NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 Review: Ultra Expensive, Ultra Rare, Ultra Fast
by Ryan Smith on May 3, 2012 9:00 AM ESTCrysis: Warhead
Kicking things off as always is Crysis: Warhead. It’s no longer the toughest game in our benchmark suite, but it’s still a technically complex game that has proven to be a very consistent benchmark. Thus even four years since the release of the original Crysis, “but can it run Crysis?” is still an important question, and the answer when it comes to setups using a pair of high-end 28nm GPUs is “you better damn well believe it.”
Crysis was a game that Kepler didn’t improve upon by a great deal compared to the Fermi based GTX 580. NVIDIA sees some good SLI scaling here, but AMD’s performance lead with a single GPU translates into an equally impressive lead with multiple GPUs; in spite of all of its capabilities the GTX 690 trails the 7970CF by 18% here. So long as AMD gets good Crossfire scaling here, there’s just no opening for Kepler to win, allowing AMD to handily trounce the GTX 690 here.
As for the intra-NVIDIA comparisons, the GTX 690 does well for itself here. Performance relative to the GTX 680 SLI at 2560 is 98%, which represents a 77% lead over the GTX 680. Overall performance is quite solid; at 55.7fps we’re nearly to 60fps on Enthusiast quality at 2560 with 4x MSAA, which is the holy grail for a video card. Even 5760 is over 60fps, albeit at lower quality settings and without AA.
It’s taken nearly 4 years, but we’re almost there; Crysis at maximum on a single video card.
Our minimum framerates are much the same story for NVIDIA. The GTX 690 once again just trails the GTX 680 SLI, while interestingly enough the dual-GPU NVIDIA solutions manage to erode AMD’s lead at a single point: 2560. Here they only trail by 8%, versus 20%+ at 5760 and 1920. Though at 1920 we also see another interesting outcome: the GTX 580 SLI beats the GTX 680 SLI and GTX 690 in minimum framerates. This would further support our theory that the GTX 680 is memory bandwidth starved in Crysis, especially at the lowest performance points.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
200 Comments
View All Comments
bobsmith1492 - Thursday, May 3, 2012 - link
It's not that rare; I got a fairly inexpensive 24" 1920x1200 HP monitor from Newegg a year ago. There weren't many options but it was there and it's great.a5cent - Thursday, May 3, 2012 - link
You are right that the average Joe doesn't have a 1920x1200 monitor, but this is an enthusiast web-site! Not a single enthusiast I know owns a 1080 display. 1920x1200 monitors aren't hard to find, but you will need to spend a tad more.CeriseCogburn - Saturday, May 5, 2012 - link
Nope, 242 vs 16 is availability, you lose miserably. You all didn't suddenly have one along with your "friends" you suddenly acquired and have memorized their monitor sizes instantly as well.ROFL - the lies are innumerable at this point.
UltraTech79 - Thursday, May 3, 2012 - link
They make up about 10% stock. I wouldn't call that very rare. Newegg and other places have a couple dozen+ to choose from.Maybe YOU dont buy very much.
CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, May 8, 2012 - link
Closer to 5% than it is to 10%, and they cost a lot more for all the moaning penny pinchers who've suddenly become flush.Digimonkey - Thursday, May 3, 2012 - link
It's either 1920x1200 @ 60hz, or 1920x1080 @ 120hz. I prefer smoother gameplay over 120 pixels. Also I know quite a few gamers that like using their TV for their PC gaming, so this would also be limited to 1080p.CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 4, 2012 - link
No one here is limited, they all said, so no one uses their big screens, they all want it @ 1200P now because amd loses not so badly there...ROFL
Dracusis - Thursday, May 3, 2012 - link
I'm be more worried about AMD's performance going down in certain games due to Crossfire than something as trival as this. As a 4870X2 owner I can tell you this is not at all uncommon for AMD. I still have to disable 1 GPU in most games, including BF3, because AMDs drivers for any card more than 12 months old are just terrible. As you can see even the 6990 is being beat by a 6970 in games as modern as Skyrim - their drivers are just full of fail.Galidou - Thursday, May 3, 2012 - link
A much higher percentage?!? that's 7% more... nothing extraordinary...Let's just say a higher percentage, when you say much, it makes us beleive Nvidia's paying you.CeriseCogburn - Saturday, May 5, 2012 - link
10% you might be able to ignore, 17% you cannot. It's much higher, it changes several of the games here as to who wins in the article in the accumulated benches.It's a big difference.