Overclocking and benchmarking: GTX 670 vs GTX 680

[featsdontfailme]

I've seen 1285 on my MSI GTX 670s running in SLi at 5760 x 1200 (+100 MHz OC).

I've only worked with them briefly, but saw that clock in Surround with 120FPS in CODMW3.......yeah.....it's all i had loaded up at the time.....

 

[Dev1ant]

Is it? You've taken it apart then and posted pictures? I'd love to see them.

.........?

From the onset, we must say that GIGABYTE's GTX 670 OC WindForce 3X 2GB card looks exactly the same as its flagship non-reference GTX 680 model that we've reviewed earlier this year... because it is! Other than a white sticker that identifies it as a GTX 670 over existing silkscreen on the PCB , the card we are looking at today has the same component layout, output connectors and and cooling solution as the top dog,

Read more: http://vr-zone.com/articles/gigabyte-gtx-670-oc-windforce-3x-2gb-review/15831.html#ixzz1vWCIpvhk

GTX670 (http://vr-zone.com/articles/gigabyte-gtx-670-oc-windforce-3x-2gb-review/15831.html):

GTX680(http://vr-zone.com/articles/gigabyte-gtx-680-oc-windforce-3x-2gb-review/15433-2.html):

lol....compared to the reference cooler:

maybe they have a ton of those pcbs and coolers but not enough gtx680 chips.

Would not be surprised at all.

 

[Starrbuck]

Wonder what the catch is? How can they afford to sell the 670 version at the same cost as reference?

 

[Blkout]

Wonder what the catch is? How can they afford to sell the 670 version at the same cost as reference?

Well, there's mark-up in everything. There's profit margin built in to the reference cards and most manufacturers just extend it even further by charging you more for a non-reference board. It appears Gigabyte has chosen not to mark-up their Windforce 670's at least for now, maybe in an effort to gain more market share and recognition. I don't care what their reason is, they won me over. I've never owned a Gigabyte video card before this one and I don't care that much for their motherboards but this card was just too much value for the money to refuse so for that, I thank them.

 

[Starrbuck]

Or maybe they cut some corners in other areas. Nothing in life is free! I'm glad you're taking the optimistic view, though.

 

[Blkout]

Or maybe they cut some corners in other areas. Nothing in life is free! I'm glad you're taking the optimistic view, though.

Not sure what corners are cut, they look identical, everything about them except the chip itself, its pretty obvious by the OC's they're getting too that they didn't cut any corners. It wasn't "free" it was just wasn't part of charging more to increase the profit margin.

 

[chronicfx]

Hey guys. Just finally getting around to overclocking my GTX 680. I am running into a problem though using overclock scanner. When I stress test using furry or tessy I get a message after anywhere from 2-5 minutes. It says the windows time-out limit has been reached between the monitor and the GPU driver. I am until now considering this equivalent to a crash and lowering the overclock accordingly (I am kind of going backwards.. instead of forwards with the clocks) I started at +150 for gpu offset and ended up at +80 for a 1241 gpu boost and I started at +200 mem offset and am currently down to +125.. This seems to be the only error I get though, no artifacts are ever detected. Anyone know if this windows time-out limit error is just a value that I need to change or is my gtx680 signature just not an awesome overclocker?

 

[Blkout]

Hey guys. Just finally getting around to overclocking my GTX 680. I am running into a problem though using overclock scanner. When I stress test using furry or tessy I get a message after anywhere from 2-5 minutes. It says the windows time-out limit has been reached between the monitor and the GPU driver. I am until now considering this equivalent to a crash and lowering the overclock accordingly (I am kind of going backwards.. instead of forwards with the clocks) I started at +150 for gpu offset and ended up at +80 for a 1241 gpu boost and I started at +200 mem offset and am currently down to +125.. This seems to be the only error I get though, no artifacts are ever detected. Anyone know if this windows time-out limit error is just a value that I need to change or is my gtx680 signature just not an awesome overclocker?

