Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Will the Gtx680 not be worth it?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 16, 2012 6:27:46 PM

I have read some recent forums and comments on articles about how people are saying the gtx680 won't be worth it because it has the gk104 instead of some other. Are these guys just fanboys whining about whatever they can or are they right? I looked at some leaked benchmarks and stuff of the 680 and it showed really good performance. Doesn't look to me like it is a bad chip. What do you guys think?

More about : gtx680 worth

March 16, 2012 6:42:16 PM

BigMack70 said:
GTX 680 looks fairly likely to come in around 10% faster than the 7970. Price isn't set in stone yet but there's rumors of a $500 price point, which would be excellent.

Two things will determine if it's worth it:
-What does the price actually end up being?
-How does it overclock?

If it doesn't overclock well, it needs to be priced cheaper than the 7970 to be a good deal. If it does overclock well, it can be priced the same as a 7970 and will be a better deal. If it is priced cheaper and overclocks well, it's a slam dunk must buy for anyone in the market for a high end single GPU.


Is there going to be only the 2gb version or is there going to be a 4gb version also? Also, is the $500 rumored to be for the 2gb or 4gb? If it is for the 2gb then how much would the 4gb be do you think?
March 16, 2012 6:56:44 PM

My take is that unless you absolutely, positively have to have a graphics card now, wait for the release and benchmarks.

Why?

The release is rumored to be happening on March 22, or so which is six days away.
Related resources
March 16, 2012 7:05:05 PM

Count me in with the group that will not spend $500 for a video card. You can play anything out there for half that price.
March 16, 2012 7:13:29 PM

mkmitch said:
Count me in with the group that will not spend $500 for a video card. You can play anything out there for half that price.


Okay this is what I say to that. You can spend around $250 for a card that you will be able to play any game on decent to good settings. But after a year you have or at least need to upgrade. So of you upgrade every year for a new $250 card it is not worth it. 1year ($250) + 1year($250) + 1year($250)= $750. While you can a $500 card like the gtx 580 or upcoming 680 and hold at maybe double the performance of the $250 cards for all three years thus saving money.

I just hope that the 2gb gtx 680 will be enough because my max budget for graphics card is around $500. Which $550 is pushing it for the 680. I'll wait a week after the release (march 23rd rumored) of the 680 in order to check reviews and benchmarks but then I'm buying.
a c 251 U Graphics card
March 16, 2012 8:02:13 PM

There was a demo video clip that was used at the Game Developers Copnference last year called "The Good Samaritan" and it took three GTX 580's to run it , so at this years conference they ran the same demo clip and it was run with one GTX 680. I think that should tell you something right there. They are now saying that the new Keplers will be about 20% faster across the board than the 7900's. I can't wait for these things to come out , however it's not such a good idea to jump right in because they will be coming out with various models over the next few months. Look at what Evga came out with in thier Classified model and that didn't come out untill several months after the initail release of the 580's. If the initial release has 2gb of vram you can count on other models coming out with 3gb or 4gb soon after.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Nvidia-Kepler-GeForce-...
a c 236 U Graphics card
March 16, 2012 8:07:08 PM

destroyer432 said:
I have read some recent forums and comments on articles about how people are saying the gtx680 won't be worth it because it has the gk104 instead of some other. Are these guys just fanboys whining about whatever they can or are they right? I looked at some leaked benchmarks and stuff of the 680 and it showed really good performance. Doesn't look to me like it is a bad chip. What do you guys think?


Worth is a value judgement that only YOU can make.

The GTX680 will be launched at a competitive price performance point. It is unclear what that will be.
I am inclined to believe the rumors that peg it at a 7970 +20%, and a price of $550.
I think the ram will be 2gb which should be plenty.
March 16, 2012 8:16:13 PM

Price and Efficiency are typically Nvidias downfall I would just therefore go to Radeon if I were you.
March 16, 2012 8:28:53 PM

Except that its already been shown that the 680 is both more efficient and uses less power..

Plus it has x4 monitor support
plus it has TXAA which is better the x16 mxaa and uses less than x2 mxaa

Plus it has great driver and software support

plus nvidia has physx and better 3d support

plus its going to have better peformance than 7970

plus its going to be cheaper (ok ok i have no proof on this one but just wait 6 days then you will see im right)


amd really doesnt have much left... all they can hope is that there multi card 7970 will pull something out of that hat but we all know thats not going to happen
March 16, 2012 8:31:52 PM

sp0nger said:
Except that its already been shown that the 680 is both more efficient and looses less power..

