More GTX 680 news

Forceman said:
Yes, but the naming is what places it in the product line-up, and so in the pricing scheme. They'd have trouble charging $500 for a card called the GTX 660 Ti, but they'll have no trouble charging that for the GTX 680. There are three iterations of the GTX x80 card being $499 at launch, I don't see that changing now.
Click to expand...


NVIDIA could change the naming this time around so the past pricing based on names may not be in order as you think it will be.

2GB of ram with 256bit memory interface leads me to believe the card will not be over $400.
 
I sure hope so. At that price point they would have my buy, but at 2GB, I hope they don't try and charge more than $500. Especially considering AMDs $350 cards are 2GB and the $450 cards are 3GB.
 
$300?

Yup... in about 10 months, when GK110 comes out. And GK104 (aka GTX 680) will be rebranded GTX 760, while GK110 will be GTX 780 & 770. But by then, you will want to buy a GTX 770 instead of GTX 760. And GTX 770 won't be $300, probably $450. Why must NVIDIA toy with us like this!?
 
Luishi5k0 said:
Can anyone confirm that one Kepler card can run 3 monitors with NVIDIA Surround.
Click to expand...

I hope so, but wouldn't waste your money ($550) on a 2gb card to do it. You would do better with a 3gb 7970. I sure hope to hell they have a 4gb version and soon.

aintz said:
this is just the same stuff thats in every other thread...
Click to expand...

posted days late no less, why does this have it's own thread...
 
If they perform as predicted at $400 these will be flying off their virtual shelves.
 
0100 said:
I hope so, but wouldn't waste your money ($550) on a 2gb card to do it. You would do better with a 3gb 7970. I sure hope to hell they have a 4gb version and soon.



posted days late no less, why does this have it's own thread...
Click to expand...

Nvidia fanboys must have something to talk about!:rolleyes:
 
SonDa5 said:
NVIDIA could change the naming this time around so the past pricing based on names may not be in order as you think it will be.

2GB of ram with 256bit memory interface leads me to believe the card will not be over $400.
Click to expand...
The GTX580 had 1.5GB at launch while the HD5870 and HD6970 had 2GB, only vendor specific models of GTX580's had 3GB and that was several months after release. I do agree though that Nvidia should have learned that customer's are clamoring for large RAM sizes on the highest end cards, which is why companies debuted the GTX580 3GB in the first place. I believe that the 680 should debut with 4GB of RAM, but I will doubt Nvidia will follow through on that at launch.

The bus width really doesn't mean anything. That debate was proven bullshit with the AMD HD2900XT when it debuted with a 512bit bus. AMD went right back to a 256bit bus the next generation but used higher clocked ram to compensate when they finally had a GPU that could utilize that much bandwidth (4xxx series and higher). Since AMD was so good at keeping the RAM speeds high and using the latest available standard, they didn't need to increase the bus size until this generation with the 7000 series. Nvidia had the reverse problem. They couldn't get the RAM speed quicker and didn't always use the latest memory types so they over-engineered the chip to use a 512bit bus instead to get the desired bandwidth. So Nvidia dropping the bus size to 256bit but using higher speed RAM makes perfect since. The chip just might be more efficient with its bandwidth. That's not necessarily a bad thing either. If they figure out how to make their chip's use the bandwidth more efficiently, when they decide to go back to a 512bit bus it will be a monster.

As far as the RAM size is concerned, there is nothing stopping the board partners from engineering a board with 4GB of RAM, and I bet a few of them will do it soon. All they have to do is put higher density RAM on the boards. I'm betting the Nvidia reference design is simply 2GB.
 
Yikes2000 said:
$300?

Yup... in about 10 months, when GK110 comes out. And GK104 (aka GTX 680) will be rebranded GTX 760, while GK110 will be GTX 780 & 770. But by then, you will want to buy a GTX 770 instead of GTX 760. And GTX 770 won't be $300, probably $450. Why must NVIDIA toy with us like this!?
Click to expand...

I saw some numbers and release date (August) about GK110 and was going to post but then I noticed it was going to be a lower ranked card when it comes to specs and price. (Some German site).

