Nvidia Kepler - Geforce GTX680 Thread - Now with reviews

It's weird when you think about it, considering how GPU intensive it seems to be. But it's probably the most CPU limited game around. :\

Just gotta turn on that Ubersampling. :)

Still, I wouldn't worry too much about 80fps with a stock Sandy Bridge CPU. I'm sure there will be many GPU limited areas in the game, and I'm sure that 680 will still drop below 60fps plenty. At least, that's what I'd assume. No way to know without testing it out. Maybe I'll get around to it some day.
 
Who honestly owns a stock clocked (K series) Sandy Bridge chip and is going to purchase a GTX680?

Sandy Bridge OC is like 2 settings in the bios and you're good to go. Heck my 2500k runs at 4.5GHz undervolted.

Waiting on these to be back in stock should be a massive upgrade over this clunker HD5830.
 
Man... got some good news tonight. I might be grabbing a GTX 680 in the near-future for dirt cheap. It's so cheap I'll probably get lynched if I post the price.

So looks I'll be getting dat Kepler sooner rather than later. And if I'm lucky, I may get a 2nd one for dirt cheap 'cause I kinda like SLI (Don't tell Hawk269 or Smokey).
 
Oh okay.

I think a 680 purchase right now would be a little premature. Currently there are no games out that require a 680 unless you're really determined to ubersample on Witcher 2.

Of course, I'm saying all this with a 1920 by 1080 resolution in mind, which is what I'm rocking for the next few years.

I'm hoping my 570 will last me for a few years before I get a 7xx series card.

My Core i7 2600 is not a bottleneck for now but I feel kind of bad for not getting a 2600k. Overclocking doesn't seem to work well on my processor.

That might be true for most gamers but I want to play in 3D so 680 would be worth getting over 570/580.
 
I thought nvidia's non-GeForce cards (e.g. Quadro) have a different drivers, which are not optimized for gaming, right? So even if the hardware isn't gimped for gaming, the drivers might make it so.
You can install GeForce drivers on Quadros and vice versa with a customized INF file. Quadros aren't meant for GPU compute markets btw, professional graphics workloads are closer to gaming workloads than GPU compute. I think that we'll see Quadros on GK104 soon.

On a separate note, I wonder if all these people saying "I'll wait for GK110" realize that it's going to be priced well above the 680 (currently at $500 for 2GB reference cards). What price range do you expect a GK110 GeForce (if nvidia releases one) will come at? I know it depends on when nvidia releases it (this year vs next year), and also on whether AMD puts up a good fight or not... but I'm interested in what $from-$to range would be expected.
$499. GK104 has a shitload of room for a price cuts. With 28nm getting better it's only natural to push GK104 lower (as 760 cards for example) and put GK110 on its current price points.

Witcher 2 is CPU limited.
That's on 590 though which has a much higher CPU overhead as all dual chip AFR cards do.
 
Huh? Kepler is arguably the most significant change in NV GPU architecture since G80.
Umm.. no.
Fermi was the new chip after G80, kepler is the 'upgrade' although they did some interesting changes to compute side.

Maxwell will be the new architecture and will bring 'DX12' compability.
 
Umm.. no.
Fermi was the new chip after G80, kepler is the 'upgrade' although they did some interesting changes to compute side.
What are you basing this on? If you look at the architecture going from G80 to Fermi doesn't seem like a larger difference than going from that to Kepler. The former introduces more changes in the geometry pipeline, but the latter completely changes the type and design of the processing elements that take up the majority of the chip.
 
Oh okay.

I think a 680 purchase right now would be a little premature. Currently there are no games out that require a 680 unless you're really determined to ubersample on Witcher 2.

Of course, I'm saying all this with a 1920 by 1080 resolution in mind, which is what I'm rocking for the next few years.

I'm hoping my 570 will last me for a few years before I get a 7xx series card.

My Core i7 2600 is not a bottleneck for now but I feel kind of bad for not getting a 2600k. Overclocking doesn't seem to work well on my processor.

My 570 isn't enough for many games at 1080p, 60fps. For the majority of games it's fine, but there are still several games that need to be toned down to get that 60fps mark (Crysis 2, The Witcher 2, Battlefield 3, Anno 2070, Shogun 2, Metro 2033).
 
That was my expectation judging from the chip and the board (which I assume you hadn't seen until 22th of March). I can't be responsible for marketoids at NVIDIA getting greedy at some point between December and March. GK104 was made to sell at GF114 price range. It was called GTX 670 Ti for some time even. Blame AMD's failure with GCN for it selling as GTX 680 at $499 now.

Doesn't matter, dr_noob. Similar results will occur from a 680 or SLI cards as well, I'm sure. I'll test it for myself soon enough.
Riiight. And while you're waiting why don't you listen to a "noob" with the card?
 
That was my expectation judging from the chip and the board (which I assume you hadn't seen until 22th of March). I can't be responsible for marketoids at NVIDIA getting greedy at some point between December and March. GK104 was made to sell at GF114 price range. It was called GTX 670 Ti for some time even. Blame AMD's failure with GCN for it selling as GTX 680 at $499 now.


Riiight. And while you're waiting why don't you listen to a "noob" with the card?

Doesn't matter if you have the card or not. You have not posted any benchmarks disproving whether Witcher 2 is CPU limited with 680 vs GTX 590. Your appeal to authority is a lame logical fallacy which falls flat on its face.
 
Is there such a thing as being meaningfully CPU limited in a high-end PC gaming scenario though? At least as long as you're not rendering at 8xSGSSAA, just increase the IQ. I guarantee you'll be GPU limited in no time.
 
Is there such a thing as being meaningfully CPU limited in a high-end PC gaming scenario though? At least as long as you're not rendering at 8xSGSSAA, just increase the IQ. I guarantee you'll be GPU limited in no time.

Yes, there is, depending on the engine. Look at Skyrim before Skyboost/1.4 patch... CPU dictated the threshold for performance. Witcher 2 benchmarks showing that maximum performance even at Ultra with 1200p resolution depending on CPU power indicates that the engine/game needs high end CPU power to perform at max. I think I'm going to install it and test with 1 card vs 2 and 3.3 Ghz 2500k vs 4.5 ghz 2500k.
 
That was my expectation judging from the chip and the board (which I assume you hadn't seen until 22th of March). I can't be responsible for marketoids at NVIDIA getting greedy at some point between December and March. GK104 was made to sell at GF114 price range. It was called GTX 670 Ti for some time even. Blame AMD's failure with GCN for it selling as GTX 680 at $499 now.
Let me requote you.
This is my expectation going from the data about GK104 that I have. It may cost as high as $349.
Clearly your data was wrong. I wouldnt be shocked if your data on GK110 (which is already sketchy) isnt wrong either.
 
Come on guys.

Everything is all speculation at one point or another heard from other sources from other sources. Especially in an industry that changes as quickly as this one, there's no reason to be so uppity about someone who wants to contribute to the discussion even if their sources ended up being incorrect this time.
 
Come on guys.

Everything is all speculation at one point or another heard from other sources from other sources. Especially in an industry that changes as quickly as this one, there's no reason to be so standoffish about someone who wants to contribute to the discussion even if their sources ended up being incorrect this time.

Haven't seen anybody else quoting the rumor mill as fact over and over like dr_rus does.
 
My 570 isn't enough for many games at 1080p, 60fps. For the majority of games it's fine, but there are still several games that need to be toned down to get that 60fps mark (Crysis 2, The Witcher 2, Battlefield 3, Anno 2070, Shogun 2, Metro 2033).

You'll still get around 45 to 55 frames per second on max settings on all of those games with a 570 (save for ubsersampling, of course). I've recently come to the PC gaming side, so I've been dealing with 30 frames per second at 720p or lower for 5 years. 1080p at 45 frames per second is golden for me. As for Shogun 2 I thought that was more of a CPU intensive title.
 
Come on guys.

Everything is all speculation at one point or another heard from other sources from other sources. Especially in an industry that changes as quickly as this one, there's no reason to be so uppity about someone who wants to contribute to the discussion even if their sources ended up being incorrect this time.
Nah, the fact is that there was no fixed pricing set up when he posted that. And I did mention the same thing, that pricing isnt set around that time. That was correct.

Now we all know GK110 for all intents and purposes is quite far from release. To claim its pricing so early is BS, if he's guessing he should let others know. I do, at least.
 
You'll still get around 45 to 55 frames per second on max settings on all of those games with a 570 (save for ubsersampling, of course). I've recently come to the PC gaming side, so I've been dealing with 30 frames per second at 720p or lower for 5 years. 1080p at 45 frames per second is golden for me. As for Shogun 2 I thought that was more of a CPU intensive title.

The problem there is 30fps console palyers, 60fps pc players and 120fps uber player. Then when you hit 120fps you want higher res screens/triple screens then 3d and so on. Thats the beautiful and horrible thing with PC gaming, always a way to upgrade to something better.
 
