GeForce GTX 680 Up To 40% Faster Than Radeon HD 7970: NVIDIA

[the54thvoid]

Originally Posted by 20mmrain

The performance difference is on average 10% going both ways. There are some areas where this card does beat the HD7970 but there are a other areas the GTX 680 looses too. What they failed to mention that it also looses sometimes by 20% or more too.

Originally Posted by beck24

This is a great card for what will be the third fastest in the nvidia line up this year. It is supposed to overclock like crazy so I'm excited to see what it can do as drivers mature and vendors customize.

This isn't me having a go at either of you but it's tantamount to douchebaggery to state things from what may well be seen as an insider viewpoint without proof.

20mm, you've said you have retail sources about the 680, so prove it in a very discrete way that will validate what you say without bringing your source into the picture. Irrespective of ANYBODY's insider knowledge, stating it on a thread full of supposition and guesswork is meaningless.
Even if the knowledge is truth, it's pointless without some back up.

Like I say - not having a go but you can appreciate that your consistent claims of 10% either way would be better served to the TPU crowd with a morsel of evidence (be it a pic of a part of a retail card or anything).

Throw us a frickin bone dude!!

[Dj-ElectriC]

Originally Posted by beck24

This is a great card for what will be the third fastest in the nvidia line up this year. It is supposed to overclock like crazy so I'm excited to see what it can do as drivers mature and vendors customize.

Who in the god of flying f**ks said so? got evidence? now? prove it. Now.

Every year, same freaking sh*t. Suddenly everybody turns into a freaking fortune teller (ohhh yes this weill be exactly 25.32556% faster yesss...)
The hell with any speculation and "leaked" information until i will disassemble the poor plastic thing with my bare hands.

[/rage]

[N3M3515]

Originally Posted by beck24

This is a great card for what will be the third fastest in the nvidia line up this year. It is supposed to overclock like crazy so I'm excited to see what it can do as drivers mature and vendors customize.

I think it is already overclocked, in order to be competitive with HD7970.

[GoldenTiger]

Originally Posted by N3M3515

I think it is already overclocked, in order to be competitive with HD7970.

Stock clock = what the manufacturer sets it at. It's not overclocked.

[Vulpesveritas]

Originally Posted by GoldenTiger

Stock clock = what the manufacturer sets it at. It's not overclocked.

I think he means they took what they were originally going to release and pushed the clocks as high as they could to compete.

[Ferrum Master]

mates!! We're screwed...

[Benetanegia]

Well yeah from 950 Mhz to 1000 Mhz, not much of an increase. I think they did it because of AMD's "Ghz edition" campaign, they can match it and they just did. Assuming anything of this info is legit of course.

[Covert_Death]

Originally Posted by Dj-ElectriC

Who in the god of flying f**ks said so? got evidence? now? prove it. Now.

Every year, same freaking sh*t. Suddenly everybody turns into a freaking fortune teller (ohhh yes this weill be exactly 25.32556% faster yesss...)
The hell with any speculation and "leaked" information until i will disassemble the poor plastic thing with my bare hands.

[/rage]

[rolleyes]
lol maybe a speculation thread in the forums isn't the best place for you to be hanging out then

[/rolleyes]

[buggalugs]

Originally Posted by N3M3515

I think it is already overclocked, in order to be competitive with HD7970.

Thats the thing, the Nvidia card may not have the overclocking headroom of the 7970 so the average 15% faster 680 might only have another 15% overclocking whereas the 7970 has a good 25%-30% overclocking headroom......making both cards almost the same in performance.

Nvidia might have clocked their cards higher to beat the 7970 in stock performance but overclocking could even things out again.

We will have to wait and see I guess.

Soon there will be the enthusiast overclocked 7970's like the Sapphire Atomic, MSI Lightning etc that will close the 15% gap anyway.

This is really good news for AMD and people wanting a 7970, it means the price will drop from $549 to $449 and as usual it comes down to price/performance. Nvidia 680 will be $100 more for ~15% performance gain. Just like the 580/6970 and 480/5870.

People will see better value with a $449 7970 or $379 7950 than a $549 680, heaps of people on the forums have been complaining about the $549 price of the 7970 as it is.

Same thing happens every generation.

[MarcusTaz]

Originally Posted by Super XP

This should be taken with a grain of salt. Many sources have already confirmed both HD 7970 and the GTX 680 are practically identical in performance with each one taking the win in almost an equal matter.

Let's hope the NV is slightly faster to help drive prices down.

Right on man just what we need, make that free market work in our favor!

[jamsbong]

with famous games like TES4:Skyrim and Unigine: Heaven missing, it looks like a cherry picked leaked benchmarks to me.

Nevertheless, the 3Dmark11 shows that Kepler is 8% faster than 7970, which is really impressive. Remember, the chip is smaller than Tahiti and runs only on 256bit bandwidth.

Are we seeing a RV770 (HD4870) comeback with Nvidia as the comeback kid?

[beck24]

Originally Posted by N3M3515

I think it is already overclocked, in order to be competitive with HD7970.

Actually I've seen reports that it will go to 1400 on air.

[sclera]

Gotta love Nvidia's bullshit graphs with their meaningless Y axes. Lets wait for an actual benchmark, yeah?

[Nihilus]

Yippie Beck!! What a great year for nvidia! We are all so happy for you!! Yeah Nvidia!!!

[alexsubri]

Release it already! For around $550, it better beat the 7970. It would be a major fail for nVidia.

I too have a feeling that ATI will be releasing more driver previews around release date

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by MarcusTaz

Right on man just what we need, make that free market work in our favor!

You can take that to the bank.
Also doesn't Battlefield favor Nvidia Nice Benchies NV

[Benetanegia]

Originally Posted by sclera

Gotta love Nvidia's bullshit graphs with their meaningless Y axes. Lets wait for an actual benchmark, yeah?

Common practice. I wonder what AMD were thinking, saying it would be 41% faster when it was so clear that we would find out that it only barely beats it when reviews came in.

[xenocide]

Originally Posted by Super XP

You can take that to the bank.
Also doesn't Battlefield favor Nvidia Nice Benchies NV

I have proved that to be almost entirely false using W1z's review numbers--comparing the BF3 results at 2560x to the Relative Performance numbers at 2560x--in like 3 other threads. BF3 does not favour Nvidia.

[Benetanegia]

Originally Posted by xenocide

I have proved that to be almost entirely false using W1z's review numbers--comparing the BF3 results at 2560x to the Relative Performance numbers at 2560x--in like 3 other threads. BF3 does not favour Nvidia.

Look at AMD's slide I posted, even if BF3 favoured Nvidia a little bit, would it really matter? Could anyone really say something about nit-picking benchmarks anymore, with a straight face, really? We're way past that "level of honesty" IMO.

[mrsemi]

I do enjoy the speculation and banter but what does it really matter. If it's faster than the 7970 then the green team fans have an upgrade option, one the red team already got.

I just picked up two 7950's for eyefinity and one of them's handling most games quite handily on 3 1920 x 1080 monitors with just the factory overclock.

We're getting to the point that unless high res monitors become the norm there's not going to be much need for more.

That said, devils advocate, maybe I'll be in line for some new ones in a couple years but only if there's a need for that much power.

[Covert_Death]

Originally Posted by mrsemi

That said, devils advocate, maybe I'll be in line for some new ones in a couple years but only if there's a need for that much power.

I agree that monitor resolutions need an upgrade.... 1080p is for TV's haha i don't get why computer monitors are stopping here, its beyond stupid, the pixel density is nowhere near what the human eye can see so why are monitor manufacturers getting cozy at this rez??? lets keep moving forward and progress digital beauty!

[xenocide]

Originally Posted by Covert_Death

I agree that monitor resolutions need an upgrade.... 1080p is for TV's haha i don't get why computer monitors are stopping here, its beyond stupid, the pixel density is nowhere near what the human eye can see so why are monitor manufacturers getting cozy at this rez??? lets keep moving forward and progress digital beauty!

Not to mention the fact that a Monitor that supports 1920x1200 will cost almost as much as a whole tablet that sports a screen with the same resolution. Monitors should have an average of 2560x or greater at this point...

[hhumas]

it think its would be around 700$

[DarkOCean]

Originally Posted by hhumas

it think its would be around 700$

Maybe gk 110 not this .

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

Wiz must be laughing off right now to us mere mortals