Leaked GeForce GTX 680 2GB Benchmarks

Status
Not open for further replies.
ShuttleLuv said:
More people as in how many? I don't have a Korean IPS monitor. In fact I'd be a betting man that most people in this world right now have a TN panel monitor. Sad but true. Until like millions have a korean IPS monitor, it's a minority.
Click to expand...

I was slightly being sarcastic, but you can count here

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1678985

here

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1675393

and here

http://www.overclock.net/t/1215866/...g-90hz-achieva-shimian-qh270-and-catleap-q270

:)
 
EPOQ said:
Not saying you are wrong at all but 2GB is 2GB and we know upfront that is going to be a limiting factor when it comes to higher resolution with todays AA standards. You can get 2GB vRAM usage in 1080p on Battlefield 3.
Click to expand...


Yes thats true, which is why I said that above to Kyles post. The main limiting factor here with 680 in my opinion is the 2gb, but I don't think it will be much. Also someone will probably release a higher vram model, this always happens.
 
BETA. said:
With more people in the community getting these korean IPS monitors on the cheap, we're going to have to rely on the 2560 x 1440(1600) benchmark numbers more than 1080p. It looks like the 7970 and 680 are pretty much neck and neck at those resolutions. Waiting for SLI results too.
Click to expand...

LOL I know the thread you are referring to, and yes, it looks like these things are selling like crazy from the number of posts between [H] and the overclocker.net forums.
 
EPOQ said:
Not saying you are wrong at all but 2GB is 2GB and we know upfront that is going to be a limiting factor when it comes to higher resolution with todays AA standards. You can get 2GB vRAM usage in 1080p on Battlefield 3.
Click to expand...

Just because you can use 2GB of vram in BF3 doesn't mean that it needs it. It caches vram kind of like Vista did with memory. I don't think that 2GB of vram will be a limiting factor at 1920x1080 any time soon.
 
EPOQ said:
LOL I know the thread you are referring to, and yes, it looks like these things are selling like crazy from the number of posts between [H] and the overclocker.net forums.
Click to expand...


One thing computer guys do is they over inflate how much something is selling based on a few hardware forums. When you compare the amount of korean IPS monitors sold day to day to say, something like an Xbox 360 day to day, it's not much at all. Thats what I mean by minority.
 
ShuttleLuv said:
One thing computer guys do is they over inflate how much something is selling based on a few hardware forums. When you compare the amount of korean IPS monitors sold day to day to say, something like an Xbox 360 day to day, it's not much at all. Thats what I mean by minority.
Click to expand...

I actually don't have and don't want one of these. I'll stick with the US name brand IPS's and their multi-year manufacturer warranties.
 
ShuttleLuv said:
One thing computer guys do is they over inflate how much something is selling based on a few hardware forums. When you compare the amount of korean IPS monitors sold day to day to say, something like an Xbox 360 day to day, it's not much at all. Thats what I mean by minority.
Click to expand...

But, you're also leaving out the fact that these same people are the ones who make up most of the sales for high end graphics chips like the 7970 and 680. It's not like you can walk down the street, hell down a few blocks and expect someone to own a PC like yours or mine. I work in the retail environment under PC repairs, and the average person who comes in with a PC usually has one that is about 4 years old.
 
ShamisOMally said:
*looks at Dirt 3 benchmark*

The ffffffffffffuck?

80FPS for a 7970 at 1920x1080? On ultra and 4xMSAA?

I'm getting OVER 105FPS at those settings with my 7970

WTF is going on here?

EDIT: I am comparing them with every other review site on the web, the scores they are getting, vs the scores other sites are getting with 7970

All of Tom's scores are -WAY- under for the 7970, and -WAY- inflated for Nvidia's line

I think this may just be trolling benchmarks put out by somebody to try and draw attention away from AMD
Click to expand...

While I cannot vouch for the validity of the data, and I never would for another website, I can tell you this. Chris Angelini THG Editor-in-Chief did verify that "someone accessed our internally-facing CMS and exported all of the charts that I had uploaded in preparation for my GTX 680 review." So those are THG charts and such.
 
Performance rumors and leaked slides aside, wasn't the main reason for this release coming to market so late due to low yields? I have a feeling this launch is going to be plagued horribly by epically low availability that will only serve to drive prices up. Anyone else feeling the same way?
 
wasteomind said:
Performance rumors and leaked slides aside, wasn't the main reason for this release coming to market so late due to low yields? I have a feeling this launch is going to be plagued horribly by epically low availability that will only serve to drive prices up. Anyone else feeling the same way?
Click to expand...


I have worried about that, but I don't feel this will happen because they are hard launching it. I worry more about that with paper launches. But with retailers really in control, who knows.
 
TheBluePill said:
Yall know the 7990 is just around the corner..
Click to expand...


