• 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.

The first "proper" Kepler news Fri 17th Feb?

Marine-RX179 said:
This is not good...so what we are going to have to pay GTX680 money for a rebadged GTX660, just because it is faster than 7970 by a bit? This sucks big time.

While Nvidia is a jerk for doing this...AMD's high price average performance for new gen cards and picking fight with last gen cards is also to blame for this to happen.
Click to expand...

Honestly man I think it's just time to accept things for how they are. AMD got its prices from Nvidia, blah blah, yawn.

I guess at the end of the day it is what it is really. And there's not much we can do to change that so time will take care of it in the end.

Hopefully Nvidia won't have wafer problems and will be able to release some mid ranged cards (well, in the category of) and then that will force AMD to drop their prices.

Let's face it. Buying any of these new cards is not exactly sensible is it? True sense would be to just wait until they are all out and let the price battles begin before buying anything.
 
ALXAndy said:
I will. I'm happy.

I needed a card for 1080p that could do 3D. At the time there was really no option to do it with Nvidia so I went with AMD and a LG monitor. Job done, very happy, games are amazing.

I would say 3D performance (not that it will ever be compared) will once again be very similar between the two cards. What I mean is that the technologies are similar with no clear winner, so using a 680 with 3dvision compared to a 7970 with cheaper passive 3d ($149 for the monitor glasses and software all ready to go).

So to me? the Nvidia option, even if the card costs less than the 7970 would have been horribly more expensive :)

I just guess it depends on personality. I think Nvidia could have done this differently, but the end product is what counts and I doff my cap to them as it's clearly a very impressive card :)
Click to expand...

:D Both can play all games @ 1080P with no slow down, so thats good. Forget willy waving as this IDC about. Game wise I do and TBF most of us should (who game that is). CUDA dissapointing for some though.

stulid said:
http://downloads.guru3d.com/MSI-Afterburner-2.2.0-Beta-15-download-2884.html

Kepler support in MSI Afterburner.
Click to expand...

Nice find m8.
 
Not sure why peeps are saying this card doesnt live up to their expectations and AMD does ...

Its faster then AMDs top dog -
the question is what is it like at max oc to amds max oc
 
gregster said:
:D Both can play all games @ 1080P with no slow down, so thats good. Forget willy waving as this IDC about. Game wise I do and TBF most of us should (who game that is). CUDA dissapointing for some though.
Click to expand...

And of course if you actually game and actually use your card then that's how it is. The only game I can't play due to terrible framerates is Crysis. 13FPS I get in 3D.

This is known by DDD but apparently there's nothing they can do about it. Not that I care, I mean I've played through it three times now and the graphics look pretty dated.

I didn't buy my card to wave my willy. I don't make a point of going around bragging about it, and up until yesterday I hadn't even ran a Heaven bench on it or overclocked it.

Was just a simple philosophy of spending as much as I could on something and making it last. This could well be the last GPU I ever buy depending on what happens with Microsoft next year. I've three very large TVs in my house, all of which run 1080p.
 
djxput said:
Not sure why peeps are saying this card doesnt live up to their expectations and AMD does ...

Its faster then AMDs top dog -
the question is what is it like at max oc to amds max oc
Click to expand...
You are missing the point.

This "GTX680" we see now was supposed to be a GTX660 which would probably be at around £200~£250 price range, which is 2nd most popular "sweet spot" for most people after the "£150~£200" price range. Now with the price tag of £400+ for this card, it instantly become out of range for lots of people (if not most people).
 
ALXAndy said:
And of course if you actually game and actually use your card then that's how it is. The only game I can't play due to terrible framerates is Crysis. 13FPS I get in 3D.

This is known by DDD but apparently there's nothing they can do about it. Not that I care, I mean I've played through it three times now and the graphics look pretty dated.

I've three very large TVs in my house, all of which run 1080p.
Click to expand...

Haha I also have 3 very large TV's which are all 1080. Crysis again was a poor console port like GTA4.

Both dissapointed me TBH.
 
Marine-RX179 said:
You are missing the point.

This "GTX680" we see now was supposed to be a GTX660 which would probably be at around £200~£250 price range, which is 2nd sweet spot for most after the "£150~£200" range. Now people instead have to dish out £400+ for this card, and instantly become out of range for lots of people (if not most people).
Click to expand...

supposed to be?

More like assumed to be.

Price reflects performance/availability from competition.

Why would nVidia price at £200 for the worlds fastest single GPU irrespective of what part it MIGHT of been?
 
More from Gibbo

"All I can say it looks good, its quieter than 7970 which was quiet, it clocks to similar levels and it cost less.

Asus, OcUK, MSI, EVGA and Gigabyte are in stock and ready for launch."
 
Marine-RX179 said:
You are missing the point.

This "GTX680" we see now was supposed to be a GTX660 which would probably be at around £200~£250 price range, which is 2nd most popular "sweet spot" for most people after the "£150~£200" price range. Now with the price tag of £400+ for this card, it instantly become out of range for lots of people (if not most people).
Click to expand...

How do you know the price range, I would say it could have been a lot more than £150-£200 looking at AMD's pricing if it was released under a different monica!
 
Sin_Chase said:
supposed to be?

More like assumed to be.

Price reflects performance/availability from competition.

Why would nVidia price at £200 for the worlds fastest single GPU irrespective of what part it MIGHT of been?
Click to expand...

We was all expecting the "Mid range" card to be released first and from everything I read, it was going to be a mid range card. On saying that though, they have come up trumps because the 7970 was underwhelming, which has lead to the first Nvidia card being able to rub shoulders with it.

I agree with you that the price reflects AMD performance. Only a fool company would under price a card that is even par with a 7970.
 
If it was supposed to be mid-range then the only thing to blame for the likely price it will command is AMD releasing a lacklustre high end part.

That's life though.
 
According to those benchmarks it performs better than the 7970. It has limited compute power but that's not a major concern for most people, as it will be used primarily for gaming. Even at 2560x1600 it performs better, despite having less VRAM - that's even in BF3, which is known for being memory intensive.

The discussion over whether it was originally going to be a mid-range card is irrelevant. nVidia changed their strategy and decided to considerably increase the clocks over what it was designed for - that inevitably lowers the yield, which increases the price. And AMD is equally to blame for the high pricing of the 7xxx series. At the end of the day it looks like the 680 is the faster card, which makes it the fastest single GPU card available. There is still some doubt over how far it can overclock, which will be a deciding factor for many.

If it comes out at around £400 then that makes it better value than the 7970. We may see a price drop from AMD but how long are people willing to wait? Unfortunately my 5970 failed after I tried to increase the overclock on it, so I'm looking to buy as soon as possible. I'll base my decision on availability, price and the reviews, particularly with regards to overclocking headroom. If these benchmark results are accurate, along with the price, then I may go for the 680.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom