Kepler Unveiled: Nvidia's GTX 680 Benchmarked In-Depth!

81

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Neckername

I think that the reference design is great, they are finally going for efficiency instead of just pulling a ****-load of power to get performance. I see AMD going the other way which is ironic. Anyways, it is too early to tell who will be the king for this generation of cards. nvidia will most likely release an updated chip sometime later on (ex: A GTX 685, or something like that). As for now, it is obvious AMD still has the crown, as 3rd parties have been able to develop OC'd cards. It has always been like this, so nVidia fan-boys, stop crying, you guys released later (as always) and have the advantage of improving where AMD has had their faults. AMD fan-boys, stop whining, just because they have a minuscule frame rate advantage doesn't mean the cards are better. Remember benchmarks vary by system as well. I think this will be an interesting GPU generation, many new features coming to light here, this will be the best generation of DX11 GPUs by far, in terms of innovation!

avatar

PhuxAche

Give this n00b a gold star for being an "attempted" NerD who, well, really knows nothing about nothing. In fact, I'm gonna give you three ***

avatar

PhuxAche

The GK110 is the next chip. Hello?! And yes it's a single GTX685 with a dual soon after called the GTX690. EVGA has a superclocked already. As for raw power, I go where it is whether it's AMD or Nvid. Who care who holds the lead. It's like everything else in life.

avatar

Watson Harlan

Stop this BS right now, if I look at the comments and all I see is meh, it was evenly matched, you didn't read.
1)more power efficiency
2)Standard 680 vs. SUPERCLOCKED 7970 isn't a fair match, that is comparing a standard with a boosted version of the 7970.
3)This is not GK110, not the big gun. So stop acting like AMD still has the crown, the king got dethroned by the non- flagship GPU, you imbeciles.
4)saying that the cards are evenly matched when it was beaten in almost all of the benchmarks is like saying I tied you in a race, but came in second.
That is all.

avatar

PhuxAche

Put the dummy back in and give this guy rattle, and change his nappy/diaper. It stinks. It's clear to see you're an Nvidia Fanboy. Dry your eyes sunshine.

If Nvid had priced this at the mid-range price it SHOULD HAVE been, then I can see where you're coming from. Unfortunately, the robbing barstewards once again fleece their loyal punters with the ridiculous price tag for a MID.RANGE.CARD. Hello?!?!?!

So, after you've had your nappy (diaper) changed, had some milk, and got a tasty new dummy, then we might listen to ya haha!

avatar

Watson Harlan

I will give you credit that that my comment was not an appropriate response, but if it performs better, is already cheaper and has a smaller power draw, they have a right to demand that much for it.

avatar

Watson Harlan

I like how it is still better than a more expensive card, and you want it to be cheaper.

avatar

PhuxAche

Watson, the GTX680 was supposed to be a GTX670, which technically, it is. This was the "Entry Level" Card. However, the card performed beyond Nvid's expectations, therefore, Nvid "upped" the card to a GTX680 and charged the price of a High End card. It's. Just. Not. Right.
This is my argument. Robbery is the word I'd use in this instance. Daylight Robbery!

If you want to utterly kick sand in the competitors face, then this was the card to do it, BUT at the right price, and I mean the mid-range-price. It's never been done before, and Nvidia missed that opportunity. Twats!

avatar

Chronologist

Just because it isn't the big Kepler, it deserves the same cost simply because it's on par with the 7970. I'd imagine that when a GK110 comes out, the prices would adjust accordingly. Additionally, they have been having yield issues with their 28nm process, so its understandable they price it in the 500 dollar range.

avatar

PhuxAche

Welcome to Nvidia's GTX680. A mid range GPU, over-priced. Ok, the GPU performed better than thye expected, but no need for a Mid Range GPU and High End GPU price. Unfortunately, I've been with Nvid since the demise of the ATi9800 Pro. AMD/ATi are getting stronger with each GPU release. Nvid, you really REALLY are taking the piss this time. Lower your GTX680 price, and be a formidable contender.. if only....!!

avatar

JohnP

How about a 50% speed bump for only $100 more? BIG KEPLER coming this summer.. Meantime, I will just have to get along with my GTX580s...

avatar

PhuxAche

Yea, I'm waiting for the GK110. But I am just annoyed with the way Nvid has priced this card. It's not on. The GK110 I'd happily pay the GTX680 price no sweat. I wouldn't pay anymore. AMD is giving Nvid a run for their money and they are getting better. I really don't understand Nvid's economics, tactics, and competitiveness. If they'd sold the 680 at a mid range price, they'd be onto a winner. But no! They got surprising results, and bumped the price up thinking we'd be non the wiser. Lol.

avatar

americaeh

Fix in the main article 2nd paragraph under the first comparison where Kepler is claimed to have a 15w idle.

