GTX680 pics

[Termie]

What's the source on that?
Really, die size should be pretty locked down from the pictures released at this point. If Tahiti really does have 21% more transistors and 14% more power dissipation for the same load, even a performance tie would be a big win for nVidia.

If the GTX680 performs better than the 7970, that would be such a huge disparity that AMD would be screwed this generation. Even at price parity the GTX680 would be a better choice as it performs better, and costs for nVidia would be lower so margins would be higher.

That being said, for the 680 to have 10% more performance than a 7970, it would need to have 36.6% better perf/mm^2 than Tahiti. That's a bit hard to believe. I'd say it's much more likely that GK104 performs similar to or a little below the 7970, on average.

Nvidia has done plenty of things to screw with its customers over the years (GTX465, GTX460SE, 550Ti, and every card under $100), but it will never be so stupid as to release a GTX680 with performance within 10-15% of the GTX580, which is where your estimate would place it. I leave that kind of chicanery to AMD, which in my mind is now king of rolling out new cards with big new numbers that perform just like their old cards but cost more. Even the GTX580 was 20% faster than the GTX480, and it was basically the same card.

If there is a GTX680, and by all indications there is, it will be significantly faster than a GTX580 and will therefore be faster than the 7970. Let's be serious - all Nvidia would need to do to hammer the 7970 is respin the 580 on 28nm and overclock it. They can do better.

 

[Zebo]

The most surprising thing to me is the 256 bit mem. It's been awhile since nV could use this much cheaper solution. They must feel very comfortable about their new chip. I expect 20% over 7970 and thus 35% over GTX 580 since we are guessing.

 

[Meaker10]

Again this was to be their midrange chip.

Also with faster memory controllers they can now get more bandwidth out of the same width.

 

[Termie]

Again this was to be their midrange chip.

Also with faster memory controllers they can now get more bandwidth out of the same width.

Understood, but nVidia simply will not use the GTX680 moniker on a card that performs like a GTX580. If this is midrange, then it won't be called GTX680 and it won't cost $500.

The namegames that nVidia plays are more along the lines of introducing a new card and calling it the same thing as the old card but offering less performance. They won't roll out new names only to offer crappy performance (well, except for the 550Ti).

 

[tviceman]

The most surprising thing to me is the 256 bit mem. It's been awhile since nV could use this much cheaper solution. They must feel very comfortable about their new chip. I expect 20% over 7970 and thus 35% over GTX 580 since we are guessing.

Hmmmm, I would be pleasantly surprised if it averaged 20% over an hd7970... I'm expecting performance to be something more along the lines of how the gtx480 and hd5870 played out at Fermi's release... in other words in the range for 10-15%. For those saying that Nvidia has clocked this chip aggressively to take the performance crown - I think clock speeds are based more on yields than on competitor's products (although I am sure competitor products still hold some sway). Either way, I think there will still be some noticeable overclocking headroom with a supposed TDP of only 190 watts.

With 2x6pin connectors for reference version, it will be interesting to see how well it overclocks. Since it is being priced as an enthusiast product, I personally would rather see 6+8 pin power connectors.

 

[boxleitnerb]

Nvidia has done plenty of things to screw with its customers over the years (GTX465, GTX460SE, 550Ti, and every card under $100), but it will never be so stupid as to release a GTX680 with performance within 10-15% of the GTX580, which is where your estimate would place it. I leave that kind of chicanery to AMD, which in my mind is now king of rolling out new cards with big new numbers that perform just like their old cards but cost more. Even the GTX580 was 20% faster than the GTX480, and it was basically the same card.

If there is a GTX680, and by all indications there is, it will be significantly faster than a GTX580 and will therefore be faster than the 7970. Let's be serious - all Nvidia would need to do to hammer the 7970 is respin the 580 on 28nm and overclock it. They can do better.

9800GTX...:biggrin:
On par or even significantly slower than the 8800GTX. But I highly doubt that will happen again. They would be crucified for it.

 

[Meaker10]

Understood, but nVidia simply will not use the GTX680 moniker on a card that performs like a GTX580. If this is midrange, then it won't be called GTX680 and it won't cost $500.

The namegames that nVidia plays are more along the lines of introducing a new card and calling it the same thing as the old card but offering less performance. They won't roll out new names only to offer crappy performance (well, except for the 550Ti).

You're saying the king of renaming would not rename? Errrrr.......

GTX570M is becoming the 670M.

Nvidia has nothing else, this is why it's the GTX680.

 

[sontin]

Hm, it's a shame that ~3333 X-Points in 3DMark11 is nothing. :|

It will be fun to see how people will call the GTX680 a midrange card while it's on par with the GTX590 and 6990.:awe:

 

[Termie]

You're saying the king of renaming would not rename? Errrrr.......

GTX570M is becoming the 670M.

Nvidia has nothing else, this is why it's the GTX680.

This is not a rename, it's a new product. Even if we say it's a 670Ti renamed to a 680, it flat out must perform significantly faster than a 580. They've had a long time to work on this, and they're not going to introduce 580-performance, call it a 680, and sell it for $500.

 

[chronochime]

Nvidia has done plenty of things to screw with its customers over the years (GTX465, GTX460SE, 550Ti, and every card under $100), but it will never be so stupid as to release a GTX680 with performance within 10-15% of the GTX580, which is where your estimate would place it. I leave that kind of chicanery to AMD, which in my mind is now king of rolling out new cards with big new numbers that perform just like their old cards but cost more. Even the GTX580 was 20% faster than the GTX480, and it was basically the same card.

If there is a GTX680, and by all indications there is, it will be significantly faster than a GTX580 and will therefore be faster than the 7970. Let's be serious - all Nvidia would need to do to hammer the 7970 is respin the 580 on 28nm and overclock it. They can do better.

