NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Kepler 2 GB

[MxPhenom 216]

heres the full thread of the picture i posted above

http://kingpincooling.com/forum/show...0414#post20414

[bear jesus]

why are people so happy with this when they complained so loud at the 7970 which is obviously very close in most games? i know the dynamic overclock is a nice feature but i was expecting more from the way everyone hyped it and is now responding to the results.

I pay attention to 2560x1600 mainly as it gives similar results to my setup and i just keep seeing the 680 being neck and neck with the 7970 or beating it by a mall margin excluding a few yet in all the games TPU reviewed that i currently play the 7970 beats it or is neck and neck but i do not intend to buy this for games i have already played .

According to the TPU review the 7970 is more power efficient in idle, multi monitor and average power consumption, it is mainly just blu-ray that is the major difference effecting normal usage efficiency between them

I am not complaining about the card at all, i was happy with the performance increase the 7970 showed in reviews so i am more than happy with the increases over it for the exact same price but the way everyone is reacting it seams like this is something way more special than it is.

I would like to take a look at what the non reference models bring before i make my choice and no this is not some AMD fan boy rant trying to make the 680/7970 look good/bad, i just want to buy a 680 as well as all you excited GPU lovers.

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by bear jesus

why are people so happy with this when they complained so loud at the 7970 which is obviously very close in most games? i know the dynamic overclock is a nice feature but i was expecting more from the way everyone hyped it and is now responding to the results.

I pay attention to 2560x1600 mainly as it gives similar results to my setup and i just keep seeing the 680 being neck and neck with the 7970 or beating it by a mall margin excluding a few yet in all the games TPU reviewed that i currently play the 7970 beats it or is neck and neck but i do not intend to buy this for games i have already played .

According to the TPU review the 7970 is more power efficient in idle, multi monitor and average power consumption, it is mainly just blu-ray that is the major difference effecting normal usage efficiency between them

I am not complaining about the card at all, i was happy with the performance increase the 7970 showed in reviews so i am more than happy with the increases over it for the exact same price but the way everyone is reacting it seams like this is something way more special than it is.

I would like to take a look at what the non reference models bring before i make my choice and no this is not some AMD fan boy rant trying to make the 680/7970 look good/bad, i just want to buy a 680 as well as all you excited GPU lovers.

I don't know what review your are watching but the 680 review shoes its consumes less pwoer then the 7970 in everything other then idle?

We are happy mainly because the price to performance ratio is great compared to the 7970. ITs performs better in almost everything, and it costs less. thats win in a lot of peoples books, no matter its its better by 1% or 100%

Nevermind your right. average and multimonitor the GTX680 consumes more power, but only be 1-3w which is like nothing

[bear jesus]

Originally Posted by nvidiaintelftw

I don't know what review your are watching but the 680 review shoes its consumes less pwoer then the 7970 in everything other then idle?

Ok well i must have got that one wrong, i just scanned through them again when typing my message, will look back.

*edit* i think it is right. but the point is people are super stoked over this when its not much better than the 7970 and they were hating on that so hard

But also the 7970 and 680 are the same price here.

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by bear jesus

Ok well i must have got that one wrong, i just scanned through them again when typing my message, will look back.

*edit* i think it is right.

But also the 7970 and 680 are the same price here.

The egg the price for them is 499 and then for the 7970 its still from 549 to about 574

[bear jesus]

Originally Posted by nvidiaintelftw

The egg the price for them is 499 and then for the 7970 its still from 549 to about 574

http://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-...-gtx-680-pci-e

http://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-...n-hd7970-pci-e

I live in the land of the brits

But i wonder if them being the same price added to my interpretation of the results being more negative than most.

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by bear jesus

http://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-...-gtx-680-pci-e

http://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-...n-hd7970-pci-e

I live in the land of the brits

well then id still get the 680 haha

[bear jesus]

Originally Posted by nvidiaintelftw

well then id still get the 680 haha

As i said i intend to

I just want to try Nvidia again as it's been a while, i was just kind of hoping for something more exciting and i just see it as the 7970 in green with some added software/hardware features.