Man... got some good news tonight. I might be grabbing a GTX 680 in the near-future for dirt cheap. It's so cheap I'll probably get lynched if I post the price.

So looks I'll be getting dat Kepler sooner rather than later. And if I'm lucky, I may get a 2nd one for dirt cheap 'cause I kinda like SLI (Don't tell Hawk269 or Smokey).

Wait what??? You kinda like SLI? What happened? If anyone on this board that I though would not give SLI a shot it was you...lol.

I hope you get them at the "dirt cheap" price so you can see what these bad boys can do. Remember, we are also working with 1st edition drivers as well...I really think based on past experiences with the 500 series cards that there will be some really good improvements at the driver level.
 
You'll still get around 45 to 55 frames per second on max settings on all of those games with a 570 (save for ubsersampling, of course). I've recently come to the PC gaming side, so I've been dealing with 30 frames per second at 720p or lower for 5 years. 1080p at 45 frames per second is golden for me. As for Shogun 2 I thought that was more of a CPU intensive title.

I was in the same boat as you...I exited PC gaming over 10 years ago and been soley a console gamer...and pure 1080p and 60fps with every bell and whistle turned to it's max is bliss. If you think 1080p/45fps is nice, just wait until you are able to do it at 60fps and have every possible slider/setting set to ultra. It is pretty damn amazing what some games look like with such settings.
 
The problem there is 30fps console palyers, 60fps pc players and 120fps uber player. Then when you hit 120fps you want higher res screens/triple screens then 3d and so on. Thats the beautiful and horrible thing with PC gaming, always a way to upgrade to something better.

For me, the only way I will go to a 120fps monitor is when HDTV's adopt that speed. I am stictly a PC/Sofa playing player myself. I have my rig hooked up to a Sony XbR-55929 3D-TV and use a wireless keyboard/mouse and a 360 wireless controller for my PC. My tower sits nicely next to my front left speaker and is part of my entertainment system.

I don't think I will ever go multimonitor just for the fact that I prefer to play games on a comfy sofa versus sitting at a desk. To me to play games on a 55" HDTV at 1080p pure and 60fps rock solid with no jaggies and IQ set to it's absolute max is what I want and for the most part now with my 680's I have achieved.
 
UPS is pretty close with my 680 but it's not estimated until Tuesday. Hope they come a day early since it's only a couple miles away.
 
Wait what??? You kinda like SLI? What happened? If anyone on this board that I though would not give SLI a shot it was you...lol.

I hope you get them at the "dirt cheap" price so you can see what these bad boys can do. Remember, we are also working with 1st edition drivers as well...I really think based on past experiences with the 500 series cards that there will be some really good improvements at the driver level.

Yeah, I like it, though I think it has some microstuttering with BF3. But the raw power is absolutely intoxicating. Some of the scaling on games is really nice. Playing BF3 @ 1440p maxed out with 4x MSAA + SMAA and not dropping below 60 FPS is sweet. Plus I didn't have to upgrade my mobo for SLI (although I might if I get a 2nd 680).

Oh, I'll get them dirt cheap, no worries about that. It's just a matter of 'when'. In the next couple of weeks I should get the 1st 680, and then we'll see how it goes from there. I probably won't need any more power than the 1st 680, but you know how it goes... it's an addiction.
 
Who honestly owns a stock clocked (K series) Sandy Bridge chip and is going to purchase a GTX680?

Sandy Bridge OC is like 2 settings in the bios and you're good to go. Heck my 2500k runs at 4.5GHz undervolted.

Waiting on these to be back in stock should be a massive upgrade over this clunker HD5830.
What are the steps? Haven't had to overclock it yet as I haven't run into problems running anything.
 
so the US price point is around $500 (from the newegg link. we're looking at about $700usd (approx) which sucks. :( I'm going to have to look around for US sites that ship to AUS.
 
Doesn't matter if you have the card or not. You have not posted any benchmarks disproving whether Witcher 2 is CPU limited with 680 vs GTX 590. Your appeal to authority is a lame logical fallacy which falls flat on its face.
It seems you have problems with reading words. All I've said is that any AFR card or system have more CPU overhead than a single GPU. That's a fact that doesn't need any proof (google it if you don't have the knowledge yourself). When you show benchmarks of GTX 590 as a proof of The Witcher 2 being CPU limited you should remember this. I never said that the game won't be CPU limited on GTX 680 because that kind of depends on a lot of factors. For example if you'll use ubersampling option it sure as hell won't be CPU limited even on an older Core 2 class CPU.

Let me requote you.

