Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Apr 29, 2012.
Then you have to upgrade for PCI EX 3.0 support...
Ive gone off Nvidia this last few yrs with there cards, but DAM that card is sexy, lets hope it doesn't blow up like the 590 did
personally, great looks & the best detailing i have seen for a 'reference' card (i doubt there will be any custom cooled designs from AIBs as with the 590), but I would have preferred darker metallic shade to the chromium shade...
& the new GEFORCE GTX logo glows!
here is the pcb back face
curiously, there doesn't seem to be a back plate for this card (590 had it).. I don't see any photos showing with it.. wouldn't a card of this length need it?
since available boost depends on temp/power draw of gpu.. i wonder how nvidia has placed logic to consider the TDP of both GPUs to control the 'boost' in tandem
the 999 pricing is confirmed(straight from nV)
"At a MSRP of $999, it's not a graphics card for everyone. But for enthusiasts who demand the very best and gamers who want a graphics card that will last for generations, the GeForce GTX 690 represents the ultimate in gaming from NVIDIA."
Because in Australia 1/2 population is crocodiles.
On topic: Best reference design I ever seen.
Since when was it ok to charge double for a dual gpu card? Nvidia needs to get their heads out of the asses and realease the GTX 660/670s already. AMD is happily cleaning house with their line up. I bought Nvidia stock for $15 a share last month thinking the only place to go was up.....
.....it is now under $13/ share. At least i cleaned house with AMD when i bought for $4.30 share and the sold last month at just under $7 /share. Nvidia is a piss poor ran company and that shows since Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft want nothing to do with them.
For starters, Dual-GPU cards are generally very close to twice the price of their single equivalents (HD6970 was $370, HD6990 was $700), the reason they are usually a tad under, is because traditionally they are cut down versions of their individual selves or ran at lower clock speeds than an individual card to keep power consumption and heat generation down. Not sure why people are surprised this card is around $1000 when the individual GPU's were at $500. If you OC the GTX690 to the same clock speeds as the GTX680, I'm sure you'd get pretty much identical scaling as an SLi setup, maybe better.
As for the Console makers ditching them, at the time AMD had better products in terms of Power Consumption and Heat Generation. Fermi was poorly designed all things considered, and just wouldn't work well in Consoles. No shocker there. I think Kepler would be excellent for Consoles, but they are too far into development to just up and change the GPU configurations.
You guys make it sound like Intel\Nvidia are these beings of pure evil that had people paid to sodomize Rory Reed's family several times over. Quit sensationalizing everything to make everyone who's not AMD seem so terrible.
You must know something that everyone else doesn't. Seeing how even the GTX590 didn't overheat and it had 2 GPUs that run hotter then GK104. THe GTx690 also seems to have a better cooling design, not to mention quality in the construction of the card.
Too bad most game publishers are stuck on last gen 32-bit/Dx9.0c.
This is both aesthetically and a technically awesome product. But only a handful of games are going to take advantage of the power.
all that is true BUT why pay 200% price for 160% performance?
Convenience, the fact that it only takes one pci-e slot.
People who buy top end enthusiast gear usually don't care about price.
That's why Intel sells extreme CPUs for $999 and Asus sells Mars and Ares GPUs for $1000+.
Seriously....a vid card for a grand...???
Not in this lifetime.
Separate names with a comma.