“How do you follow up on Fermi?” That’s the question we had going into NVIDIA’s press briefing for the GeForce GTX 680 and the Kepler architecture earlier this month. With Fermi NVIDIA not only captured the performance crown for gaming, but they managed to further build on their success in the professional markets with Tesla and Quadro. Though it was a very clearly a rough start for NVIDIA, Fermi ended up doing quite well in the end.

So how do you follow up on Fermi? As it turns out, you follow it up with something that is in many ways more of the same. With a focus on efficiency, NVIDIA has stripped Fermi down to the core and then built it back up again; reducing power consumption and die size alike, all while maintaining most of the aspects we’ve come to know with Fermi. The end result of which is NVIDIA’s next generation GPU architecture: Kepler.

Launching today is the GeForce GTX 680, at the heart of which is NVIDIA’s new GK104 GPU, based on their equally new Kepler architecture. As we’ll see, not only has NVIDIA retaken the performance crown with the GeForce GTX 680, but they have done so in a manner truly befitting of their drive for efficiency.

GTX 680 GTX 580 GTX 560 Ti GTX 480
Stream Processors 1536 512 384 480
Texture Units 128 64 64 60
ROPs 32 48 32 48
Core Clock 1006MHz 772MHz 822MHz 700MHz
Shader Clock N/A 1544MHz 1644MHz 1401MHz
Boost Clock 1058MHz N/A N/A N/A
Memory Clock 6.008GHz GDDR5 4.008GHz GDDR5 4.008GHz GDDR5 3.696GHz GDDR5
Memory Bus Width 256-bit 384-bit 256-bit 384-bit
Frame Buffer 2GB 1.5GB 1GB 1.5GB
FP64 1/24 FP32 1/8 FP32 1/12 FP32 1/12 FP32
TDP 195W 244W 170W 250W
Transistor Count 3.5B 3B 1.95B 3B
Manufacturing Process TSMC 28nm TSMC 40nm TSMC 40nm TSMC 40nm
Launch Price $499 $499 $249 $499

Technically speaking Kepler’s launch today is a double launch. On the desktop we have the GTX 680, based on the GK104 GPU. Meanwhile in the mobile space we have the GT640M, which is based on the GK107 GPU. While NVIDIA is not like AMD in that they don’t announce products ahead of time, it’s a sure bet that we’ll eventually see GK107 move up to the desktop and GK104 move down to laptops in the future.

What you won’t find today however – and in a significant departure from NVIDIA’s previous launches – is Big Kepler. Since the days of the G80, NVIDIA has always produced a large 500mm2+ GPU to serve both as a flagship GPU for their consumer lines and the fundamental GPU for their Quadro and Tesla lines, and have always launched with that big GPU first. At 294mm2 GK104 is not Big Kepler, and while NVIDIA doesn’t comment on unannounced products, somewhere in the bowels of NVIDIA Big Kepler certainly lives, waiting for its day in the sun. As such this is the first NVIDIA launch where we’re not in a position to talk about the ramifications for Tesla or Quadro, or really for that matter what NVIDIA’s peak performance for this generation might be.

Anyhow, we’ll jump into the full architectural details of GK104 in a bit, but let’s quickly talk about the specs first. Unlike Fermi or AMD’s GCN, Kepler is not a brand new architecture. To be sure there are some very important changes, but at a high level the workings of Kepler have not significantly changed compared to Fermi. With Kepler what we’re ultimately looking at is a die shrunk distillation of Fermi, and in the case of GK104 that’s specifically a distillation of GF114 rather than GF110.

Starting from the top, GTX 680 features a fully enabled GK104 GPU – unlike the first generation of Fermi products there are no shenanigans with disabled units here. This means GTX 680 has 1536 CUDA cores, a massive increase from GTX 580 (512) and GTX 560 Ti (384). Note however that NVIDIA has dropped the shader clock with Kepler, opting instead to double the number of CUDA cores to achieve the same effect, so while 1536 CUDA cores is a big number it’s really only twice the number of cores of GF114 as far as performance is concerned. Joining those 1536 CUDA cores are 32 ROPs and 128 texture units; the number of ROPs is effectively unchanged from GF114, while the number of texture units has been doubled. Meanwhile on the memory and cache side of things GTX 680 features a 256-bit memory bus coupled with 512KB of L2 cache.

