Shocked 680 GTX is faster then my 580 SLI

Status
Not open for further replies.
gerardfraser

gerardfraser

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
1,366
680GTX+450 for Physx

Pros=faster then 580SLI 3gb No AA
Cons=not all games work for me with 680GTX+450Physx
one 680 card twice as loud as 580 GTX SLI 3GB

WTF 680 single card is faster then my 580SLI 3gb.
Need to do a format of windows to get all my games to work.For now waiting on my second 680GTX.
For more testing

Batman arkham city maxed DX11 Extreme with FXAA 580 OC 920 core SLI 3GBb 1920x1080
Normal SLI
MIN=24
MAX=111
AVG=63

580gtxsli.jpg




Batman arkham city maxed DX11 Extreme with FXAA 680OC 1300 core+450 for physx.1920x1080

MIN=16
MAX=120
AVG=72


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Crysis Warhead Enthusiast Ambush No AA 1920x1080 580 OC 920 core SLI 3GBb 1920x1080
MIN=73.30
MAX=137.13
AVG=111.67


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Crysis Warhead Enthusiast Ambush No AA 1920x1080 680OC 1300 core+450 for physx but physx no good iin this game.
MIN=83.80
MAX=139.49.13
AVG=113.90


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

3D Mark11 580 SLI 3GB default clocks
Pscore 10233

hv3w2f.jpg


3d mark 11 -680OC 1300 core+450 for physx

10535ew.jpg
 
"one 680 card twice as loud as 580 GTX SLI 3GB"


Really? I have mine in SLI and boy, they're pretty quiet compared to the stock cooler on the EVGA 580s I used to have. Are you comparing to an aftermarket?
 
Nope had Gigabyte 580 SLI 3GB windforce and they were quiet compared to 680GTX.
SIDE NOTE:I do not like EVGA cards. everyone I bought always felt cheap and I bought lots EVGA cards
Now I know all 680 cards are the same as of now but I would never buy another EVGA card due to poor ass build,let the flaming begin LOL
 
windforce
Click to expand...

Non-stock cooling will generally be quieter than stock (otherwise they're kind of removing half the point of adding custom cooling solutions). A single 680 with stock will be a LOT quieter than 2x 580 with stock :p
 
Not surprised. At 1920x1080 you're bottlenecked by CPU/PhysX more than anything else. Test without the 450 and/or at higher res and you'll see a different picture.
 
Xeth said:
Not surprised. At 1920x1080 you're bottlenecked by CPU/PhysX more than anything else. Test without the 450 and/or at higher res and you'll see a different picture.
Click to expand...

You are smart of course the higher the resolution the less FPS.Also the higher the resolution the lower you have to set your settings,so I like 1920x1080 best FPS and best screens for me.
For shits and giggles heres a run with crysis same settings ,so I ask why would you want to go higher then 1920x1080.TO have a worst looking game.Lower settings.Yeah get off the glue nut
2e3vhck.jpg
 
You are smart of course the higher the resolution the less FPS.Also the higher the resolution the lower you have to set your settings,so I like 1920x1080 best FPS and best screens for me.
For shits and giggles heres a run with crysis same settings ,so I ask why would you want to go higher then 1920x1080.TO have a worst looking game.Lower settings.Yeah get off the glue nut
Click to expand...

Completely irrelevant to the point that was brought up of CPU bottlenecking and your initial comparison of the two GPUs. Though, if 1080 is your preferred resolution then I say be happy with your purchase and the results :)
 
gerardfraser said:
Did not know a 5.0 Ghz CPU was a bottleneck,Please tell me whats a better CPU and I will buy it.
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2116903
Click to expand...

Bro you need LN2, a $1000 3960x EXTREME processor at 6 Ghz or you're just CPU bottlenecked, it's scientific forum facts! Just open your wallet because there's just gobs of proof of your CPU bottlenecking, come on man! Do you even need to question it? :cool:

Edit: In all seriousness, I am totally stumped as to why you're using a 450 GTS for "PhysX". You realize that it's slower than running Arkham City's PhysX on one of your 580's or on your 680, right? It's literally bottlenecking your performance. And why the hell are you trying to use it for Crysis Warhead? Crysis WH doesn't use PhysX! Just take that card out, you'll get faster performance running PhysX on one of the 580's or the 680. Test it for yourself.

And why are you using FXAA with that level of performance? Use MSAA or CSAA... FXAA just doesn't look as good. :\
 
Xeth said:
Not surprised. At 1920x1080 you're bottlenecked by CPU/PhysX more than anything else. Test without the 450 and/or at higher res and you'll see a different picture.
Click to expand...

