Official GeForce GTX 680 Review and Discussion thread

[Muppet]

Nvidia recommends: minimum 550watts, with 38amps on the 12volt rail.

[Muppet]

Originally Posted by slaWter

Sounds great! Maybe it's because you gained 0.5GB with these. Glad you like the cards

Yes, after all the hassle with Skyrim, I just did an integrity check of the files and that fixed it.

I also found out the issue with the 4th monitor, you need to connect it with Displayport or HDMI. That is if you are using Surround on the first 3 monitors. Otherwise it can be any connection you want if it's 4 individuals you using. There is a bug in the drivers, that won't allow Displayport to work with surround, but HDMI works ok. Nvidia knows and are working on a fix.

As for the cards, I love them.

[john19055]

If this is there low end chip the GK110 should be a monster.But my GTX 470's still have at least another year in them or longer ,and since I have three ,I can go to TRI-SLI when needed since I just game at 1920x1080.But the GTX 680 was more then I excepted since it is a GK104 chip supposed to be a midrange card,The GK110 should be out by the holidays and it should put the hammer down since the GK104 is a midrange chip or at least it used to be.

[RollinThundr]

Originally Posted by Muppet

Nvidia recommends: minimum 550watts, with 38amps on the 12volt rail.

Thank you for the info, I'm going to upgrade the 750 watt I have now before getting one of these cards. I think my machine is underpowered due to led's and a lit front panel. Since I am consistently getting the lovely "display driver has crashed and has been restarted" crap off and on no matter what card is in the system or what Nvidia drivers I use.

[GitDat]

I thought I read in one of these threads (can't find it now) that there was a way to boost the FPS on the middle screen while lowering the FPS on the 2 side screens in Surround. Is that true?

[Johnny C]

Originally Posted by K007

http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/Review/2...he-labs.aspx/2

"The Boost technology – in order to function effectively – needs to process data every few milliseconds and adjust core voltage and clock instantly to reduce any “lag” between clock changes and greater demand from the user. If they only updated clocks every few seconds, the experience would be rather clunky to say the least. As you can probably guess, changing core voltage and clock every few milliseconds while trying to benchmark at a 40% overclock isn’t really helping anyone. For that reason alone, this card is sure to fail at extreme level overclocking, and arguably for some amateur overclockers.

For our sample, 1215MHz seemed to be all that we were able to boost to with any sort of reliability issues. This equates to a 159MHz overclock, past the default 1056MHz ceiling, and to be honest it isn’t really worth the hassle. Power draw goes up roughly 25 per cent to 45W, while performance only rose 1-10% over a range of applications. This removes most of the power advantage the GTX 680 has over the HD7970, and performs far worse than the latter when both are overclocked."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...d,3162-11.html

"Overall, it’s pretty easy to see that AMD’s Radeon HD 7970 has more to gain from an aggressive overclock than Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 680."

"The other conclusion to fairly easily draw is that Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 680 sees much of its headroom exposed by GPU Boost already, leaving less on the table for overclocking."

For me..my next upgrade has to be a GTX680..unless ATI drops its price down before the end of the week..it makes no sense to get a 7970

Good info.

I'm waiting 2 weeks to see if AMD prices drop, if not....I'm getting a 680. It will be the last upgrade for this rig. Next rig will regretfully be an Intel based one.

[Muppet]

An overclocking guide. Nice performance increase.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforc...rclock-guide/1

Originally Posted by GitDat

I thought I read in one of these threads (can't find it now) that there was a way to boost the FPS on the middle screen while lowering the FPS on the 2 side screens in Surround. Is that true?

Yes, that is what I have read to.

[ViN86]

Originally Posted by K007

http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/Review/2...he-labs.aspx/2

"The Boost technology – in order to function effectively – needs to process data every few milliseconds and adjust core voltage and clock instantly to reduce any “lag” between clock changes and greater demand from the user. If they only updated clocks every few seconds, the experience would be rather clunky to say the least. As you can probably guess, changing core voltage and clock every few milliseconds while trying to benchmark at a 40% overclock isn’t really helping anyone. For that reason alone, this card is sure to fail at extreme level overclocking, and arguably for some amateur overclockers.

For our sample, 1215MHz seemed to be all that we were able to boost to with any sort of reliability issues. This equates to a 159MHz overclock, past the default 1056MHz ceiling, and to be honest it isn’t really worth the hassle. Power draw goes up roughly 25 per cent to 45W, while performance only rose 1-10% over a range of applications. This removes most of the power advantage the GTX 680 has over the HD7970, and performs far worse than the latter when both are overclocked."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...d,3162-11.html

"Overall, it’s pretty easy to see that AMD’s Radeon HD 7970 has more to gain from an aggressive overclock than Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 680."

"The other conclusion to fairly easily draw is that Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 680 sees much of its headroom exposed by GPU Boost already, leaving less on the table for overclocking."

For me..my next upgrade has to be a GTX680..unless ATI drops its price down before the end of the week..it makes no sense to get a 7970

Yea if AMD doesn't drop the price then there's no advantage. If they could sneak in under the 680 at the $450 mark, the OC headroom allows it to pull ahead of the 680. But at $550, it's a no-brainer for the 680.

[Johnny C]

Originally Posted by ViN86

Yea if AMD doesn't drop the price then there's no advantage. If they could sneak in under the 680 at the $450 mark, the OC headroom allows it to pull ahead of the 680. But at $550, it's a no-brainer for the 680.

@$425 or even $450 the 7970 is the winnar......it just fails @ 550

[i SPY]

well it sucks in cuda-z as expected.. I just saw this over at overclock.net


http://www.overclock.net/t/1232473/o...#post_16833215

Btw it has 1.98tflops and not ~3tflops heh, looks like that Samaritan will run without a problem on mine too, ok at 950mhz (1.81tflops)..:P



vs my Oc'ed 570 @ 965mhz


stock still faster in other 3..

[Fotis]

Gainward Geforce GTX680 Phantom
GPU Clockspeed : 1150 MHz (boost) / 1084 MHz (base)
Memory Clockspeed : 3150 MHz (DDR6300)
6 phase pwm
DrMOS

[Fotis]

Indeed very good review.Some things just can't be measured simply by quoting min or avg frames.