NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 Review Feat. EVGA: Bringing GK104 Down To $400
by Ryan Smith on May 10, 2012 9:00 AM ESTIn a typical high-end GPU launch we’ll see the process take place in phases over a couple of months if not longer. The new GPU will be launched in the form of one or two single-GPU cards, with additional cards coming to market in the following months and culminating in the launch of a dual-GPU behemoth. This is the typical process as it allows manufacturers and board partners time to increase production, stockpile chips, and work on custom designs.
But this year things aren’t so typical. GK104 wasn’t the typical high-end GPU from NVIDIA, and neither it seems is there anything typical about its launch.
NVIDIA has not been wasting any time in getting their complete GK104 based product lineup out the door. Just 6 weeks after the launch of the GeForce GTX 680, NVIDIA launched the GeForce GTX 690, their dual-GK104 monster. Now only a week after that NVIDIA is at it again, launching the GK104 based GeForce GTX 670 this morning.
Like its predecessors, GTX 670 will fill in the obligatory role as a cheaper, slower, and less power-hungry version of NVIDIA’s leading video card. This is a process that allows NVIDIA to not only put otherwise underperforming GPUs to use, but to satisfy buyers at lower price points at the same time. Throughout this entire process the trick to successfully launching any second-tier card is to try to balance performance, prices, and yields, and as we’ll see NVIDIA has managed to turn all of the knobs just right to launch a very strong product.
| GTX 680 | GTX 670 | GTX 580 | GTX 570 | |
| Stream Processors | 1536 | 1344 | 512 | 480 |
| Texture Units | 128 | 112 | 64 | 60 |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 | 48 | 40 |
| Core Clock | 1006MHz | 915MHz | 772MHz | 732MHz |
| Shader Clock | N/A | N/A | 1544MHz | 1464MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1058MHz | 980MHz | N/A | N/A |
| Memory Clock | 6.008GHz GDDR5 | 6.008GHz GDDR5 | 4.008GHz GDDR5 | 3.8GHz GDDR5 |
| Memory Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit | 384-bit | 320-bit |
| VRAM | 2GB | 2GB | 1.5GB | 1.25GB |
| FP64 | 1/24 FP32 | 1/24 FP32 | 1/8 FP32 | 1/8 FP32 |
| TDP | 195W | 170W | 244W | 219W |
| Transistor Count | 3.5B | 3.5B | 3B | 3B |
| Manufacturing Process | TSMC 28nm | TSMC 28nm | TSMC 40nm | TSMC 40nm |
| Launch Price | $499 | $399 | $499 | $349 |
Like GeForce GTX 680, GeForce GTX 670 is based on NVIDIA’s GK104 GPU. So we’re looking at the same Kepler design and the same Kepler features, just at a lower level of performance. As always the difference is that since this is a second-tier card, NVIDIA is achieving that by harvesting otherwise defective GPUs.
In a very unusual move for NVIDIA, for GTX 670 they’re disabling one of the eight SMXes on GK104 and lowering the core clock a bit, and that’s it. GTX 670 will ship with 7 active SMXes, all 32 of GK104’s ROPs, and all 4 GDDR5 memory controllers. Typically we’d see NVIDIA hit every aspect of the GPU at once in order to create a larger performance gap and to maximize the number of GPUs they can harvest – such as with the GTX 570 and its 15 SMs & 40 ROPs – but not in this case.
Meanwhile clockspeeds turn out to be equally interesting. Officially, both the base clock and the boost clock are a fair bit lower than GTX 680. GTX 670 will ship at 915MHz for the base clock and 980MHz for the boost clock, which is 91MHz (9%) and 78MHz (7%) lower than the GTX 680 respectively. However as we’ve seen with GTX 680 GK104 will spend most of its time boosting and not necessarily just at the official boost clock. Taken altogether, depending on the game and the specific GPU GTX 670 has the capability to boost within 40MHz or so of GTX 680, or about 3.5% of the clockspeed of its more powerful sibling.