Plus it has x4 monitor support
plus it has TXAA which is better the x16 mxaa and uses less than x2 mxaa

Plus it has great driver and software support

plus nvidia has physx and better 3d support

plus its going to have better peformance than 7970

plus its going to be cheaper (ok ok i have no proof on this one but just wait 6 days then you will see im right)


amd really doesnt have much left... all they can hope is that there multi card 7970 will pull something out of that hat but we all know thats not going to happen

All of what you said is completely unproven and false.
March 16, 2012 8:33:22 PM

BigMack70 said:
It does tell you something... it says that neither you nor like half the other people posting this story has a clue how to read the fine print. Kepler did not run the same demo that 3 580s ran. 3 580s ran the demo with MSAA, while Kepler ran the demo with FXAA, which is FAR, FAR less stressful on the GPU than MSAA. Kepler is likely to be 10% ish faster overall than a stock 7970, based on current rumors/benchmarks.

At 1080p, if you're OK either minimizing AA options and/or getting minimum framerates at 30fps or lower, then yeah don't spend more than $200-250 on a GPU. However, if you want to be able to play with AA and get smooth minimum framerates in the most demanding games, you need a GPU stronger than a GTX 580, which either puts you into the $400+ SLI/CF or $500+ single GPU range.

I agree ^ +1
a c 251 U Graphics card
March 16, 2012 8:46:02 PM

I guess that we'll just have to wait and see when the cards are relaesed and put through the benchmarks to see what it can actually do. We can sit here and debate this all day and in the end there is no competition untill both cards are there to compete. AMD always feels like they have to release thier cards first and Nvidia always seems to wait untill AMD does that. It would be a whole lot better if they both released thier cards together then you could see right then and there which is better. Still some people will always buy Nvidia and some will always buy AMD/ATI. Because in the end most of the time you are only talking about 5-10 fps difference and that's not much. If you look at the benchmarks of the different cards you see some that Nvidia wins and some that AMD/ATI wins.
March 16, 2012 8:46:54 PM

Demon slayer said:
All of what you said is completely unproven and false.



Really?

http://www.techpowerup.com/162498/GTX-680-Generally-Fas...

http://www.techpowerup.com/162504/NVIDIA-s-New-AA-Algo-...

http://www.techpowerup.com/162500/GK104-Block-Diagram-E...

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/26391-nvidia-gtx-680-...


Im pretty sure i just tea bagged your arguement,

Everything i said was true

gtx 680 is less than 200W compared to your whopping 250W on the 7970 ( better price per watt)
gtx 680 WILL out bench 7970 (better total performacnce)
Nvidia already has better driver/software so no need to argue there
gtx 680 will be able to run x4 monitor support ( so no more relying on your eye finity > 3d argument )
gtx 680 will have txaa
The only thing i cant prove is the price, and im saying here on the internet that i bet my left nut it will come out at a lower price point then the current 550 price point of the 7970
March 16, 2012 8:52:20 PM

sp0nger said:
Really?

http://www.techpowerup.com/162498/GTX-680-Generally-Fas...

http://www.techpowerup.com/162504/NVIDIA-s-New-AA-Algo-...

http://www.techpowerup.com/162500/GK104-Block-Diagram-E...

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/26391-nvidia-gtx-680-...


Im pretty sure i just tea bagged your arguement,

Everything i said was true nvidia has

Total performance
Performance per watt
Must certainly have performance per price
Amazing drivers/software support
X4 monitors to 1 GPU
3D vision supremecy
Physx
TXAA

Team red looses deal w/ it

They have not released anything concrete on the 680 yet I mean they have not even Benchmarked or Reviewed it yet your claims are not based on facts they are just unverified opinion's and vague ball park theoretics.
March 16, 2012 8:53:44 PM

Demon slayer said:
All of what you said is completely unproven and false.


Cmoing from the ATI fanboy who said:
Quote:
Price and Efficiency are typically Nvidias downfall I would just therefore go to Radeon if I were you.


Your an idiot. Nvidia is for higher end, Radeon is for the lesser lower end. You are and fanboy and are in denial just admit it. And oh yea, Nvidia has less consumption, better temps, Radeon is louder than a train, TXAA is definitely coming and so much better than MSAA, and 3D is really supported with Nvidia. What does Radeon have? Cheaper cards? Yes, but only in the low end. Let me guess, you have a 6950 dont you? Have fun replacing that next year.
March 16, 2012 8:55:52 PM

Demon slayer said:
They have not released anything concrete on the 680 yet I mean they have not even Benchmarked or Reviewed it yet your claims are not based on facts they are just unverified opinion's and vague ball park theoretics.


Ok lets pretend you actualy took the time to read those articles and that the same information hasnt been appearing on every website with the same exact information. Lets just ignor all of that

If tomshardware released benchmarks that validated everything i had to say,

then you as an ovious team red member (not that im not denying my team green badge) what would you then have to say?

artard
a b U Graphics card
March 16, 2012 8:58:39 PM

sp0nger said:
Really?

http://www.techpowerup.com/162498/GTX-680-Generally-Fas...

http://www.techpowerup.com/162504/NVIDIA-s-New-AA-Algo-...

http://www.techpowerup.com/162500/GK104-Block-Diagram-E...

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/26391-nvidia-gtx-680-...


Im pretty sure i just tea bagged your arguement,

Everything i said was true

gtx 680 is less than 200W compared to your whopping 250W on the 7970 ( better price per watt)
gtx 680 WILL out bench 7970 (better total performacnce)
Nvidia already has better driver/software so no need to argue there
gtx 680 will be able to run x4 monitor support ( so no more relying on your eye finity > 3d argument )
gtx 680 will have txaa
The only thing i cant prove is the price, and im saying here on the internet that i bet my left nut it will come out at a lower price point then the current 550 price point of the 7970





Guess what everyone. Elvis is working at a Walmart in Florida!!




Just because I wrote that does not mean it is true. The internet is full of BS getting passed off as fact. We will believe it when some reputable benches are done by popular sites.
a b U Graphics card
March 16, 2012 9:00:47 PM

I am not a fanboy. I flipflop. My last setup was nvidia. You just can't pass off rumor as fact and call people idiots for believing it.
March 16, 2012 9:03:03 PM

ttg_Avenged said:
Cmoing from the ATI fanboy who said:
Quote:
Price and Efficiency are typically Nvidias downfall I would just therefore go to Radeon if I were you.


Your an idiot. Nvidia is for higher end, Radeon is for the lesser lower end. You are and fanboy and are in denial just admit it. And oh yea, Nvidia has less consumption, better temps, Radeon is louder than a train, TXAA is definitely coming and so much better than MSAA, and 3D is really supported with Nvidia. What does Radeon have? Cheaper cards? Yes, but only in the low end. Let me guess, you have a 6950 dont you? Have fun replacing that next year.

Well once again the verified and produced by solid publications such as Tom's Hardware benchmark's and reviews have all stated that the 7970 is all around superior to the GTX 580 and then there are benchmarks that even show the 7870 running games cooler, quieter and getting near enough to same performance of the GTX 580 in some games. Currently there is an Nvidia card in my rig I run both Nvidia and Radeon cards but today an old Nvidia card is what is in my box but Radeon is just doing better for right now today however Kelper will change up the playing field when it gets here but today it's not here so Red team is on top if not for a short while.
March 16, 2012 9:07:09 PM

BigMack70 said:
Anyone else notice that this thread got completely off topic as soon as sp0nger posted as if it were a pissing contest between the 7970 and GTX 680?


correction, while i did exacerbate a pissing contest i was not the one who started it :D 


and edit, even if op wasnt a troll the title of this thread alone is enough to attract a pissing contest :bounce: 
a b U Graphics card
March 16, 2012 9:10:34 PM

ttg_avenged - careful who you call an idiot - If you've read any of the graphic reviews over the past year AMD has had a pretty good share of the recommendations for the higher end gaming systems. Before you say fanboy - I have both ATI & nvidia cards.
-Bruce
March 16, 2012 9:13:04 PM

sp0nger said:
correction, while i did exacerbate a pissing contest i was not the one who started it :D 


and edit, even if op wasnt a troll the title of this thread alone is enough to attract a pissing contest :bounce: 

That still does not make justified your spreading of false unverified rhetorical information on a product that is yet to become into physical existence.
a b U Graphics card
March 16, 2012 9:14:28 PM

Demon slayer said:
Radeon is just doing better for right now today however Kelper will change up the playing field when it gets here but today it's not here so Red team is on top if not for a short while.


I think the red team will still be on top even after the 680 comes out. Let the flaming begin!

