GTX 690 owner's experience

Tripp17 said:
#1Rage, i love my card, it truely is a work of art. I got mine to clock at 1300/7200. Im gonna flash it it to 1058/1124 core and 6300 memory. Ill let ya know how it works out. 915 at base is too low for me as all my games are vysnced at 85-120Hz. There are new drivers out, 301.44s but i havent given them a go yet. Truely epic performance. I had a 5970 and bought a 680 but it was almost identical in most games, getting the 690 solved that!
Click to expand...

I haven't tried overclocking yet. I'm working on my CPU now. For years I ran my i7 920 at 3.4-3.5 GHz with barely any extra voltage. Now I'm pushing the voltage and I want to hit at least 3.8 (on air). I noticed on 64 player BF3 my fps dip a bit here and there so I put the graphics to low and 640x480 and still saw the same performance so I'm definitely CPU limited. I always here BF3 doesn't need much from the CPU but I think if you are playing with 64 people it starts to matter.

I wasn't aware of the new drivers. I'll try them out tomorrow.
 
Anyone see a water block for the 690 yet?

Once i'm ready for SLI I'd rather sell my single 680 and grab a 690 with a single water block.

Grats to the people that were able to nab one of these suckers.
 
I have my 690 flashed to 1058/1124 and 6300 on the memory, with that said, it out performs the 680 in SLI in every game/benchmark while using less power, less heat, and much quieter. I dont blame you for wanting a 690 with a water block, that would be sick! If i had one id flash my card to 1124/1200 and 7000 memory. The best my card could do was 1258 boost but i wonder if heat was an issue or not. Gotta remember that the 690 uses 5 VRMs instead of 4 and they are the very best binned 680s. I would kill for a H20 block!
 
Tripp17 said:
I have my 690 flashed to 1058/1124 and 6300 on the memory, with that said, it out performs the 680 in SLI in every game/benchmark while using less power, less heat, and much quieter. I dont blame you for wanting a 690 with a water block, that would be sick! If i had one id flash my card to 1124/1200 and 7000 memory. The best my card could do was 1258 boost but i wonder if heat was an issue or not. Gotta remember that the 690 uses 5 VRMs instead of 4 and they are the very best binned 680s. I would kill for a H20 block!
Click to expand...

How much further than 1124 can you get? What kind of offset are you using?
 
Tripp17 said:
I like to think so, there just arent any LCD or LED monitors that are as nice as my monitor. Believe me, if im willing to spend 1K on a GPU, you dont think id pony up a few grand for the very best monitor? Ive tried so many and they dont come close to as fluid as my CRT. I have a 55 inch Sammy LED D7000 sitting next to my CRT, and it BLOWS compared to my monitor. I tried 120HZ monitors, but no flexability... 60 or 120. I like playing my games at 85Hz, 100Hz, 120Hz in some games. Say what ya want, but most of the people who have negitive stuff cant hold a candle to my rig. If u have a 60Hz monitor and your happy than im glad. When they make a monitor thats better than what i have, I'll buy it. It will be a few years i think, i hope. Until then, Ill play my games at any resolution from 2048X1536 to 1280X1024 at 85Hz.
Click to expand...

I've been saying this for years. Anyone who thinks a LCD is in any way better than a CRT (except in size/weight and geometry issues) is just completely delusional. There's NO comparison in quality between a CRT and a LCD when you're trying to pump 85 (minimum hz/fps) to 120 FPS. NONE. The ones that think there are, are the ones that have been chugging lcd's at 30 FPS at super high resolutions.....(or even the 60 fps crap).

Even 60 FPS @ 60 hz on a CRT is MUCH smoother than 120hz/120 fps on most lcd's....(besides the input lag).....

I did hear about the 26" samsungs, which apparently are smoother than the smalller ones, but still not in CRT league.....
 
