NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 Review Feat. EVGA: Bringing GK104 Down To $400

414 Comments

View All Comments

• chizow - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link

  Hehe ya exactly.
  
  It seems as if many of the apologists willing to give AMD and Nvidia a pass on 28nm pricing are new to the GPU game, or tech toy game for that matter. They just have no historical perspective at all which I'm sure thrills the marketing/finance guys over in Silicon Valley....they can't sink their meathooks into these guys fast enough.
  
  But yeah its not about being able to afford it, its about being able to buy them and actually feel good about the purchase looking back, a week, a month, a year from now. Most people only need to be burned once to learn their lesson, hopefully those early adopters who bought 7970/7950 and GTX 680/690 have learned theirs.

• CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

  Hehe exactly read above, you're wrong. Prove otherwise or shut up. Calling everyone else stupid when you have ZERO EVIDENCE presented doesn't cut it.

• chizow - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

  Zero evidence? Try 10 years of GPU benchmarks. Seriously, try looking at some before commenting because its obvious you haven't paid close enough attention in the past....

• SlyNine - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

  You never provide any valid evidence. But this topic has been debated and historical data is all the proof you need.

• SlyNine - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

  I didn't want to spend 500$, but I did want something 2x as fast as my 5870. So the 680GTX got the bill.
  
  But honestly I wouldn't expect cards to keep evolving at the same rate. Cards used more slots and more power to keep doubling and tripling in performance. That trend cannot go on for long because their is not enough slots and power to do so.
  
  I fully expect all performance increases now to be from architecture improvements and node changes.

• CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

  You guys can claim anything you want with your bland, data absent talking point, so let's examine just how far out of sane bounds you two are ( you and chizow ) - and BTW I'd appreciate the reviewers talking point as well. A full quote will be fine.
  
  Let's skip any insane retentiveness with fancy specific wording you've used as a ruse taken absolutely literally in the hopes that those not noticing a perfectly literal and absolutely strict translation would be fooled by the idea presented, and do a cursory examination:
  
  We can start with the G80 - it morphed into the G92 and G92b which all you slam artists screamed was a rebranded absolute clone.
  
  So we'll take the 9800GTX+ vs- the next released card, the GTX280.
  GTX280 morphed into GTX285
  We can move from the GTX285 to the GTX480 - the GTX480 morphed into the GTX580.
  So we move from GTX580 to GTX680.
  
  Although I have not strictly gone insane talking point ruse literal and used a sort of CHEAT you people espouse with your lousy nm + new die move talking point, what I have is what people actually EXPERIENCED AS CARD RELEASES - so we'll have to go with those.
  
  9800GTX+ to GTX280 (wow that gigantic upgrade )
  
  GTX285 to GTX480 ( wow that gigantic upgrade )
  
  GTX580 to GTX680 ( wow that gigantic upgrade )
  
  Yes, you people are full of it. That's why you keep AVOIDING any real information and figured if you could spew on just the talking point, no one would have to notice what lying crap it is.

• chizow - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

  Once again, your arguments are full of fail or you simply don't know how to read simple benchmarks. Using your own, flawed comparisons, you would see:
  
  9800GTX+ to GTX280 (wow that gigantic upgrade) +70% OR MORE
  
  GTX285 to GTX480 ( wow that gigantic upgrade ) +60% OR MORE
  
  GTX580 to GTX680 ( wow that gigantic upgrade ) +30%......
  
  The reason your comparison is flawed however is because you are comparing half-generations when you compare a refresh to a new generation, so the gap in both time and performance is diminished which decreases value for your $$$.
  
  Correct comparisons are as follows, and when you look at it that way, GTX 680 and all other 28nm parts look EVEN worst in retrospect:
  
  8800GTX to GTX 280: +75% OR MORE
  GTX 280 to GTX 480: +80% OR MORE
  GTX 480 to GTX 680: +40%.....
  
  or if you prefer refresh to refresh but a full generation between them:
  
  9800GTX+ to GTX 285: +75% or MORE
  GTX 285 to GTX 580: +80% or MORE
  GTX 580 to GTX 685???: ???
  
  Seriously just read some benchmarks then come back because it seems you're the only one who doesn't seem to get it.

• CeriseCogburn - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

  For shame for shame - more lies... no wonder you're yelling and you NEVER used benchmarks....
  Let's use anand's historical data !
  
  And let's do it correctly. We go from the card we have now, to the card they release. People now have the GTX580 - and that's what they see in the charts as you whine, bitch and moan and spread your Charlie D FUD. Likewise in former tier jumps/releases.
  So we will use the TRUTH, not some anal retentive abject cheat worded just so, as you two fools suggest we should, to spin your lies ever more "in your favor".
  
  9800GTX+ to GTX280 , crysis, 25fps to 34fps
  
  http://www.anandtech.com/show/2549/11
  
  There it is chizow and it ain't no 75% ! NOT EVEN CLOSE
  
  GTX285 to GTX480 , crysisw, 30fps to 44fps
  
  http://www.anandtech.com/show/2977/nvidia-s-geforc...
  
  Guess you lost on that 80% lie there, too.
  
  GTX580 to GTX680, 41fps to 48fps
  
  http://www.anandtech.com/show/5699/nvidia-geforce-...
  
  NOPE. Certainly not half of the former two moves, with NONE at any 80%,let alone 75%, not even 50%, can't even say 33% increase, EVER.
  
  Sorry chizow, your only lies, anf big ones at that, won't do.

• SlyNine - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

  You're cherry picking. A huge fallacy. Some benchmarks do show 75%+
  
  Plus we are talking about 8800GTX to GTX280. We are not talking about rebaged products with very minor changes.

• CeriseCogburn - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link

  ROFL - I used what was first in line, I provided the information - I BROKE THE GIANT LIE you the amd fanboy have used with ZERO EVIDENCE.
  
  Let's face it, I'm 100% more accurate than you ever attempted to be, merely spewing your talking point in as big a fat fib fashion you could muster.
  
  Of course that's the usual crap from the liars.
  Now you'll just whine the facts I persented vs the no facts you ever presented or even linked to, "don't count".
  
  R O F L - loser ( what else do you expect me to do man - you're making it very difficult to support your opinion guy)