Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11 And Crysis 2 (DX 11)

Seven GeForce GTX 670 Cards, Benchmarked And Reviewed
By

A Quick Word About Drivers

When this story was originally published in Germany, the newest beta driver version was 301.34, originally intended to add support for GeForce GTX 690. It improves 3DMark results by a few percent, but it wouldn't work with all of our samples. We traced this issue to the BIOS version of some of our test cards, and finally tweaked the .INF file of build 301.33 to get it working with all cards. In that way, the GeForce-based results are all comparable.

Unfortunately, this story went live in Europe long before AMD's beta Catalyst 12.7 build was previewed, and even beta 12.6 was not yet available. As of this writing, the Catalyst 12.7 beta is still not downloadable from AMD's site, so 12.6 is the most current build you can get. Once 12.7 is posted, results for the Radeon HD 7970 should improve, though we saw in AMD Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition Review: Give Me Back That Crown! that Nvidia's GeForce GTX 670 is faster in 3DMark. Though the Crysis 2 settings used in that more recent story favored Nvidia's card, AMD's Radeon HD 7970 actually wins here.

3DMark 11

We ran this benchmark at all three quality presets, and the results demonstrate that performance scales well with clock rate. Although most enthusiasts aren't going to buy a high-end card to play at low-end settings, this metric helps amplify minor differences between the three 1006 MHz samples.

Our tests show that all factory-overclocked cards perform similarly, and they also help illustrate that if a game is unplayable on a board with a 980 MHz core, spending extra on a solution with a 1098 MHz core won't help make it smoother all of the sudden.

Factory-overclocked cards do perform better than reference models at extreme quality settings, but the differences are not earth-shattering.

Crysis 2: DirectX 11

We intentionally selected only one gaming benchmark; adding more wouldn't change the story that plays out between these modified GeForce GTX 670 cards.

It's interesting that the GeForce GTX 680, which is faster in synthetic benchmarks, is equaled or even surpassed by equally-clocked or slightly higher-clocked GTX 670s. This isn't caused by a processor limitation, since we can try different GPU clocks and see immediate frame rate scaling. Rather, we suspect a driver problem. There doesn't seem to be any other explanation.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 114 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 14 Hide
    LonelyMan , June 29, 2012 4:31 AM
    Where is the msi gtx 670 power edition?
  • 10 Hide
    FormatC , June 29, 2012 4:53 AM
    Quote:
    Where is the msi gtx 670 power edition?
    The roundup was published in German on May 22, 2012:
    http://www.tomshardware.de/Nvidia-Geforce-GTX-670-Roundup,testberichte-241027.html

    Sorry, but at this time (and 4 weeks later too) MSI was unable to deliver one of this cards. When MSI starts so late with this cards, then this is not our fault. ;) 
Other Comments
  • 14 Hide
    LonelyMan , June 29, 2012 4:31 AM
    Where is the msi gtx 670 power edition?
  • 0 Hide
    zerokontrol , June 29, 2012 4:34 AM
    Typo on conclusion. "not to loud on loud." That would be the Gigabyte card.
  • 3 Hide
    user 18 , June 29, 2012 4:50 AM
    On the Gigabyte card's page:

    Quote:
    During the course of our testing, we effortlessly set this card to run at 1059 MHz, so we're not sure why Gigabyte held back so much. During testing, we overclocked this card to 1059 MHz quite easily, so we are somewhat surprised by the conservative factory overclock.


    This seems to be saying the same thing twice. Error, or am I missing something?
  • 2 Hide
    hellfire24 , June 29, 2012 4:50 AM
    hey man,where's MSi Twinfrozer IV OC edition?
  • 10 Hide
    FormatC , June 29, 2012 4:53 AM
    Quote:
    Where is the msi gtx 670 power edition?
    The roundup was published in German on May 22, 2012:
    http://www.tomshardware.de/Nvidia-Geforce-GTX-670-Roundup,testberichte-241027.html

    Sorry, but at this time (and 4 weeks later too) MSI was unable to deliver one of this cards. When MSI starts so late with this cards, then this is not our fault. ;) 
  • 7 Hide
    monkeymonk , June 29, 2012 4:57 AM
    Please do this with the 680s
  • 4 Hide
    user 18 , June 29, 2012 4:59 AM
    Also, the second chart on the 'Sound Level and Temperature: Overclocked' page is missing the 'Mhz' label on the speed for the Palit card. It should read '1059 Mhz', while it reads only '1059'.
  • 2 Hide
    LonelyMan , June 29, 2012 5:10 AM
    I'd like to see one for the 680s too, in which the 680 classified and lightning will be present, including others. :D 
  • 5 Hide
    hellfire24 , June 29, 2012 5:14 AM
    please also do battlefield 3 benchmark!
  • 1 Hide
    erunion , June 29, 2012 5:24 AM
    I've been waiting for this review.
  • 0 Hide
    xxplosiv88 , June 29, 2012 5:44 AM
    So glad I bought the ASUS GTX 670 2 weeks ago now :) 
  • 3 Hide
    FormatC , June 29, 2012 5:56 AM
    Quote:
    please also do battlefield 3 benchmark!
    All cards were tested for our charts too (with BF3). Please wait a little bit, our team will update this results soon. :) 

  • -3 Hide
    FormatC , June 29, 2012 6:09 AM
    My phone shows me the right content :D  iPhone? :D 
  • 1 Hide
    fantastik250 , June 29, 2012 6:09 AM
    Love the video's on the graphic card sounds.

    I am wondering, if it would make any difference for sound if the video card's fans were pointing down, instead of pointing at the side. Or if the fan's sound profile, would change because of the orientation of the card.
  • 0 Hide
    mayankleoboy1 , June 29, 2012 6:37 AM
    there have been some reports and rumours that retail 670/680 are achieving much less overclock/boost than the review samples.

    can you take a look at that?
  • -6 Hide
    manwell999 , June 29, 2012 7:30 AM
    "Rather, we suspect a driver problem. There doesn't seem to be any other explanation."

    Tired of this kind of selection bias where any aspect that is subpar is dismissed as a driver issue. Another explanation is the spec sheets are misleading or the conclusions you have about what to expect from extra hardware capacity are wrong.
  • 1 Hide
    keigo_kanzaki , June 29, 2012 8:13 AM
    I would like to read GTX 680 comparison too, and using PCIE 3.0 spec :) 
  • 6 Hide
    hellfire24 , June 29, 2012 10:21 AM
    Quote:
    All cards were tested for our charts too (with BF3). Please wait a little bit, our team will update this results soon. :) 


    thanks man,team toms FTW!
  • 4 Hide
    Anonymous , June 29, 2012 11:07 AM
    Hmm... no EVGA ? :( 
Display more comments