Falkentyne said:
I've been saying this for years. Anyone who thinks a LCD is in any way better than a CRT (except in size/weight and geometry issues) is just completely delusional. There's NO comparison in quality between a CRT and a LCD when you're trying to pump 85 (minimum hz/fps) to 120 FPS. NONE. The ones that think there are, are the ones that have been chugging lcd's at 30 FPS at super high resolutions.....(or even the 60 fps crap).

Even 60 FPS @ 60 hz on a CRT is MUCH smoother than 120hz/120 fps on most lcd's....(besides the input lag).....

I did hear about the 26" samsungs, which apparently are smoother than the smalller ones, but still not in CRT league.....
Click to expand...

Uh? They look like trash in anything except gaming, I don't see how you could possibly deal with it. You also greatly over-exaggerate the difference, its pretty minimial on modern screens. You could also get a 120hz panel as well.

I remember hunking a 19" CRT around, what a piece of junk. Big, heavy, hot, it was okay for gaming though I guess. EVERYTHING ELSE is complete trash on a CRT.
 
xoleras said:
Uh? They look like trash in anything except gaming, I don't see how you could possibly deal with it. You also greatly over-exaggerate the difference, its pretty minimial on modern screens. You could also get a 120hz panel as well.

I remember hunking a 19" CRT around, what a piece of junk. Big, heavy, hot, it was okay for gaming though I guess. EVERYTHING ELSE is complete trash on a CRT.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It has been a while since I have used a CRT but I had some good ones that were great for gaming and everything else.
 
Yeah I have an old Sony G500 Crt and while I would like a bigger monitor, I have not seen an lcd that can keep up with it in any respect. The picture is simply clear and the blacks are black.
 
So I should have no issues with a Corsair 950 Watt PSU if the power draw on this thing is so low. See rest of specs in sig.

I am tired of AMD driver problems and issue with my 6950's, so hopefully once I save up some cash in the next couple months they won't be all sold out.
 
Tripp, on your overclocks are you able to get a good OC while keeping temps under 70C?

It looks like I *may* be able to score a GTX 690 this week , and i'm really curious about the overclocking. In particular, is it realistic to get a good overclock without ever passing 70C? Because the chip will throttle slightly beyond that..

Can anyone who owns a 690 comment on this? From what I gather the memory generally OCs very well on the 690s, as does the gpu, but I'm really concerned about temps though...I don't mind noise that much, if I do manual fan at 70% or higher will that
do the job in terms of keeping temps below the 70C threshold? Any input from a 690 owner would be GREATLY appreciated!
 
Soulmetzger said:
Anyone see a water block for the 690 yet?

Once i'm ready for SLI I'd rather sell my single 680 and grab a 690 with a single water block.

Grats to the people that were able to nab one of these suckers.
Click to expand...

Yes! EVGA is releasing a HC water block for the 690 and EK just released one as well.
 
Wait for the heatkiller or aqua one to come out. Sticking swiftech or EK on a $1k video card is a crime somewhere.
 
I haven't played Batman Arkham City yet but I was running some benchmarks to see what settings work best. I have a single monitor so I was experimenting running "SLI" vs GPU-A for graphics and GPU-B for dedicated PhysX. I haven't run enough benchmarks to make a good conclusion yet but I have noticed the benchmark stutters really bad at certain points. The stutter happens both with using 2 GPU's and using single GPU (+ other for PhysX) but it seemed quite a bit worse in SLI mode. So far I've only really played BF3 and haven't noticed any stuttering or micro-stuttering.

I'm running on the new 301.42 drivers.

I have a GTX 280 sitting on my desk not in use right now. Opinions on what you would expect if I set up my 280 as a dedicated PhysX card? I'll definitely try it but what do you guys think will happen? I'm guessing that even if there is a performance benefit, it might not be worth the extra heat and power usage.
 
Rage, what kind of boost clocks can you get while overclocking? And are you able to maintain these clocks without entering throttle territory? (70C)

Thanks!
 
