The GTX 690 is a great card and a good achievement from nvidia. However, there is no point in assuming things about AMD's product until it is released (which makes me wonder why it hasn't been released yet).
The GTX 690 is a great card and a good achievement from nvidia. However, there is no point in assuming things about AMD's product until it is released (which makes me wonder why it hasn't been released yet).
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
The bulk of reviews show the 7970 using roughly 30watts more than the 680 in gaming loads. The difference for multi gpu is even higher in many cases. AMD surely can manage 2 7970 dies on one board but theres no way they will run at reference 7970 clocks at stock. They will have to reduce them a good 20-25% to have remotely realistic product. Perhaps they will do something insane such as 3 pcie connectors for those who wish to run the thing at 450watts @ 900Mhz+, who knows...
EDIT:
For the sake of citation... Power results
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-26.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5805/n...-ultra-fast/16
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-690-review/8
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/NVIDI...eview/?page=13
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphic...-Consumption-T
Last edited by Chickenfeed; 05-04-2012 at 08:04 AM.
Feedanator 7.0
CASE:R5|PSU:850G2|CPU:i7 6850K|MB:x99 Ultra|RAM:8x4 2666|GPU:980TI|SSD:BPX256/Evo500|SOUND:2i4/HS8
LCD:XB271HU|OS:Win10|INPUT:G900/K70 |HS/F:H115i
At stock speeds?
Stock speed 7970s dont compare at all to stock speed GTX 680 / 690.
7970s need to be heavily overclocked before they can compete with GK104 performance, and when that is done they run very hot and consume much more power.
No.
7970 and GTX 680 are only dead even when clocked to the same clock speeds. The reference clock performance of the 7970 is no where near equal to the GTX 680. When clocked to the same speed as a GTX 680, 7970 is excessively power hungry in comparison.
Last edited by Mungri; 05-04-2012 at 08:00 AM.
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
Nope:
Link
The main problem for the 7990 is even if they make it another fire breathing howler like the 6990 and achieve a "trades benchmarks" sort of performance parity with the 690, who is going to buy it?
The 690 is worthy of the title "the greatest graphics card ever built": the aesthetics, the performance, the feature set, the power/heat/noise metrics all exceed what anyone expected, or has seen. This dual GPU card puts the rest, NVIDIA's included, to shame.
ATi/AMD has never built a card like this, and unless their spies filled them in on what NVIDIA was up to long ago, my guess is the 7990 will be nowhere close to what the 690 turned out to be. If AMD launches a footlong plastic brick with a regular PCB, high rpm fan, that exceeds 300W, it better be $800 or less or I don't think people will buy it.
NVIDIA appears to have changed the dual GPU card market on several fronts with this card.
Last edited by Rollo; 05-04-2012 at 09:01 AM.
Intel 990x/Corsair H80 /Asus Rampage III
Coolermaster HAF932 case
Patriot 3 X 2GB
EVGA GTX Titan SC
Dell 3008
If AMD releases a 375W card it will probably be within 10% from GTX 690, maybe even closer. We have to remember that this generation did not have a true highend chip (GK104 is mid to high end), so the dual cards are the true high end (of this generation) and I doubt AMD will merely let this go. Her 7970CF figures stay within range (often supersede) with GTX 690 so be sure they'll do their best to put two of those card in an 375W envelope. Sure it won't overclocked but according to reviews so does (don't) the GTX 690 (10% overclock in most cases that I have seen).
GTX 690 is an actually impressive piece of machinery, but it will lose this round due to its insanely high price (AMD will probably aim for the $600 - $700 mark like she did with the HD6990)...
Umm... I have yet to see a GTX 690 review where the conclusion even slightly resembled that claim.
The vast majority of reviews that I have looked over seem to be quite similar to HardwareCanucks where GTX 690 performs on average about 20% faster than 7970CF.
"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government"
-- Alexander Hamilton
I was referring to Jam2k's post... The 7970s seem to fare well on ultra high def (25x16 or multi-monitor). Generally -though- yeah the GTX 690 is faster which is why AMD would have to price her offering accordingly (and since GTX 690's price is through the roof she has a lot of wiggle room)...
Nope!!!
yo man Do not be sad do not cryWhen looking over the charts, it is hard not to mention the HD 7970 Crossfire solution. It scaled remarkably well in most situations and does have several merits, mostly due to a lower overall price, but latent driver problems prevent it from becoming a viable alternative. While the GTX 690 had a small misstep in Shogun 2 (as have all NVIDIA cards since the latest patch), the dual AMD cards presented scaling issues in Skyrim, black screens in The Witcher 2: Enhanced Edition, poor minimum framerates and an odd periphery flickering in Metro 2033. While the two HD 7970’s performance may look good on paper, we just can’t recommend investing $920 in them until AMD’s driver team makes some serious upgrades. With that being said, the HD 7970’s wider memory interface does tend to make a difference in some scenarios, particularly when gaming at multi monitor resolutions.
because this is the reality that says
GTX 690 beat HD 7970 CF
Link
Last edited by Tha Last Meal; 05-04-2012 at 10:36 AM.
WOOOOOF
This looks to be a great card, its too bad I cant find one anywhere.
Lian Dream: i7 2600k @ 4.7Ghz, Asus Maximus IV Gene-z, MSI N680GTX Twin Frozr III, 8GB 2x4GB Mushkin Ridgeback, Crucial M4 128GB x2, Plextor PX-755SA, Seasonic 750 X, Lian-li
HTPC: E5300@3.8, Asus P5Q Pro Turbo, Gigabyte 5750 Silentcell, Mushkin 2GBx2, 2x 500gb Maxtor Raid 1, 300gb Seagate, 74gb Raptor, Seasonic G series 550 Gold, Silverstone LC16m
Laptop: XPS15z Crucial M4
Nikon D700 ~ Nikkor 17-35 F2.8 ~ Nikkor 50mm F1.8
Lian Dream Work Log
my smugmug
Heatware
It 'catches up' and the performance gap between the 7970 and GTX 680 narrows down, but in the majority of reviews the GTX 680 still maintains the lead at higher resoultions with less heat, noise, and according to most reviews power usage too.
Exactly.
good luck buying this card its been 6 weeks and I haven't seen newegg without a SOLD OUT sign on ALL the 680s
This is posted on thier site
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130781
SOLD OUT and $1200
When the 690 is even avail to buy the HD-8970 will be out LOL
I play some BF3, Crysis MWLL and Tribes Ascend
Depending on the coding one game will favor AMD vs NV and visa versa
Last edited by iboomalot; 05-04-2012 at 10:48 AM.
i7 6700K @4.8 ghz
XSPC RayStorm (very nice block)
Z170 Sabertooh ,, 32GB- Gskill (15-15-15-36 @3600 mhz) 1:1
XFX-7970 with Swiftech Komodo nickel block
Water Cooling - MO-RA3 Pro with 4 Silverstone 180mm @ 700 rpm, Twin Vario mcp-655 pumps
Samsung 850-1TB SSD,, OCZ ZX-1250W (powerfull and silent)
Crossfire 30" decent monitor for IPS too bad SED tech died
Docsis2.0 Docsis3.0
-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
I hate to sound like I'm ragging on you, but your claim is in direct contradiction to techreport.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/22653/11
E7200 @ 3.4 ; 7870 GHz 2 GB
Intel's atom is a terrible chip.
So don't spread around your data as if it is the only truth in benchmarking. Have a little humility.
I can flip this statement around:
Using data from anandtech, techreport, and techpowerup. Reproduced, 'peer reviewed' results.Actually, from my testing, AMD excels at built-in benchmarks (what Anandtech uses for Metro 2033 and Crysis) while in-game, the situations is sometimes quite different.
E7200 @ 3.4 ; 7870 GHz 2 GB
Intel's atom is a terrible chip.
I can`t figure out why people try to see it the wrong way. It`s pretty obvious that the GTX690 is better than crossfired 7970. Look, I`m not saying that the price/performance is good, just the performance itself. Now it`s time to amd work on their monster to compete with this one.
@jam2k: seems like hardware.fr is manipulating results.
PC:
MOBO: Maximus VI Extreme
CPU: Core i7-4770k
RAM: 2x4gb Dominator Platinum 2133
GPU: GeForce GTX Titan
Greetings from Brazil!
Its pretty obvious that the two formats are equal since 50% of the games run better on the 7970CF and 50% on the 690
I would like to see what two OCed 7970s at 1200 mhz can do. Also certain games are written only for NV or even designed to hamper the AMD product.
Its very obvious when a single 7970 had the same frame rate as two.
Last edited by iboomalot; 05-06-2012 at 09:12 AM.
i7 6700K @4.8 ghz
XSPC RayStorm (very nice block)
Z170 Sabertooh ,, 32GB- Gskill (15-15-15-36 @3600 mhz) 1:1
XFX-7970 with Swiftech Komodo nickel block
Water Cooling - MO-RA3 Pro with 4 Silverstone 180mm @ 700 rpm, Twin Vario mcp-655 pumps
Samsung 850-1TB SSD,, OCZ ZX-1250W (powerfull and silent)
Crossfire 30" decent monitor for IPS too bad SED tech died
Docsis2.0 Docsis3.0
-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
Bookmarks