Your overclocks don't sound that far from the norm. Try looping Unigine Heaven for 30-60 minutes or so. if it errors, you'll get a D3D message pop-up. I would start by overclocking your core frequency, once it reaches the maximum, start on the memory. Once you reach your maximum stable clocks, try playing some intensive games, Crysis, BF3, Metro 2033 and see if your clocks are still stable.

 

[chronicfx]

Your overclocks don't sound that far from the norm. Try looping Unigine Heaven for 30-60 minutes or so. if it errors, you'll get a D3D message pop-up. I would start by overclocking your core frequency, once it reaches the maximum, start on the memory. Once you reach your maximum stable clocks, try playing some intensive games, Crysis, BF3, Metro 2033 and see if your clocks are still stable.

does the basic free version stress the gpu enough? not gonna pay the full version of unigine. Also is the timeout error I am getting a crash or something else that needs to be set?

 

[Dev1ant]

Or maybe they cut some corners in other areas. Nothing in life is free! I'm glad you're taking the optimistic view, though.

lol, I enjoy the fact that you've continuously attempt to undermine GTX670 owners with a fallacious attempt at justifying your GTX680 purchase it seems. Your posts seem to insinuate that the GB GTX670 part,is inferior in other components. VR-Zone who has BOTH of the cards says otherwise. Troll much?

Based on supplier costs, I can buy a reference based GTX670 and resell for $400 with a relatively higher margin than other computer products. There's quite a bit of leeway for Gigabyte to still turn their regular profit even if it means providing more expensive base components for their card.

EDIT: Removed supplier costs.

 

[Antiflash]

if it errors, you'll get a D3D message pop-up.

I don't know If it matter but all three GTX 680 that I have OCed crash the driver with that pop-up msg when max oc is exceeded. Only this Gigabyte 670 don't do that. It just start showing some artifacting when above 1358mhz but it does not crash. What do you think? Overheat?

 

[Blkout]

does the basic free version stress the gpu enough? not gonna pay the full version of unigine. Also is the timeout error I am getting a crash or something else that needs to be set?

Yes, the free version will do everything you need it to do.

 

[Blkout]

As it turns out my Gigabyte Windforce 670 does 1270/7516 completely stable, Unigine Heaven and Battlefield 3 as well as all other games I have. I just got finished playing BF3 for an hour and it never showed any artifacts or crashed. For some reason I was thinking 7400 was the highest stability I had achieved but it was actually 7516. Unigine Heaven crashes after 30 min or so at 7600MHz. There may be a little more room in there between 7516 and 7600, I haven't actually tried to hit the exact limit yet, that's just 50MHz increments in Afterburner which is currently at +750 and stable.

Not bad for a cut down 680 with questionable cost cutting build quality. LOL.

 

[cannondale06]

most reviews of this card get diminishing returns after about 6400mhz so just because it "runs" at higher speed does not mean it faster. really I have a hard time believing the memory is even stable at over 7500mhz.

 

[Starrbuck]

lol, I enjoy the fact that you've continuously attempt to undermine GTX670 owners with a fallacious attempt at justifying your GTX680 purchase it seems. Your posts seem to insinuate that the GB GTX670 part,is inferior in other components. VR-Zone who has BOTH of the cards says otherwise. Troll much?

Based on supplier costs, I can buy a reference based GTX670 and resell for $400 with a relatively higher margin than other computer products. There's quite a bit of leeway for Gigabyte to still turn their regular profit even if it means providing more expensive base components for their card.

EDIT: Removed supplier costs.

Ok, you don't have to get your panties in a wad. I'm free to speculate just like everyone else here, last time I checked. I just have an issue with why is the 680 GBT $30 more than the 670. Makes no sense to me.

 

[xorbe]

I don't know If it matter but all three GTX 680 that I have OCed crash the driver with that pop-up msg when max oc is exceeded. Only this Gigabyte 670 don't do that. It just start showing some artifacting when above 1358mhz but it does not crash. What do you think? Overheat?