So 580 being 20% faster than 480 is large amount and "okay" whereas 10-15% for AMD is not? :hmm:

 

[SirPauly]

Hm, it's a shame that ~3333 X-Points in 3DMark11 is nothing. :|

It will be fun to see how people will call the GTX680 a midrange card while it's on par with the GTX590 and 6990.:awe:

That would be utterly impressive to offer GTX 590 and HD 6990 performance out of such a small chip.

 

[omek]

Understood, but nVidia simply will not use the GTX680 moniker on a card that performs like a GTX580. If this is midrange, then it won't be called GTX680 and it won't cost $500.

The namegames that nVidia plays are more along the lines of introducing a new card and calling it the same thing as the old card but offering less performance. They won't roll out new names only to offer crappy performance (well, except for the 550Ti).

They rolled out the 670, found it to be on par with the 7970 and decided to call it the 680. They can get more for less and anything that has an eight in it represents an equivalent AMD flagship competitor. It's baked into the consumers brains.

Fermi naming schemes are also new and surely not set in stone. GTX_80 doesn't have to represent the high end.
Remember the 7800/7900/7950, 8800GT/GTS/GTX/Ultra, 270/275/280/285 ect ect ect.

There are a lot of numbers between 80 and 99. There are also a lot of car/leet speak acronyms that can be stuck at the end of that.

NV is holding the 'real' 680 back until it's needed, no doubt.

 

[Imouto]

If that 550$ leak for the GTX 680 is anywhere close to the truth I wouldn't expect double digits advantage over the 7970.

This is almost the same as Bulldozer price leaks. WOW! An octocore at the same price point as a 2500K? A bargain for such a beast!

NOT

 

[Termie]

So 580 being 20% faster than 480 is large amount and "okay" whereas 10-15% for AMD is not? :hmm:

Take price into consideration and it's not even a close comparison.

GTX480 on introduction = $500
GTX480 upon intro of GTX580 = $420 (Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4008/nvidias-geforce-gtx-580)
GTX580 upon introduction = $500

HD6970 on introduction = $370
HD6970 on intro of HD7970 = $330
AMD HD7970 on introduction = $550

The HD7970 was 30% faster and 66% more expensive than its predecessor. The GTX580 was ~20% faster and 20% more expensive than its predecessor. Source: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970/28.html

Furthermore, the GTX580 was just a slightly modified GTX480, so the modest jump was expected. nVidia will not mess around this time. They're on the defensive and it looks like they have the better design. They will position their card competitively. They will not play name games to fool enthusiasts into spending $500 on a card that underperforms.

 

[f1sherman]

That would be utterly impressive to offer GTX 590 and HD 6990 performance out of such a small chip.

hell yeah, if they managed to squeeze +50% over 580 that would be quite an accomplishment,

and all this meh small-mid-range talk would cease instantly

 

[tviceman]

hell yeah, if they managed to squeeze +50% over 580 that would be quite an accomplishment,

and all this meh small-mid-range talk would cease instantly

As amazing as it would be, I think it's a pipe dream. Big Kepler, whenever it hits, will probably destroy the gtx590/hd6990.

 

[rgallant]

That would be utterly impressive to offer GTX 590 and HD 6990 performance out of such a small chip.

and for only $300.00 per most of the rumors - or do those rumors don't count any more? or has the 30% faster than the 7970 the rumor of the day? @ $550.00 now ok?
-so it was = for $300.00 = to a 7970 most games
- so now it's +30% faster in most games than a7970 with a 82% rumor price driff .[$550]and it's now it's a killer card lol.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

We don't even know what's coming tbh, we have rumors upon rumors.

Wait to see what's coming out, then we can start guessing as to what comes next and when.

A $550 GK104 small die from Nvidia would be pretty lame, no matter the performance. BigK is what interests me, 10-20% over a 580 isn't worth upgrading what I have now for, especially if it's $500+.

 

[f1sherman]

what's the point of Wait to see what's coming out appeal ^^

:sneaky:

 

[tviceman]

and for only $300.00 per most of the rumors - or do those rumors don't count any more? or has the 30% faster than the 7970 the rumor of the day? @ $550.00 now ok?
-so it was = for $300.00 = to a 7970 most games
- so now it's +30% faster in most games than a7970 with a 82% rumor price driff .[$550]and it's now it's a killer card lol.

Most people grounded in reality have not been spitting out > 30% vs. hd7970. And when the $300 rumor was flying around, it was mostly tagged with being slower than an hd7970.

 

[Mopetar]

nVidia will not mess around this time. . . . They will not play name games to fool enthusiasts into spending $500 on a card that underperforms.

They most certainly will, especially if the rumors about GK100 being canceled are true. There's no indication that GK104 under-performs, and honestly, since we don't have a clear indication about how it should perform, there's no way to tell regardless. The only way to classify it at this point would be to know both its price and performance compared to AMD's offerings.

But if a bigger die is at least six months out, which most rumors indicate it is, there's no way that they can't brand what they have as the 680 and just run with it. If they call it a 660, they'll just convince people that something much better is coming out soon and hold off buying until the 680 ships. If the sell it at a significantly lower price relative to its performance with AMD cards they're just shooting themselves in the foot as their ability to supply new cards won't be able to meet demand.

 

[Tempered81]

Dunno what's doing the 7950 there anyway.

 

[Nintendesert]

I can't wait to give Nvidia my money.

 

[blackened23]

I like how the last 2 graphs completely contradict each other, more chiphell fake slides?

 

[tviceman]

I like how the last 2 graphs completely contradict each other, more chiphell fake slides?

Any graph that is generic in design and colors, looks like it was made in less than 20 minutes, and doesn't include actual numbers is fake IMO.