It's a simple matter of examining the hardware. I'd be more than happy to compare benchmarks head to head. You can make as many snide comments as you want, it doesn't change that.
Haha... Pity after upgrading to surround I was really hoping to at least break even... It's just not going to happen right now. I was willing to pay the $50~ price increase too, but at this point it seems performance wise unless I spend over double what I've already spent and go SLI/CF this gen is pretty lacking.
There was nothing snide about what I said, it was all entirely a matter of fact. http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1881/7/ The fastest pre-overclocked hd7970 loses more often than not to the gtx680 at stock speeds - kind of strange for a GPU that "has more potential" to be losing more often than not. Again, before jumping to conclusions, lets wait and see how/if custom AIB cards overclock and if the 132% tdp limit is extended / lifted or is only a function of EVGA's overclocking utility.
Maybe I missed it but even on water, isn't there going to be a limit to how much the 680 will ultimately be able to be overclocked since the voltage can't be increased? I thought I had read where, at least so far, the max voltage is locked and there isn't a solution to increase that beyond what nvidia allows. So even if you keep the temps in line, there's only so much the cards would be capable of without an ov?
According to the TechPowerUp review, the voltage regulator on the reference 680 doesn't support software voltage control. Could probably be hardmodded if you're handy with a soldering iron, though. Or better yet just wait for non-reference PCBs geared more toward overclockers, they will most likely include a different voltage regulator that supports I2C and software voltage control.
My understanding is that it's the voltage regulator, not the GPU. And it's not that the voltage regulator supports it but software control is disabled, it's just that for whatever reason, nVidia used a cheaper and less sophisticated voltage regulator on the 680 that doesn't even have support for software voltage control according to TPU. Maybe it was something as innocent as a cost-cutting measure or maybe they didn't want users to overvolt their reference 680s.
Yeah "innocent", cutting every last corner on a 500$ card that seems like 300$ card. So cutting corners on a GTX590 was also innocent?
Is it the circuitry on the PCB that disabled software voltage control, or is it the GPU itself? It sounds like to me Nvidia purposely gimped the GPU, so that when the respin and rebadge it a gtx760 (or whatever), they can raise the core speeds to higher than what most OC'ing users were getting on gtx680. What I also want to know is if the Zotac 2ghz "godly" edition is true or not...
Meh doesn't really matter when it beats AMD's flagship.
However you want to look at it, if AMD had been faster and priced their cards more reasonable this would never had happened.
As it stands Nvidia came in with a faster, quieter, more efficient card, and even looked like the good guy undercutting the 7970 by as much as $100. :awe:
Lame game selection and at 2560 it's a tie. GF wins 3 games so does radeon. Even BF3 is faster on the radeon. Those cards should be benchmarked in Crysis Warhead, Crysis 2, CIV5, The witcher 2, Total War: shogun 2, Batman AC, Dragon Age 2, BF3, metro2033, AVP and not some idiotic games like H.A.W.X 2*. GF would win only in Total War: shogun, Batman AC and Crysis 2.
At $550 the AMd 7970 doesn't make sense anymore, anyone trying to argue otherwise is a moron. As for the price cut I think it should go down to $450. Initially I thought it should go to $400 flat out but if your going to overclock or if you some insane resolution the AMD 7970 might be a better choice for you.
As for those who have a 7970 it seems like a GTX 680 would be a side grade at best and Iwould sugges waiting out for BigK.
^ already shown to be wrong and you keep repeating that NV only wins in titles no one cares about in every thread. Civ5 and Shogun 2 are also won by the 680: Anandtech's own review.
GTX680 wins in 1080P and 1600P in all the more recent games --> Batman AC, BF3, Crysis 2, Civ5, Shogun 2, Witcher 2, Dragon Age 2. It also wins handily in less popular titles such as Hard Reset and dominates in racing titles such as Track Mania and Dirt 3. It also is faster in very popular Blizzard titles (SC2 with MSAA, WOW), which means it'll be better for Diablo 3 too.
Btw, Metro 2033 is completely unplayable on any single-GPU at 1600P maxed out so it shouldn't even be discussed at 1600P as a "win" for single-GPUs. It can't even reach 30 fps on an HD7970. The games where HD7970 has a tangible lead are Crysis 1 / Warhead, AvP, Serious Sam 3 and Anno 2070. If you play those 95% of the time, HD7970 is better. This has been the rule forever: Buy the card that runs the best for the games you personally play or tasks you personally run.
Also, you keep insisting that your country's pricing is the only one that matters. Here in US/Canada, HD7970 costs $50-150 more. If where you live HD7970 is cheaper, it's a good buy, no one is disagreeing.
.
tw, Metro 2033 is completely unplayable on any single-GPU at 1600P maxed out so it shouldn't even be discussed at 1600P as a "win" for single-GPUs. It can't even reach 30 fps on an HD7970
Yup 7970 OC beating 680 OC in BF3. What else is new? Thats why its 50 bucks cheaper.
Not really surprising. As I said earlier, the 7970's have the potential to be much faster. If nvidia or AIB partners release a modified BIOS, then the GX 680 might be competitive. As it stands now, the GTX 680 doesn't get anywhere near the performance gains from overclocking that the 7970 does.By the way, another user at HardOCP is doing performance measurements himself of Max OC 7970s versus Max OC 680s in crossfire and SLI. He has some bf3 results up already.