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

[ALXAndy]

but it isn't?

the product at stock is the product at stock stop making this such a mission and chill out. no one is saying you wasted your money or you have a bad card we all know you don't but i don't understand why you're so uptight about something that is unequivocally stupid.

The card was designed to handle the boost mode. The boost mode allows it to operate inside a better TDP making it a selling point.

OK. So when I overclock my 7970 (myself) and it goes faster than a 680 it isn't faster because I did it and not Nvidia?

Seriously, I am finding some of the stuff people are coming out with today absolutely hysterical.

When people rushed out to buy the I5 and I7 K series CPUs they did so because of what they were capable of.

Not what they did out of the box. Yet, all of a sudden a product that automatically overclocks itself and goes faster than a non overclocked 7970 is the fastest product out there.

And, if you even so much as DARE to overclock a 7970 and come back at them they give you all of the excuses under the sun as to why it doesn't matter.

LOL !

I couldn't care if I had ten 7970s. I really couldn't. It's the utter rubbish people are coming out with and the hypocritical things they are saying that just cracks me up.

At the limits of both cards (when overclocked properly) the 7970 is faster. So should I just ignorantly walk around saying that the 7970 is faster because when overclocked, you know? it is.

No. I'm not allowed to. I'm also not allowed to because I own a 7970 and thus am only doing this out of spite, jealously and anger that my card is "SLOWAH".

Haha ! You just don't get it do you?

Overclocked (probably the most important thing on this forum until today's green amnesia) the 7970 is overall the faster card.

 

[Gregster]

I've looked at a slew of benchmark results today and the overall story seems to be that the 680 is ~15% faster on average so I'd say its the faster card.

Same here Rroff. The mass of benches I have seen has got the 680 winning most of the benches.

 

[Dan2kx]

Are people really getting their knickers in a twist over the built in clock boosting feature? thats a completely standard part of the way the card operates?

You know this is an overclockers forum, we don't compare stock, we compare the top end cards and their maximum potential!

 

[Duff-Man]

Putting an overclocked product up against a non overclocked product is cheating.

Totally cheating.

Overclocking is, by definition, increasing the frequency of a silicon chip beyond its factory supplied settings. The 680 comes with a dynamic clockspeed adjustment feature, design to minimise power consumption. As it is a factory-supplied feature, it is not 'overclocking' - not until you manually adjust the base or boost clocks.

This erroneous assertion of yours that using this feature of the GPU is somehow "cheating" is getting very tiresome. I really wish you wouldn't keep polluting each and every 680 thread by repeating it ad-nauseam.



Would you have reviewers disable this feature before reviewing the card? How about AMDs powertune - should that be 'disabled' as well? If the answer to either question is "yes", then what clockspeeds should we be comparing at? How do you determine a suitable "maximum" overclock for each card (since it's clear that different cards have dramatrically different overclocking capabilities)?


This is an incredibly weak argument by every definition, and seems construed only as a mechanism for purchase justification.

 

[Martini1991]

When I do my own benchmarking tomorrow comparing my 1125MHZ 7950, I will be disappointed if the GTX680 on its max OC loses out in a few situations.

 

[ALXAndy]

Not my fault AMD didn't clock the card to it's potential. Great card that only seems let down by AMD themselves for not higher clocking stock.

Ahh ! but you see Greg AMD don't treat their customers like morons and left them to do it.

And when they do they own a faster card.

Good, eh?

 

[Final8y]

Are people really getting their knickers in a twist over the built in clock boosting feature? thats a completely standard part of the way the card operates?

How it goes about it is semantics, its still an overclock.

My cards were designed to handle 900Mhz out of the box its still pre OC.

 

[Dan2kx]

Same here Rroff. The mass of benches I have seen has got the 680 winning most of the benches.

And they compare the 7970 at stock

 

[Gregster]

More than the 680 overclocks itself.

I've yet to see some one (even me) not get 1125mhz.

I thought you said your card couldn't get to 1000mhz without crashing or BSOD?

 

[ALXAndy]

Overclocking is, by definition, increasing the frequency of a silicon chip beyond its factory supplied settings.

The 680 comes with a dynamic clockspeed adjustment feature, design to minimise power consumption.

This erroneous assertion of yours that this is somehow "cheating" is getting very tiresome. I wish you wouldn't keep polluting each and every 680 thread by repeating it ad-nauseam.

Would you have reviewers disable this feature before reviewing the card? How about AMDs powertune - should that be 'disabled' as well? If the answer to either question is "yes", then what clockspeeds should we be comparing at? How do you determine a suitable "maximum" overclock for each card (since it's clear that different cards have dramatrically different overclocking capabilities)?


This is an incredibly weak argument by every definition, and seems construed only as a mechanism for purchase justification.

OK so even when it is overclocked it loses to an overclocked 7970.

Am I doing it right?

No wait ! AMD cards are not all the same and not guaranteed to overclock that much !

I must be talking crap because I own a 7970 !

Am I any better at it now?

 

[TwsT]

Are people really getting their knickers in a twist over the built in clock boosting feature? thats a completely standard part of the way the card operates?

yes they are.

PErsonally I'm beginning to think that what's happened here is AMD users are dissapointed that the 670 TI has been re branded the 680 soley to compete with the 7970 where as what they really wanted was to be completely spanked so hard by the gk110 that there was no comparison and they could fob it off as the more expensive card etc etc.

where as now there is a problem an equal card that probably has similar manufacturing margains to the 7970 so on a lower specced card nvidia can play hard ball for the $$.

And Alx just give up the only one making it a war is you. you're fighting yourself seeing things that don't matter. If it wasn't so funny i'd say it was rather pathetic.

 

[Rusty0611]

SLI 680's when the 780 is released would be a nice price/performance upgrade assuming prices drop.

 

[Duff-Man]

OK so even when it is overclocked it loses to an overclocked 7970.

Am I doing it right?

No wait ! AMD cards are not all the same and not guaranteed to overclock that much !

I must be talking crap because I own a 7970 !

Am I any better at it now?

Am I supposed to respond to that?

Try answering the questions I pose above...

 

[ALXAndy]

I thought you said your card couldn't get to 1000mhz without crashing or BSOD?

Then you didn't read the forums enough.

Actually it turns out I am a spawny get. Because, when the very very early batches of cards were released they were stable at very low voltages.

It turns out that mine could do 1020mhz at the stock voltage. However, stock voltages have changed a lot since the very early cards.

Mine? my stock voltage set by XFX was 1050mv. Astounding really, considering that Asus cards are 1100mv and Powercolors are 1174mv.

So it came as no surprise then that my card did 1125mhz with its eyes closed on 1100mv.

And I suspect there is a lot more left in the tank, too.

 

[Meaker]

To those wondering, there is no missing 128bit mem controller on this die, so a 384bit kepler would be a completely different part, you can't just bolt one on.

 

[Gregster]

Ahh ! but you see Greg AMD don't treat their customers like morons and left them to do it.

And when they do they own a faster card.

Good, eh?

This is overclockers, so I give people credit for being able to at least find out how to overclock.

The majority of people 'will not' overclock. Nvidia have just made it easier for those people.

 

[Martini1991]

To those wondering, there is no missing 128bit mem controller on this die, so a 384bit kepler would be a completely different part, you can't just bolt one on.

I'm not sure what that proves?

 

[Rroff]

How it goes about it is semantics, its still an overclock.

My cards were designed to handle 900Mhz out of the box its still pre OC.

If you want to look at it that way the card does ~1200MHz out the box and downclocks to reduce power useage and heat output when not needed... seriously complaining about the clockboosting feature is borderline idiotic.

 

[Stanners]

If you want to look at it that way the card does ~1200MHz out the box and downclocks to reduce power useage and heat output when not needed... seriously complaining about the clockboosting feature is borderline idiotic.

Roff, you are falling for it. Don't get dragged in

 

[Martini1991]

And I suspect there is a lot more left in the tank, too.

I run 1100 MHZ at 1.125v, I can only get 1125MHZ stable and that's at 1.15

I have 0.15 of voltage headroom left, still doesn't give me any more stable OC.