Well we don't know exactly when, nor nothing detailed about it except it should be dual GPU. The price will undoubtedly be insane though, and multi GPU configs do exhibit microstutter from time to time. So it's really not to be compared to the 680, as the 680 is single GPU. Compare it to the dual variant of the 680 when the time comes.
 
This is what I am worried about and seems to be happening with these damn reviews -

IDIOT REVIEWERS OUT THERE are simply copy/pasting the results that they got when they reviewed the 7970 at launch with SHITTY ASS DRIVERS. While this is no excuse and SHAME ON YOU AMD for releasing these cards with shitty drivers, it paints a COMPLETELY different story now that the drivers are more mature. Therefore - you do get these stupid results of a 7970 running 80 fps on Dirt 3 @1080p. Hell, my old 6950 could do that in its sleep.

So KYLE - Here's hoping you don't follow that trend and actually re-benchmark these AMD cards with current drivers. Yes, its a pain in the ass, but it will paint a better picture than all these other review sites, cause - who the hell wants to see how a non-optimized card benches against another? And no - this does not mean that you shouldn't do a review altogether cause it would be a "mature" card against another - It will just paint a good picture of WHAT IS AVAILABLE HERE AND NOW.
 
At least it won't need a huge PSU to power it. Looks a like a quality 400-450w PSU should work fine.
 
Apples to apples, yup that's what it's looking like.

Dynamic overclocking, hmm. I'm wonder if they left any for the user? Will have to wait to read a thorough review here on HardOCP.

You guys ROCK!
 
fIyef.jpg
 
Phishy714 said:
This is what I am worried about and seems to be happening with these damn reviews -

IDIOT REVIEWERS OUT THERE are simply copy/pasting the results that they got when they reviewed the 7970 at launch with SHITTY ASS DRIVERS. While this is no excuse and SHAME ON YOU AMD for releasing these cards with shitty drivers, it paints a COMPLETELY different story now that the drivers are more mature. Therefore - you do get these stupid results of a 7970 running 80 fps on Dirt 3 @1080p. Hell, my old 6950 could do that in its sleep.

So KYLE - Here's hoping you don't follow that trend and actually re-benchmark these AMD cards with current drivers. Yes, its a pain in the ass, but it will paint a better picture than all these other review sites, cause - who the hell wants to see how a non-optimized card benches against another? And no - this does not mean that you shouldn't do a review altogether cause it would be a "mature" card against another - It will just paint a good picture of WHAT IS AVAILABLE HERE AND NOW.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm getting over 125FPS with my 7970, just did a benchmark in Dirt 3

Something is off here......
 
Maybe a updated / particular driver they used for the 7970 on this 680 review had an inconsistincy or bug for Dirt 3? It happens. Some new drivers mess up old games, and vice versa. Don't be so quick to assume he's crooked or somehow jacked up the results in Nvidia's favor until we get further information.
 
ShuttleLuv said:
Maybe a updated / particular driver they used for the 7970 on this 680 review had an inconsistincy or bug for Dirt 3? It happens. Some new drivers mess up old games, and vice versa. Don't be so quick to assume he's crooked or somehow jacked up the results in Nvidia's favor until we get further information.
Click to expand...

wasn't my assumption, just an interesting find. the BF3 results leaked today match up with their 7950 review.
 
Phishy714 said:
This is what I am worried about and seems to be happening with these damn reviews -

IDIOT REVIEWERS OUT THERE are simply copy/pasting the results that they got when they reviewed the 7970 at launch with SHITTY ASS DRIVERS. While this is no excuse and SHAME ON YOU AMD for releasing these cards with shitty drivers, it paints a COMPLETELY different story now that the drivers are more mature. Therefore - you do get these stupid results of a 7970 running 80 fps on Dirt 3 @1080p. Hell, my old 6950 could do that in its sleep.

So KYLE - Here's hoping you don't follow that trend and actually re-benchmark these AMD cards with current drivers. Yes, its a pain in the ass, but it will paint a better picture than all these other review sites, cause - who the hell wants to see how a non-optimized card benches against another? And no - this does not mean that you shouldn't do a review altogether cause it would be a "mature" card against another - It will just paint a good picture of WHAT IS AVAILABLE HERE AND NOW.
Click to expand...
[H] always lists the drivers used to test each card in a review, in addition to stating that they used "the most current driver available". I am certain that when they do publish their GTX680 reference card review, it will also state the driver used to test each card that has its results graphed. I see no reason to think that they would suddenly deviate from established protocol.
 
