GeForce GTX 670 2 GB Review: Is It Already Time To Forget GTX 680?

Features
By
published

Not like it was ever really widely available anyway, right? The GeForce GTX 670 offers most of GK104's on-chip resources, doesn't give up much performance, and costs $100 less. Now, let's see if Nvidia can make enough of them to satisfy demand.

Test Setup And Benchmarks

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Test Hardware
ProcessorsIntel 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
MotherboardGigabyte X79-UD5 (LGA 2011) X79 Express Chipset, BIOS F10
MemoryG.Skill 16 GB (4 x 4 GB) DDR3-1600, F3-12800CL9Q2-32GBZL @ 9-9-9-24 and 1.5 V
Hard DriveIntel SSDSC2MH250A2 250 GB SATA 6Gb/s
GraphicsNvidia GeForce GTX 670 2 GB (@ 915/1502 MHz)
Row 5 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4 GB
Row 6 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2 GB
Row 7 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 7970 3 GB
Row 8 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 7950 3 GB
Row 9 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 6990 4 GB
Row 10 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 3 GB
Row 11 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 580 1.5 GB
Power SupplyCooler Master UCP-1000 W
System Software And Drivers
Operating SystemWindows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
DirectXDirectX 11
Graphics DriverNvidia GeForce Release 301.33 (For GTX 670, GTX 680, GTX 690)
Row 17 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce Release 296.10 (For GTX 580 and 590)
Row 18 - Cell 0 AMD Catalyst 12.4 (For HD 7970, HD 7950)
Row 19 - Cell 0 AMD Catalyst 12.2 (For HD 6990)

We had a couple of extra days to get the GeForce GTX 670 review wrapped up, so we re-ran the GeForce GTX 680 using Nvidia's newer 301.33 driver. We also re-ran the Radeon HD 7970 and 7950 using Catalyst 12.4. The CrossFire numbers come from GeForce GTX 690 Review: Testing Nvidia's Sexiest Graphics Card, where we also used the Catalyst 12.4 driver package.

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Games
Battlefield 3Ultra Quality Settings, No AA / 16x AF, 4x MSAA / 16x AF, v-sync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, DirectX 11, Going Hunting, 90-second playback, Fraps
Crysis 2DirectX 9 / DirectX 11, Ultra System Spec, v-sync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, No AA / No AF, Central Park, High-Resolution Textures: On
Metro 2033High Quality Settings, AAA / 4x AF, 4x MSAA / 16x AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, Built-in Benchmark, Depth of Field filter Disabled, Steam version
DiRT 3Ultra High Settings, No AA / No AF, 8x AA / No AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, Steam version, Built-In Benchmark Sequence, DX 11
The Elder Scrolls V: SkyrimHigh Quality (8x AA / 8x AF) / Ultra Quality (8x AA, 16x AF) Settings, FXAA enabled, v-sync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, 25-second playback, Fraps
3DMark 11Version 1.03, Extreme Preset
HAWX 2Highest Quality Settings, 8x AA, 1920x1200, Retail Version, Built-in Benchmark, Tessellation on/off
World of Warcraft: CataclysmUltra Quality Settings, No AA / 16x AF, 8x AA / 16x AF, From Crushblow to The Krazzworks, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, Fraps, DirectX 11 Rendering, x64 Client
SiSoftware Sandra 2012Sandra Tech Support (Engineer) 2012.SP4, GP Processing and GP Bandwidth Modules
CyberLink MediaEspresso 6.5449 MB MPEG-2 1080i Video Sample to Apple iPad 2 Profile (1024x768), 189 MB H.264 1080i Video Sample to Apple iPad 2 Profile (1024x768)
LuxMark 2.064-bit Binary, Version 1.0, Classroom Scene
Chris Angelini
Chris Angelini
Chris Angelini is an Editor Emeritus at Tom's Hardware US. He edits hardware reviews and covers high-profile CPU and GPU launches.
195 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Running to buy it!
    Reply
  • tecmo34
    Great Review Chris!!

    Though there isn't really a performance hit but it would be great to have seen the GTX 670 running at PCIe 3.0.
    Reply
  • borden5
    amd price reduce 2.0 xD
    Reply
  • master9716
    OMFG no 5760x1080 benchmarks again?!! ima have to go to hardware.info or something wow!
    Reply
  • TheBigTroll
    YAHHHHHHH!!! time to get one
    Reply
  • gilgamex101
    "Dude.......seriously!?........you sure?.......wait wait, what about image qual--.....no......looks fine.........awwww.......AWWWWWWW !@#$......!@#$.........!@#$ !^&* *&^%$#@!@.....and you !$%^*(......green peice of !@#$%............GREAT.......JUST BEAUTIFUL.....- AMD in response to 670 GTX reviews
    Reply
  • iceman1992
    $400 is still too high for me... Waiting for something around $225
    Reply
  • rglaredo
    I hate Nvidia and their supply and demand game ...it is obvious that they are just holding off the cards to inflate the prices...I'm going with AMD ....because I'm tired of waiting ...I'm not going to wait anymore ..
    Reply
  • sayantan
    Nice move nV , forcing AMD to drop their prices for entire lineup. A 7970 at $400 would be really awesome...
    Reply
  • godfather666
    The list of games is very unfair to AMD cards. Techpowerup's review, which featured a much longer list of games, had the Radeon HD 7970 faster than the GTX 670 at all resolutions 1080p and higher.

    Nvidia has had a big lead in Dirt 3 and WoW for a very long time. This skews the results.

    The GTX 670 is a fantastic card, don't get me wrong. Just pointing out that it's being slightly overrated here.
    Reply