As for clockspeeds, GTX 680 will introduce a few wrinkles courtesy of Kepler. As we mentioned before, the shader clock is gone in Kepler, with everything now running off of the core clock (or as NVIDIA likes to put it, the graphics clock). At the same time Kepler introduces the Boost Clock – effectively a turbo clock for the GPU – so we still have a 3rd clock to pay attention to. With that said, GTX 680 ships at a base clock of 1006MHz and a boost clock of 1058MHz. On the memory side of things NVIDIA has finally managed to fully hammer out their memory controller, allowing NVIDIA to ship with a memory clock of 6.006GHz.

Taken altogether, on paper GTX 680 has roughly 195% the shader performance, 260% the texture performance, 87% of the ROP performance, and 100% of the memory bandwidth of GTX 580. Or as compared to its more direct ancestor the GTX 560 Ti, GTX 680 has 244% of the shader performance, 244% of the texture performance, 122% of the ROP performance, and 150% of the memory bandwidth of GTX 560 Ti. Compared to GTX 560 Ti NVIDIA has effectively doubled every aspect of their GPU except for ROP performance, which is the one area where NVIDIA believes they already have enough performance.

On the power front, GTX 680 has a few different numbers to contend with. NVIDIA’s official TDP is 195W, though as with the GTX 500 series they still consider this is an average number rather than a true maximum. The second number is the boost target, which is the highest power level that GPU Boost will turbo to; that number is 170W. Finally, while NVIDIA doesn’t publish an official idle TDP, the GTX 680 should have an idle TDP of around 15W. Overall GTX 680 is targeted at a power envelope somewhere between GTX 560 Ti and GTX 580, though it’s closer to the former than the latter.

As for GK104 itself, as we’ve already mentioned GK104 is a smaller than average GPU for NVIDIA, with a die size of 294mm2. This is roughly 89% the size of GF114, or compared to GF110 a mere 56% of the size. Inside that 294mm2 NVIDIA packs 3.5B transistors thanks to TSMC’s 28nm process, only 500M more than GF110 and largely explaining why GK104 is so small compared to GF110. Or to once again make a comparison to GF114, this is 1050M (53%) more than GF114, which makes the fact that GK104 doubles most of GF114’s functional units all the more surprising. With Kepler NVIDIA is going to be heavily focusing on efficiency, and this is one such example of Kepler’s efficiency in action.

Last but not least, let’s talk about pricing and availability. GTX 680 is the successor to GTX 580 and NVIDIA will be pricing it accordingly, with an MSRP of $500. This is the same price that the GTX 580 and GTX 480 launched at back in 2010, and while it’s consistent for an x80 video card it’s effectively a conservative price given GK104’s die size. NVIDIA does need to bring their pricing in at the right point to combat AMD, but they’re in no more of a hurry than AMD to start any price wars, so it’s conservative pricing all around for the time being.

AMD’s competition of course is the recently launched Radeon HD 7970 and 7950. Priced at $550 and $450, the GTX 680 sits right in between them in terms of pricing. However with regard to gaming performance the GTX 680 is generally more than a match for the 7970, which is going to leave AMD in a tough spot. AMD’s partners do have factory overclocked cards, but those only close the performance gap at the cost of an even wider price gap. NVIDIA has priced the GTX 680 to undercut the 7970, and that’s exactly what will be happening today.

As for availability, we’re told that it should be similar to past high end video card launches, which is to say it will be touch and go. As with any launch NVIDIA has been stockpiling cards but it’s still a safe bet that GTX 680 will sell out in the first day. Beyond the initial launch it’s not clear whether NVIDIA will be able to keep up with demand over the next month or so. NVIDIA has been fairly forthcoming to their investors about how 28nm production is going, and while yields have been acceptable TSMC doesn’t have enough wafers to satisfy all of their customers at once, so NVIDIA is still getting fewer wafers than they’d like. Until very recently AMD’s partners have had a difficult time keeping the 7970 in stock, and it’s likely it will be the same story for NVIDIA’s partners.