Could someone with a 690 run a few benchmarks in ArmA II OA. I'm interested in that game, I plan to run it at 5760x1200 (though a few 1920x1200 benchmarks wouldnt hurt)
 
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. said:
Could someone with a 690 run a few benchmarks in ArmA II OA. I'm interested in that game, I plan to run it at 5760x1200 (though a few 1920x1200 benchmarks wouldnt hurt)
Click to expand...

With my 690 and 2700k at 4.7, ArmA II OA at 1920 x 1080 runs buttery smooth. The FPS never dips below 100 with everything turned WAY up.
 
NEED MORE DATA ON 690 OVERCLOCKS.

What have you gotten and can you maintain less than 70C...come on 690 owners....:)
 
Last edited:
xoleras said:
Rage, what kind of boost clocks can you get while overclocking? And are you able to maintain these clocks without entering throttle territory? (70C)

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I might be able to help here.

I am currently in the process of overclocking my 690 and with the power target at 135 I have a boost clock at 1120 and the fan at auto. I have yet to hit 70 degrees Celsius and plan on pushing this thing some more. I am taking it slow though as my previous card was a 590 and was unable to take any OC at all. Obviously the 690 is a whole other story with OCing, but I just want to be brutally safe so I don't end up with a paper weight.
 
I wish I had one, here in Australia they are charging a great whopping $1599 if not more in some stores. If it was $999 here I'll be all over it.
 
breadman said:
I might be able to help here.

I am currently in the process of overclocking my 690 and with the power target at 135 I have a boost clock at 1120 and the fan at auto. I have yet to hit 70 degrees Celsius and plan on pushing this thing some more. I am taking it slow though as my previous card was a 590 and was unable to take any OC at all. Obviously the 690 is a whole other story with OCing, but I just want to be brutally safe so I don't end up with a paper weight.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info! Thats not a bad OC at all. I'd like to hit 1200 with a 690 without throttling at 70C, if I can get that I will be happy...I don't mind manual fan.
 
I dont mind manual fan either, just nice to know that it isn't even hitting 70 with auto with a mild oc at present.
 
This however is most impressive...

My 590 scores are on the left... and the 690 is on the right.

ersSF.jpg


I actually saw the dip in the FPS on the 690. I was transferring data over and a screen popped up asking me a question. So I'm assuming that the dip was just an anomaly.
 
I mostly play BF3 and ArmA II now. The 690 is far superior to the 590 in every way, shape, and form. At 1920x1080 in BF3, I can jack everything up to Ultra and turn on all the eye candy except for MSAA just because I hate the way it looks, and can even turn ambient occlusion to HBAO and my FPS never - well hardly ever - dips below 100 even on 64 player maps. Which is great for my Asus VG236H 120 Hz. The 590 could do it albeit with more dips below 100, but I had to turn shadows to high and HBAO to SSAO. The 690 definitely keeps a higher average which is nice in heavy fire fights. All the while it keeps the room cooler as the temps never get above 65 C and the power usage is SOO much less it's astonishing.
 
breadman said:
I mostly play BF3 and ArmA II now. The 690 is far superior to the 590 in every way, shape, and form. At 1920x1080 in BF3, I can jack everything up to Ultra and turn on all the eye candy except for MSAA just because I hate the way it looks, and can even turn ambient occlusion to HBAO and my FPS never - well hardly ever - dips below 100 even on 64 player maps. Which is great for my Asus VG236H 120 Hz. The 590 could do it albeit with more dips below 100, but I had to turn shadows to high and HBAO to SSAO. The 690 definitely keeps a higher average which is nice in heavy fire fights. All the while it keeps the room cooler as the temps never get above 65 C and the power usage is SOO much less it's astonishing.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you're using a 1000$ card on a 23" monitor..... If I were playing 1080p on a 23 I would not get more than a 6870 or 560ti 448, thats just me though :) Getting a 30" screen was pretty much the best upgrade ever and easily justifies any sort of SLI purchase, I love my screens
 
I have one, works great. Very happy. Should hold me off until the itch comes back.
 
xoleras said:
I'm surprised you're using a 1000$ card on a 23" monitor..... If I were playing 1080p on a 23 I would not get more than a 6870 or 560ti 448, thats just me though :) Getting a 30" screen was pretty much the best upgrade ever and easily justifies any sort of SLI purchase, I love my screens
Click to expand...

