Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

When prices of GTX 680 will drop ?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 21, 2012 12:31:15 PM

im can't choose between gtx 680 and radeon 7970 ... point is only price ... im not fanboy of any brand ... but now prices are ...

1) Radeon 7970 470-510$
2) GTX 680 610-700$

prices are from amazon and i can only buy from amazon.com !!! no newegg or other sites ! so i hand only on amazon !!!!

does it worth to wait for 680 price drops ? and when drop will be afet week ? month ? half year ???

so just pick radeon 7970 and enjoy or wait for gtx 680 witch is 10-15% faster and pick it ?

More about : prices gtx 680 drop

April 21, 2012 12:42:13 PM

7970 and OC, that will bring that 10% margin down. I don't see a price drop anytime in the near future and then you would have to find a card since they're in short supply.
April 21, 2012 1:19:08 PM

darksalvatore, the price on the GTX 680 will probably drop when the true Kepler Flagship GK110 is finally launched. There are only rumors about when this might be. The shortage of the GK104 chip isn't promising so far so I'm not expecting it anytime soon.
I always go with Nvidia cards because I believe they provide better drivers support but if it was me I would opt for the HD 7970 in this case. The GTX 680 isn't worth the $140 to $190 difference in cost imo.
Related resources
a c 141 U Graphics card
April 21, 2012 3:15:24 PM

maybe they will drop a bit when they were about to launch the next series just like when GTX580 got price cut. soon after the price cut nvidia will completely EOLed the card which sometimes keep the price up or stay even if the card was no longer in the production line.

that aside if you really care about the cost then just go for 7970. if you want to wait for the 680 in supply with its intended price its up to you though i don't think you will have to wait 6 month for that to happen.

and i know many people were hoping nvidia will release the true flagship so GTX680 will dropping in price. but to me that's seems to be unlikely though. the way i see it nvidia was shifting the mid range price to $500 mark :p 
April 21, 2012 3:19:48 PM

The price isn't gonna come back down to $500 MSRP until they can stay available for more than 5 minutes at sites like newegg. There's such high demand that most places can get away with charging $600+ for the card.

Could be anywhere from a couple weeks to a couple months for that to change.

IMO +1 to the get a 7970 club. If you OC it, it's comparable with the 680, and you'll save money in the process, especially considering the 7970 starts at $450 now.
April 21, 2012 5:49:21 PM

true kelper ? do you mean 685 ? as i know 680 is final single gpu and they will make 690 only after 680 :)  sure midrange cards to like 670ti 670 and 660 :)  .... i don't like overlocking but .... maybe just get oc version>? 1000 mhz version :)  and one more thing ...
7970 will be better in cf then gtx 680 in sli ??? for future i think 3 gb vram will be needed and better choice for cf or sli .. or im a wrong ? :p 
April 21, 2012 6:21:00 PM

Go with the AMD. I know all of the purest say the 680 is better. OK. cool. This supply problem is completely rediculous. I've never seen anything like this. Nvidia should be so embarrassed that they add a bonus to all of their customers who waited. I don't know maybe this "problem" is a marketing gimmic to make them look cooler but I don't see it. if I had been waiting this long and had all of these problems I'd be pissed. I think the 7970 is also giving away some free games as well right now.

Are there any known issues with the 97xx series cards yet?
April 21, 2012 6:27:31 PM

The 79xx cards had some pretty bad problems at launch with crossfire driver support pretty much not working, but it's been mostly fixed.

AMD's driver problems get blown out of proportion a bit... they generally get things working OK, it just takes them 3 or 4 months longer than Nvidia to do so.
April 21, 2012 6:29:04 PM

i haven't found any free game with 7970 on amazon :)  i can't buy from newegg or ebay so .... yes it seems like nvidia is just toooooooooo popular .. nothing more .... i thing is that nvidia has adaptive vertical sync .. and i paly on TV with 60 herz ... so i need it .. but if adaptive V sync does not worth i will go for amd for sure .... i don't care about physx or TXAA to... i think MLAA 2.0 will not be worse then TXAA
April 21, 2012 6:48:57 PM

At these prices, 7970 for sure. You don't need adaptive V-sync, and the only times the performances of the 680 are 15% better than the 7970 is when both cards are completely overkill for the game you're running. When both cards are pushed to their limits, it's pretty even, especially if both are overclocked (7970 OCs much better). I'd personally say if both cards are at the same price, maybe the 680 has a very very slight advantage. You should definitely go with whichever one of the two is cheapest.
April 21, 2012 7:04:29 PM

i see that many people recommend amd at that prices ... and even on same prices :)  so i think 1 gb more ram in the future will be better choice :p  is good that .. there is no blame nvidia fanboys ... who will recommend gtx 680 with words like : its the best card bro ! and no more argument :) )) so i hope i will not have any lags while playing BF3 with 7970 :p 
April 21, 2012 7:06:27 PM

Here is one of the quote about the free games: "The promotion, expected to run for a limited time, is being dubbed 'Three for Free' and will offer buyers a chance to download DiRT Showdown (released in May), Nexuiz (released in May), and Deus Ex: Human Revolution (available now) for free."

Hope that helps..
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2012 7:09:36 PM

Quote:
Funny thing is, some nvidiots want that card so bad tey're willing to pay up to 700USD for them

LOL sounds like someone overpaid for a 7970.....
April 21, 2012 7:21:09 PM

Swolern said:
LOL sounds like someone overpaid for a 7970.....


LOL I overpaid for a GTX 680. 580$, YAY! Wa- DOES THAT SAY, BAAAAAACKOOOORDEEEERED!!?!??
April 21, 2012 7:25:20 PM

but he has 6950 :) ))))


it's sad .. i expected restock of gtx 680 in may with 500$ price on amazon but seems like there is no chance to get them for 500$ .. i can't wait 2-3 months ... now im on GT 520 :) )) only thing i can do is watch movies :) )))

and one more thing .... better get XFX radeon 7970 or Saphire brand with custom cooling ? there is like 40$ difereence between the ... XFX is more expensive... and both has 1000 core clock :) 
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2012 7:27:41 PM

darksalvatore said:
i haven't found any free game with 7970 on amazon :)  i can't buy from newegg or ebay so .... yes it seems like nvidia is just toooooooooo popular .. nothing more .... i thing is that nvidia has adaptive vertical sync .. and i paly on TV with 60 herz ... so i need it .. but if adaptive V sync does not worth i will go for amd for sure .... i don't care about physx or TXAA to... i think MLAA 2.0 will not be worse then TXAA


I have a 680 game on a HDTV and there has been 2 Nvidia applications that have been a lifesaver in smooth gameplay. Adaptive Vsync & framerate limiter. One thing that makes gameplay stuttery or choppy on any display is framerate less than 60 and the rate changing very frequently which is shown as uneven frame display and it looks horrible, this is encentuated on a larger HDTV. U know about A Vsync but say if a game is running 45-55fps and jumping up and down it can look like it in the 20s because it so stuttery. Use the Nvidia framerate lock and lock the FPS at 45 and the gameplay will be much smoother.

So yes the 680 is better due to performance and drivers but in reality you just cant find one right now at retail cost, $500. It's going to be a few months. Id say if you can't wait then the 7970 will be fine. You just have to make sure ur fps stay locked @ 60fps on the games you play. So look at some benchmarks of you favorite game and decide. Make sure your looking at max, & min FPS. Good luck.
April 21, 2012 7:32:21 PM

Locking framerate to 45 is possible with other programs and is by no means unique to Nvidia. Adaptive vsync has no effect one way or another on framerate "jumping up and down" (:edit: - didn't think through that one enough, it does prevent the jumps caused by vsync when your GPU can't keep up with the refresh rate)... all Adaptive Vsync does is help eliminate tearing while not resulting in the fps drops that normal vsync does.

It's a neat feature, but it's really only relevant to people who hate tearing. It has somewhere between very little and no affect on the smoothness of play. If tearing bothers you, then Adaptive Vsync is a good feature. If tearing doesn't really bother you, then it's an irrelevant feature.
April 21, 2012 7:35:24 PM

problem is that on 1920x1080 u can't get constant 60 on BF3 with full ultra 4x msaa... same story with gtx 680 .... but as you say it has frame locker ... so it's really hard to choose then from gtx 680 and 7970 :( ((((
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2012 7:39:50 PM

ttg_Avenged said:
LOL I overpaid for a GTX 680. 580$, YAY! Wa- DOES THAT SAY, BAAAAAACKOOOORDEEEERED!!?!??


I doubt u have a 680. Unless ur a Nvidiot that Greghome was talking about. But who likes to be called an idiot??
April 21, 2012 7:39:54 PM

Why not just turn off vsync? Tearing is minimal in BF3 maxed out, because your framerate averages around 60.

Tearing only gets real bad when you start getting like 90+ average fps.

Personally, I don't understand the fuss about adaptive vsync, but I'm not all that sensitive to tearing either so I guess I'm not the target demographic.
April 21, 2012 7:40:14 PM

actually ... i don't know .... when i palyed games with v sync on and fps jumper from 60 to 40 and back ....i haven't noticed it .... i just though that adaptive v sync will give me more fps in games ;/ then normal v sync .... and what a program can lock fps ?
April 21, 2012 7:42:14 PM

BigMack70

i have 60HZ TV so ... with v sync off ... i can see slow refresh rates on screen ...or how to say it idk ... it will be bad for my eyes to play games with v sync of on my tv :)  im 100% sure ....
April 21, 2012 7:42:43 PM

If you WANT vsync in games where you can't get 60fps minimum, then adaptive vsync is a cool feature.

I personally do not use vsync unless I get 60fps minimum framerate, and I don't notice tearing during gameplay unless I'm looking for it.
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2012 7:42:43 PM

darksalvatore said:
problem is that on 1920x1080 u can't get constant 60 on BF3 with full ultra 4x msaa... same story with gtx 680 .... but as you say it has frame locker ... so it's really hard to choose then from gtx 680 and 7970 :( ((((


Yes my EVGA 680 overclocked never drops below 60fps on 1920x1080 BF3 all ultra settings except motion blur off.
April 21, 2012 7:45:55 PM

BigMack70

wait wait ... your single radeon 7970 never drops below 60 fps while playing BF3 full ultra on 64 palyers map :o O????????? or you just don't max this game ????


Swolern


can you show me vide on youtube with your gameplay and framerates ??? just a few minutes if you can please :) 

p.s

motion blur sux anyway .... no need to use in mp

April 21, 2012 7:46:35 PM

darksalvatore said:
BigMack70

i have 60HZ TV so ... with v sync off ... i can see slow refresh rates on screen ...or how to say it idk ... it will be bad for my eyes to play games with v sync of on my tv :)  im 100% sure ....


What exactly do you think that vsync/adaptive vsync does? I'm confused...

vsync PROs:
-No image tearing

vsync CONs:
-lower average fps because fps will jump between multiples of your refresh rate (e.g., 60fps down to 30fps when without vsync it might be at 44fps)

Adaptive Vsync attempts to remove the cons of vsync. However, that is only meaningful if you care about getting the reduction on image tearing. That is a matter of personal taste and sensitivity. Tearing drives some people crazy, and others (like myself) don't care.
April 21, 2012 7:50:01 PM

darksalvatore said:
BigMack70

wait wait ... your single radeon 7970 never drops below 60 fps while playing BF3 full ultra on 64 palyers map :o O????????? or you just don't max this game ????


What I'm saying is this:
-I only find tearing very noticeable when my FPS is far higher than the refresh rate, say... 90+ (this results in near-constant image tearing).
-I do not notice image tearing unless I am looking for it when I am getting 40-60 fps
-Therefore, because BF3 only averages around 65fps, I don't really notice tearing unless I look for it, and so I don't care about vsync.

The only reason I bring all this up is that people seem to be drooling over this Adaptive Vsync feature even when I only rarely hear people complaining about image tearing. That suggests to me that people are being duped by Nvidia's marketing department into wanting a feature that they don't really care about for any reason other than Nvidia tells them they should care about it.
April 21, 2012 7:50:47 PM

BigMack70

you mean that ?

when v sync is on .... 60 fps or more = 60 fps... between 60 fps and 30fps =30 ???

your single radeon 7970 never drops below 60 fps while playing BF3 full ultra on 64 palyers map? i noticed like 45 fps dips on some videos ....

a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2012 7:51:44 PM

darksalvatore said:
i haven't found any free game with 7970 on amazon :)  i can't buy from newegg or ebay so .... yes it seems like nvidia is just toooooooooo popular .. nothing more .... i thing is that nvidia has adaptive vertical sync .. and i paly on TV with 60 herz ... so i need it .. but if adaptive V sync does not worth i will go for amd for sure


Most monitors are 60 Hz. you don't need adaptive vsync. Bottom line is 7970s are cheaper, available, have more memory, better compute performance, and perform just as well as the GTX 680 for games when BOTH are overclocked to the Max AND comes with free games. I don't understand why anyone would even get a 680 anymore?

I don't get this "big Kepler is coming " junk either. maybe on the next cycle but they can't even get this chip out the door, 3 months behind AMDs card that matches its performance. They are.both good cards but as usual AMD is dominating on value again.
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2012 7:52:38 PM

BigMack70 said:
Locking framerate to 45 is possible with other programs and is by no means unique to Nvidia. Adaptive vsync has no effect one way or another on framerate "jumping up and down" (:edit: - didn't think through that one enough, it does prevent the jumps caused by vsync when your GPU can't keep up with the refresh rate)... all Adaptive Vsync does is help eliminate tearing while not resulting in the fps drops that normal vsync does.

It's a neat feature, but it's really only relevant to people who hate tearing. It has somewhere between very little and no affect on the smoothness of play. If tearing bothers you, then Adaptive Vsync is a good feature. If tearing doesn't really bother you, then it's an irrelevant feature.


Wrong. Wide varied framerate on a HDTV with Vsync off & fps<45 still looks like a choppy mess. Metro 2033 maxed out was a great example. Lacked at 30fps looks and plays 10x better that 30-40fps.

And I've used a lot of the 3rd party framerate limiters. They are hard as hell to get working depending on each game if u can get them to work at all.
April 21, 2012 7:53:19 PM

My minimum framerate is around 45 in 64 player mp BF3.

And yes that is roughly how traditional vsync works. If your GPU is capable of 59fps but the refresh rate is 60fps, the end result will be something like 40fps with vsync enabled as opposed to 59 with perhaps some minimal tearing with vsync disabled.
April 21, 2012 7:54:58 PM

BigMack70 said:
What I'm saying is this:
-I only find tearing very noticeable when my FPS is far higher than the refresh rate, say... 90+ (this results in near-constant image tearing).
-I do not notice image tearing unless I am looking for it when I am getting 40-60 fps
-Therefore, because BF3 only averages around 65fps, I don't really notice tearing unless I look for it, and so I don't care about vsync.

The only reason I bring all this up is that people seem to be drooling over this Adaptive Vsync feature even when I only rarely hear people complaining about image tearing. That suggests to me that people are being duped by Nvidia's marketing department into wanting a feature that they don't really care about for any reason other than Nvidia tells them they should care about it.



hehe :) )) thank you for explain .... i was close to belive that adaptive v sync is the feature what i need most on my 60hz TV ! and it was 1 of the most important reasons why i though to get gtx 680 over radeon 7970 .... imho 10% does not matters hen you have 1 more gb vram for future and great overlocking on card :)  + good CF for future when prices drop even more on 7970 :) 
April 21, 2012 7:56:23 PM

Swolern said:
Wrong. Wide varied framerate on a HDTV with Vsync off & fps<45 still looks like a choppy mess. Metro 2033 maxed out was a great example. Lacked at 30fps looks and plays 10x better that 30-40fps.

And I've used a lot of the 3rd party framerate limiters. They are hard as hell to get working depending on each game if u can get them to work at.


I'm not really sure what you are talking about, to be honest... especially since I've never really had an issue with using Afterburner's framerate limiter.
April 21, 2012 7:56:58 PM

maybe im a bit strange .... but i notice lag only below 30 fps ... some people say that with no 60 fps constan they can't paly games and feel lag .... but i don't really notice difference between 60 and 30 fps ... maybe there is difference ... but it is so tiny that i can't even notice
April 21, 2012 7:59:08 PM

Bottom line is this:
If Adaptive Vsync is going to be a meaningful feature to you, you already know it because you know that image tearing drives you nuts and you use vsync all the time already.

If you don't really ever use vsync on your games and have always been happy with that, then adaptive vsync isn't going to do anything all that meaningful for you.

Adaptive vsync ONLY affects framerate smoothness at all when it is compared to normal vsync. It has NO effect on fps smoothness compared to vsync off.
a b U Graphics card
April 21, 2012 7:59:12 PM

darksalvatore said:



Swolern


can you show me vide on youtube with your gameplay and framerates ??? just a few minutes if you can please :) 

p.s

motion blur sux anyway .... no need to use in mp


Ya I'll post it later today
April 21, 2012 8:16:01 PM

Swolern
thank you :)  im waiting ....

BigMack70

maybe for me is hard to understand what is tearing .... maybe im like you and never noticed it .... so Adaptive Vsync will be useless for me then i think ....
if tearing means just jumps between framerates ... its not problem for me .... problem is only framerates below 30 :) 

April 21, 2012 8:34:35 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_tearing

If you've never noticed it, it means that it doesn't bother you and adaptive vsync is not a must have feature. It's more of an image quality thing than a framerate thing. Tearing does not affect your framerate.
April 21, 2012 8:36:19 PM

just to put out there that the supply problem isnt just nvidia. intel is having the same problems. The company manufacturing the chips couldnt produce the new ones fast enough due to the change in chip size. so now theyre hiring new foundries and getting them online. Yes it could have been prevented but its not worth bailing on a company that has provided great products to its fans for years.
April 21, 2012 8:42:53 PM

BigMack70

ah wait wait .... when i have vertical sync on i never notice tearing ..it removes tearing ... i only notice tearing when v sync is off .... so what will be differnce between adaptive vertical sync and standard v sync ... ? nothing i guess ;/ .... because i can't notice tearing on standard v sync to ....
April 21, 2012 8:44:37 PM

You can't notice tearing if you use vsync, because both adaptive vsync and regular vsync completely remove tearing - that's their purpose.

Adaptive vsync ALSO removes the fps drops that are caused by normal vsync.
April 21, 2012 8:46:50 PM

Honestly dude, I'm not sure what you want to be told at this point... this is like the 2nd or 3rd topic where you've gotten tons of advice yet haven't made a decision.

You're not gonna go wrong with either card, so if you want a card now, get the 7970 at < $500. Or if you want to wait for the 680, get that when it's available for $500. You're not gonna go wrong either way.
April 21, 2012 8:55:14 PM

Adaptive vsync ALSO removes the fps drops that are caused by normal vsync.

okay .... i understand that so .. when i have 45 fps and standard v sync on .... its 30 .... when adaptive its 45 .... then if i don't see diference between 45 and 30 then Adaptive vsync is useless .... if i notice diference then it's useful ... okay thnx ^^



normal v sync
April 21, 2012 8:59:16 PM

darksalvatore said:
Adaptive vsync ALSO removes the fps drops that are caused by normal vsync.

okay .... i understand that so .. when i have 45 fps and standard v sync on .... its 30 .... when adaptive its 45 .... then if i don't see diference between 45 and 30 then Adaptive vsync is useless .... if i notice diference then it's useful ... okay thnx ^^



normal v sync


I think you get the general idea.

When you have 45fps with standard vsync on, you might not drop all the way to 30fps (e.g., it may drop to 40), but it will be less than 45fps. Personally, I would notice the fps drop. However, I do not notice the slight image tearing that occurs by running the 45fps without vsync.
April 21, 2012 9:17:46 PM

haha ... im different .... i don't notice fps drop from 45 to 40 ... but i notice tearing :) )) okay thank you .... i will wait until may .... if gtx 680 will be restock i will buy .. if not ... jsut go for 7970 and enjoy it .... i don't think that i will have any trouble to max BF3 on 7970 without any lags :) 
April 22, 2012 12:09:03 AM

tougas said:
just to put out there that the supply problem isnt just nvidia. intel is having the same problems. The company manufacturing the chips couldnt produce the new ones fast enough due to the change in chip size. so now theyre hiring new foundries and getting them online. Yes it could have been prevented but its not worth bailing on a company that has provided great products to its fans for years.


Not exactly but are you saying I should wait possibly months and overpay for a card that's relatively on par performance wise simply for brand loyalty? :pfff: 
April 22, 2012 12:28:03 AM

im saying that if you arent deperate for a new gpu waiting wont hurt anyone
April 22, 2012 2:55:42 AM

Sorry but i have to ask this, what the hell happened to the 6990? it looks amazing and by the look if it they just stopped making them for some reason?
April 22, 2012 3:04:29 AM

The 6990 has been discontinued, I think. Even if not, it's not really available. It's not that amazing anyways - it's hot and loud and a single 7970 OC or GTX 680 give very similar performance for less money, less power, and less heat/noise.
April 22, 2012 6:41:53 AM

Yeah .. no one said yet that Sapphire has bad quality :)  i had 6960 to but msi ^^ ...
and about dual gpus ..... never liked them ... worst Performance/Price ever .... with both brands ... nvidia and amd to :) 
about price drop .... when gtx 670ti will be relesed ... will be there any chance of gtx 680 price drops ? because gtx 670ti will me relesed in few weeks as i know :) 
!