Tuesday, March 13th 2012

New NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Pictures Hit The Web

Courtesy of ChipHell we now have a couple of fresh pictures of NVIDIA's first Kepler-powered graphics card, the GeForce (or should we write' GeFORCE') GTX 680. Shot both from above and the back, the incoming card has a black PCB, a dual-slot/single-fan cooler, two (stacked) 6-pin PCIe power plugs, a couple of SLI connectors, and four display outputs - dual DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort.

The GTX 680 is equipped with one GK104 28 nm GPU, and reportedly boasts 1536 CUDA Cores, a 256-bit memory interface, 2 GB of GDDR5 VRAM (4 GB models should also be in the works), PCI-Express 3.0, and a TDP of around 190 W. The GeForce GTX 680 is expected to be launched next week, on March 22nd. Its rumored price tag is $549.

Source: ChipHell
Add your own comment

76 Comments on New NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Pictures Hit The Web

#1
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
NHKS said:
No, and in fact I am totally disappointed seeing the price speculation of the GTX680 @ 550$.. I was hoping nvidia to price the GK104 competitively.. we all know that GK104 means a mid-to-high range gpu.. since GK100 has nt seen light we get the 104 branded as GTX680 at the price of GK100(?), which is just unfair of nvidia.. GK104 should have got the GTX660 branding like GF114 was GTX560Ti.. and so u can find my 'meme' for nvidia under my earlier comment..:p

EDIT:to futher support my view on GK104 being a mid-range > http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/26310-nvidia-aims-for-record-quarter (Massive margins on GK104)
Nice to see you agreeing with me!


Crap Daddy said:
These are meant for enthusiasts, a very small community who want to spend whatever it takes to have the high-end. Even if a 150$ card can play any of the games out there at decent framerates with decent settings on a decent monitor, if you want higher resolutions, multi-monitor setups and 60 FPS at least, even a 350$ card will choke. So that's why we have these prices.

Now the problem is that there's not enough of a performance jump for the money in lower segments as witnessed by the recent AMD offerings and I don't see Nvidia improving on this given the price and the estimated performance of their top card. So what I'm saying is that basically we pay the same amount of money for the same performance as last gen or we have to pay much more for a jump in performance. That's the catch here and not the fact that the top cards cost 550$.
Oh I understand the concept, but this is not a enthusiast card.. it's a midrange card.. an enthusiast card is a MARS.. something you can overclock the piss out of and has great cooling.. We should not be paying $550 for just a highend card or midrange card.. but hell if people keep buying them then shit i don't see any fault in Nvidia or AMD.. Everybody waits for the other guy to make something better to lower prices.. Well shit that's not great economics when they are not doing it.. If we want better prices.. then stop buying the bullshit they keep putting out. [/Class]
Posted on Reply
#2
NHKS
Vulpesveritas said:
.. which means that AMD won't have quite as high 2st quarter profits. Also note that Nvidia has the NDA held until near the end of the 2st quarter? Seeing as the NDA ends on the 22nd, and the 2nd quarter ends on the 31st. Oh and that means that most people won't hear the news until the end so that means that Nvidia gets to keep AMD profits down. ...
i guess u mean 1st quarter
Posted on Reply
#3
radrok
That power supply pin arrangement... GTFO I watercool my graphics to have them single slot.
Posted on Reply
#4
15th Warlock
$549?

$549.99 for a GPU that's around 300 mm2? Can you imagine Nvidia's margins on these cards? Do the math, the G92b which had about the same die size was around $300 when it came out, sure Nvidia has to make up for R&D expenses, low yields and whatnot, but we are talking about a $250 markup give or take...

Take a good look boys and girls, this is price fixing at its finest, both manufacturers are ripping costumers a new one, don't be fools, vote with your wallets.

I pride myself in being at the bleeding edge of technology, and believe me, it required a lot of effort not to jump on the 7970 bandwagon a few months ago, the only couple things that stopped me were the fact that I wouldn't be able to fully utilize my 3D surround setup, and I also felt pricing wasn't quite right for what I deemed relatively small jump in performance compared to my current setup.

So I made up my mind and decided to wait for Nvidia, keeping up with the rumor mill has meant day after day of one disappointment after another, and this is the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back, if this price is indeed true, I'm not favoring Nvidia with my business either.

