http://www.abload.de/img/21omyry.jpg
Printable View
Wow, I guess I will keep that one for last, probably can finish the others altogether in the same time I would read yours. Does it really take so many words to write a review in russian ? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian
BTW where could I read that ?
GK104 is a very powerful GPU, but it seems to be bandwidth limited at resolutions over 1080p.
Attachment 124755
Res....... 7970 ...... GTX 680 .....
1050p: 133 fps | 162 fps (122%)
1200p: 118 fps | 135 fps (114%)
1600p: 082 fps | 083 fps (101%)
Now imagine that GK110 comes with 384 bit, or even 512 bit bus width. Even with 'just' 50% more shaders it should be able to pull 60%+ ahead.
Don't tease me... Been waiting for this card for 4 months, now should look forward to another half a year of wait for the GK110. T_TQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Ironically, its not in Russian. Its in English. Bright Side of News* is where you can find it. I'd give you a pre-emptive link but nobody can confirm if its actually keeping our review from the public :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuroimaho
Thanks for the interest, its only 11 pages ;) I just cover a lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
I do not think so
look here
http://cdn5.tweaktown.com/content/4/...ard_review.png
Res....... 7970 ...... GTX 680 .....
1600p: 127 fps | 161 fps
http://cdn5.tweaktown.com/content/4/...ard_review.png
Res....... 7970 ...... GTX 680 .....
1600p: 63 fps | 71 fps
http://cdn5.tweaktown.com/content/4/...ard_review.png
Res....... 7970 ...... GTX 680 .....
1600p: 63 fps | 76 fps
http://cdn5.tweaktown.com/content/4/...ard_review.png
Res....... 7970 ...... GTX 680 .....
1600p: 133 fps | 151 fps
I'm going to sleep, its 4:30am I've been awake for 20 hours. 17 of which I spent working on this review, lol
It doesn't have to happen in every single application. Some games are more bandwidth intensive. Fps reduction going from 1200p to 1600p for GTX 680 is noticeably greater than for 7970 in most scenarios.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tha Last Meal
Almost definitely not a VRAM amount issue, though.
In Dx11 games overall perfomance GTX680 VS reference speed HD7970 is as follows:
1920x1200 4xAA16xAF +9,1%
1920x1200 8xAA16xAF +8,9%
2560x1600 4xAA16xAF +5,2%
2560x1600 8xAA16xAF +3,5%
http://translate.google.com/translat...#137;€
Additional source of table http://www.upload.ee/image/2185336/total.png
@up
ORLY?
in the box say DX11, the GPU-Z say DX11.1... LOL
http://cdn5.tweaktown.com/content/4/...ard_review.png
price is 20 minutes later but i confirmed that my local store will start to sell just after nda lifted. so availability is very very good.
What's the price here? 7970 was 800 to 1000$ on january launchQuote:
Originally Posted by kromosto
@kaktus1907 dont know yet bt vatan is counting down :)
Yup ;) : http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post5072476Quote:
Originally Posted by Roch
GTX 680 = $500......good price
based on toms review + tweaktown Review shows us that GTX 680 beat HD 7970 By (15%-18%) 1920x1200.
Do not forget that HD 7970 price: $550!
FYI, Tweaktown was NOT using the correct drivers for the GTX 680.
Then we should expect pricedrop on 7970 I suppose?
Means there's more juice for the 680...;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
edit8 wrong link.
Huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by chispy
This means that the results that we have seen in the Tweaktown review is not accurate?Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Hope so... would take some of the sting out of likely not getting my 2x eVGA 680's until Monday since they didn't ship last night :D.Quote:
Originally Posted by labs23
HWC is up! http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...gb-review.html
Alienbabeltech too! http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=28910
you bought two GTX 680 ?Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-680-review/
Correct link.
Yep. I ordered them last night from newegg at around 7:30pm Eastern when they were available for a couple of minutes. 2-day shipping means unfortunately I likely won't receive them until Monday at this point, though, with shipment today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tha Last Meal
EDIT: Wow, I'm liking the sound of the adaptive vsync feature!
nice man.....You have now officially a 2 big Monster in your computer:DQuote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...GTX_680/1.html
I quess its fair to say that its 1:1 now.
Perfomance 1920 or above is slightly better.
Total power consumption on average is pretty much identical. (+3W to GTX680)
Perfomance per watt is slightly better also on high resolutions.