Different chips can show too much oc in different ways.

 

[Blkout]

most reviews of this card get diminishing returns after about 6400mhz so just because it "runs" at higher speed does not mean it faster. really I have a hard time believing the memory is even stable at over 7500mhz.

Understandable that you believe that, but I've benched it at 100MHz increments and it shows improvement at each increment. I'll gladly post any screens you would like, just be prepared to eat crow when you're wrong. Its crazy I know, but I have no reason to lie about it when I'll gladly post screens.

 

[cannondale06]

Understandable that you believe that, but I've benched it at 100MHz increments and it shows improvement at each increment. I'll gladly post any screens you would like, just be prepared to eat crow when you're wrong. Its crazy I know, but I have no reason to lie about it when I'll gladly post screens.

then you should post in every tech forum possible because you are running the highest memory speed I have ever seen.

 

[Blkout]

then you should post in every tech forum possible because you are running the highest memory speed I have ever seen.

I don't need to, but like I said, I dont mind posting proof unless Afterburner is reporting something incorrectly, I swear its legit. Pics coming later tonight. Any bench you prefer?

 

[xorbe]

most reviews of this card get diminishing returns after about 6400mhz so just because it "runs" at higher speed does not mean it faster. really I have a hard time believing the memory is even stable at over 7500mhz.

This must vary wildly by card. Mine posts higher and higher bench results until ~6970 and then it artifacts and crashes after that. I use 6700 normally though. btw I think you meant 3400 (or 6800).

I'm going to throw out a total WAG here: if one of the gpu mem chips is lackluster compared to the rest, then crc kicks in and saves the day but gives the slower results due to retry. For similar gpu mem chips that start throwing errors around the same speed, everything is fine and then the wall is hit with crashes. I'm going to guess that the latter may be more common.

 

[Blkout]

This must vary wildly by card. Mine posts higher and higher bench results until ~6970 and then it artifacts and crashes after that. I use 6700 normally though. btw I think you meant 3400 (or 6800).

I'm going to throw out a total WAG here: if one of the gpu mem chips is lackluster compared to the rest, then crc kicks in and saves the day but gives the slower results due to retry. For similar gpu mem chips that start throwing errors around the same speed, everything is fine and then the wall is hit with crashes. I'm going to guess that the latter may be more common.

Yea I was thinking 6800-7000 was more common and I think that's what he meant too.

 

[Lord_Exodia]

I don't need to, but like I said, I dont mind posting proof unless Afterburner is reporting something incorrectly, I swear its legit. Pics coming later tonight. Any bench you prefer?

Your ram may be fine, however what would need to be done to prove that your ram is running well at the speeds your indicating youd need to run a bench a few times at your current speed and them lowering it a bit e.g.

7500mhz
7000mhz
6750mhz
6500mhz

The GDDR5 ram will not artifact easily and will dynamically relax it's internal timing to prevent errors and artifacts. If canondale is right your benchmark results would show that you are actually losing performance at 7500 than on 7000, or the below #s.

At a certain point on the ram you still may be able to bench it but the ram may be dynamically relaxing it's timings and making you lose performance. The only way to prove/debunk this happening at your clocks would be to run multiple of the same bench and post that.

The key with overclocking your vram is finding the highest stable clock before you begin losing performance. (as supposed to when you see artifacts or crash a bench)

I would recommend heaven but heaven is so weird and unpredictable.

 

[cannondale06]

This must vary wildly by card. Mine posts higher and higher bench results until ~6970 and then it artifacts and crashes after that. I use 6700 normally though. btw I think you meant 3400 (or 6800).

I'm going to throw out a total WAG here: if one of the gpu mem chips is lackluster compared to the rest, then crc kicks in and saves the day but gives the slower results due to retry. For similar gpu mem chips that start throwing errors around the same speed, everything is fine and then the wall is hit with crashes. I'm going to guess that the latter may be more common.

no I meant 6400 because I saw a couple of reviews that could only get just over 6400.

