiple, similar vectors and whatnot) then there's a reason physics acceleration would be necessary. A CPU is completely code-driven(theoretically), meaning it is very general-purpose. Now, CPUS can easily keep up with the physics seen in modern games. But, there is really nothing being done; tossing a box around? Screensavers do that. If games are to ever advance in realism (the assumed goal), they are going to want a lot more physical realism. To do that would require a lot more than a general-purpose CPU could handle. Hence, the need for dedicated physics accelerators. Just think of it like what video cards do for graphics (ever seen the CPU-rendered 3DMark tests?) and get one in a few years when they're cheap. Oh, and in case you're being sarcastic, I don't care; I was bored anyway. Crighton's Congo was a super-short read...

 

[m21s]

Argh...
I don't want another card on my case!

I wish it would work the same using an extra core on the CPU to get the same results.

Blast!

 

[bobsmith1492]

Maybe AMD's 4x4 or Torrenza or something will let it be just another core, like a northbridge, sitting on your motherboard; then you wouldn't need a card.