GTX 680: Who's got one/Getting one? real world results

[fxscreamer]

I got the 7950 Sapphire OC and have no regrets. The thing is crazy quiet, and a huge overclocker. The 680 and 7900 series are neck and neck this generation, depending on the applications / games you use. It really comes down to what you prefer. If you don't believe me, check the reviews and benchmarks. I certainly have.

[jethro]

I got the 7950 Sapphire OC and have no regrets. The thing is crazy quiet, and a huge overclocker. The 680 and 7900 series are neck and neck this generation, depending on the applications / games you use. It really comes down to what you prefer. If you don't believe me, check the reviews and benchmarks. I certainly have.

No kidding?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5699/n...-680-review/20

at the end of the day it’s NVIDIA who once again takes the performance crown for the highest performing single-GPU card.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-29.html

NVIDIA’s newest flagship card is superior to the HD 7970 in almost every way.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-680-review/26

Performance wise it will beat the competitions Radeon HD 7970 in most cases with an exception here and there.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1881/20/

Our testing showed that this card did phenomenally well with DirectX 11 game titles and is currently the overall fastest graphics card for gaming.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/gra..._15.html#sect0

Nvidia’s response to AMD’s recent advances is quite a success. Based on the GK104 processor with the new Kepler architecture, the GeForce GTX 680 graphics card has proved to be somewhat faster than the AMD Radeon HD 7970 across all the tests.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...onclusion.html

The GTX 680 offers significant gaming and power enhancements over the last generation of NVIDIA cards and is priced very competitively against the 7970 which it regularly matches or exceeds in gaming.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...TX_680/32.html

When compared to AMD's $549 HD 7970, the GTX 680 is the clear winner. It offers better performance at similar power consumption and comes with more features.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...k,3161-20.html

.
Sometimes, when a new graphics card launches, we really have to put some effort into figuring out whether the performance and features justify the price. It’s not a science, and the right answer isn’t always crystal clear.

This is not one of those times.

GeForce GTX 680 is now the fastest single-GPU graphics card, and not by a margin that leaves room to hem or haw

Hmmm...that's odd. All the reviews I'm finding say the GTX680 kicks the 7970 in the stones, then stomps a mudhole in it's a**.

What reviews were you seeing that say 7970s are just as good? AMDZone?

[fxscreamer]

Weird,

This guy says quite differently, and he reviews the shit out of everything and doesn't cater to sponsors. Go to 26:30 minutes if you don't want to watch it all. Results don't lie. Also keep in mind, the benchmarks you're showing are based off reference cooler designs. Even my 7950 can easily surpass a stock 7970. I argue neck and neck in "real world" results. You're playing numbers and statistics. Just because the paper says it, doesn't it mean it's THAT much different. Is the 680 better on paper? Perhaps. Does it smash it in the field? I severely doubt it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8RZDPjMttY

The full review
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/g...tx680_review/1

[kbohip]

^^^I like how the guy in the video says it's a good time to be a gamer, but you better have the money! I honestly don't care which card is fastest between the 7970 and 680. Both share the same big problem for me, and that is their exorbitant price tags. I look forward to the next more budget oriented model Nvidia comes out with.

[fatlazyhomer]

Theres not really much new incentive to upgrade to the bleeding edge for those who havn't been religiously doing it before. The people who routinely bought 2-300$ cards will continue to buy 2-300$ cards. Unless you are one of the few using multi-monitor gaming or a big 30" LCD, you can crank up most visuals on 19x12 res with current generation cards on the most recent PC games.

[fxscreamer]

Theres not really much new incentive to upgrade to the bleeding edge for those who havn't been religiously doing it before. The people who routinely bought 2-300$ cards will continue to buy 2-300$ cards. Unless you are one of the few using multi-monitor gaming or a big 30" LCD, you can crank up most visuals on 19x12 res with current generation cards on the most recent PC games.

Well, the way I play it, is buy a really nice card that will last 2-3 years of solid high end gaming. Granted, the Radeon HD 7000 series is high priced, and might break that rule a bit, but generally it's not a bad idea to splurge for the long haul. I had a Nvidia 7800GT get me by for almost 4 years.