 

[Blkout]

Your ram may be fine, however what would need to be done to prove that your ram is running well at the speeds your indicating youd need to run a bench a few times at your current speed and them lowering it a bit e.g.

7500mhz
7000mhz
6750mhz
6500mhz

The GDDR5 ram will not artifact easily and will dynamically relax it's internal timing to prevent errors and artifacts. If canondale is right your benchmark results would show that you are actually losing performance at 7500 than on 7000, or the below #s.

At a certain point on the ram you still may be able to bench it but the ram may be dynamically relaxing it's timings and making you lose performance. The only way to prove/debunk this happening at your clocks would be to run multiple of the same bench and post that.

The key with overclocking your vram is finding the highest stable clock before you begin losing performance. (as supposed to when you see artifacts or crash a bench)

I would recommend heaven but heaven is so weird and unpredictable.

I swear I've stated already in this thread and others that I've already benched it at 100MHz increments, it shows gains all the way up to 7500 where I start to have stability issues. Heaven isn't consistent but I've seen gains at every 100MHz increment starting at 6400MHz all the way up to 7500MHz in Metro 2033 and 3DMark11. I get a 200 point increase going from 6800MHz to 7500MHz in 3DMark11 on Extreme settings. Considering even a few points matters at the Extreme setting that's pretty significant when you're talking total scores in the 3K-4K range.

I appreciate your help, but honestly, this isn't my first picnic and I know what I'm doing and I hope I'm not sounding arrogant in saying all of this but I've already done everything you stated. Maybe this memory is just very unusual or is over-volted slightly on this card, I sure can't explain it. I honestly don't care about any bragging rights, just happy that my 670 does what I want it to do and was pretty fun to overclock as well.

 

[cannondale06]

I swear I've stated already in this thread and others that I've already benched it at 100MHz increments, it shows gains all the way up to 7500 where I start to have stability issues. Heaven isn't consistent but I've seen gains at every 100MHz increment starting at 6400MHz all the way up to 7500MHz in Metro 2033 and 3DMark11. I get a 200 point increase going from 6800MHz to 7500MHz in 3DMark11 on Extreme settings. Considering even a few points matters at the Extreme setting that's pretty significant when you're talking total scores in the 3K-4K range.

I appreciate your help, but honestly, this isn't my first picnic and I know what I'm doing and I hope I'm not sounding arrogant in saying all of this but I've already done everything you stated. Maybe this memory is just very unusual or is over-volted slightly on this card, I sure can't explain it. I honestly don't care about any bragging rights, just happy that my 670 does what I want it to do and was pretty fun to overclock as well.

well scaling well to 7500 is basically unheard of so of course most people are going to be skeptical.

 

[Blkout]

well scaling well to 7500 is basically unheard of so of course most people are going to be skeptical.

And I completely understand that. I'm not bragging at all, I'm humble and don't care if this card has some crazy memory other than its just a great performer. I wasnt ever really trying to brag about it. Someone mentioned their 680 overclocked better than my 670 and I simply stated that was true on the core, but not on the memory. All of these 680's and 670's are so new that I didn't realize mine was THAT far out of the norm. I haven't had as much time as I would like to scour the internet to see what others are getting, but I've seen some reviews showing 6800-7000 range so I just figured mine was slightly better than the review samples. Many people have reported artifacts when they push their memory too far. I haven't gone above 7600 but I wasn't getting any artifacts at that speed either, it just simply wouldn't complete Heaven loops after about 30 minutes so I backed it down to 7500'ish(7516) and it runs anything I throw at it and the benches confirm improvements over any speed less than 7500.

I'm really not trying to come off like an ass so I hope no one gets that impression. I know its outside of the norm and this is THE INTERNET where people claim to be Superman everyday. Like I said, I don't mine posting screens, but it will probably have to be tomorrow now, its late here and I spent a good bit of my night with my son so I don't have time to run benches and post screens tonight. Will gladly do it tomorrow though if anyone wants to see them. Just let me know what you want to see.