As for the memory subsystem, like the ROPs they have not been touched at all. GTX 670 will ship at the same 6.008GHz memory clockspeed of GTX 680 with the same 256-bit memory bus, giving it the same 192GB/sec of memory bandwidth. This is particularly interesting as NVIDIA has always turned down their memory clocks in the past, and typically taken out a memory controller/ROP combination in the past. Given that GK104 is an xx4 GPU rather than a full successor to GF110 and its 48 ROPs, it would seem that NVIDIA is concerned about their ROP and memory performance and will not sacrifice performance there for GTX 670.
Taken altogether, this means at base clocks GTX 670 has 100% of the memory bandwidth, 91% of the ROP performance, and 80% of the shader performance of GTX 680. This puts GTX 670’s specs notably closer to GTX 680 than GTX 570 was to GTX 580, or GTX 470 before it. In order words the GTX 670 won’t trail the GTX 680 by as much as the GTX 570 trailed the GTX 580 – or conversely the GTX 680 won’t have quite the same lead as the GTX 580 did.
As for power consumption, the gap between the two is going to be about the same as we saw between the GTX 580 and GTX 570. The official TDP of the GT 670 is 170W, 25W lower than the GTX 680. Unofficially, NVIDIA’s GPU Boost power target for GTX 670 is 141W, 29W lower than the GTX 680. Thus like the GTX 680 the GTX 670 has the lowest TDP for a part of its class that we’ve seen out of NVIDIA in quite some time.
Moving on, unlike the GTX 680 launch NVIDIA is letting their partners customize right off the bat. GTX 670 will launch with a mix of reference, semi-custom, and fully custom designs with a range of coolers, clockspeeds, and prices. There are a number of cards to cover over the coming weeks, but today we’ll be looking at EVGA’s GeForce GTX 670 Superclocked alongside our reference GTX 670.
As we’ve typically seen in the past, custom cards tend to appear when GPU manufacturers and their board partners feel more comfortable about GPU availability and this launch is no different. The GTX 670 launch is being helped by the fact that NVIDIA has had an additional 7 weeks to collect suitable GPUs compared to the GTX 680 launch, on top of the fact that these are harvested GPUs. With that said NVIDIA is still in the same situation they were in last week with the launch of the GTX 690: they already can’t keep GK104 in stock.
_thumb.jpg)
_(G57-V100950)_thumb.jpg)
Due to binning GTX 670 isn’t drawn from GTX 680 inventory, so it’s not a matter of these parts coming out of the same pool, but realistically we don’t expect NVIDIA to be able to keep GTX 670 in stock any better than they can GTX 680. The best case scenario is that GTX 680 supplies improve as some demand shifts down to the GTX 670. In other words Auto-Notify is going to continue to be the best way to get a GTX 600 series card.
Finally, let’s talk pricing. If you were expecting GTX 570 pricing for GTX 670 you’re going to come away disappointed. Because NVIDIA is designing GTX 670 to perform closer to GTX 680 than with past video cards they’re also setting the prices higher. GTX 670 will have an MSRP of $399 ($50 higher than GTX 570 at launch), with custom cards going for higher yet. This should dampen demand some, but we don’t expect it will be enough.
Given its $399 MSRP, the GTX 670 will primarily be competing with the $399 Radeon HD 7950. However from a performance perspective the $479 7970 will also be close competition depending on the game at hand. AMD’s Three For Free promo has finally gone live, so they’re countering NVIDIA in part based on the inclusion of Deus Ex, Nexuiz, and DiRT Showdown with most 7900 series cards.
Below that we have AMD’s Radeon HD 7870 at $350, while the GTX 570 will be NVIDIA’s next card down at around $299. The fact that NVIDIA is even bothering to mention the GTX 570 is an interesting move, since it means they expect it to remain as part of their product stack for some time yet.
