** Official 680 review thread **

[TwsT]

I don't understand all this nonsense about the gk110 saying the 680 isn't a top end card is daft and self defeating. You're mugging yourselves off trying to justify the 7970 and the cost etc. When if you think about it. If Nvidia have released this so called sub par card and it's still matching a 7970 then you're saying nvidia have brought a three legged horse to the race flogged the ******** off it and matched AMD's 4 legged horse.

so at which point doesn't it deserve the price tag? At which point have nvidia done the wrong thing?

 

[titaniumx3]

Looks like it safely beats the 7970 though, except in a few titles like Crysis and Metro2033, which are probably down to driver immaturity and poor use of the the new architecture.

I'm not sure about this 'full fat' Kepler card people are talking about, possibly something of a refresh like the 580 was to the 480, but I don't buy this idea that nvidia are releasing a mid-range card badged as a high-end card. What I do think is happening is that nvidia are beating AMD at their own game. They've realised that you don't need to have huge numbers and hardware specs to compete.

 

[MichaelM]

Until Nvidia announce otherwise, buying a 680 has the possibility of making people buy a 560 type card for 580 money. People are just pointing out a possible pitfall in the generation.

 

[ALXAndy]

Until Nvidia announce otherwise, buying a 680 has the possibility of making people buy a 560 type card for 580 money. People are just pointing out a possible pitfall in the generation.

Have a look at the pic Cat The Fifth just posted in another thread.

Because that is exactly what people have done.

 

[TheRealDeal]

You don't know that though.
For all we know the delay is the change of direction with Nvidia, flashing the 660's to 680's, etc, etc.
We also can't judge overclocking either, the 4XX all OC'ed fine, as did the 570's, better than the 5XXX and 6XXX percentage wise and percentage gain wise.

They've then got the previous GTX680 ready to launch as a refined GTX780, giving we're stuck on 28nm.

Makes far more sense than "Nvidia couldn't bring a high end to the table"

All the rumours point to the full fat card being cancelled as there was no gk102. The gk112 is named as a refresh part ie gf112 was the gtx580. From the very early rumours and charts there was no mention of a highend gk102 which suggests this is what nvidia planned all along as they probably could not manufacture the gk102 in time. I will say again that the gk104 gtx680 is the highest performing part nvidia have atm. I believe nvidia for this round have moved over to the amd strategy of bringing out a small fast gpu and doubling it up for the highest part gtx690.

 

[bhavv]

This GTX 680 is what should have been the 660 / 670.

The actual 680 would have been at least a 384 bit part with an 8 + 6 pin PCI-E requirement.

Even the past GTX *70s werent released with 256 bit memory and 2x 6 pin connectors, everthing about this GTX 680 screams that it is a mid range card selling as a high end instead because AMD didnt deliver what was expected by Nvidia.

 

[MichaelM]

Have a look at the pic Cat The Fifth just posted in another thread.

Because that is exactly what people have done.

Haha found it. Rumbled

 

[mmj_uk]

Until Nvidia announce otherwise, buying a 680 has the possibility of making people buy a 560 type card for 580 money. People are just pointing out a possible pitfall in the generation.

I don't understand the logic, perhaps it would have been NVidia's midrange card given the competition but at the end of the day AMD released a 'flagship' card that is even SLOWER than it (and equally expensive).

Neither of the cards are good value.

 

[Destination]

What is this autoclokcing that is spoken of?
Is the card automatically overclocking itself in benchmarking programs?
Or does it automatiucally do this for the duration of the actual gameplay in normal play modes rather than benchmarking?

 

[Martini1991]

All the rumours point to the full fat card being cancelled as there was no gk102. The gk112 is named as a refresh part ie gf112 was the gtx580. From the very early rumours and charts there was no mention of a highend gk102 which suggests this is what nvidia planned all along as they probably could not manufacture the gk102 in time. I will say again that the gk104 gtx680 is the highest performing part nvidia have atm. I believe nvidia for this round have moved over to the amd strategy of bringing out a small fast gpu and doubling it up for the highest part gtx690.

Not disagreeing with you.

 

[beejjacobs]

What is this autoclokcing that is spoken of?
Is the card automatically overclocking itself in benchmarking programs?
Or does it automatiucally do this for the duration of the actual gameplay in normal play modes rather than benchmarking?

It is like Turbo Boost with Intel CPUs. If the card is under load and can boost the clock speed without surpassing the TDP, it will.

 

[Owenb]

Nothing about the 680 says high end to me apart from the benchmark results.