[Activate: AMD]

Weird,

This guy says quite differently, and he reviews the shit out of everything and doesn't cater to sponsors. Go to 26:30 minutes if you don't want to watch it all. Results don't lie. Also keep in mind, the benchmarks you're showing are based off reference cooler designs. Even my 7950 can easily surpass a stock 7970. I argue neck and neck in "real world" results. You're playing numbers and statistics. Just because the paper says it, doesn't it mean it's THAT much different. Is the 680 better on paper? Perhaps. Does it smash it in the field? I severely doubt it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8RZDPjMttY

The full review
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/g...tx680_review/1

don't feed the shill

Bottom line is that the 7970 and the 680 are neck-and-neck when both are overclocked to their potential. At stock the 680 is faster than the stock 7970, but both are capable of running high resolutions with lots of eye candy on in pretty much every game out there.

[PerfectShot]

My GTX285 is still doing well. 30 fps in BF3 at 1920x1200 - not sure what quality setting.

If I'd go 3D or start playing in surround, I'd be tempted to upgrade...


I think it's awesome that the GTX680 uses less power than my current card...
So far the little PSU of mine has been doing well...

[Parn]

Even though GTX680 is more power efficient than 7970 and priced lower, it's still too much for what I can afford. Waiting for GTX660.

[kbohip]

Even though GTX680 is more power efficient than 7970 and priced lower, it's still too much for what I can afford. Waiting for GTX660.

I wonder if the 680's will be in stock by then?

[Pehu]

In one thing the GTX680 does not really deliver and that is GPGPU processing. The GTX580 is actually usually the more powerful card compared to GTX680 and the 7970 pretty much (not in everything, but often with a quite wide margin) wipes the floor with both. Naturally GPGPU is a very trivial to the (great) majority of users and the Kepler GK100 is likely to deliver, but if you have to (and if you have a slight bias towards AMD, as I at the moment do ) find GTX680s weak point, this certainly is one of them.

[jethro]

In one thing the GTX680 does not really deliver and that is GPGPU processing. The GTX580 is actually usually the more powerful card compared to GTX680 and the 7970 pretty much (not in everything, but often with a quite wide margin) wipes the floor with both. Naturally GPGPU is a very trivial to the (great) majority of users and the Kepler GK100 is likely to deliver, but if you have to (and if you have a slight bias towards AMD, as I at the moment do ) find GTX680s weak point, this certainly is one of them.

As a person with a professed "slight bias toward AMD", can you tell buyers what you're doing with that GPGPU performance advantage that should make them want to pay more for it, and get less gaming performance, use more power, disperse more heat, listen to more noise, give up PhysX, give up TXAA, give up FXAA, give up adaptive vsynch, give up auto OCing, give up better 3d options, give up NVIDIA specific features like CUDA enhanced water in Just Cause 2, AA in Batman AA, and forcing ambient occlusion?

The only other "weak point" the GTX680 I can think of is gaming at resolutions higher than 57X12, and as there is probably up one gamer per state doing this I'll give you that one. (and note 4GB GTX680 models will end that very very small advantage in the next few weeks accoring to rumor)

[kbohip]

Who cares how great the 680 is. The fact remains that no one can buy it as it's in stock no where!

[jethro]

Who cares how great the 680 is. The fact remains that no one can buy it as it's in stock no where!

People are buying them every day, there's just a lot more people who want them so they go fast.

[Pehu]

As a person with a professed "slight bias toward AMD", can you tell buyers what you're doing with that GPGPU performance advantage that should make them want to pay more for it, and get less gaming performance, use more power, disperse more heat, listen to more noise, give up PhysX, give up TXAA, give up FXAA, give up adaptive vsynch, give up auto OCing, give up better 3d options, give up NVIDIA specific features like CUDA enhanced water in Just Cause 2, AA in Batman AA, and forcing ambient occlusion?

Obviously my bias is not as strong as yours.