Clearly your data was wrong. I wouldnt be shocked if your data on GK110 (which is already sketchy) isnt wrong either.
My data was 294 mm^2 for the chip and a simple board which cost little to make. It was wrong? Ha ha oh wow.jpg.
Any data on GK110 is sketchy at the moment simply because a lot of it may change before (or even if) it'll be launched as a GeForce. But there are some expectations based on what's known about it at the moment. Is that so hard to grasp?
 
really disappointed in the limited stock :( I had no trouble securing a GTX 570 near launch. This is ridiculous.

Would have been a dead-on impulse buy for me. Maybe I should be thankful?

Anyone think a 4GB edition is going to make any difference if you never plan on running more than two monitors?
 
really disappointed in the limited stock :( I had no trouble securing a GTX 570 near launch. This is ridiculous.

Would have been a dead-on impulse buy for me. Maybe I should be thankful?

Anyone think a 4GB edition is going to make any difference if you never plan on running more than two monitors?

Yes...that is where it comes into play. I think for the most part 2gb will be fine for now, but as we move into the year and next year there will be more demanding games that if you play multi-monitor and you want to maintain all the AA and other bells and whistles, you may need more than 2gb. I know that some have reported on a single monitor, Crysis 2 in DX11 with the high-res texture pack pulling around 1.7 of video ram and that is on one monitor. I have the game and will test that to be sure, but I would say for any multi-monitor gamer that ideally having more that 2gb ram would be a good idea for more future proofing...unless you are a complete nut job llike me and upgrade GPU's almost every 6-8 months, then you wil be fine with 2gb because 6 months down the line you will upgrade again.
 
It's so vulgar to see your local, trusted hardware pushers squeezing the limited stock so badly. Usual place I buy from has 10 Zotac in stock for like $1000, rip-off prices.
 
really disappointed in the limited stock :( I had no trouble securing a GTX 570 near launch. This is ridiculous.

Would have been a dead-on impulse buy for me. Maybe I should be thankful?

Anyone think a 4GB edition is going to make any difference if you never plan on running more than two monitors?

Um 570 was a derivative GPu and the 680 is on a new fab process....
 
You'll still get around 45 to 55 frames per second on max settings on all of those games with a 570 (save for ubsersampling, of course). I've recently come to the PC gaming side, so I've been dealing with 30 frames per second at 720p or lower for 5 years. 1080p at 45 frames per second is golden for me. As for Shogun 2 I thought that was more of a CPU intensive title.

The problem is my standards keep getting higher and higher, and I want more. :)
 
Yes...that is where it comes into play. I think for the most part 2gb will be fine for now, but as we move into the year and next year there will be more demanding games that if you play multi-monitor and you want to maintain all the AA and other bells and whistles, you may need more than 2gb. I know that some have reported on a single monitor, Crysis 2 in DX11 with the high-res texture pack pulling around 1.7 of video ram and that is on one monitor. I have the game and will test that to be sure, but I would say for any multi-monitor gamer that ideally having more that 2gb ram would be a good idea for more future proofing...unless you are a complete nut job llike me and upgrade GPU's almost every 6-8 months, then you wil be fine with 2gb because 6 months down the line you will upgrade again.

On Crysis 2 Ultra, DX11 with high res pack, 1440p + MaldoHD 3 high res texture pack, I'm pullin 2.3 GB VRAM usage.
 
My data was 294 mm^2 for the chip and a simple board which cost little to make. It was wrong? Ha ha oh wow.jpg.
The same data that was available to all of the Internet ever since Charlie broke the news.
Any data on GK110 is sketchy at the moment simply because a lot of it may change before (or even if) it'll be launched as a GeForce. But there are some expectations based on what's known about it at the moment. Is that so hard to grasp?
Now thats a 180 degree turn from your earlier post. I'm glad that you came clean, took three tries.
 
The same data that was available to all of the Internet ever since Charlie broke the news.

Now thats a 180 degree turn from your earlier post. I'm glad that you came clean, took three tries.

He's a backpedaling BS'er. Lol @ 'Witcher 2 only appears to be CPU limited because of the CPU overhead of a dual GPU/SLI system using AFR!! I have no proof, but I have a GTX 680 so believe me!'
 
I got the MSI one since it was the only one in stock for a short period lol. I heard they were a pretty good brand so can't go wrong I suppose.

MSI and EVGA are the only brand GPU's I have owned and like them both. I would suggest getting the eVGA Precision X software for your card. It is really nice and works great. Afterburner is also another great program to tweak as well..but right now I think Precision X is the way to go for tweaking.
 
Top Bottom