Update 5/11: NVIDIA said GTX 670 supply would be better than GTX 680 and it looks like they were right. As of this writing Newegg still has 5 of 7 models still in stock, which is far better than the GTX 680 and GTX 690 launches. We're glad to see that NVIDIA is finally able to keep a GTX 600 series card in stock, particularly a higher volume part like GTX 670.
| Spring 2012 GPU Pricing Comparison | |||||
| AMD | Price | NVIDIA | |||
| $999 | GeForce GTX 690 | ||||
| $499 | GeForce GTX 680 | ||||
| Radeon HD 7970 | $479 | ||||
| Radeon HD 7950 | $399 | GeForce GTX 670 | |||
| Radeon HD 7870 | $349 | ||||
| $299 | GeForce GTX 570 | ||||
| Radeon HD 7850 | $249 | ||||
| $199 | GeForce GTX 560 Ti | ||||
| $169 | GeForce GTX 560 | ||||
| Radeon HD 7770 | $139 | ||||
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
414 Comments
View All Comments
CeriseCogburn - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link
And thus we can put the "sad performance increase" of this generation to rest, even though you try backing chizow in it in the prior pages.ROFL - way to go.
CknSalad - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
I don't see the point in even getting the 680 GTX. Both nvidia and AMD show a good improvement in their flagship over their best last gen card of about 30-40%. Other than that, I can't help but feel underwhelmed with the current $250 and $350 range cards as they are just merely more power efficient (which is great), but with maybe 5% or so better performance. Hopefully we see better midrange to upper midrange cards in the near future as I don't want to spend anymore than $350, preferably $300-$325. AMD is just looking really bad this round. The only props I can give them is that they made a good gaming and compute card at the same time. Unfortunately, I feel that most gamers will not care too much for compute. It'll depend mainly on if games will become more compute heavy like metro 2033 or Crysis, but I highly doubt it as most games are consolized and with even the next gen consoles, pc games will still be a bit held back by the next gen consoles.raghu78 - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
I can't help but be surprised by how unintelligent your comments are. Look at the most demanding games released in the last 12 months - BF3, Alan Wake, Crysis 2, Batman Arkham City, The Witcher 2, Shogun 2 Total War, Anno 2070. Are you able to max out these games at 2560 x 1600 and get 60 fps. No you can't. I can bet the HD 7970 will win or tie each one of these games with the GTX 680 OC especially looking at HD 7970 OC editions available at upto 1.1 Ghz with headroom upto 1300 Mhz with voltage OC.What happens when games like Crysis 3 and Metro Last Light release in 2013. They will be hard to max out at 1080p. So please don't make such stupid statements. PC gaming is about gaming at maximum image quality at ultra high resolutions and in fact
last but not the least multi monitor gaming. Also the PS4 and Xbox Next are to be launched in 2013 so the graphics quality of games will improve significantly.
maximumGPU - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
dude please stop it.we get it, your an amd fanboy that had his feelings hurt when the gpu from his favourite manufacturer loses the race.
Don't give one website or one review as evidence. Taken as a whole and across many reviews, most put the 680 on top as fastest card available stock for stock. ( for gaming, compute is a different story)
start talking OC'ed editions and there won't be consistent comparisons as it's dependent on 3rd party PCB's and coolers. no doubt there will be nicely overclocked cards from both camps, but the most relevant comparison is the one done at stock speeds.
raghu78 - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
this is escapist tendency. People running 1150 Mhz on HD 7970 OC editions at stock voltage are on the forums. i have got their feedback. In fact others who have pushed to 1250 with extra voltage have said the scaling is phenomenal. So if you know the facts then speak. At USD 500 you are talking about the high end of the market where people go for maximum performance with stock voltage OC or maximum voltage OC and some even modify their cards with watercooling. Websites will say what they have to. Its upto you to deduce the real potential and value.Then there is the availability question. All this comparison is irrelevant if you are talking about a product like GTX 680 which 6 weeks after launch is difficult to find. Don't give me the crap that its only extraordinary demand and not a supply problem. I am not hurt at all. In fact I have had Nvidia 7950 GT before my current HD 6950. What pisses me off is the constant 925 Mhz stock comparisons raised by Nvidia fanbois when there are cards like MSI HD 7970 Lightning (1070 Mhz) and Powercolor HD 7970 Vortex II (1100 Mhz).
ksheltarna - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
i just ordered a GTX 680, just sold my 2 year old Radeon HD5850 for 120$I must say, GTX 680 is the best buy for your buck right now.
Only 1 shop had it on stock in Denmark, it` s selling out as soon as it shows up, so i guess there are plenty of enthusiasts out there..:)
I had to add this to my X79 Asus board with the 6 cores I7 and 32 Gb ram..and connected to my two 27 inches dell monitors running at 2560 x 1440..
Now i can play the best games and make music production, all in one workstation..
I` m not a Nvidia fan, was on Amd` s side, also back in time when they use to make good processors, but since then I moved to Intel cores, and now to Nvidia.
Gotta be impartial when it comes to hardware.:)
CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
Here rag, have a looksie, and this time I will translate the chart, but before that imagine the hundreds of thousands on angry nVidia fans who have had to look at YEARS of charts with the GTX570 732 stock core (914 average air OC hwbot) put up against the 6850 or 6970 and now the 7850 and 7870 with much higher stock core clocks...Or the GTX580, an absolute winning monster at stock clocks, and almost always shown at stock clocks 777, very low stock clocks, when just the average OC is 951mhz, nearly 200mhz of raw power higher...
http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/geforce_gtx_58...
So your complaint, if you call it valid, applies to the last THREE nVidia generations... at the very least, and can we say, given the same standard you claim is needed, nVidia was SCREWED for years on end here... ?
YES WE CAN.
Now how about some truth when it comes to "at the same clockspeed" ? There's the link.
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/37209-gefor...
At stock 7970 is only 86.6% and 88.4% the speed of the 680 (1920 and 2560 respectively)
At the same clockspeed as the 680, the 7970 loses twice again, behind about 6% and 4% in each case, 1920X and 2560X resolution.
The 7970 is SLOWER than the 680 at the same clockspeed.
CeriseCogburn - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link
this is escapist tendency, you are in the GTX670 thread raghu78it is $399 and available
it beats the 7970
it's way better
the 7970 costs way more
amd drivers suck
let us know when you've escaped the amd podpeople orbit ship
snakefist - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
"PC gaming is about gaming at maximum image quality at ultra high resolutions and in fact last but not the least multi monitor gaming"hmmm, so PC gaming is basically a 10x costlier console? why do i occasionally like to play a game on my PC, and am rather successful at having fun with it, when i didn't payed 2000$ for it? guess cause i'm unintelligent... oh, ultra high resolution is a nice thing to have, but maximum image quality - often i fail to see any difference, except in framerate, and the faster paced the game is, quality difference is harder to spot, opposite to framerate drops
"Also the PS4 and Xbox Next are to be launched in 2013 so the graphics quality of games will improve significantly."
you are aware that all three new gaming consoles will be based on medium-range AMD cards, aren't you? and still expect that graphics quality will increase significantly? both AMD and NVIDIA are likely to have another generation of cards launched by then...
raghu78 - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
You want a good example. Alan Wake on Xbox 360 and Alan Wake on PC at 2560 x 1600 maxed out. Try the difference. I have played Alan Wake on PC at 1080p maxed out. I can say it was fantastic. I have seen the Xbox 360 versions on youtube. The quality is much better on the PC. Its just not just texture quality, anti aliasing but even lighting and visual effects like god rays.I can say that BF3 would similarly look much better on the PC maxed out in DX11 at 2560 x 1600. If you prefer to cheap out and go for the console its fine. But the PC is the ultimate gaming platform.