 

[Lord_Exodia]

And I completely understand that. I'm not bragging at all, I'm humble and don't care if this card has some crazy memory other than its just a great performer. I wasnt ever really trying to brag about it. Someone mentioned their 680 overclocked better than my 670 and I simply stated that was true on the core, but not on the memory. All of these 680's and 670's are so new that I didn't realize mine was THAT far out of the norm. I haven't had as much time as I would like to scour the internet to see what others are getting, but I've seen some reviews showing 6800-7000 range so I just figured mine was slightly better than the review samples. Many people have reported artifacts when they push their memory too far. I haven't gone above 7600 but I wasn't getting any artifacts at that speed either, it just simply wouldn't complete Heaven loops after about 30 minutes so I backed it down to 7500'ish(7516) and it runs anything I throw at it and the benches confirm improvements over any speed less than 7500.

I'm really not trying to come off like an ass so I hope no one gets that impression. I know its outside of the norm and this is THE INTERNET where people claim to be Superman everyday. Like I said, I don't mine posting screens, but it will probably have to be tomorrow now, its late here and I spent a good bit of my night with my son so I don't have time to run benches and post screens tonight. Will gladly do it tomorrow though if anyone wants to see them. Just let me know what you want to see.

I believe you man, congrats. Maybe when they were building your batch they ran out of the 6000mhz rated ram and had some 7500mhz rated ram and used that instead. My ram wont go past 6900mhz on the card i currently have. My other card is in RMA at this time. Bad dvi port and weird issues where my pc wouldn't power on randomly with it.

 

[cannondale06]

I believe you man, congrats. Maybe when they were building your batch they ran out of the 6000mhz rated ram and had some 7500mhz rated ram and used that instead. My ram wont go past 6900mhz on the card i currently have. My other card is in RMA at this time. Bad dvi port and weird issues where my pc wouldn't power on randomly with it.

lol, there is no such thing as 7500mhz gddr5. the fastest made is 7000mhz but the fastest that's actually mass available is 6000mhz. so really right from the factory its running at its max guaranteed speed. not to mention the controller itself could be the high speed limitation anyway.

that sucks that you had issues with a brand new card but at least you have another one though.

 

[Blkout]

lol, there is no such thing as 7500mhz gddr5. the fastest made is 7000mhz but the fastest that's actually mass available is 6000mhz. so really right from the factory its running at its max guaranteed speed. not to mention the controller itself could be the high speed limitation anyway.

that sucks that you had issues with a brand new card but at least you have another one though.

Technically, no one should be able to get much over 6000 anway since that's memory's rated max speed, although with a little voltage like every other PC component, they should be able to do more. I don't know that anyone has actually checked the voltage on the memory chips on these cards yet but its possible that most of them are running slightly higher than spec which may explain why everyone is getting almost 800-1000MHz more than the rated speed. Maybe my memory just responded a bit better to the voltage than some others have, its really the only explanation I have to offer at this point.

 

[Forceman]

Or maybe the limiting factor for the memory speed isn't the memory chips themselves, but instead the memory controller (historically an issue for Nvidia). So maybe you just got a really good chip where the memory controller isn't holding you back as much as everyone else.

 

[Blkout]

Or maybe the limiting factor for the memory speed isn't the memory chips themselves, but instead the memory controller (historically an issue for Nvidia). So maybe you just got a really good chip where the memory controller isn't holding you back as much as everyone else.

Something certainly seems to be the case here. I've owned a lot of video cards over the years, I usually upgrade about once per year on average, I've had ATI and Nvidia and I've never had any cards that didn't fall into the average category for overclocking so I'm happy I finally got ONE in the last 18 years that exceeds the average and appears to be special.

 

[masterjin]

hmm to 670 or not to 670..... that is the question.

 

[b.larin27]

I order two GTX 670 to do SLI.
I will post my result

 

[Blkout]

hmm to 670 or not to 670..... that is the question.

LOL, it wasn't a question for me very long. I jumped.