This. If the settings are high enough, the 580 SLI will kill a 680.
 
Yeah your correct.I am going one better two 6.0 GHZ CPU'S to get rid of bottleneck.Now where to find a motherboard,Ram for the new CPU'S LOL
 
It's not the CPU that's the bottleneck atm, but the resolution + graphics settings becoming a bottleneck to the performance comparison. The CPU may become the first bottleneck at that resolution in the future, but I don't think it will be for these tests.

Eh, I'm tired and my brain is foggy, everything I say right now should be taken with a grain of sodium chloride.
 
boxleitnerb said:
This. If the settings are high enough, the 580 SLI will kill a 680.
Click to expand...

I kow this.I owned a 580 SLI 3GB system ,and the benches were with noAA,but come on A 680 beat my 580 SLI 3GB but I am sure it wont beat my 2 680 cards.
I spent the cash and one 680 so far is better then two 580's which is fact to me ,noone can tell me different.
 
An interesting thought. Definitely run some benchmarks without it installed. I haven't looked much into individual physic card setups, but from what little I know the overall performance will be limited to the slowest component (the primary graphics card, or the physics card). So if the 450 is a bottleneck, removing it may boost performance even with the 680 handling the physics workload.
 
Why don't you bench with some really demanding settings? No one with these kinds of cards plays without AA ;)
 
RealityCrunch said:
An interesting thought. Definitely run some benchmarks without it installed. I haven't looked much into individual physic card setups, but from what little I know the overall performance will be limited to the slowest component (the primary graphics card, or the physics card). So if the 450 is a bottleneck, removing it may boost performance even with the 680 handling the physics workload.
Click to expand...

WellI really tested the 680 with and witout the 450.

I am willing to bet $100 that your bottleneck is the GTS 450 for PhysX. Turn that crap off.
Click to expand...
This is crap I tested it without and with 450 its faster just did not bother to include bench for 680 alone

I sincerely doubt that.
Click to expand...
People like me spend cash on this shit all the time.I make more in a day then it cost for 2 680 cards.

8vuip2.jpg

2hr3j9h.jpg
 
I also have 2 x MSI GTX 680's Coming :) :), however, havent shipped yet... waiting on supplies.... :(
 
gerardfraser said:
WellI really tested the 680 with and witout the 450.


This is crap I tested it without and with 450 its faster just did not bother to include bench for 680 alone


People like me spend cash on this shit all the time.I make more in a day then it cost for 2 680 cards.

]
Click to expand...

Nope. Test it with one 680, SLI 580's, and then 1 580 dedicated to PhysX.
 
gerardfraser said:
WellI really tested the 680 with and witout the 450.


This is crap I tested it without and with 450 its faster just did not bother to include bench for 680 alone


People like me spend cash on this shit all the time.I make more in a day then it cost for 2 680 cards.
Click to expand...

Can't tell whether you're asking for someone to rob you, trying to make the rest of us jealous, or just being a troll...
 
gerardfraser said:
People like me spend cash on this shit all the time.I make more in a day then it cost for 2 680 cards.

]
Click to expand...

Really dude???Who gives a fuck??And posting a newegg receipt means what??Trying to convince yourself of something??

- credibility. :rolleyes:
 
This guy makes $450k a year but somehow still writes like a 12 year old. OK pal...

*Troll Alert*
 
gerardfraser said:
Nope had Gigabyte 580 SLI 3GB windforce and they were quiet compared to 680GTX.
SIDE NOTE:I do not like EVGA cards. everyone I bought always felt cheap and I bought lots EVGA cards
Now I know all 680 cards are the same as of now but I would never buy another EVGA card due to poor ass build,let the flaming begin LOL
Click to expand...

Problem here is that since this is a reference 680 as of now it won't matter. Also, I have 0 faith in any of those other companies RMA services so I felt compelled to go with EVGA.
 
gerardfraser said:
People like me spend cash on this shit all the time.I make more in a day then it cost for 2 680 cards.
Click to expand...

i bought a breakfast burrito this morning. people like me spend cash on this shit all the time. i make more in a day than it costs for 3, maybe even 4 breakfast burritos.
 
Porter_ said:
i bought a breakfast burrito this morning. people like me spend cash on this shit all the time. i make more in a day than it costs for 3, maybe even 4 breakfast burritos.
Click to expand...

4 is a total waste of money. Everyone knows that scaling is really bad from 3 burritos to 4:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top