March 16, 2012 9:15:30 PM

Demon slayer said:
That still does not make justified your spreading of false unverified rhetorical information on a product that is yet to become into physical existence.


haha as i get preached to from the guy who started the pissing contest by spouting useless nonsense, you can claim what i said is false all the way to the barn for all i care im not one whos going to be wrong in 2 weeks,

tell you what, in april when 680 is actualy out and everything i said was right, ill send you a pm regarding this thread and then you can reflect how i was right why you come up with another exuse
March 16, 2012 9:16:33 PM

dish_moose said:
ttg_avenged - careful who you call an idiot - If you've read any of the graphic reviews over the past year AMD has had a pretty good share of the recommendations for the higher end gaming systems. Before you say fanboy - I have both ATI & nvidia cards.
-Bruce

F*** me Nvidia and Radeon both make great cards but Radeon just has better options right now with there 7xxx series cards and 68xx cards.
March 16, 2012 9:19:33 PM

Demon slayer said:
F*** me Nvidia and Radeon both make great cards but Radeon just has better options right now with there 7xxx series cards and 68xx cards.



that was the problem in the first place artard, if you had come out and said this thread would have gotten that far,

Price and Efficiency are typically Nvidias downfall I would just therefore go to Radeon if I were you.

thats what you said, i countered with EVIDENCE that you were wrong

then you countered with the same bs denial that every else says

March 16, 2012 9:23:30 PM

sp0nger said:
haha as i get preached to from the guy who started the pissing contest by spouting useless nonsense, you can claim what i said is false all the way to the barn for all i care im not one whos going to be wrong in 2 weeks,

tell you what, in april when 680 is actualy out and everything i said was right, ill send you a pm regarding this thread and then you can reflect how i was right why you come up with another exuse

Good for you man but I don't want Nvidia to flop and I never insinuated I did also I don't want Radeon to flop either what I do want isFor Nvidia and Radeon to offer the end users the purchasing power for more value for my hard earned dollars and efficiency for my dollar cause to me the performance today since the 4xx and 48xx is already available for running todays and tomorrows games what we need is more value.
March 16, 2012 9:27:08 PM

I wouldn't really exactly call all of this off topic. Each of you are expressing your opinions on either Nvidia or the Gtx680 which I like to hear. Right now I am more convinced that Nvidia is superior and that the Gtx680 is what I should get. I don't give a crap about what brand each is under. I only care what is best for my machine. To the people who said that the Gtx680 info that another user posted was "unproven and false" is wrong. The only thing he didnt have completely proven or right was the price but I believe that he won't be that far off when we find out.

Also, do you guys think the 2gb version of the Gtx680 will be enough? Or should I wait for one with more memory like 4gbs?
March 16, 2012 9:27:22 PM

BigMack70 said:
... OP could always be a troll but his post looks far more like a legit question from someone who is confused by fanboys like yourself, especially with his follow up.

In other words, this wasn't a pissing contest until you showed up. People like you (on both sides of the fanboy battle) are why people get confused and make topics like this in the first place. Maybe if we all kept to legit, established info and acknowledged rumors as rumors, newbies to the scene wouldn't get mixed up. :pfff: 

Demon slayer, once he joined in on the other side, is just as culpable as you are. Nice job ruining OP's thread, though.



Im pretty sure that this thread gave him enough information to come to a conclusion on his own, plus research is a really awesome tool that im not going to pitty someone for not using.

If you dont like reading the bullshit you dont have too, if people want to argue rationaly i prefer it, but one thing ive learned about participating in forum discussion over my whole life is that if everyone else is going to spew there bullshit with out any rational then im not going to waste my time, ill just join in on the fun and spew it back in there face more agressively and why do you ask? because i havent had a patient for the past 3 hours and it makes my day go by quicker
March 16, 2012 9:28:48 PM

destroyer432 said:
I wouldn't really exactly call all of this off topic. Each of you are expressing your opinions on either Nvidia or the Gtx680 which I like to hear. Right now I am more convinced that Nvidia is superior and that the Gtx680 is what I should get. I don't give a crap about what brand each is under. I only care what is best for my machine. To the people who said that the Gtx680 info that another user posted was "unproven and false" is wrong. The only thing he didnt have completely proven or right was the price but I believe that he won't be that far off when we find out.

Also, do you guys think the 2gb version of the Gtx680 will be enough? Or should I wait for one with more memory like 4gbs?



Point proven, suck it (not you OP)

yes i think the 2gb version will be enough unless your planning multi monitor set up or a super high resolution
March 16, 2012 9:32:08 PM

sp0nger said:
that was the problem in the first place artard, if you had come out and said this thread would have gotten that far,

Price and Efficiency are typically Nvidias downfall I would just therefore go to Radeon if I were you.

thats what you said, i countered with EVIDENCE that you were wrong

then you countered with the same bs denial that every else says

I would have left it alone but the problem is no physical GTX 680s are even in existence for a legitimate review of the finished product that the end user will have made available for purchase therefore you sentiment are full of BS
March 16, 2012 9:33:07 PM

Demon slayer said:
F*** me Nvidia and Radeon both make great cards but Radeon just has better options right now with there 7xxx series cards and 68xx cards.