The Kepler Architecture: Fermi Distilled
Comments Locked

404 Comments

View All Comments

  • _vor_ - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link

    All I read is blah blah blah NVIDIA blah blah nerdrage blah blah.
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link

    I'll translate for the special people that need more help.
    AMD's IQ has been bad since 5000 series, with 6000 series also screwey.
    You will have shimmering in game textures and lines in shading transitions on screen since their algorithm has been messed up for years, even though it is angle independent and a perfect circle, IT SUCKS in real life - aka gaming.
    Nvidia doesn't have this problem, and hasn't had it since before the 5000 series amd cards.
    AMD's 7000 series tries once again to fix the ongoing issues, but fails in at least 2 known places, having only Dx9 support, but may have the shimmering and shading finally tackled and up to Nvidia quality, at least in one synthetic check.
  • _vor_ - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link

    How much is NVIDIA paying you to babysit this discussion and zealously post?

    "It's better to keep quiet and people think you are a fool, than to open your mouth and prove them right."
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link

    Words right from anandtechs articles, and second attack.
    A normal person would be thankful for the information.
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link

    Did you notice the Nvidia card won Civ5 by more than the amd did in Metro2033, but Civ5 is declared a tie, and well we know what everyone is claiming for Metro2033.
    I noticed that and thought it was quite interesting how that was accomplished.
  • BoFox - Monday, March 26, 2012 - link

    AMD's angle-independent AF is still flawed in that it's not fully trilinear when it comes to high-frequency textures (noisy moire). You'd be seeing lines of transition when everything suddenly becomes a bit blurry in a distance with these kinds of grainy textures.

    It's rather subjective, though.

    Nvidia does offer up to 32x CSAA with TRAA (transparent, or alpha textures) in DX10/11 games for superb IQ without having to use brute-force SSAA. AMD does not currently support "forced" AAA (Adaptive AA) on alpha textures in DX10/11 games, and the SSAA support in DX10/11 games was finally announced in beta driver support form with HD 7970 cards.

    Transparency AA has been around since 2005, and Nvidia actually maintained the quality IQ options for DX10/11 games compared to DX9 games all along.
  • ati666 - Monday, March 26, 2012 - link

    did AMD fix this problem in their HD7970 or not?
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link

    We will find out what's wrong with it a year from now when the next series big 8000 is launched, until then denials and claims it's as good as nvidia are standard operating procedure, and spinning useless theoretical notions that affect gameplay exactly zero and have amd IQ disadvantages will be spun in a good light for amd to get all the amd fans claiming the buzzwords are a win.
    That will work like it has for the last 3 releases, 4000, 5000, and 6000, and we just heard the 7000 series fixes that fix the 5000 and 6000 crud that was covered up until now in the 7970 release article.
    So amd users will suffer bad IQ in several ways while buzzing up words that are spun from this website as notional greatness and perfectness of amd till like, next release... then your question will be answered - just try to not notice anything until then, ok ?
  • blanarahul - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link

    I was confused as to GPU Boost was necessary or not. Thanks for making the difference clear.
  • ammyt - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link

    Dafuq y'all saying?
    The benchmarks are tight in front of your faces! The 680 is tied with the 7950, which surpasses it by a little, and the 7970 is the leader. The 7950 is cheaper by a little margin, but the 7970 is roughly $80 more expensive. What are y'all fighting for?

    If I were to choose between the 680, 7950, 7970, I will choose the 7950, cheaper, and a faster by a little margin than the 680. I don't care how or why (memory clock, architecture, bla bla bla) but the benchmarks are in front of you! Clearly, anandtech is biased towards Nvidia.

    (Perhaps they're getting paid from them more than AMD...)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now