avatar

Neckername

They might have actually mistaken that for the idle wattage difference, the amount that the idle power savings feature saves. On average the Radeon HD 7000 series cards have around 10W, so 15W savings should be about right for these cards.

avatar

turbogamer1000

meh, can get performance that is good enough for me from a $260 7850, but the 600 series looks promising

avatar

Bonefish

User
Bonefish
Intel Core i7-2700K Processor
Processor clock
4589 MHz
Physical / logical processors
1 / 4
# of cores
4
Graphics Card
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680
Vendor
EVGA Corporation
# of cards
1
SLI / CrossFire
Off
Memory
2048 MB
Core clock
705 MHz
Memory clock
3004 MHz
Driver name
Driver version
8.17.13.110
Driver status
Not FM Approved
Graphics Card (Secondary)
General
Operating system
64-bit Windows 7 (6.1.7601)
Motherboard
ASRock Z68 Extreme7 Gen3
Memory
16384 MB
Module 1
4096 MB Corsair 9 @ 667 MHz
Module 2
4096 MB Corsair 9 @ 667 MHz
Module 3
4096 MB Corsair 9 @ 667 MHz
Module 4
4096 MB Corsair 9 @ 667 MHz
Hard drive model
120GB OCZ-AGILITY3 ATA Device
Detailed scores
3DMark Score
P9121
Graphics Score
9453
Physics Score
8752
Combined Score
7604
GraphicsTest1
44.87 FPS
GraphicsTest2
44.27 FPS
GraphicsTest3
58.03 FPS
GraphicsTest4
28.4 FPS
PhysicsTest
27.79 FPS
CombinedTest
35.37 FPS

avatar

Fray

I'd like to see more emphasis placed on sound levels. A maximum PC should be quiet as well as fast when it is performing most of the functions that it's used for (gaming, internet, movies, word processing).

I'm prepared to sacrifice a few frames per second for quieter components. At the high levels of speed nowadays it's better to play with 15 less fps to have a computer that doesn't sound like a chainsaw.

Whenever I'm evaluating components for a new system I find myself scrabbling around trying to work out how many decibels each brand of graphics card puts out.

It would be great to see comparison tables that show the quietest/fastest/best featured cards for each generation.

avatar

aferrara50

watercool then you don't have to worry. You have silence when you want it and performance when you need it.

avatar

Fray

That may be the best idea, but my image of water-cooling is that it's a fiddly and dangerous business.

I don't want to do much maintenance on the PC once it's built, other than opening it up to vacuum inside now and then.

From reading reviews over the years I have the notion that water-cooling means having to deal with dripping pipes, corrosion, and the rare but intermittent destruction of the other PC components.

And that you have to regularly flush the system and replace the gunk.

There are also the closed system liquid coolers, which are surely an easier proposition. I just had a look at some of the reviews on this site, but some of these coolers look as if they have fans attached. How noisy are they? The reviews don't say. In fact on the review of the Corsair Hydro Series H60 I see someone else has commented that it would be nice to read the relative decibel levels.

I want to be able to compare the noise levels along with features, prices and efficiency.

avatar

aferrara50

All-in-one cooler are a waste of money. Shouldn't even be considered watercooling. I'm going to have to disagree with the maintenance and danger issue. Both are only applicable to poorly built and cheaper systems. I have two very high end watercooling setups ($2500 and $4200 on just cooling parts alone) and never had a leak that wasn't caused by manufacturer product defect (in which parts were replaced by the manufacturer for free). My current build has 42 possible "weak points", places where the fittings seal to blocks, and guess what? It's never leaked, but I did spend hours upon hours making sure everything was perfect and absolutely nothing was skimped on. Gunk doesn't happen unless you use cheap dyes and mix dies with biocides. I use a filtration system where I pop out the filter once every six months. Water never has to be changed and is as crystal clear as the day I put it in, and I don't use biocides. It is impossible for a system on air/ all-in-one watercooling system to have the same performance. It just can't dissipate the heat. My build log may change ur mind http://www.overclock.net/t/1001892/work-log-project-liquid-death-back-on-track-dream-machine-build/0_20

avatar

Fray

Thanks for your helpful and detailed reply. It sounds like you have two great computers and better cooling than the standard air cooling systems. On the other hand, your reply confirms me in thinking that water-cooling is not for the likes of me. I do want a quiet machine, but I can't justify paying the sums you mention for reliable cooling.

avatar

poee

+1

avatar

hades_2100

My situation exactly.

avatar

logicmaster2003

still now good enough to run STALKER (40fps max)

avatar

UrbanSmooth

[img]http://i829.photobucket.com/albums/zz215/UrbanSmooth/Kanye_GTX_780.jpg[/img]

:D

avatar

SPreston2001

Im not sure what you guys are reading but the 680 clearly beats the 7970. Not by much but it is the better card. And wait until the drivers mature, the the 680 will really start to pull away from the 7970. Plus the 680 is only a GK104 chip wait until the King Kong GK110 drops...

avatar

damicatz

Well unless you care about compute performance (which you should if you ever want GPU physics to take off).