Why, Honestly WHY? 6970 vs GTX 580, GTX wins. 6870 vs 560, 560 still wins. 7970 vs GTX 680, we know whos gonna win. Dont get me started on the GK110, GTX 690.
March 16, 2012 9:33:39 PM

I have yet to see any additional evidence of the four display support that was mentioned. There are four connectors, but as I heard it, it is still locked to two pipelines. Just because a card has more connectors doesn't mean it supports more displays. Forgive me for not remembering the article I read about it remaining at 2 display support. The article that was linked mentioned it, but what about further proof there? I haven't found anything else. When it comes to rumors, I like to hear it from a couple places or I disregard it.
March 16, 2012 9:36:40 PM

wasn't the real question by the OP based around the conjecture that nVidia is amp'ing up a mid-range chip and grabbing 500+ dollars from us, while holding out on the real chip just because this 680 hybrid will compete with the 7970.

I was really looking forward to buying the 680 this year, but I will wait for the 780 or w/e they are calling it because if I'm spending that kinda money I want the best.
March 16, 2012 9:40:30 PM

ttg_Avenged said:
Why, Honestly WHY? 6970 vs GTX 580, GTX wins. 6870 vs 560, 560 still wins. 7970 vs GTX 680, we know whos gonna win. Dont get me started on the GK110, GTX 690.

well you fail to mention Price GTX 580 was for how long $500+ Radeon 6970 was $370 and 6870 was always at leased $50-60 cheaper than the 560ti so once again it's not clear cut win or lose because of price brackets however the fanboys would have real ammo if and when certain competing cards were cheaper and more powerful and they never were so moot.
a c 236 U Graphics card
March 16, 2012 9:46:01 PM

destroyer432 said:
I wouldn't really exactly call all of this off topic. Each of you are expressing your opinions on either Nvidia or the Gtx680 which I like to hear. Right now I am more convinced that Nvidia is superior and that the Gtx680 is what I should get. I don't give a crap about what brand each is under. I only care what is best for my machine. To the people who said that the Gtx680 info that another user posted was "unproven and false" is wrong. The only thing he didnt have completely proven or right was the price but I believe that he won't be that far off when we find out.

Also, do you guys think the 2gb version of the Gtx680 will be enough? Or should I wait for one with more memory like 4gbs?


No need to decide now, since you can't buy or reserve anything now.

I think the vram bit is a bit overblown. I now use two 2560 x 1600 monitors with a GTX580 and the default 1.5gb ram.
Perhaps I am insensitive, but it still works well, at least for me.

At launch, perhaps there will be some benchmarks to sort things out. Nvidia is in the business of making products work for their market.
I think they will include the appropriate amount of vram for their cards. If more vram sells, you can be sure that vendors will increase it, regardless of it's benefit.
March 16, 2012 10:03:05 PM

arbiter12 said:
wasn't the real question by the OP based around the conjecture that nVidia is amp'ing up a mid-range chip and grabbing 500+ dollars from us, while holding out on the real chip just because this 680 hybrid will compete with the 7970.

I was really looking forward to buying the 680 this year, but I will wait for the 780 or w/e they are calling it because if I'm spending that kinda money I want the best.


That was exactly the original question I was asking. You probably already have a pretty powerful graphics card which allows you the option of waiting for the 780 or whatever, but I don't have that option because this is my first build and I want top of the line graphics or at least close to it. My current computer is a 3 year old Compaq which I cannot even play minecraft on lowest settings. The reasons I have waited till now to build a powerful machine is because I am wanting to play games on highest settings, I want a machine that will be sort of future proof, and I want to make high quality YouTube gameplay videos. So you see my dilemma? I cannot wait for the gtx 780 because I have nothin to use while waiting.

I have also realized that the people who are against the gk140 chip situation should realize also. Think about if we were not given the information that said the gk140 was supposed to be middle class and so forth. We would probably fully believe that the gtx680 was high end and would not have another thought about it. Isn't the increase on performance, or rumored increase, from te previous line of Nvidia gpus enough to call it the next line?
March 17, 2012 3:49:34 AM

Best answer selected by Destroyer432.
March 17, 2012 3:52:20 AM

ttg_Avenged said:
Why, Honestly WHY? 6970 vs GTX 580, GTX wins. 6870 vs 560, 560 still wins. 7970 vs GTX 680, we know whos gonna win. Dont get me started on the GK110, GTX 690.


I doubt that the Gtx690 will have the GK110. I think they will save that for 780.
March 17, 2012 3:54:26 AM

destroyer432 said:
I doubt that the Gtx690 will have the GK110. I think they will save that for 780.

It's just Mantra after Mantra with these Nvidia boys I tell ya.
!