Did NVIDIA Originally Intend to Call GTX 680 as GTX 670 Ti?

RavenXXX2 · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:07

Although it doesn't matter anymore, there are several bits of evidence supporting the theory that NVIDIA originally intended for its GK104-based performance graphics card to be named "GeForce GTX 670 Ti", before deciding to go with "GeForce GTX 680" towards the end. With the advent of 2012, we've had our industry sources refer to the part as "GTX 670 Ti". The very first picture of the GeForce GTX 680 disclosed to the public, early this month, revealed a slightly old qualification sample, which had one thing different from the card we have with us today: the model name "GTX 670 Ti" was etched onto the cooler shroud, our industry sources disclosed pictures of early samples having 6+8 pin power connectors.

Next up, while NVIDIA did re-christian GTX 670 Ti to GTX 680, it was rather sloppy at it. The first picture below shows the contents of the Boardshots (stylized) folder in NVIDIA's "special place" for the media. It contains all the assets NVIDIA allows the press, retailers, and other partners to use. Assets are distributed in various formats, the TIFF is a standard image-format used by print-media, for its high dot-pitch. Apart from a heavy payload, the TIFF image file allows tags, that can be read by Windows Explorer, these tags help people at the archives. The tags for images in TIFF format, of the GTX 680 distributed to its partners in the media and industry contain the tag "GTX 670 Ti".

It doesn't end there. Keen-eyed users, while browsing through NVIDIA Control Panel, with their GTX 680 installed, found the 3D Vision Surround displays configuration page refer to their GPU as "GTX 670 Ti". This particular image was used by NVIDIA on their 3D Vision Surround guide.

We began this article by saying that frankly, at this point, it doesn't matter. Or does it? Could it be that GK104 rocked the boardroom at NVIDIA Plex to the point where they decided that since it's competitive (in fact, faster) than AMD's Radeon HD 7970, it makes more business sense selling it as "GTX 680"?

What's in the name? Well for one, naming it "GTX 680" instead of "GTX 670 Ti", releases pressure off NVIDIA to introduce a part based on its "big chip" based on the GeForce Kepler architecture (GK1x0). It could also save NVIDIA tons of R&D costs for its GTX 700 series, because it can brand GK1x0 in the GTX 700 series, and invest relatively less, on a dual-GK104 graphics card to ward off the threat of Radeon HD 7990 "New Zealand", and save (read: sandbag) GK1x0 for AMD's next-generation Sea Islands family based on "Enhanced Graphics CoreNext" architecture, slated for later this year, if all goes well. Is it a case of mistaken identity? Overanalysis on our part? Or is there something they don't want you to know™?

http://www.techpowerup.com/162901/Did-NVIDIA-Originally-Intend-to-Call-GTX-680-as-GTX-670-Ti-.html

bhavv · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:10

Its blatantly obvious, this GTX 680 was planned as their mid range card that would have sold for around £250, and a 384 bit version with an 8 + 6 pin power connectors would have been the actual GTX 680, but because it performed so well they simply made the 256 bit version their high end.

beejjacobs · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:13

This the first I've heard of this :confused:

lol.

bhavv · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:16

G104 - GTX 460
G114 - GTX 560 ti
GK104 - .... GTX 680?

Something sounds wrong just for that.

Also a 256 bit plus 2 x 6 pin power connectors coming from Nvidia has been a GTX *60 for the last few generations.

littlepuppy · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:18

Very interesting, thanks for bringing this to the table. Makes a lot of sense if its true.

beejjacobs · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:18

bhavv said:
G104 - GTX 460
G114 - GTX 560 ti
GK104 - .... GTX 680?

Something sounds wrong just for that.

Yeah I think everyone who's read about this card knows it's not the best of Kepler. But if it can perform that well, excellent

Aedus · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:19

bhavv said:
Its blatantly obvious, this GTX 680 was planned as their mid range card that would have sold for around £250, and a 384 bit version with an 8 + 6 pin power connectors would have been the actual GTX 680, but because it performed so well they simply made the 256 bit version their high end.

They should have kept it like that, they would have literally decimated AMD's range.
I think they got too greedy so released their mid-range as their high end, just because they can due to the performance, and have kept the GK110 for the 780 without major development costs.

Not saying it's not a great card, cos it is, but if they could make a profit from selling this part for their original intent (Maybe £250-300) they must be making a total bomb on this now.

Lunawolfy · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:20

Thrashing the competition is bad for the market as it increase the hours spend working per $

If you JUST beat the competition, that work lowers significantly.

If sustainability and profit margins weren't a priority. It would be interesting to see the PC today..

TheRealDeal · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:20

I think there will still be a gtx570 ti or just a plain gtx570. It was most likely a smoke screen to make people think nv's new card was to compete with the 7950 and was slower than the 7970.

People keep saying mid range but the 570 name has never been mid range.

Gregster · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:22

Maybe they did but realised what a gem they had, so called it a 680 and charged us a fair few pounds more. I am happy though as it beats a 7970 in most games that I play.

bhavv · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:24

Aedus said:
They should have kept it like that, they would have literally decimated AMD's range.
I think they got too greedy so released their mid-range as their high end, just because they can due to the performance, and have kept the GK110 for the 780 without major development costs.

Not saying it's not a great card, cos it is, but if they could make a profit from selling this part for their original intent (Maybe £250-300) they must be making a total bomb on this now.

This is better for Nvidia because now they can keep their real GTX 680 postponed until they need it to compete.

I believe that the GK104 was being developed with both 256 and 384 bit possibilities for the GTC 670 Ti and GTX 680, but they scrapped / postponed the 384 bit version because they do not need it yet, and can profit from the 256 bit card now, and from the 384 bit one in a years time.

This vastly reduces their R+D time and costs.

TheRealDeal said:
People keep saying mid range but the 570 name has never been mid range.

Any GPU number from Nvidia ending in a 4 and with a 256 bit memory interface has always been a mid range. They can easily change the names any time they want, just like AMD introduced the 6900 / 7900s as their new high end, and reduced *800s to their mid range.

BarBrawllin · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:24

Woah thats just sick tbh lol

Tute · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:27

I don't understand how, if this was the mid-range, why is it so delayed? Surely yields would have been strong?

I've no doubt that there's a bigger, badder Kepler somewhere in the bowels at nVidia HQ, but this is an odd strategy for a company that has an exceptionally good product.

RavenXXX2 · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:27

We may see a 670ti in the coming months, think 680 with lower clock and a few less cores. Expect it to just top 7950 performance.

Dan2kx · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:27

Aedus said:
They should have kept it like that, they would have literally decimated AMD's range.
I think they got too greedy so released their mid-range as their high end, just because they can due to the performance, and have kept the GK110 for the 780 without major development costs

Maybe AMD are doing the double bluff, maybe they released their card "downclocked" knowing that nvidia would JUST beat them and then save their top end card for the next round, thus "dropping the ball" in the meantime AMD would drop a STONKER.

hmmmmmmm....

Aedus · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:29

bhavv said:
This is better for Nvidia because now they can keep their real GTX 680 postponed until they need it to compete.

I believe that the GK104 was being developed with both 256 and 384 bit possibilities for the GTC 670 Ti and GTX 680, but they scrapped / postponed the 384 bit version because they do not need it yet, and can profit from the 256 bit card now, and from the 384 bit one in a years time.

This vastly reduces their R+D time and costs.

Oh yeah, I know this.

They could even make a 685 GTX when the dual AMD card is about to come out, undercut the price and then use the GK110 there. Unsure how they will play it. This card is undoubtedly 1 of the best releases for a while for Nvidia.

They can easily afford to price war with AMD, and I really hope they do.

Martini1991 · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:29

Tute said:
I don't understand how, if this was the mid-range, why is it so delayed? Surely yields would have been strong?

I've no doubt that there's a bigger, badder Kepler somewhere in the bowels at nVidia HQ, but this is an odd strategy for a company that has an exceptionally good product.

Only 2 and a half months after the 7970's retail launch.
Could have spent the time reflashing previous cards and rebranding etc.

Who knows, we'll probably never know.

TheRealDeal · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:32

bhavv said:
This is better for Nvidia because now they can keep their real GTX 680 postponed until they need it to compete.

I believe that the GK104 was being developed with both 256 and 384 bit possibilities for the GTC 670 Ti and GTX 680, but they scrapped / postponed the 384 bit version because they do not need it yet, and can profit from the 256 bit card now, and from the 384 bit one in a years time.

This vastly reduces their R+D time and costs.

Any GPU number from Nvidia ending in a 4 and with a 256 bit memory interface has always been a mid range. They can easily change the names any time they want, just like AMD introduced the 6900 / 7900s as their new high end, and reduced *800s to their mid range.

It really is not hard to understand that there is no gk102 so gk104 is the top end single gpu for this generation. It really is not rocket science. Nvidia had massive trouble with fermi and could not bring out the full part and it seems this time around was the same hence no gk102. Gk104 is simply put nvidias best atm.

ALXAndy · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:33

Tute said:
I don't understand how, if this was the mid-range, why is it so delayed? Surely yields would have been strong?

I've no doubt that there's a bigger, badder Kepler somewhere in the bowels at nVidia HQ, but this is an odd strategy for a company that has an exceptionally good product.

It isn't delayed.

Sheesh, have you not been paying attention ?

Last year. LAST YEAR. Nvidia explained how they were going to release some mid ranged cards right about now. Then, they explained how later on in the year they were going to release their HIGH END PARTS.

Why were they so laid back? well, AMD had nothing on the horizon and they were comfortably in the lead. They were ahead with the 570ti and 580 and thus were being pretty laid back about it all. I would suspect that they assumed they had the market place all to themselves and thus, didn't have to worry about what AMD were up to.

More than anything early Kepler GPUs were designed for laptops, and going into other things (like Apple's laptops, for example).

Then AMD came along with Southern Islands, and they lost the lead.

So, the card they had pegged labelled specced and badged as the 670ti was adjusted, overclocked and pushed until it competed with the 7970.

It doesn't conclusively beat the 7970 AT ALL regardless of what others may tell you. When they are both overclocked there is literally 2FPS in it here, 2FPS there. NOT THE considerable lead people want you to believe.

They made a statement to say that Southern Islands was, quote - "underwhelming" and they were right. For a top end very heavily specced GPU AMD's 7970 *IS* underwhelming when compared to the 680.

The 7970 should be miles ahead, but instead they do fisticuffs.

Seeing an opportunity to milk people and try and induce some amnesia Nvidia simply overclocked the 670ti, rebadged it, boxed it, then squirmed a bit and said that it WAS a high end card.

But it isn't and it was never designed to be. It has been hinted at that AMD are having "Fermi type problems" with the Southern Islands cards. IE - they get too hot for clocks to be where they really ought to, and thus the card is (for what it was designed to be) disappointing.

So Nvidia have just gotten very lucky, at the expense of their fans.

The end.

MaxP779 · 22 Mar 2012 at 20:34

I heard it was meant to be the 660ti.

Yeah makes sense though...

- Small card
- 6 x 2 pin power
- 256 bit memory bus

Seems mid range, guess they decided it performed so epic they just made it the high end card.