I mean, it's not even a contest. Comparing the 7970 to the 680 in compute performance is like comparing Speedy Gonzales to Slowpoke Rodriguez. In SmallLux, even the 560TI gives the 680 a run for the money.

avatar

JohnP

ONCE AGAIN, The GTX680 is NOT BIG KEPLER. The compute performance is not optimized on this chipset, that will be done for the GTX685 (just like the GTX580 compute performance is much better than the other cards in the family).

avatar

Nimrod

What a massive disappointment. Looks like nvidia is really behind now. Their new card isnt any better than AMDs cards when their both OCed and AMD has already been talking about their next release.

avatar

SPreston2001

Disappointment?? The 680 beats the 7970 in almost every benchmark, and its cheaper!! Whats to be disappointed about?? I hope your not a AMD fanboy...

avatar

JohnP

Err, read my post below. This is NOT NVidia's best single GPU card, it is just what they have released SO FAR. Whenever they want, NVidia can release the big gun, the GTX685, that will completely swamp AMD's 7970 and come damn close to the dual core 7990. Don't count NVidia out yet.
Another point is that this is the release version of NVidia's drivers for the card. With AMD having a large head start, their drivers are more mature (if that can ever be said of AMD drivers, heh).

avatar

damicatz

And exactly how much will the GTX685 cost?

I mean, the GTX680 is supposedly a "mid range" card and it costs $500.

avatar

JohnP

Current rumor is $650 for the GTX685.

avatar

Nimrod

Oh really? yeah, yeah. Oh ok then. Well that means there "next top card" is in the same god damn place it was on the first day AMD released their cards, no where to be seen. Doesnt do very much good to people like me who needed a new card back then or even now does it? Huh.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/asus-gtx-680-2gb-overclocking-review-win-some-lose-some/15322-5.html

Doesnt look like i missed much. How much longer should i have waited? How much more money would I have to spend? I bet AMD made a killing waiting for nVidia to show back up. Now that their here, theres nothing to gain. Yeah you will get higher performance EVENTUALLY, if you wait even longer and then spend more money again. Then again, you could just wait for the next gen AMD cards that will of course be leagues ahead of what ever Titanium or ULTRA card nVidia puts out in the next months.

avatar

aferrara50

The GK 110 gpu is going to end up being $649 while the dual gk 104 will be $999. I'm waiting for the gk110 chip since 680s won't be such an enormous visible upgrade. It's really not that much money considering the rigs these higher end gpus are tailored to go in. What's $649 x 3 or 4 when you've already spend $8,000 on a rig? Not really much of a difference.

avatar

JohnP

Same, waiting for the GTX 685 (GK110) cards...

avatar

kiaghi7

Actually, not to really give either one a real "nod" until the products are in machines in my vicinity and drivers can really come out to "settle them in"...

The 680 stats are specifically noted at reference, the XFX7970 is actually a super-clocked card out of the box.

Previous benchmarks against earlier GTX580's that were OC'd as well yielded very comparable results, often within single digits.

The reference spec of the 680 being able to edge out a super-clocked XGX7970 in most of the tests is very arguably a stronger showing given that the 680 still has some room to be overclocked or "super clocked" (translation: overclocked more) like the XFX product.

Now, for anyone to pretend like it's some OMG IT BLEW OUT THE COMPETITION! Sort of showing, no, just like the overclocked 7970 is just barely able to edge out the 580 for the top crown prior to today, the reference 680 is able to edge out the OC'd 7970.

With the potential for overclocking in the future, the 680 not only has the reference crown, it has the potential for tomorrow as well since the 7970 is already overclocked in this match up and still loses out, albeit by a small and very arguably irrelevant margin.

If you want pure bragging rights, the 680 has them right now, to pretend otherwise is not being intellectually honest, a reference spec 680 is showing the overclocked 7970 how the job is done, and with less power consumption.

Nvidia's current offering is well ahead, but this also isn't the final word in the matter either. AMD is going to turn around and respec their highest-end offerings to aim for the watermark that Nvidia has struck, to which Nvidia will also reply to... That's what makes it a competition.

What should be taken away from this however is that AMD pretty much had their behinds handed to them last generation, so they HAD to respond this year, and be the first to swing for the fence. As with the original review of the XFX7970, while a very powerful card, the very latest and greatest of AMD's lineup, overclocked right out of the box yet having mostly single digit boosts over a previous generation's overclocked 580 Classified wasn't the grand-slam they were hoping for, particularly in the light that they were comparable in price.

If AMD is going to answer this latest release from Nvidia, that can do as well as an overclocked 7970 while the 680 is still at reference level specs, they (AMD) are going to have to up their own reference design to be their new flagship card.

Sadly the 7970 can only be pushed but so hard, so perhaps a new reference from AMD, like "7980" or some such thing could be cobbled together with a bit more "umph" at the base level reference design that could slug it out with the 680 directly, and still have room to OC left like the 680 tested has.

avatar

biggiebob12345

I don't see AMD managing to get a "7980" out of the door. It seems like AMD doesn't hold anything back in their releases except for a dual gpu card. NV does the exact opposite and will do Ti versions, "Core 104" versions, extra memory versions, etc. Plus there's the elephant in the room in that the 680 is more like their 670 and GK110 will be the real 680.

This situation also seems like the 680 is the 8800 GTS and GK110 will be the 8800 GTX Ultra. The prices especially are very similar.

avatar

aferrara50

nvidia seems to be doing something similar to the 200 series here. If I recall the gtx285 was a better chip than the gtx 275 and 295, the 297 just being 2x 275s smushed together at first.

avatar

biggiebob12345

You're completely wrong. The stock 680 is on par with an overclocked 7970. The 680 also costs $50 less than the 7970. What were you expecting from the 680? A free BJ coupon with every purchase?

avatar

kiaghi7

THEY CAN DO THAT!?!

I'll take two please! :D

avatar

imagonex

I like the power efficiency of these new cards. Any choice to buy the same or better performance at a lower wattage is an improvement in my books.

avatar

JohnP

No wonder there was not a lot of news about the GTX680 here. MPC obviously had a card with a big fat NDA (non disclosure agreement) sitting over their heads. Good review, Lloyd (but fix the heading, Kepler is misspelled).

avatar

JohnP

(repost)
One thing that Lloyd did not mention is that the NVidia GTX680 is NOT the top end single GPU from NVidia. That honor will go to the NVidia GTX685 to be released sometime soon (NVidia is finally getting better yields on the Kepler 28 nm chips). The GTX685 will be a lot more powerful than the GTX680. Rumor on the web is an April release but strictly a rumor...

The GTX680 is based on the GK104 family of chipsets. The high end Kepler is the GK685 and will have the GK100 ( 100 better than 104, don't ask me...) chipset. There is a substantial bump in CUDA cores (50%) and 3DMark11 performance goes from X3000 to X4500. Benchmarks for the GTX680 does indeed show a 3DMark11 score of 3,165. If that holds true, then the GTX685 might well reach 4,500+ (compared to AMD 7970's score of 2,670). That is a hel'of'a bump in performance!
Now for the bad news. The retail value of the GTX685 will be around $700 (still, the GTX680 price is below what what was expected). For the extra performance per dollar, it might be a good deal.

avatar

thetechchild

I'm more looking forward to a lower-end card based on the same tech. It'd be amazing to have a ~$250 mid-range card that rivals some of AMD's best offerings, and has much lower TDP. The power draw, plus the performance gap and lower pricing, are a very enticing combo. If that can be applied to a mid-range card, nVidia will sell a mountain of cards before AMD manages to catch up.

Of course, if AMD decides to race and push out an even faster card with competitive pricing/TDP, then things only get better.

avatar

JohnP

Heh, rumors coming thick and fast. The GTX 690 will be the dual chip equivalent of the GTX 680 and is planning to be released in May. No rumor yet of cost, rumored specs are here (330 Watt draw -that will be be impressive):
http://videocardz.com/nvidia/geforce-600/geforce-gtx-690

avatar

aferrara50

There is rumor of cost for the whole series already. It will sit at $999 as expected with the 685 at $649

The naming on this scale chart is obviously wrong since the current 680 falls in at the 660 mark. All other specs seem to be right on

http://videocardz.com/30528/kepler-gk-110-details-leaks-out-geforce-600-series-spefication-overview

avatar

bpstone

I thought it was August this year?

avatar

JohnP

Yeah, August sounds more like it. I think I got on some fanboy site, no reason for NVidia to release so soon. I also have a LOT of stuff wrong in my post (which I lost edit privileges dammit).
The GTX 685 (name still up in the air) is the GK 110 chipset (not the 100). The release date is sometime in the summer. The cost is going to be around $650.
http://videocardz.com/31126/geforce-kepler-gk110-specification

avatar

EthicSlave

the rumor is as follows:
gtx685 - GK110
Die - up to 550mm squared
CUDA/cores - 2304
4.5Tflops
250-300watts
6billion transistor count

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.