AMD will keep up if they drop their price just some cents below this newborn green.
this is a really strange card very very strange results. i dont know i am giving it to the premature drivers but they say it is not fundamentally different fermi so. numbers are so strange.
AMD was beaten at their own game Price, Performance & power!!
Good luck AMD, in finding someone to buy your overpriced GPUs now. I'm glad i waited.
here's from BSN.
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news...-new-hope.aspx
I guess this was done by this guy. :up:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian
ahahaha it is branded little more then 1000 usd here. it is just for the start but this means it wont go under 750 usd for a long time :(
Order it somewhere else? It's around $575 here in Europe.
i will in germany in may maybe i grab it from there
it is expensive here right now from 590 and 6990
Newegg dropped the price on the 680's I ordered by $10/ea (20 total)... thankfully they have agreed to give me the price difference as a gift card :). Relatively small difference given the overall cost of these, but hey, $20 is $20 :) especially since they hadn't shipped yet even.
I just submitted my order in newegg, 2x EVGA GeForce GTX 680 2GB, over night shipping :D
Cant wait to play with these cards :up:
Really? I didn't get that impression at all. In my tests, the GTX 680 wins handily (on average) at every resolution and only looses in a few situations. Minimum framerates are much better as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
5-10 percent give or take not a game changer thats for sureQuote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
by the way why nobody compared oced 7970 with oced 680 ? seems weird to me
http://www.abload.de/img/2my6gpt1w0u9o.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
From a purely performance standpoint, it was never meant to be a game changer.Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
Where it changes the game is price for performance of a flagship product. If NVIDIA had continued the trend set by themselves and AMD for years now, the GTX 680 would have been $600+, regardless of the core's GK104 code name.
bought mine from the egg, got a promo for free shipping and they were out of asus, so i picked up the zotac one which looks like it comes with free assassins creed games (which i dont own)
Well, here we go. My 5870 goes to retirement, my GTX680 is ordered and should be here monday (friday if I'm very lucky!). BF3 will be ran at max res and will be enjoyed as such! :P
Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
but what about rumors that they sacrificed gpgpu part in order to do that is that true ?
Awesome, bitstreaming audio support!
Looks like all that 2gb memory not being enough talk was rubbish.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Was there ever any doubt? I mean, GTX 580 had 1.5GB and it was fine, so it couldn't possibly be worse with more memory available :)
We don't really know since the final unified drivers with optimized GPGPU code aren't due out until sometime in the next two months. Hence why there are several bugs (Design Garage, Folding, etc. don't work right now). This launch is geared solely towards gaming at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
Plus, the GK104 won't be the basis of their HPC cards anyways.
Also remember that this is a GK104 so its compute performance should be compared against the GF114. The compute powerhouse will be the card that replaces GF100 / GF110 on the desktop side and the higher end Tesla models on the other.
Question for SKYMTL: Is the GTX680 really a DX11.1? Because with all the rumours and nonsense coming out of everywhere, sometimes it can be hard to get the cold hard facts. Your review states it, but I just want to make sure it's not a typo :)
Read over the last last 10 or 20 pages and it's filled with people :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing and moaning that 2gb is not enough for high resolution gaming, and here we are where Kepler clobbers the 7970 in surround.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
:eek:
Attachment 124757
Why didnt you quote my entire post? You see me saying the reasons there. Whats unclear to you? Do i need to make it GREEN for you to see better?Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Im not being either green or red here. Simple facts from reviews say that GTX is bit better on 1920 and higher resolutions on overall. One post earlier i even posted the percentages. In DX11 games, the GTX is around 9% better in 1920 and only 4% better in 2560 resolutions with 8xAA/16AF used. The power draw is identical to 7970. That makes GTX a better performer per watt.
The reason i sayd 1:1 is because its rather similar perfoming card which came out nearly 4 months after the HD. Its not 16% better like some fans posted earlier. Not even close.
Dont tell me that in lower resolutions the difference is bigger. If you buy this card and play under full HD, then good luck to you!
Like i sayd before. AMD needs to drop 7970 price bit under the GTX and it will still be atractive to buyers. AMD has already sold a lot of cards in past months. Now they can afford a price cut.
What interests me a lot is how much costs the production of GTX 680 vs HD 7970. The GPU dye is big part of the overall cost, but its not everything. We may think that GTX should be cheaper to make, but im not 100% sure on that.
