NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Review: Retaking The Performance Crown
by Ryan Smith on March 22, 2012 9:00 AM ESTBattlefield 3
Its popularity aside, Battlefield 3 may be the most interesting game in our benchmark suite for a single reason: it’s the first AAA DX10+ game. It’s been 5 years since the launch of the first DX10 GPUs, and 3 whole process node shrinks later we’re finally to the point where games are using DX10’s functionality as a baseline rather than an addition. Not surprisingly BF3 is one of the best looking games in our suite, but as with past Battlefield games that beauty comes with a high performance cost
NVIDIA’s cards have always done well at Battlefield 3, which puts the Radeon HD 7900 series in a bad position from the beginning. Short of the GTX 680’s massive lead in the Portal 2 bonus round, this is the single biggest victory for the GTX 680 over the 7970, beating AMD’s best by 28% at 2560, and by continually higher amounts at lower resolutions. Based on our experience with BF3 I’d hesitate to call the 680 fully fluid at 2560 as large firefights can significantly tear into performance relative to Thunder Run, but if it’s not fully fluid then it’s going to be very, very close.
What’s also interesting here is that once again the GTX 680 is doing very well compared to the dual-GPU cards. The GTX 590 and 6990 never pull away from the GTX 680, and at 1920 with FXAA the GTX 680 finally squeaks by and takes the top of the chart. Performance relative to the GTX 580 is also once again good for that matter, with the GTX 680 beating its predecessor by 48% at almost every resolution.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
404 Comments
View All Comments
mm2587 - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
Well I guess we can expect AMD to slash price $50 across the top of their line to fall back into competition. Competion is always good for us consumers.While theres no arguing gtx680 looks like a great card I am a bit dissapointed this generation didn't push the boundries further on both the red and the green side. Hopefully gk100/gk110 is still brewing and we will still see a massive performance increase on the top end of the market this generation.
Unfortunatly I predict the gk100 is either scrapped or will be launched as a gtx 780 a year from now.
MarkusN - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
As far as I know, GK100 got scrapped due to issues but the GK110 is still cooking. ;)CeriseCogburn - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
Competition isn't "the same price with lesser features and lesser performance". I suppose with hardcore fanboys it is, but were talking about reality, and reality dictates the amd card needs to be at least $50 less than the 680..Lepton87 - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
http://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&sl=...So they are basically even at 2560 4xMSAA yet anand doesn't hesitate to call GTX680 indisputable king of the heel. It's strange because 7950 is at least the same amount faster than 580 yet he only implicitly said that it is faster than 580.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-27.h...
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-680-revi...
http://translate.google.ca/translate...itt_einleit...
judging from those results OC7970 is at least as fast if not faster than OC680. Wonder why they didn't directly compare oc numbers, probably this wasn't in nvidia reviewiers guide. Also it's not any better in tandem
http://www.sweclockers.com/recension...li/18#pageh...
Sabresiberian - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
Someone needs to learn how to read charts.What, did you post a bunch of links and think no one was going to check them out?
I'll quote one of your sources, HardwareCanucks:
"After years of releasing inefficient, large and expensive GPUs, NVIDIA's GK104 core - and by association the GTX 680 - is not only smaller and less power hungry than Tahiti but it also outperforms the best AMD can offer by a substantial amount. "
Personally, I don't much care who comes out on top today, what I want is the battle for leadership to continue, for AMD and Nvidia to truly compete with each other, and not fall into some game of appearances.
"Big Kepler" should really establish how much better it is than Tahiti, though I wouldn't be surprised if some AMD fanboys will still turn the charts upside down and backwards to try to make Tahiti the leader - just as they are doing now. Of course, the 7990 dual GPU board will be out by then, and they will claim AMD has the best architecture based on it performing better than Big Kepler (assuming it does).
I don't know what AMD has planned, but I hope they come out with something right after Kepler (September? Too long, Nvidia, too long!) that is new, that will re-establish them. Of course, then there's Maxwell for next year . . .
;)
jigglywiggly - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
it's slower in crysis, it's slowerSabresiberian - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
Yeah? What if it's faster in Crysis 2?http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-68...
(While I get why using a venerable bench that Crysis provides gives us a performance base we're more familiar with, the marks for Crysis 2 show why an older model may not be such a good idea. Clearly, the GTX 680 beats out the Radeon 7970 in most DX9 benchmarks, and ALL DX11 Crysis 2 benches.)
So, your troll doesn't just fail, it epic fails.
SlyNine - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
My problem is the tests are run without AA. I'd rather seen some results with AA as I suspect that would cause the 680GTX to trade blows with the 7970.On the other hand 1920x1200 with 2x AA is AA enough for me.
HighTech4US - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
In the review all the slides are missing.For example: instead of a slide what is seen is this: [efficiency slide] or this [scheduler]
HighTech4US - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
OK, looks like it just got fixed