Sound Level And Temperature: Overclocked
Normalizing Clocks To Test Cooling Performance
We set all cards to employ a 1059 MHz GPU clock (which the reference board handles at a load temp under 80°C) and a 1527 MHz memory frequency. All of the boards ran at that combination of clock rates without crashing throughout testing.
A look at the thermal and sound level measurements at this clock rate make it clear that our critiques on Zotac's card were premature. All of the other cards have to work hard in this environment, while the AMP! Edition board gets to relax a bit.
To our surprise, Nvidia's reference card can keep up with the pack. It even pulls in front of two three-slot competitors. The high bar of 78°C is no cause for concern; this is an intentional stress test.
Cooling Them Down to 70°C
Our next comparison involves measuring acoustics when we dial in a fan speed able to hold each card at 70°C, a temperature chosen for its long-term attractiveness in heavy workloads like Bitcoin mining. We're using each card at its factory clock rate because overclocked reference cards simply cannot hold 70°C.
Zotac's AMP! Edition board shines here. It can even spin slower to maintain 70°C at this lower clock rate. But the real winners are Asus and Gigabyte. Meanwhile, our Galaxy/KFA² board again annoys us with its high-frequency chirping.
Related Stories :
- GeForce GTX 670 2 GB Review: Is It Already Time To Forget GTX 680?
- Seven GeForce GTX 670 Cards, Benchmarked And Reviewed
- GeForce GTX 690 Review: Testing Nvidia's Sexiest Graphics Card
- Asus Has Launched Its Mini GeForce GTX 670 Early
- GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost Review: A Budget-Oriented GK106-Based Boss
- Deals Oct. 18: Galaxy GeForce GTX 670 $334.99 FS
- GeForce GTX 650 Ti Review: Nvidia's Last Graphics Card For 2012
- Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 And 660 Review: Kepler At $110 And $230
- GeForce GTX 660 Ti Review: Nvidia's Trickle-Down Keplernomics
- GeForce GTX 680 2 GB Review: Kepler Sends Tahiti On Vacation
Where is the msi gtx 670 power edition?
Typo on conclusion. "not to loud on loud." That would be the Gigabyte card.
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.[/QUOTE]
This seems to be saying the same thing twice. Error, or am I missing something?
hey man,where's MSi Twinfrozer IV OC edition?
Where is the msi gtx 670 power edition?
The roundup was published in German on May 22, 2012:
http://www.tomshardware.de/Nvidia- [...] 41027.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.
Please do this with the 680s
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'.
I'd like to see one for the 680s too, in which the 680 classified and lightning will be present, including others.
please also do battlefield 3 benchmark!
I've been waiting for this review.
So glad I bought the ASUS GTX 670 2 weeks ago now
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.
My phone shows me the right content
iPhone? 
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.
Where is this test lab located at? Middle East? Here in the US, most popular brands nVidia GPU are EVGA, MSI and I don't see they're on the list. That stopped me reading at page 2. Good night.
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?
"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.
I would like to read GTX 680 comparison too, and using PCIE 3.0 spec
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!