Price fixing is a crime, ask the LCD and RAM manufacturers how that worked out for them, even both video card manufacturers have been caught red handed conspiring to price fixing in the past if memory serves me right, and then what, a big lawsuit from the government, millions of dollars in fines, and absolutely no benefits to your costumers.

I just bought a couple of GTX480s for $440 dollars at Newegg to replace my aging 285 for my game room; $440! Yes, this setup might be hot, its doesn't have the latest GPUs, it might not beat a 680 in performance by a hair, but it sure beats it in price, and it is faster than a 7950 at a lower price, and the best thing is it runs all of my console ports PC developers are releasing just fine, thank you!

As I already said, don't be fools, vote with your wallets :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#5
NHKS
radrok said:
That power supply pin arrangement... GTFO I watercool my graphics to have them single slot.
why u need watercooling?... with GK104, u dont need water cooling, chip reaches 50C max at full load(8xMSAA, 3d mode, folding,etc).. u can overclock it by 20% over base clock and still it only reaches 70C max.. thats why nvidia demands 550$ for its all in one high-end(ahem mid-range) gpu.. :D

just kidding..;) i still cant understand the reason behind the stacked 6 pin-connectors.. & maybe even the stacked DVi outs :banghead:
Posted on Reply
#6
Wrigleyvillain
PTFO or GTFO
15th Warlock said:


As I already said, don't be fools, vote with your wallets :shadedshu
I too just bought a GTX 480 for $220 so...yeah.
Posted on Reply
#7
Vulpesveritas
NHKS said:
i guess u mean 1st quarter
The U.S. government's fiscal year begins on October 1 of the previous calendar year and ends on September 30 of the year with which it is numbered. Prior to 1976, the fiscal year began on July 1 and ended on June 30. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 stipulated the change to allow Congress more time to arrive at a budget each year, and provided for what is known as the "transitional quarter" from July 1, 1976 to September 30, 1976. As stated above, the tax year for a business is governed by the fiscal year it chooses.[17]
For example, the United States government fiscal year for 2012 ("FY 2012" or "FY12") is as follows:
1st Quarter: October 1, 2011 - December 31, 2011
2nd Quarter: January 1, 2012 - March 31, 2012
3rd Quarter: April 1, 2012 - June 30, 2012
4th Quarter: July 1, 2012 - September 30, 2012
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_year#United_States
Posted on Reply
#8
sanadanosa
Does anyone see white Sapphire box?
Posted on Reply
#9
Crap Daddy
15th Warlock said:
I just bought a couple of GTX480s for $440 dollars at Newegg to replace my aging 285 for my game room; $440! Yes, this setup might be hot, its doesn't have the latest GPUs, it might not beat a 680 in performance by a hair, but it sure beats it in price, and it is faster than a 7950 at a lower price, and the best thing is it runs all of my console ports PC developers are releasing just fine, thank you!
I bet 2 480 in SLI will beat a 680 fairly easy. Anyway Nvidia users may consider themselves privileged compared to AMD since they are asked to pay only 50$ more for 30-35% increase in performance (my estimate) over last gens top card launch price while AMD users are asked 170$ more for 40% performance increase over last gens top card launch price.
Posted on Reply
#10
15th Warlock
Crap Daddy said:
I bet 2 480 in SLI will beat a 680 fairly easy. Anyway Nvidia users may consider themselves privileged compared to AMD since they are asked to pay only 50$ more for 30-35% increase in performance (my estimate) over last gens top card launch price while AMD users are asked 170$ more for 40% performance increase over last gens top card launch price.
Either way we are all being screwed by this pricing scheme, I guess we are going back to the good old days of the $600 GTX8800, both manufacturers must be salivating at the thought, and laughing all the way to the bank I believe :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#11
NHKS
sanadanosa said:
Does anyone see white Sapphire box?
good spotting!.. I think u are right too, the stylised 'E' looks it.. i can also see the words PURE & 'White A'.. It means 'Pure White' series.. but currently there is only 'Pure White E350' (Zacate APU).. so could 'White A' mean something new(unrealeased) ?
(click here to see the Pure White E350 box)
Posted on Reply
#12
Horrux
Mindweaver said:
Ok from your statement above you would pay those high prices to play a game you might get from a developer that caters to consoles? I hate to tell you but even DICE started to back track before release... Oh and the last time I checked my 5850's in CF have the latest Microsoft DirectX features... and play all of those games just fine... So, again why would anybody pay these prices that there current cards can handle? You could argue that hey you can go to a single card, but but.. wait my GTX480 that I only paid $219 plays all of these games just fine as well... Err if we listened to NVIDIA - The Way it's meant to be played we would all go buy a fu*kn console... [/rant]
Yep, the last gen is AMPLY SUFFICIENT for the VAST MAJORITY of users. Of course, there are those who play on 3 monitors, heck 3 x 120hz monitors, and need the bleeding edge in video cards. It goes all the way to 6 x 120hz monitors (or projectors) which requires 12x the GPU power of gaming on a single monitor. But that is such a tiny minority. The vast majority are doing plenty well playing at 1080p with an HD 6870 or GTX 560 or so.

The need to upgrade comes from those who are still running something significantly below these cards. And in all likelihood, they're, generally speaking, not paying $500 for a video card, when their previous one was a $200 item.
Posted on Reply
#14
Wrigleyvillain
PTFO or GTFO
The only reason I upgraded recently was more vram. Wanted to try the NV drivers again for a change but hardly gonna swap cards just for that.
Posted on Reply
#15
Casecutter
We're told the GTX680 that has a capability overtake a 7970 (here or there for) at $550, although for that they use much more cost-effective chip, 256-Bit and just 2Gb. But for that you get those Dynamic Profiles to spike the clocks by 35%.

Such the Deal!

Remenber 28Nm GPU production had a increase that basically wiped out the normal incentive of move to a die shrink, so AMD has contented with that, and so is Nvidia by working from a GK104.
http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=210049

Recus said:
http://www.abload.de/img/2702126_03aaaafe-863drr0ai.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/mcj2P.png
Isn't this how AMD formats such slides in their presentations? That has me seeing it as a photo-shop.
Posted on Reply
#16
sanadanosa
NHKS said:
good spotting!.. I think u are right too, the stylised 'E' looks it.. i can also see the words PURE & 'White A'.. It means 'Pure White' series.. but currently there is only 'Pure White E350' (Zacate APU).. so could 'White A' mean something new(unrealeased) ?
(click here to see the Pure White E350 box)
So sapphire will ship Pure White APUs bundled with GTX 680?:laugh:
Posted on Reply
#18
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
Recus said:

What is that graph supposed to show us? AMD is consistent.. :slap: I call fake.. :banghead:
Posted on Reply
#19
N3M3515
btarunr said:
Will GK104 be competition to HD 7900 series? Yes. Will that cause a price-war leading to happier consumers? Resounding NO.
So much WIN in this comment.

All of the "wait for nvidia to offer xxxxx so that AMD can price its cards at a reasonable price"
Still calling whinning to those complaining about MAD stratosferic prices?

RESULT = coumsumers, perf/price . . . . . . SCREWED UP.......big time.
Posted on Reply
#20
Horrux
Mindweaver said:
What is that graph supposed to show us? AMD is consistent.. :slap: I call fake.. :banghead:
Well I guess it's supposed to be scores normalized at 7970 = 1.0.

I call fake too, no way that GK104 is 50% more powerful than the 7970.
Posted on Reply
#21
Animalpak
pfff damn! Why out so soon? My 580 still has a lot to give !
Posted on Reply
#22
Wrigleyvillain
PTFO or GTFO
You have a point re. your 580 but I think you're like the only one saying it's too "soon"...
Posted on Reply
#23
erocker
Senior Moderator
Mindweaver said:
What is that graph supposed to show us? AMD is consistent.. :slap: I call fake.. :banghead:
According to my calculations using that graph GTX 680 is about 11.4% faster than HD7970 on average. Seems very plausible to me.
Posted on Reply
#24
xenocide
erocker said:
According to my calculations using that graph GTX 680 is about 11.4% faster than HD7970 on average. Seems very plausible to me.
Yea I was just doing that math in my head, and it doesn't seem unreasonable. People's eyes are just drawn to the BF3 bar.
Posted on Reply
#25
INSTG8R
Mindweaver said:
What is that graph supposed to show us? AMD is consistent.. :slap: I call fake.. :banghead:
Yeah that was the first thing I caught too. There is no change at all in the AMD numbers with different settings yet the NV numbers are up and down. Makes no sense at all and is obviously BS.

WTH is hell is up with this proposed pricing for this "supposed" mid/mainstream card? So when the GK100 or whatever it ends up as which is supposed to be the "enthusiast" card comes out are we talking $700-800 price tag? Something stinks here...:shadedshu
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment