• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

680 2048 or 4096?

JHONO

JHONO

JHONO

Associate
Joined
8 Feb 2004
Posts
865
Location
North West
Looking to upgrade my graphics card in the new year to a GTX 680, the one im looking at is the EVGA superclocked version (2048mb) available here on OCUK.

Im curious about the 4096 version, i game at 1920@1080 and that's what i intend to stay at. Been told i dont need the 4096 by a friend but just want your version on this. Im thinking more future proof, or will the 2048 version serve me well for the 18 months or so?

Also my board is only PCI-E 2.0 and the card is 3.0, still x16. Is it backwards compatible and will performance be hampered or not?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
The 2GB is plenty for 1080P resolutions and PCI-E 2.0 is no different to 3.0. (it is backward compatible). If you are intent on Nvidia, why not save a few quid and get a 670? These are ~5%-10% slower than the 680 and yet cost quite a bit less.

On a side note, why do you want to get Nvidia or are you open to AMD?
 
Hi guys

Was hoping you would say that, 2GB it is then. Ive seen that the 670 is only a few percent less, which is very good considering the price also but my mind is set on a 680 or something else of that caliber.

I do like AMD, also using a 6970 and its a good card, its never let me down runs the likes of FC3 well, but after seeing games on the 680 using the likes of PhysX etc i think im going to jump ships?
 
Last edited:
As an owner of 2x680's, I can't say I blame you and you can see the differences of price/performance. Go for it and enjoy :)
 
JHONO said:
I do like AMD, also using a 6970 and its a good card, its never let me down runs the likes of FC3 well, but after seeing games on the 680 using the likes of PhysX etc i think im going to jump ships?
Click to expand...

There aren't that many titles which use PhysX unfortunately. I really liked the effects in Borderlands 2 but other than that it's not really something I'd base a purchasing decision on especially when a 680 is quite a lot more expensive than a 7970. Not as much as it used to be granted.

I'll give you some context on the difference between a 670 and a 680 as I wouldn't want you to waste your money without truly appreciating what you're getting for the extra cash.

A 670 is effectively a slightly cut down 680 which performs within 5% of a 680. They're so close that it's completely feasible that you could have a poor clocking 680 which is slower than a good clocking 670. For £60-100 more this is quite an important point.

If you consider in a theoretical example that the two cards clocked identically and they were 5% apart then that 5% equates to the following:

680 - 80 FPS
670 - 76 FPS

680 - 60 FPS
670 - 57 FPS

680 - 110 FPS
670 - 105.5 FPS

680 - 40 FPS
670 - 38 FPS

And so on.

The difference between the two cards is never going to be the difference between playable and unplayable so you would be much better saving the money and putting it towards a second 670 when the time comes or banking it towards a future upgrade.
 
Totally understand your point there, and thanks to all for the help, the advice on here is second to non! I will defiantly look into this and re-evaluate what im going to do.

Although just thinking, the 680 that i like is the Superclocked version, would that give more than a 10% increase over a 670?

Thanks
 
JHONO said:
Totally understand your point there, and thanks to all for the help, the advice on here is second to non! I will defiantly look into this and re-evaluate what im going to do.

Although just thinking, the 680 that i like is the Superclocked version, would that give more than a 10% increase over a 670?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Only the Lightning will :)
 
JHONO said:
Totally understand your point there, and thanks to all for the help, the advice on here is second to non! I will defiantly look into this and re-evaluate what im going to do.

Although just thinking, the 680 that i like is the Superclocked version, would that give more than a 10% increase over a 670?

Thanks
Click to expand...

No worries mate.

The difference between the different models - excluding the Lightning - is just the cooler used and the clock speeds that they come with out the box.

As there isn't voltage adjustment on all but a couple of the nVidia 600 series range it's quite easy (and safe) to overclock these cards. You just find the maximum stable clock and then take it back a bit for 24/7 use.

Done and dusted :)
 
lol :p I hope it strikes fast then ;)

Also one more little thing, my rig, there wont be any bottlenecks with this will there? Been told its absolutely fine, but just want the experts opinion? CPU is still very good. Never needed to clock it, but i will be soon just to get the most of this new card (which ever one i buy)

Thanks
 
BaDBoY_uK said:
Is that an unbiased opinion ;)
Click to expand...

lol maybe a little. On the LN2 BIOS, it is standard 1202Mhz without even thinking of overclocking so yes it is >10% (I suck at math though).

JHONO said:
lol :p I hope it strikes fast then ;)

Also one more little thing, my rig, there wont be any bottlenecks with this will there? Been told its absolutely fine, but just want the experts opinion? CPU is still very good. Never needed to clock it, but i will be soon just to get the most of this new card (which ever one i buy)

Thanks
Click to expand...

No bottleneck but deffo get that chip clocked up or it will be.
 
Now looking at the EVGA 680 Superclocked Signature and Signature 2, ive been told to go for the Signature as its less noise and less power with only 1 fan, whats your opinion on this and which one should i go for?

Thanks
 
I don't think there would be too much in it but would like any owners to confirm. The reviews I looked at favoured both cards and said the Signature 2 was quieter than the Signature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom