1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

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

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Mar 13, 2012.

  1. the54thvoid

    the54thvoid

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,338 (1.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,566
    Location:
    Glasgow - home of formal profanity
    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!!
     
  2. Dj-ElectriC

    Dj-ElectriC

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,196 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    838
    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]
     
    Bambooz says thanks.
  3. N3M3515

    N3M3515

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    440 (0.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    51
    I think it is already overclocked, in order to be competitive with HD7970.
     
  4. GoldenTiger

    GoldenTiger

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Messages:
    41 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12
    Stock clock = what the manufacturer sets it at. It's not overclocked.
     
  5. Vulpesveritas

    Vulpesveritas

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    383 (0.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    85
    Location:
    USA
    I think he means they took what they were originally going to release and pushed the clocks as high as they could to compete.
     
    N3M3515 says thanks.
  6. Ferrum Master

    Ferrum Master

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    670 (0.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    151
    Location:
    Rīga
    mates!! We're screwed... :shadedshu

    [​IMG]
     
    eidairaman1 says thanks.
  7. Benetanegia

    Benetanegia New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,683 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    694
    Location:
    Reaching your left retina.
    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.
     
  8. Covert_Death

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    309 (0.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    [rolleyes]
    lol maybe a speculation thread in the forums isn't the best place for you to be hanging out then

    [/rolleyes]
     
  9. buggalugs

    buggalugs

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Messages:
    936 (0.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    143
    Location:
    Australia
    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.
     
    jigar2speed says thanks.
  10. MarcusTaz

    MarcusTaz

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    433 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    Location:
    NJ
    Right on man just what we need, make that free market work in our favor!
     
    Super XP says thanks.
  11. jamsbong New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2010
    Messages:
    83 (0.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    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?:laugh:
     
  12. beck24

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    62 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    Actually I've seen reports that it will go to 1400 on air.
     
  13. sclera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    18 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Gotta love Nvidia's bullshit graphs with their meaningless Y axes. Lets wait for an actual benchmark, yeah?
     
    Vulpesveritas says thanks.
  14. Nihilus

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    219 (0.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Yippie Beck!! What a great year for nvidia! We are all so happy for you!! Yeah Nvidia!!! :roll:
     
  15. alexsubri

    alexsubri New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,391 (0.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    199
    [​IMG]

    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 :)
     
  16. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,759 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    538
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    You can take that to the bank. :D
    Also doesn't Battlefield favor Nvidia :eek: Nice Benchies NV ;)
     
  17. Benetanegia

    Benetanegia New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,683 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    694
    Location:
    Reaching your left retina.
    [​IMG]

    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.
     
  18. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,137 (1.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    458
    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.
     
    eidairaman1 says thanks.
  19. Benetanegia

    Benetanegia New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,683 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    694
    Location:
    Reaching your left retina.
    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.
     
  20. mrsemi

    Joined:
    May 22, 2007
    Messages:
    655 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    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.
     
  21. Covert_Death

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    309 (0.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    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!
     
  22. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,137 (1.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    458
    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...
     
  23. hhumas

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Messages:
    551 (0.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    22
    Location:
    Islamabad
    it think its would be around 700$
     
  24. DarkOCean

    DarkOCean

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,616 (0.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    349
    Location:
    on top of that big mountain on mars(Romania)
    Maybe gk 110 not this .
     
  25. Bjorn_Of_Iceland

    Bjorn_Of_Iceland

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,175 (1.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    375
    Wiz must be laughing off right now to us mere mortals :D
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2012

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page