From china forum.. kepler is Fast....!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
depending on power consumption i might be in for 2
 
Irregardless of power consumption, I want at least a 670Ti. My GTX 470 just isn't cutting it anymore. I never thought the day would come when I said that, but I just want something with some more oomph behind it.
 
Not quite sure how they get that high, but the test I got on "same clock speed" as 7970, the K's top dog can't keep up with 7970 in multiple gaming benchmark.

I think that should tells tell some story there. ;)
 
haha true

i might get two and overclock the shit out of them
 
shansoft said:
Not quite sure how they get that high, but the test I got on "same clock speed" as 7970, the K's top dog can't keep up with 7970 in multiple gaming benchmark.

I think that should tells tell some story there. ;)
Click to expand...

A) What test? B) Not sure why you'd compare them at like clockspeeds since they don't come that way nor will they OC that way.
 
I hope drivers will be better but why didn't they make it 384 bit. Anyways at least they will have 2 and 4 for memory. I would get 4 not the 2 in size for memory.
 
i usually rock an amd gpu but i might give nvidia a try this gen
 
Night_Hawk-19 said:
I doubt it because its 256 bit not 384 bit of current fermi
I hope drivers will be better but why didn't they make it 384 bit. Anyways at least they will have 2 and 4 for memory. I would get 4 not the 2 in size for memory.
Click to expand...

Bus width != performance. It's one of many factors. As far as 2gb vs 4gb, unless you're running high-res surround, you won't need more than 2gb in the near future.
 
Wonder how it does on higher resolutions. That 4x MSAA BF3 result is impressive (actually, strike that, it's amazing). I wasn't planning on an upgrade, but that kind of improvement might be worth it.
 
IMO, unless you are gaming on 2560x1600 monitors or doing eyefinity/fermi @ those resolutions, these cards won't really matter to you performance wise.

@ 1920x1080 resolutions, it's not really a challenge for cards from late 2010-2011...
 
I can't wait for [H]'s number on 2560x1600! I hope I can replace my SLI 570's with a single 680 without losing much performance.
 
cannondale06 said:
if those numbers are true then its lucky for Nvidia that what would have been a gtx560ti replacement is beating AMD's top card.
Click to expand...

Legitreview quoted VR-Zone, who in turn mentioned that they pulled that table online via Google. No idea then why they'd put their watermark on it, but the point is, the source of the table is from neither VR-zone nor legitreview.

There, translated the important part. the rest are on that table :p
 
shansoft said:
Not quite sure how they get that high, but the test I got on "same clock speed" as 7970, the K's top dog can't keep up with 7970 in multiple gaming benchmark.

I think that should tells tell some story there. ;)
Click to expand...

I think the story is that you don't know what you're talking about.
 
i most likely will go back to nvidia after i build a new computer.

ati sure seems more stable than nvidia but i miss the features that nvidia have that ati doesnt. also i tried 3d vision and it was quite neat. ati 3d stuff is all a mess.
 
Hey guys, remember all those leaked Bulldozer benchmarks, before reviewers released their information? Don't be surprised if these benchmarks aren't telling the whole story.

When a company delays people to release benchmarks, it's usually for a good reason.
 
not bad results.

To bad its still not enough to beat the 7970 when its overclocked, unless these have the same overclocking headroom.
 
Ashbringer said:
Hey guys, remember all those leaked Bulldozer benchmarks, before reviewers released their information? Don't be surprised if these benchmarks aren't telling the whole story.

When a company delays people to release benchmarks, it's usually for a good reason.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges here though.
 
if true that's pretty damn impressive BF3 1920x1080 4xMSAA results
 
GoldenTiger said:
A) What test? B) Not sure why you'd compare them at like clockspeeds since they don't come that way nor will they OC that way.
Click to expand...

The reason why the clock speed is set to the same for comparison because the clock is high enough and close to each other. It also implies about overclocking ;). Plus, it's just fun to test to see how the new architecture and features work.

That is all I can say for now if you still can't figure out what I am trying to say. :D

Last thing I can say is, I do not expect this card to be price anything lower than what is already in the market.
 
Ashbringer said:
Hey guys, remember all those leaked Bulldozer benchmarks, before reviewers released their information? Don't be surprised if these benchmarks aren't telling the whole story.

When a company delays people to release benchmarks, it's usually for a good reason.
Click to expand...

When exactly have we had reviews of cards before they were announced? Reviewers always are under NDA utnil announcements.
 
This better be true and have monster overclocking if it wants to beat the 7970 otherwise 7970 is king.

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT STOCK SCORE ON TOL CARDS. enthusiasts only care about how fast the card is and oced scores are all that matters.


This is just a rumor anyways. If they showed the card in their system then I would believe it.
 
onthemour said:
This better be true and have monster overclocking if it wants to beat the 7970 otherwise 7970 is king.

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT STOCK SCORE ON TOL CARDS. enthusiasts only care about how fast the card is and oced scores are all that matters.


This is just a rumor anyways. If they showed the card in their system then I would believe it.
Click to expand...

All cards don't OC the same, so performance has to be measured from stock clocks to eliminate any margins of error.
There will always be the group of people touting 1300MHz 7970s when only a handful of people managed to reach it. Just like how people are disappointed with [H] OC reviews because they didn't push the cards more.

Verifiable Performance is greater than potential performance.
 
Panties in knots.. Wait until the NDA is lifted and proper reviews are out before making a call. Sounds like a great card if the rumours are true. Not that I trust leaked benches from China. :S
 
I really hope the 680 is amazing. If it is better in sli than the 7970 crossfire then I will be happy. I have been holding off on buying another 7970. One thing is certain, 2 gigs is not enough to play Skyrim at my settings. ugrids 7 hd texs eyefinity locked at 60 = 2.9 vram usage all the time. This is what I am worried about. The 3 gig 7970 single card does it all on just one gpu for eyefinity! That is going to be hard to beat
 
WorldExclusive said:
All cards don't OC the same, so performance has to be measured from stock clocks to eliminate any margins of error.
There will always be the group of people touting 1300MHz 7970s when only a handful of people managed to reach it. Just like how people are disappointed with [H] OC reviews because they didn't push the cards more.

Verifiable Performance is greater than potential performance.
Click to expand...


Almost everyone can hit 1125/1575 on stock volts just like sandybridge doing 4.5. The potential is much higher than average for this card that is why it is labeled a monster overclocker. That is big shoes to fill
 
ICOM said:
...for a card that is not commercially available. The stupidity is asstounding.

Never underestimate an nVidiot.
Click to expand...

Says the guy arguing facts as though they were opinions.

Again, IF (as the rumor says), the GTX 680 scores around X3300... that would place it equal to a highly-oc'd Radeon 7970 (X3300) What part of that comparison is inaccurate, sir? Unreal.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top