*edit*
Yes i know it is a little more than just that

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by bear jesus

As i said i intend to

I just want to try Nvidia again as it's been a while, i was just kind of hoping for something more exciting and i just see it as the 7970 in green with some added software/hardware features.

eh you can dumb down any graphics card to that, I however am pleased with the 680. I have always gone with nvidia. there were 2 generations that I went with AMD/ATI. X1950XTX and HD5870. I like being back with nvidia though. THey support the games I play better with more features especially with skyrim being able to force really nice eye candy into the game with barely any performance hit.

[bear jesus]

Originally Posted by nvidiaintelftw

eh you can dumb down any graphics card to that, I however am pleased with the 680. I have always gone with nvidia. there were 2 generations that I went with nvidia. X1950XTX and HD5870. I like being back with nvidia though. THey support the games I play better with more features especially with skyrim being able to force really nice eye candy into the came with barely any performance hit.

I never noticed a difference between brands when in use other than software logos/ui/features, i just bought what was suitable for my wallet and enjoyed it until i upgrade next... or it dies and i am forced to upgrade

[Shurakai]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

consumes less power

On average it's actually 3watts more, so it doesn't beat the 7970. Still, one sexy card Gogo price war!

[Benetanegia]

Originally Posted by bear jesus

But i wonder if them being the same price added to my interpretation of the results being more negative than most.

The way I see it, yes.

It's not excitement IMO, but up to 10% more performance for 10% cheaper is a step in the right direction and people are happy about that I guess.

Like I said in page 1 or 2, personally, I'd like to see them at $400 before I get excited about the product.

But now, about the chip, maybe I'm more excited than the average reader because internally I'm comparing it to the chip that should really be compared with from a technical standpoint: the GTX560 Ti.

Twice as fast at 2560x1600, a little less at 1200p, similar powr consumption and a 25% smaller chip, meaning that there's room for a 25% bigger refresh chip, that will hopefully sell on the price bracket where it belongs, or closer at least, if AMD decides to compete.

And then what GK110 could bring into the table is just amazing.

[W1zzard]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

1.) So you are admitting that AMD does the same thing then?

2.) The chip on the GPU only measures those figures, the driver then uses them to estimate power consumption and drops the clocks.



Again, go read more detailed explanation that W1z gives. The chip on the GPU is nothing more than a controller chip that was already present on AMD's GPUs that reads the data, the driver is still what is doing the actual calculations for power consumption and clock/voltage adjustements.

But I'll stop arguing with you now, because I know you know it all, and AMD definitely "HAS NEVER used a driver to forcefully control power to the card", even though I just showed you they have/do.

i think you are confusing
- voltage controller (which controls the voltage regulators to generate output voltage)
- power measurement IC (which checks how much power is running through the 12V input lines and reports that to the driver)

obviously both cards needs a voltage controller, otherwise they couldnt dynamically adjust voltages.

power measurement IC is only present on NVIDIA, AMD does not use any components to get the input data for their powertune algo

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by W1zzard

i think you are confusing
- voltage controller (which controls the voltage regulators to generate output voltage)
- power measurement IC (which checks how much power is running through the 12V input lines and reports that to the driver)

obviously both cards needs a voltage controller, otherwise they couldnt dynamically adjust voltages.

power measurement IC is only present on NVIDIA, AMD does not use any components to get the input data for their powertune algo

but they both essentially do the same thing. jsut nvidia is hardware side AMD is software

[theoneandonlymrk]

cheers wizzard ,good review as ever

they have done well , I like the new card ,but it dosnt exceed my expectations in any way ,theyve had long enough to make a faster card then Amd imho,and given the choices they have made they have come up smelling of roses to most ,as even an idiot is now going to be able to brag about his super ocd gfx card, i prefer the old school way of ocing a card, but since this is all software and driver based i dont see this issue not being overcome by someone soon.

any reviews with a waterblock on because id be interested in what it might do, kept do-ably cool (not ln2 max) and judging by your review it might then hold high clocks much better

[Am*]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

1.) So you are admitting that AMD does the same thing then?

2.) The chip on the GPU only measures those figures, the driver then uses them to estimate power consumption and drops the clocks.



Again, go read more detailed explanation that W1z gives. The chip on the GPU is nothing more than a controller chip that was already present on AMD's GPUs that reads the data, the driver is still what is doing the actual calculations for power consumption and clock/voltage adjustements.

But I'll stop arguing with you now, because I know you know it all, and AMD definitely "HAS NEVER used a driver to forcefully control power to the card", even though I just showed you they have/do.

*Facepalm*

Forgot I was talking to the genius who thinks forcefully downclocking the GPU to hit average power consumption figures through drivers (which you CAN'T manually override) is the same thing as a GPU that directly checks the on chip load monitor before dropping or increasing the clocks (and which can be manually overridden). Last time I checked, only one of the companies in question has stuttering problems (due to throttling) on single card setups, and that happens to be Nvidia and I'd probably know more about it than you, since I've had to put up with mine for what will soon be 2 years now, on 5 completely different setups (that have had AMD cards from the 4890 to a 6970). With this generation, Nvidia are adding MORE throttling crap, which saves me the trouble of considering buying another GPU from them, even though a simple mode selection feature (gamer/blu-ray/2D clocks) would have easily fixed this problem if they hadn't introduced power limiters as well.

And I would bother to return the favour to you and mis-quote something from one of your posts, but you're not the first and you certainly won't be the last to do it and so I can't be arsed, to be perfectly honest. Good day, sir.

[happita]

Good for Nvidia. They finally got a handle on the power efficiency front. With that debut price of $499, they're really looking for the kill. If I had a video card that was 1 generation older, I would jump on this right freaking now!! But my 5850 is still decent enough to give me mid/high settings in the games that I play. So I'm gonna hold my breath for now until more demanding games come out.

[Hayder_Master]

this is NIVIDIA big bang, didn't expect all thous things come with this card, impressive

[Frick]

I LOVE the power consumption on this one. Nice job there.

[Isenstaedt]

So when can we expect mid-range Kepler cards?

[Benetanegia]

Originally Posted by nvidiaintelftw

but they both essentially do the same thing. jsut nvidia is hardware side AMD is software

Yeah I think Am* is living in lalaland. I fail to see how AMD doing a guesswork rather than a direct power consumption measurement, is in any way better. Neither worse the way it is implemented, but it makes no difference.

Also it's all a moot point when you can set the slide to +32% so that it's absolutely imposible to hit the limit and the performance difference is 1-2% anyway. It's not trottling too much if at all at default settings. In fact that 1-2% could come from the gains from GPU Boost reaching higher heights, rather than being something the GPU "regains back" from not being trottled.

[v12dock]

If AMD priced the 7970 at 400 or better yet 350 it would be gameover

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by v12dock

If AMD priced the 7970 at 400 or better yet 350 it would be gameover

your dreaming because that would never happen. The 7970 still performs pretty well, except Nvidia just kicked AMD in the teeth by releasing a card that is about 15% faster across the board for $50 cheaper.

[sergionography]

according to the graphs on average gtx680 is 6% faster than hd7970, but has like 15% less transistors and is 20% smaller in die sizem, that sure is an achievement! good job nvidia
now 7970 should come down in price to about 470$ or something considering performance difference.
but i wouldnt say kepler is better than GCN tho, i think nvidia will have a harder time competing with the 7800 series as they have an ever better performance/watt than the gtx680, and thats were GCN architecture truly shines, which makes me wonder if AMD's drivers are crippling its performance or something

tho ive seen some odd cases like civilizations, i could swear i saw the hd7970 beating kepler on the anandtech review, i wonder what settings it was running on there or so
also i would like to see more in depth overclock benchmarks because with dynamic clock topping at 1110mhz its hard to know if 12%overclock headroom will truly give a 12% gain in performance

another aspect i wanna see is compute performance, because ive seen other benchmarks were kepler is slower than fermi in compute.

but thank you W1zz, great review

[theoneandonlymrk]

Originally Posted by sergionography

another aspect i wanna see is compute performance, because ive seen other benchmarks were kepler is slower than fermi in compute.

but thank you W1zz, great review

you know what, thats a very good point, wizzard ,many people on tpu would love to know F@home ppd and power per watt for every card and many outside tpu would be interested, and in general computes getting more seriouse these days,,, any chance i mean you could let em run at night for tpu

i would of course be able to do such testing if you wanted