That's... OVER 9000!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
lol yeah 7870 faster than 7970Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
NVIDIA did a pretty good job with GTX 680 though I'm more interested with the flagship card. At least this card is not power hungry unlike the previous generations and thats a good thing.
Yes. Fully DX11.1 compliant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad1723
:eek: GTX 680 (machete) :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i3...se-Machete.gif
[H] review with 57x12 triple display numbers included
http://hardocp.com/article/2012/03/2..._card_review/1
and Techreport
http://techreport.com/articles.x/22653
at 57x12 the 680 and the 7970 are dead even.
Impressive card so far! Though Perf/watt crown stays on the AMD side for now.
Anyone found any OC numbers yet?
is there a review that compares both oced i am on my 4-5 review still can't see any
Haven't read the techreport one but hardocp shows surround being better on 57x12 for GTX 680 by a margin, versus radeon 7970. And perf/watt is NOT better on amd, the GTX 680 outperforms the 7970 *and* runs at a good bit lower wattage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoran
EDIT: Um, techreport's doesn't have 57x12 display numbers even... and the hardocp article you linked shows the GTX 680 as superior, plus all reviews showing it as better perf/watt. I'm confused by your post.
Yes. http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=28910Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
And the GTX 680 wins nicely still.
Jaw... on floor...Quote:
Originally Posted by Handrox
First of all, the reason why I don't fully quote posts (other than this one) is because I believe it is a courtesy to ensure people don't have to read through two whole posts every time someone quotes. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
My whole point is that AMD DIDN'T sell many HD 7970 cards. Everyone noticed how there were a few in the channel at launch and then stock suddenly dried up with cards being sporadically available at retailers. And then, three days ago EVERY retailer suddenly gets a huge shipment of the things. Coincidence? I think not. ;)
how did you get 240 mhz OC while leaving the power level at 100%?Quote:
Originally Posted by Handrox
wouldnt it throttle everything down?
Its good to see, that 2GB and 256bit does not become much of the bottleneck on NV surround. :) .
Pretty much:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoran
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-24.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-25.html
Actually it's been only 2 months since HD7970 became available for purchase. Paper launch, remember?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
When you take into account ALL resolutions commonly used in games, yes... it is 16% better. I know you just want to cherry pick a few very high resolutions that 99.999% of gamers don't use because they don't run 3 monitors, but the numbers are quite clear.Quote:
Its not 16% better like some fans posted earlier. Not even close.
You'd have to cut the price at least $150 in order to get an objective customer to even consider the 7970. I could care less about the fanboys since they'll buy anything. If the CEO took a dump in a box, one of them would buy it. hehe.Quote:
Like i sayd before. AMD needs to drop 7970 price bit under the GTX and it will still be atractive to buyers. AMD has already sold a lot of cards in past months. Now they can afford a price cut.
Of course GTX 680 is cheaper to produce. It's a much smaller GPU die which means more chips can be made from each wafer, plus you guys are forgetting about the elephant in the room.... VRAM!! That extra gb GDDR5 is not cheap, nor is the wider memory bus, or additional layers in the PCB.Quote:
What interests me a lot is how much costs the production of GTX 680 vs HD 7970. The GPU dye is big part of the overall cost, but its not everything. We may think that GTX should be cheaper to make, but im not 100% sure on that.
Indeed. That's not possible. It may SHOW an OC but that OC won't necessarily be applied in games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Also, it wouldn't throttle down, it would just default to its standard clock speeds.
Attachment 124762Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Appreciate do full review! http://lab501.ro/placi-video/nvidia-...e-overclockingQuote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
lol no thanks gonna wait for some proper sites to do thatQuote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
some sick oc there really nice oneQuote:
Originally Posted by Handrox
Great review SKYMTL, will you be doing any SLI results?
They are a "proper" site. What are you insinuating? Oh, and you're welcome :).Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
Those of you who run 3+ monitors and are fully convinced 2gb is not enough.... BEHOLD!!! EVGA GTX680 FTW 4gb
I'm trying to download eVGA PrecisionX for when my cards arrive, but... the download keeps trailing off and getting interrupted due to how slammed their site is haha. /likes to have all software waiting on desktop. :D
Nvidia said that the left and right displays off of the center display in a triple monitor setup would run at a slightly lower FPS since they aren't constantly being looked at. This was to improve performance. I think the idea is super smart in most cases but there are some games like RTS games where I would prefer them to be all at the same FPS.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Anyone have a link to the article that talked about this?
Should've ended that with an evil laugh like "MUAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH *COUGH* MUAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAA"Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew LB
this: http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeF...fwatt_2560.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Don't take me wrong, it is great to see an nVidia card among the AMD ones. FINALLY. But still some way to go for nV.
this: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post5072621Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
few frames give or take is dead even for me, especially if it is not playable on either.
I'm confused... the chart you link shows the GTX 680 as better perf/watt than the Radeon 7970.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoran
When a few frames are technically 15-20%, it shows the scalability will be better in SLI overall for playability. Hypothetical, BF3 24fps on Radeon 7970, 29fps GTX 680. Then two cards.... and your numbers look more like 44fps 7970 CFX and 54fps GTX 680 (assuming 85% SLI and CF scaling). The gap widens in absolute # despite the percentage being the same. Otherwise, you are correct... but those numbers result in playable vs. not enjoyable in these edge cases. Hopefully this helps explain the logic as to my thinking.
I didn't state 7970 anywhere, and I meant AMD cards in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
I understand your logic and agree to some extent. We can continue this dispute once we see SLI/CF numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
There are two resolutions I commonly use, the native res of my 3x24" LCDs and the native res of my 30". I do not care about a million FPS @ 1024x768. If you spend 500$ on a GPU you usually do not use it with a 80$ 19" monitor. Anything under 19x12 is not a valid information for me/my customers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew LB
Ah, sorry, I just assumed... mistake on my part then :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoran
Yeah, we'll see how it pans out in actuality, soon.
Very interesting piece of SW. :up:
If anyone still wants EVGA Precision X - http://www.mediafire.com/?fh19bn8ac0bzuws
Thanks, grabbing it now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
I've been curious about that as well, but I don't think nVidia has said that. TPU made the claim in this article - but I can't find anything in any of the reviews I've read (or on nVidia's site) that confirms what TPU reported.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3lfk1ng
Mate, by looking at the bench-runs you do...are you playing with a pad or something? The aiming around seems very sloppy and the only explanation that I could found was that you were using a pad in order to play those runs. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
BTW, have you ever tried to measure the performance differences between BF3 single-player and multi-player runs? I've found BF3 to be super taxing @ multiplayer...but of course, its a pita to test the game in such mode properly as there are many variables you don't control which would require a ton of extra testing in order to minimise such variances.
Anyway, good job with your review, yours are probably the ones I enjoy most since you put important staff in perspective while doing a good testing job altogether. Thanks :)
One of the main issues is the fact that in order to save some space and minimize processing / uploading time, I recorded all of the videos @ 30FPS with FRAPS. In an FPS, that seriously messes up aim. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by prava
As for MP versus SP, I have tried but the issue is that MP introduces far too many variables into the equation. My benchmark runs ended up being all over the place.
Going to throw one in my HTPC to replace my 570. I've found myself using it alot more than my desktop lately. Ever since I got this home theater thing in the bag. I tend to use the desktop for flight sims, online fps and rts games and use the tv and htpc for everything else.
I should probaley wait for an aftermarket sink as I do quite like Asus' DCII sink performance and low noise level but I'm sure someone will release a decent aftermarket sink ( perhaps the Acclero Xtreme is compatible already... ? )
I was curious Sky, is the adaptive vsync a feature of the 300 series drivers themselves or is it exclusive to the 680? ( I'm assuming the former ) That along with optional 3rd party frame limitors is a huge attraction for me as I tend to use my tv with vsync as the tearing detracts from it alot more than my desktops display interestingly enough. However I recently played through the Darkness 2 and the performance droped much too often with vsync on so I had to turn it off.
I play a lot of single player games with a 360 controller so I'm a little more tollerable to the added input lag. On my desktop I tend to keep it off at all costs.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...2&d=1331802528
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/wp-co..._No_Therma.jpg
I've noticed some parts were removed in the final PCB. Early leaked pics had those.
they are a bit greenish lets say ah whatever still great card kudos to nvidiaQuote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Why the thread title still GTX780 ??
It should be available for all cards in the future but for the time being, it will only be the 600-series that can use it. We'll all know more once a unified WHQL driver is released.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chickenfeed
Good job nvidia. The 7970 and 680 should be neck and neck when overclocked to the limit, TPU did a max 7970 vs 680 overclocked performance but the 7970 was without vmods and around 5% slower. With it, should be equal. Great power numbers for the 680 though.