BababooeyHTJ said:
http://i.imgur.com/fIyef.jpg
Click to expand...
With only a few cards listed the only assumpations become.
AMD drivers in particular to that game is a performance drop for the 7xxx series.
Or that in particular to the built in Dirt benchmark performance does not equate to in game performance.
the charts are bogus or altered, cheated as in all the cards weren't tested again on the rig.
Either way the charts are some of the best stuff we have short of actual reviews.
 
well, it looks like it shits all over my gtx 480 SLI. It has better frame averages, plus it wont stutter? This is my next card.
 
Anyone else not impressed? With no AA/AF, the GTX680 is faster at 1080P, but in other situations like adding max AA/AF, or higher resolutions, the 7970 is on par or better. Must be the 2GB of memory. 4GB probably won't be much of an improvement because of that memory bus.
 
JMCB said:
Anyone else not impressed? With no AA/AF, the GTX680 is faster at 1080P, but in other situations like adding max AA/AF, or higher resolutions, the 7970 is on par or better. Must be the 2GB of memory. 4GB probably won't be much of an improvement because of that memory bus.
Click to expand...


You're in the minority man. The GTX 680 is one impressive card from the looks of it.
 
Yes I posted it as a matter of fact. :cool: And it really doesn't equate to anything negative for gamers, it's most likely deliberately crippled because of Nvidia's Tesla and Quadro.
 
JMCB said:
Anyone else not impressed? With no AA/AF, the GTX680 is faster at 1080P, but in other situations like adding max AA/AF, or higher resolutions, the 7970 is on par or better. Must be the 2GB of memory. 4GB probably won't be much of an improvement because of that memory bus.
Click to expand...

Factor in that it is a smaller die than the 7970, and uses less power - both areas where Nvidia has lagged in the past. So from that standpoint it is a pretty significant step for them. The fact that they can compete with the 7970 with what may have been intended as their mid-range chip is pretty impressive (assuming that is the case).
 
wasteomind said:
Performance rumors and leaked slides aside, wasn't the main reason for this release coming to market so late due to low yields? I have a feeling this launch is going to be plagued horribly by epically low availability that will only serve to drive prices up. Anyone else feeling the same way?
Click to expand...

I don't share that outlook, but if it comes up short it will be because of huge demand not anemic supply IMO.

Phishy714 said:
So KYLE - Here's hoping you don't follow that trend and actually re-benchmark these AMD cards with current drivers. Yes, its a pain in the ass, but it will paint a better picture than all these other review sites, cause - who the hell wants to see how a non-optimized card benches against another? And no - this does not mean that you shouldn't do a review altogether cause it would be a "mature" card against another - It will just paint a good picture of WHAT IS AVAILABLE HERE AND NOW.
Click to expand...

Guess you have not read the fine print for the last 10 years or so eh? We almost never re-use benchmark numbers if something has changed. And if there is a new driver out we look into to make sure the new driver should not render performance increases/decreases in the games we are using.

ShamisOMally said:
Somebody already looked up Tom's previous reviews on videocards for the 7970, and in the older reviews it was scoring between Ten and THIRTY FPS higher for games

So yeah, these graphs seem fake, or like I said, Tom's is skewing results again
Click to expand...

These graphs are not fake. These are from THG.

Ford Prefect said:
[H] always lists the drivers used to test each card in a review, in addition to stating that they used "the most current driver available". I am certain that when they do publish their GTX680 reference card review, it will also state the driver used to test each card that has its results graphed. I see no reason to think that they would suddenly deviate from established protocol.
Click to expand...

We are using the latest drivers available from AMD and NVIDIA. Did a driver update yesterday for Batman....
 
I'm behind the curve a little bit?

Is this new nvidia card the single chip flagship for the 600 series or is this the middle card?

What I mean is, is the 680 = 7970 or 680 = 7870?? Or is this the "GTX570" or "GTX 580" comparatively?

Results in this thread look very promising what ever slot this card fills.:D
 
magoo said:
I'm behind the curve a little bit?

Is this new nvidia card the single chip flagship for the 600 series or is this the middle card?

What I mean is, is the 680 = 7970 or 680 = 7870?? Or is this the "GTX570" or "GTX 580" comparatively?

Results in this thread look very promising what ever slot this card fills.:D
Click to expand...


Yes it's single gpu and it's competing mainly with the 7970. Of course comparisons could be made to the 7950 or even 6990 but the target comparison has to be the current flagship, the 7970. The price is very similiar as well, though Nvidia is reportedly going to be releasing this card at $499 so might undercut AMD alittle.
 
I think the only reason NVIDIA went with the smaller die size is that TSMC couldn't meet their demand for their larger die GK110. The GK104 may very well have been their midrange chip initially. After seeing what AMD had to offer, they decide to reevaluate their strategy. Nothing wrong with that but I wouldn't expect it to be less then $500. Also I think the 256 bit memory bus is only going to hurt them at higher resolutions, AA and GPGPU.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top