It would make little sense putting out something that would rank as a possible 7xx model that soon. Was it ever confirmed the GK110 would be the high end?
 
Yikes2000 said:
Yup... in about 10 months, when GK110 comes out. And GK104 (aka GTX 680) will be rebranded GTX 760, while GK110 will be GTX 780 & 770.
Click to expand...

I'd buy that theory. They've even done it in the past with the 8800 -> 9800 cards.

Tisca said:
I saw some numbers and release date (August) about GK110 and was going to post but then I noticed it was going to be a lower ranked card when it comes to specs and price. (Some German site).

It would make little sense putting out something that would rank as a possible 7xx model that soon. Was it ever confirmed the GK110 would be the high end?
Click to expand...

GK106 and GK107 should be the lower-end parts (I think those are the numbers). GK110 will be the high-end part.
 
Forceman said:
GK106 and GK107 should be the lower-end parts (I think those are the numbers). GK110 will be the high-end part.
Click to expand...
On 2nd thought, not so crazy after all. Isn't the AMD 8000 series supposed to be out by the end of the year/early 2013? Well, there will be delays. There's always delays.
 
Tisca said:
On 2nd thought, not so crazy after all. Isn't the AMD 8000 series supposed to be out by the end of the year/early 2013? Well, there will be delays. There's always delays.
Click to expand...

Looks more like it, that AMD refresh and GK110 will be the refresh line of cards by the end of this year or next year.

But personally I can't wait that long. If GK104 will be the current high end card along with 7970, then this is what I'm getting. I have a backlog of games that takes advantage of DX11 I'm eager to play.
 
idk why ppl keep on making threads for the GTX680.

If this is more news it should of been posted in the main thread.
 
Elmy said:
idk why ppl keep on making threads for the GTX680.

If this is more news it should of been posted in the main thread.
Click to expand...

It's not more news, it's less news, that is why it gets it's own thread. Come on man get with the times.
 
secretsauce said:
lol

Nvidia hasn't even officialy said that it is a 680 remember that is a rumor.
Click to expand...

Seriously, stay out of the nvidia section. You deserve to be banned from here for all your uninformed and flame baiting posts.

Its been confirmed by Kyle and other reviewers that it is the 680 and they have the cards right now. So, stfu if you have no clue what you are talking about.
 
If this thing out performs or is neck and neck with the 7970 it's going to be $549 why would anyone think it will be less then a 7970 if it's faster?
 
My friend is a reviewer and he has it in his PC right now. From what he told me it beats 7970 on most benches he did. I asked him about the heat generation and he told me he hasn't started on recording the temperature yet but the card is fairly quiet.

Overall he said it was better than the 7970.
 
Marcdaddy said:
If this thing out performs or is neck and neck with the 7970 it's going to be $549 why would anyone think it will be less then a 7970 if it's faster?
Click to expand...

Well, it will have less ram, a less complicated PCB, and it's a smaller chip so it will be cheaper to manufacture in the long run.

A gig of vram probably only costs $8-10, a PCB with less power phases is probably only $1-3, but it is significantly smaller and that is not an insignificant cost decrease.
 
Marcdaddy said:
If this thing out performs or is neck and neck with the 7970 it's going to be $549 why would anyone think it will be less then a 7970 if it's faster?
Click to expand...

Die size, cost to manufacture, less Vram etc.. of course Nv will milk it though and charge far more than its actually worth, thanks to AMD pricing.
 
demowhc said:
Die size, cost to manufacture, less Vram etc.. of course Nv will milk it though and charge far more than its actually worth, thanks to AMD pricing.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the fact that it would be silly to come up with same performance at the same price 2 months late.
 
Marcdaddy said:
If this thing out performs or is neck and neck with the 7970 it's going to be $549 why would anyone think it will be less then a 7970 if it's faster?
Click to expand...
Don't forget the fact that it would be silly to come up with similar performance at the same price and 2 months late and having built up so much hype.
 
saw the hilarious graph this morning -- the Y axis scale is comical.

