| Test Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Processors | Intel Core i7-3960X (Sandy Bridge-E) 3.3 GHz at 4.2 GHz (42 * 100 MHz), LGA 2011, 15 MB Shared L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Power-savings enabled |
| Motherboard | Gigabyte X79-UD5 (LGA 2011) X79 Express Chipset, BIOS F10 |
| Memory | G.Skill 16 GB (4 x 4 GB) DDR3-1600, F3-12800CL9Q2-32GBZL @ 9-9-9-24 and 1.5 V |
| Hard Drive | Intel SSDSC2MH250A2 250 GB SATA 6Gb/s |
| Graphics | Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4 GB |
| 2 x Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2 GB | |
| 2 x AMD Radeon HD 7970 3 GB | |
| AMD Radeon HD 7950 3 GB | |
| AMD Radeon HD 6990 4 GB | |
| Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 3 GB | |
| Nvidia GeForce GTX 580 1.5 GB | |
| Power Supply | Cooler Master UCP-1000 W |
| System Software And Drivers | |
| Operating System | Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit |
| DirectX | DirectX 11 |
| Graphics Driver | Nvidia GeForce Release 301.33 (For GTX 690) |
| Nvidia GeForce Release 300.99 and 301.10 (For GTX 680) | |
| Nvidia GeForce Release 296.10 (For GTX 580 and 590) | |
| AMD Catalyst 12.2 (For HD 7950 and HD 6990) | |
| AMD Catalyst 12.4 (For HD 7970) | |
As a rule, we do our testing with the latest drivers each time we start a new story. This ensures that any fixes or performance improvements introduced by a software update get reflected in our coverage.
This time around, however, we don't have that luxury. So, the GeForce GTX 690 is tested using Nvidia's new 301.33 build. From there, we spot-checked the GeForce GTX 680 on its own and in SLI using the public 301.10 release. Then, we did the same thing with AMD's Radeon HD 7970 in one- and two-card configurations using Catalyst 12.4.
| Games | |
|---|---|
| Battlefield 3 | Ultra Quality Settings, No AA / 16x AF, 4x MSAA / 16x AF, v-sync off, 1920x1080 / 2560x1600 / 5760x1080, DirectX 11, Going Hunting, 90-second playback, Fraps |
| Crysis 2 | DirectX 9 / DirectX 11, Ultra System Spec, v-sync off, 1920x1080 / 2560x1600 / 5760x1080, No AA / No AF, Central Park, High-Resolution Textures: On |
| Metro 2033 | High Quality Settings, AAA / 4x AF, 4x MSAA / 16x AF, 1920x1080 / 2560x1600 / 5760x1080, Built-in Benchmark, Depth of Field filter Disabled, Steam version |
| DiRT 3 | Ultra High Settings, No AA / No AF, 8x AA / No AF, 1920x1080 / 2560x1600 / 5760x1080, Steam version, Built-In Benchmark Sequence, DX 11 |
| The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim | High Quality (8x AA / 8x AF) / Ultra Quality (8x AA, 16x AF) Settings, FXAA enabled, vsync off, 1920x1080 / 2560x1600 / 5760x1080, 25-second playback, Fraps |
| 3DMark 11 | Version 1.03, Extreme Preset |
| HAWX 2 | Highest Quality Settings, 8x AA, 1920x1200, Retail Version, Built-in Benchmark, Tessellation on/off |
| World of Warcraft: Cataclysm | Ultra Quality Settings, No AA / 16x AF, 8x AA / 16x AF, From Crushblow to The Krazzworks, 1920x1080 / 2560x1600 / 5760x1080, Fraps, DirectX 11 Rendering, x64 Client |
| SiSoftware Sandra 2012 | Sandra Tech Support (Engineer) 2012.SP4, GP Processing and GP Bandwidth Modules |
| LuxMark 2.0 | 64-bit Binary, Version 1.0, Room Scene |
Previous
Next
Summary
- GeForce GTX 690 4 GB: Hands-Off The Magnesium, Pal!
- Overclocking And Tessellation Performance
- PCI Express 3.0 And What Of GK110?
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11 (DX 11)
- Benchmark Results: Battlefield 3 (DX 11)
- Benchmark Results: Crysis 2 (DX 9 And DX 11)
- Benchmark Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (DX 9)
- Benchmark Results: DiRT 3 (DX 11)
- Benchmark Results: World of Warcraft: Cataclysm (DX 11)
- Benchmark Results: Metro 2033 (DX 11)
- Benchmark Results: Sandra 2012 And LuxMark 2.0
- Noise And Temperatures
- Power Consumption
- GeForce GTX 690 4 GB: Beauty Isn’t Always Practical
Ask a Category Expert
6990 aren't that hard to find. Back in January before the 7000 series came out, you could easily pick one or two up. I am pretty sure in 6 month, the 690 will be easy to grab.
Also the design of this reminds me of my old leadtek 5900
http://www.ixbt.com/video2/images/gffx-27/leadtek-5900lx-front.jpg
GTX 590 launch...
GTX 580 launch price: $500
GTX 590 launch price: $700
Difference: 140%
Now today GTX 690 launch...
GTX 680 launch price: $500
GTX 690 launch price: $1000
Difference: 200%
So, is it just me or is nVidia really gouging on the price here?
Why the hell else would they be charging an additional 43% more than their last dual GPU launch while using less silicon?
Come on AMD, we really need some more competition here.
The only use case for that much graphics hardware is excessively high multi monitor resolutions like 6k x 2k in 3d. AMD doesn't need to invest in new PCB designs to make a dual cpu GCN chip yet because the demand is so low.