I could never get away with a 560ti. I love having all the eye candy cranked way up and the FPS high enough that there is NO stutter, screen tear, or fps dip on the 120hz screen. If all you've used are big screens, you wouldn't understand.
 
breadman said:
I could never get away with a 560ti. I love having all the eye candy cranked way up and the FPS high enough that there is NO stutter, screen tear, or fps dip on the 120hz screen. If all you've used are big screens, you wouldn't understand.
Click to expand...

Believe me i've used both, 120hz and whatnot. A 23" is too tiny to become an immersive experience, there is no going back from a 27" or 30" PLS panel. Its just way better - IMO of course. Aside from that, TN panels are horrible for anything but gaming.

My philosphy has and always will be :

Money spent on GPU(s) = Money spent on display(s). If you're uneven you're not doing yourself justice...just my opinion though, which doesn't mean much :cool:
 
Last edited:
breadman said:
This however is most impressive...

My 590 scores are on the left... and the 690 is on the right.

I actually saw the dip in the FPS on the 690. I was transferring data over and a screen popped up asking me a question. So I'm assuming that the dip was just an anomaly.
Click to expand...

You were doing a data transfer while running a benchmark? :confused:
 
breadman said:
Blurry to you...
Click to expand...
Uh, this isn't an issue of perception. FXAA definitely results in blurriness, more pronounced in some titles than others. Turn post-process FXAA on in BF3 on high, then switch to 4X AA. It's MUCH blurrier on FXAA. Screenshots can demonstrate this. It's not a matter of personal opinion whether or not it actually blurs the image slightly, just whether or not it bothers you.
 
Tripp17 said:
I love my 690, and im soooo not rich, smart but not rich. Anyways, im having a good time with it. It overclocks alot better than my 680 evga SC and my PCPC 750 silencer can handle the load with ease. Games are so fluid, most people will laugh but i use a 21 inch CRT. It goes up to 2048x1536 and 1920x1440 at 85Hz. So i game at 1600x1200 at 120Hz with all games vsynced. Flat screens to me are not quite there yet compared to this guy. Playing games at 85 to 120hz synced is like silk. Most games i use 4-8XAA and TSAA at 4X with FXAA always on. I am very happy with my card as there hasnt been this big an improvement in performance in some time. Very cool and VERY quiet!
Click to expand...

Are you using the Dell with the Trinitron tube? That's the one I have, too. Love the flexibility.
 
xoleras said:
I'm surprised you're using a 1000$ card on a 23" monitor..... If I were playing 1080p on a 23 I would not get more than a 6870 or 560ti 448, thats just me though :) Getting a 30" screen was pretty much the best upgrade ever and easily justifies any sort of SLI purchase, I love my screens
Click to expand...

Are there any 30", 2560x1600+ screens with 120Hz output? I can't find any. If they do exist they must be more than $2000 I'm sure. I need to upgrade my monitor soon but I think I'll go for higher refresh over larger size/resolution.
 
#1RAGE said:
Are there any 30", 2560x1600+ screens with 120Hz output? I can't find any. If they do exist they must be more than $2000 I'm sure. I need to upgrade my monitor soon but I think I'll go for higher refresh over larger size/resolution.
Click to expand...

My point exactly. CRTs taught us what true gaming should feel like. No LCD screen, even the 120 Hz screens, have come close to what even a mediocre CRT could do. Do I want a higher resolution? Sure. Will I be happy playing at 1080p 120 Hz with EVERYTHING turned way up and the framerate locked at 120? Yep!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top