Overall it looks like in the setup/benches they used, avg performance is maybe what? 10 or 15%

that gap can be made up with drivers/OC/whatever. No doubt there are nvidia fanboi's out there fondling themselves while looking at this graph thinking how they were so right about the 600 series from nvidia.

All that waiting and the average gain is 10-15%

Looks like my 6950+6970 combo will continue to serve me well for another year while the next gen improves. I game at 1920x1080 anyways, so no worries about blowing cash I on hardware. Sadly next bug purchase I gotta look into is a cheap new or used car.
 
Even if it is a 10-15% gain, it's a 10-15% gain over the flagship 7970 with what was originally intended to be a mid-range card. Price is likely going to be the only downside here.

I'm not understanding this argument where people expect it to beat the 7970 by 50% or some shit. That's not what it's intended to do. It's already looking to be quite a bit faster than the 580 and I think that's the point. Though, as I said, price is going to be an issue here but based on the alleged relative performance to the 7970 and AMD's pricing, it makes business sense.

If you want to be blown away I'm guessing you'll need to wait until the 8000 series or GK110.
 
I guess I don't get the big deal with the scale of the graph. Do people really only go off of the appearance of the bars without actually looking at what a bar corresponds to numerically? It's not difficult to look at the graph and see how they compare in performance. In fact, a graph such as that is probably about the simplest way to indicate relative performance. People have freaked out about the scale of the graph and I guess I truly do not get it :confused:
 
thebski said:
Do people really only go off of the appearance of the bars without actually looking at what a bar corresponds to numerically?
Click to expand...

Apparently so. Though I guess the argument was that it was designed to be intentionally misleading, and I can see that as being a valid argument. That said, it's not hard to look at the axis labels and that's what anyone should be doing first thing. If anyone around here was truly misled by that graph then they need some statistics lessons. :D
 
1.png

510€ + tax
 
MavericK96 said:
Though I guess the argument was that it was designed to be intentionally misleading, and I can see that as being a valid argument. :D
Click to expand...

I guess, but that's kind of marketing 101. nVidia did NOT invent scale alteration of a graph.
 
MavericK96 said:
Even if it is a 10-15% gain, it's a 10-15% gain over the flagship 7970 with what was originally intended to be a mid-range card.
Click to expand...

Please stop with that argument. It's a new architecture, therefore codenames probably aren't going to match up exactly. Plus, there was never any confirmation (for good reason). That's a lame cop out to think Nvidia says, "Well, AMD fucken sucked, let's go ahead and overcharge for our weaker chip." All the while blaming AMD for prices.

Whatever anyone thinks, this is Nvidia's high end, and looks mighty good.
 
SonDa5 said:
NVIDIA could change the naming this time around so the past pricing based on names may not be in order as you think it will be.

2GB of ram with 256bit memory interface leads me to believe the card will not be over $400.
Click to expand...

until you consider the fact that they are supplement that performance loss due to the 256bit bus by using DDR5 6Ghz chips so it offsets what should be a cost savings. either way this is nvidia we are talking about here.. theres not a chance in hell this card comes in under 500 bucks. hell if it is even remotely close to the 7970 or faster don't be surprised if it sells in excess of 600 dollars. Nvidia doesn't need to undercut AMD for market share, they already control the majority of the desktop market and on top of that i highly doubt they will have enough cards available to make an attempt to under cut them.
 
GoldenTiger said:
2GB is fine for any single-monitor resolution. Bus width doesn't matter: performance does.
Click to expand...

Well, basically any 7970 will be able to overclock the ram to the max in ATI Overdrive, which is like 1575 and provides for ~300GB a sec memory bandwidth. How's that for performance?
 
JustinCorrigible said:
Please stop with that argument. It's a new architecture, therefore codenames probably aren't going to match up exactly. Plus, there was never any confirmation (for good reason). That's a lame cop out to think Nvidia says, "Well, AMD fucken sucked, let's go ahead and overcharge for our weaker chip." All the while blaming AMD for prices.

Whatever anyone thinks, this is Nvidia's high end, and looks mighty good.
Click to expand...

What do you call GK110 then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top