It's small, and it has a tiny die. Nvidia are known to produce huge dies for their top end cards. It only has two 6 pins and has specs that are inferior to the 7970. Nvidia are known for having some incredible paper specs.

So unless they are winding back matching a 7970 is pretty underwhelming really.

Well their big die strategy wasn't working out too well for them. Both the GTX280 and GTX480 were terrible cards both which needed redesigns in the shape of the 285 and 580 before they were good chips.

Looks like I will be going back to Nvidia after a ~7 year gap, however it won't be for another month or two by which time a more affordable 670 option might be available.

 

[Rusty0611]

What I don't understand with this argument is that if the 680 is indeed a "mid range" part - pricing aside (just for a second) - surely it's worse for AMD that nvidia's "mid range" part outperforms their "top end" part.

I mean who really cares all that much even if it was originally proposed to be a mid range part? What difference does it make to the performance it gives in your machine. I take issue only with the stigma of a mid ranged card being attached to the 680s. Fair enough though - value for money if it was originally scheduled to be a mid range part is not great but for me it's the performance it offers in its relative position in the pricing framework which matters.

I don't particularly care for playing devils advocate (Andy!) and I have no loyalty to either brand.

 

[d_brennen]

What I don't understand with this argument is that if the 680 is indeed a "mid range" part - pricing aside (just for a second) - surely it's worse for AMD that nvidia's "mid range" part outperforms their "top end" part.

I mean who really cares all that much even if it was originally proposed to be a mid range part? What difference does it make to the performance it gives in your machine. I take issue only with the stigma of a mid ranged card being attached to the 680s. Fair enough though - value for money if it was originally scheduled to be a mid range part is not great but for me it's the performance it offers in its relative position in the pricing framework which matters.

I don't particularly care for playing devils advocate (Andy!) and I have no loyalty to either brand.

It's only a few percent here and there faster, not massively cheaper, Nvidia were said to be unimpressed with GCN as well. I think AMD could slash the price of the 78xx/79xx to make these cards less attractive, at the cost of burning the early adopters. Or they could release stupidly high clocked cherry picked 7970 cores with 6GB VRAM and 9 display ports for £500

 

[Klo]

I'm guess this card wouldn't be worth it for a 1440x900 screen

 

[ALXAndy]

What I don't understand with this argument is that if the 680 is indeed a "mid range" part - pricing aside (just for a second) - surely it's worse for AMD that nvidia's "mid range" part outperforms their "top end" part.

I mean who really cares all that much even if it was originally proposed to be a mid range part? What difference does it make to the performance it gives in your machine. I take issue only with the stigma of a mid ranged card being attached to the 680s. Fair enough though - value for money if it was originally scheduled to be a mid range part is not great but for me it's the performance it offers in its relative position in the pricing framework which matters.

I don't particularly care for playing devils advocate (Andy!) and I have no loyalty to either brand.

It doesn't outperform anything.

Which would be why, two days before release, Nvidia decided to drop the prices.

Once the truth gets out (and it is, slowly) it will become clear that the 680 absolutely and utterly does not beat the 7970.

A fair conclusion is they are dead level.

 

[Rusty0611]

The point still stands even if it is similar performance between the two.

Edit: every review I've read puts the 680 ahead in games. Granted not by much but by a fair amount. So I look forward to seeing the results of your crusade to uncover the "truth"

 

[Mr. May]

The point still stands even if it is similar performance between the two.

Edit: every review I've read puts the 680 ahead in games. Granted not by much but by a fair amount. So I look forward to seeing the results of your crusade to uncover the "truth"

Have a look at this That both cards Fully overclocked

 

[TAC4U]

It doesn't outperform anything.

Once the truth gets out (and it is, slowly) it will become clear that the 680 absolutely and utterly does not beat the 7970.

Reviews that disagree with you:

AnandTech
BitTech
Guru3D
HardOCP
Hexus
HotHardware
PCPro
Tom's Hardware
Tweaktown

And yes, they even compare overclocked 7970s to overclocked 680s. Every review shows that the 680 has a performance lead over the 7970.

Your evangelical crusade against the 680 is completely ridiculous. It's nothing to do with the "truth" and your insults against everybody that disagrees with you are incredibly tiring.

 

[Muzy]

impressive, well done Nvidia.

Excellent improvements over 580GTX.

I am using 580GTX, so i will pass this gen, can't wait to see 100% performance in next gen 2013

At the moment, there ain't games out there which demands this performance at 1080p res.