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.
... One of those rare times when I have to agree with Mr Drunkenmaster
GK110 will be a compute-monster. It will also out-perform GK104 in terms of raw performance. However I expect it to be significantly poorer in terms of performance per Watt, performance per mm^2, and also in terms of transistor density. We've seen time and again (from both manufacturers now) that carrying heavy GPGPU features comes with a price in terms of the efficiency metrics.
If it is a 2304-shader part, i.e. a 50% bump over the GK104, then I would expect somewhere in the region of ~30-40% improvement in performance, with much greater than 50% increase in power consumption, and perhaps an 80% increase in die size. If it does have a 512-bit memory interface (which would certainly be very attractive for the HPC market) then we could perhaps see a much bigger improvement at very high resolutions (2560x1600 and triple-screen resolutions), perhaps over and above the 50%.
I don't see it approaching double the performance of the GTX680 in any realistic gaming applications.
That's why people think performance advancement is poor, in if looking at it, then looking at the GTX580, and then looking at the GTX680 (the original GTX660) again.
Is it that hard to believe a new gen mid-range card at around £200~ price range can beat previous gen high-end card? Remember 5850 vs GTX285? 6950 vs 5870? If you look at the spec of the current "GTX680", it looks more like a GTX660 than a high-end part no matter how you look at it, especially with the 256-bit memory bandwidth and being the GK104. Now we are stucked with paying more money for less performance than original planned, and guess as customer like usual we can only suck up to it.
Personally I think all this talk of the 680 being a 'mid-range' card is starting to get a bit silly, especially since its shaping up to be much higher performing than their last high end card.
Companies aren't always going to deliver products in line with a minority of people's expectations & NVIDIA will 'always' have something faster & better in the pipeline whether it be a 780, 880, 980 or whatever.
Who cares really...
If you don't do your homework on architecture of GPUs and what range they fit into, we can't help you on that (especially when you don't seem to care).
