OFFICIAL KEPLER "GTX680" Reviews

[Lepton87]

10% less is not enough. Should be 20% less even here in the states.
So, you'll pay 10% less for 0-15% less performance. Sounds about right. You definitely should pay less for them, as those of us should here in my country.

I doubt OC 7970 in CF would be any slower than OC 680 in SLI probably even faster, that would also depend on the luck of the draw. 680 is 15% faster but at 1080p and in single card configuration.
I just found 3-way and 4-way benchmarks

http://nl.hardware.info/reviews/264...uad-sli-review-english-version-3dmark-vantage

It's really a mixed bag, I wouldn't say that any card is faster than the other so buying the cheaper cards seems like the right decision.

 

[Vesku]

10% less is not enough. Should be 20% less even here in the states.
So, you'll pay 10% less for 0-15% less performance. Sounds about right. You definitely should pay less for them, as those of us should here in my country.

I'm all for price dropping, imo we may see the higher clocked AIB 7970s hover near 680 pricing and replace the reference entirely.

Edit: Given the lack of GPGPU in the 680, looks like I'm left waiting on 7870/7950 price drops to hit my personal price/perf requirements.

 

[tviceman]

I'm going to wait for the 7970s to drop a bit in price before I pick up a set. I'll also pick up another GTX680.

Curiously, why would you pick up any hd7970's at all, now that the gtx680 is out?

 

[Lepton87]

Curiously, why would you pick up any hd7970's at all, now that the gtx680 is out?

So he can find where it falters the most against GT680 and aid nvidia marketing with that knowledge. Just a guess

PS. I want BigK not some little boy 104

 

[RussianSensation]

Wow.

gg, AMD. Your only weapon now is price cuts. I guess you should be used to being in this situation, what with Intel and all.

EDIT: Wait, that can't be right, RS. I think those numbers are wrong because of AT's table showing how they are already beyond that voltage well before 1.2GHz: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5699/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-review/4

Hey Blastingcap, take a look here, even better. Reference GTX680s hitting 1400mhz+ on air.

Monster overclocking.

 

[OCGuy]

I doubt OC 7970 in CF would be any slower than OC 680 in SLI probably even faster, that would also depend on the luck of the draw. 680 is 15% faster but at 1080p and in single card configuration.

That isnt the conclusion I am reading. Sorry.

 

[Zebo]

Hey Blastingcap, take a look here, even better. Reference GTX680s hitting 1400mhz+ on air.

Monster overclocking.

kingpin with a modded bios. Cards merits can stand on its own no reason to hype unrealistic expectations IMO. No reviewer even got close.

 

[blastingcap]

Hey Blastingcap, take a look here, even better. Reference GTX680s hitting 1400mhz+ on air.

Monster overclocking.

I don't believe the software is counting voltage properly for when the boosts happen. 1.162V for 1.4GHz just doesn't seem plausible, even at 100% fanspeed. See my link to Anandtech's review table.

 

[Lepton87]

That isnt the conclusion I am reading. Sorry.

So what conclusion are you reading?

BTW. It turns out that performance in 2-way configuration has no correlation to performance in 3-way or 4-way. It's really a mixed bag :/

http://nl.hardware.info/reviews/264...uad-sli-review-english-version-3dmark-vantage

 

[bryanW1995]

What reviews are you reading? Almost every review shows the 680 easily surpassing the 7970. Kepler is a very, very nice feat by Nvidia IMO.

He did, um, you know, link to a top-tier review site. Their information is within the margin of error for other sites' scores at 2560x1600, TPU only showed a 7% difference across all games/settings that they tested on 2560x1600 for example, and RussianSensation linked another site earlier that showed a 1-9% difference at that resolution. Everything is so game-specific these days, I think it's just easier to say that gtx 680 is 10 % overall faster but slips down to 5% faster at 2560x1600 with lots of AA.

 

[Tempered81]

Yeah all ur gonna get regular bios is 1265, 1335 on Asus bios, and higher if you unlock it

 

[Zebo]

I don't believe the software is counting voltage properly for when the boosts happen. 1.162V for 1.4GHz just doesn't seem plausible, even at 100% fanspeed. See my link to Anandtech's review table.

These are not refernce boards, or a least don't look like picture I saw when I bought mine.

 

[bryanW1995]

These are not refernce boards, or a least don't look like picture I saw when I bought mine.

I'll take the kingpincooling tek 9 FAT 6.0 for $100, Alec.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

lol @ dat memory bandwidth, something done brokeded.

 

[blastingcap]

These are not refernce boards, or a least don't look like picture I saw when I bought mine.

well then! lol

He did, um, you know, link to a top-tier review site. Their information is within the margin of error for other sites' scores at 2560x1600, TPU only showed a 7% difference across all games/settings that they tested on 2560x1600 for example, and RussianSensation linked another site earlier that showed a 1-9% difference at that resolution. Everything is so game-specific these days, I think it's just easier to say that gtx 680 is 10 % overall faster but slips down to 5% faster at 2560x1600 with lots of AA.

I wonder what driver improvements will do for both sides...

 

[Silverforce11]

Xbitlabs results are telling. Their Turbo gtx680 hit 1.3ghz, while its trading blows with a 7970 @ 1.15ghz. Similar results for a few other sites.

If you have a 7970 @ 1.2ghz or above, its faster. If you have a 7970 @ 1.3ghz, no contest.

But the good thing about the gtx680 is the low power use even once OC, that's a huge plus for that design and the main reason why as a consumer, I prefer & will recommend it over 7970s. As for pricing, AMD will have to lower 7970s to at least $499 to match.

 

[bryanW1995]

I don't think it matters what driver improvements do. Even assuming that it's easy to OC 7970 to gtx 680 levels (which I'm just saying for the sake of discussion), gtx 680 smokes 7970 in every other metric available, including price. Sorry, the only way 7970 makes sense is for bitcoiners, others using compute-intensive apps, or after it gets a $100 price drop. The only caveat, of course, is that gtx 680 needs to remain in stock and exert the price pressure that it should on 7970.

 

[blastingcap]

Ugh, just learned GTX 680 has no hotkeys/presets for switching monitor configurations. That's a big negative to me. I don't wanna have to menu-dive to switch.

On the plus side, NVDA has bezel peeking (not peaking, contrary to their illiterate website staff that calls it that), plus apparently you do not need a DP adapter to get Surround.

Perhaps AMD and NVDA can learn from each other and incorporate the good aspects of their respective Surround/Eyefinity software.

 

[badb0y]

nVidia went balls to wall to get that efficiency out of the GTX 680 lol. They took the Fermi criticism to heart.

 

[blackened23]

Yeah all ur gonna get regular bios is 1265, 1335 on Asus bios, and higher if you unlock it

Can you expand on this please? Getting my cards tomorrow and this knowledge will be great to have. How do I unlock them?

 

[Keysplayr]

Curiously, why would you pick up any hd7970's at all, now that the gtx680 is out?

So I can b*itch and moan about them for the next year and a half. :biggrin:
Seriously though, I always buy a top end ati card every other gen.

 

[blackened23]

He did, um, you know, link to a top-tier review site. Their information is within the margin of error for other sites' scores at 2560x1600, TPU only showed a 7% difference across all games/settings that they tested on 2560x1600 for example, and RussianSensation linked another site earlier that showed a 1-9% difference at that resolution. Everything is so game-specific these days, I think it's just easier to say that gtx 680 is 10 % overall faster but slips down to 5% faster at 2560x1600 with lots of AA.

Here's the deal from what i've been reading today:

Stock 680 >> Stock 7970
Max OC'ed 7970 == MAX OC'ed 680
Sli/crossfire results == wash

We'll get some more user experiences with 680 overclocking tomorrow, looking forward to it. (get my pair as well!)

 

[blackened23]

So I can b*itch and moan about them for the next year and a half. :biggrin:
Seriously though, I always buy a top end ati card every other gen.

I can help you out with this D:

 

[Grooveriding]

So the more I read about this TXAA mode, the more I think it will go the way of physx. Yeah, I went there. :hmm:

Proprietary AA mode that only works on nvidia hardware, has to be specifically implemented on a per game basis by the developers. I think it's safe to assume we will only see this in Mafia 3, Batman 3 and Hawx 3 ?

I don't like the blurry AA modes anyways, I had initially thought that this was something you would be able to turn on via the CP. That is just FXAA that has been added that way though.

 

[blastingcap]

So I can b*itch and moan about them for the next year and a half. :biggrin:
Seriously though, I always buy a top end ati card every other gen.

Huh? Why? Is that part of your agreement or something, to use rival products to see how they are good and bad for competitive analysis reasons? Else I don't see a point to doing so.

Here's the deal from what i've been reading today:

Stock 680 >> Stock 7970
Max OC'ed 7970 == MAX OC'ed 680
Sli/crossfire results == wash

We'll get some more user experiences with 680 overclocking tomorrow, looking forward to it. (get my pair as well!)

You forgot:

power draw of 680 < power draw of 7970 (when both are equally speedy, via Boosting and overclocking/overvolting)
price of 680 < price of 7970
feature set of 680 > feature set of 7970