NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 Review Feat. EVGA: Bringing GK104 Down To $400
by Ryan Smith on May 10, 2012 9:00 AM ESTFinal Words
Looking at this data I’m reminded a great deal of the Radeon HD 6900 series launch. AMD launched the 6900 series after the GTX 500 series, but launch order aside the end result was very similar. NVIDIA’s second tier GTX 570 and AMD’s first tier Radeon HD 6970 were tied on average but were anything but equals. This is almost exactly what we’re seeing with the GTX 670 and the Radeon HD 7970.
Depending on the game and resolution we’re looking at the GTX 670 reaches anywhere between 80% and 120% of the 7970’s performance. AMD sails by the GTX 670 in Crysis and to a lesser extent Metro, only for the GTX 670 to shoot ahead in BF3 and Portal 2 (w/SSAA). Officially NVIDIA’s positioning on the GTX 670 is that it’s to go against the 7950 and not the 7970, and that’s a wise move on NVIDIA’s behalf; but the GTX 670 is surely nipping at the 7970’s heels.
With that said, there are a couple of differences from the 6900 series launch which are equally important. The first is that unlike last time the GTX 670 and Radeon HD 7970 are not equally priced. At MSRP the GTX 670 is $80 cheaper, while at cheapest retail it’s closer to $60. The second difference is that this time the competing cards are not nearly as close in power consumption or noise, and thanks to GK104 NVIDIA has a notable advantage there.
Much like the GTX 570 and the Radeon HD 6970, if you’re in the market for cards at these performance levels you need to take a look at both cards and see what kind of performance each card gets on the games you want to play. From our results the GTX 670 is doing better at contemporary games and is cheaper to boot, but the Radeon HD 7970 can hold its own here at multi-monitor resolutions and games like Crysis or Metro. Or for that matter it can still run circles around the GTX 670 in GK104's real weakness: compute tasks
On the other hand if you’re buying a gaming card on price then this isn’t a contest. For the Radeon HD 7950 this is the GTX 680 all over again. NVIDIA can’t quite beat the 7950 in every game (e.g. Crysis), but when it loses it’s close, and when it wins it’s 15%, 25%, even 50% faster. At the same time gaming power consumption is also lower as is noise. As it stands the worst case scenario for the GTX 670 is that it performs like a 7950 while the best case scenario is that it performs like a 7970. And it does this priced like a 7950, which means that something is going to have to give the moment NVIDIA’s product supply is no longer in question.
Outside of the obligatory AMD matchup, interestingly enough NVIDIA has put themselves in harm’s way here in the process. At 2560x1600 the GTX 680 only beats the GTX 670 by 7% on average. NVIDIA has always charged a premium for their top card but the performance gap has also been greater. In games that aren’t shader bound the GTX 670 does very well for itself thanks to the fact that it has equal memory bandwidth and only a slight ROP performance deficit, which means the GTX 680 is only particularly strong in Metro, Portal 2, and DiRT 3. The 7% performance lead certainly doesn’t justify the 25% price difference, and if you will give up that performance NVIDIA will shave $100 off of the price of a card, but if you do want that top performance NVIDIA intends to make you pay for it. Of course this is also why the GTX 670 is only priced $100 cheaper rather than $150. Potential buyers looking for a $350 GK104 card are going to be left out in the cold for now, particularly buyers looking for a meaningful GTX 570 upgrade.
Finally, the nature of NVIDIA’s power target technology has put partners like EVGA in an odd place. Even with a moderate 6%+ factory overclock the GTX 670 Superclocked just isn’t all that much faster than the reference GTX 670, averaging only a 3% gain at 2560. Since the GTX 670 virtually always operates above its base clock the culprit is NVIDIA’s power target, which keeps the GTX 670SC from boosting much higher than our reference GTX 670. Once you increase the power target the GTX 670SC can easily make an interesting niche for itself, but while this isn’t true overclocking it isn’t stock performance either. In any case it’s clear that for factory overclocked cards to really push the limit they’re going to need to go fully custom, which is what a number of partners are going to do in the coming months.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
414 Comments
View All Comments
CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
And let's add, since another amd fanboy has a big problem again - let's add, the great and "superior" amd Tahiti "gpu compute monster ! housefire !" gpu loses miserably in the compute benchmarks in this review, loses 3 tests to nVidia, to the gpu teh amd fanboys have spewed is very, very bad in compute compared to their loser amd 7970 core.Hey, how about that, now we both have some compute to talk about, and how amd is a loser failure, and nVidia won again, even in compute ! :)
Wow, I guess compute is really, really, really important like all the amd fanboys have been saying this entire thread.
CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
Here's the idiot spew from you about compute on the prior page, amd fanboy: " Anyway, 7970 is a superior product over 680 if only for the compute performance it offers."LOL
It lost the benches here clueless.
ROFL
I love my amd fanboy friends.
versesuvius - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link
Oh, you are back. Learned to read?Which benchmark are you talking about, know nothing imbecile? You are talking about this review? Are you trying to tell us that you cannot read or count? We already know that. Oh, you are trying to tell us that NVIDIA cannot get its act together even on the one benchmark that it has always done good, with 670 falling behind everyone? Hey, you are making progress. The NVIDIA way. Keep it up. You are doing fine.
CeriseCogburn - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link
In this review nVidia won 3 compute benches and and won 2 compute benches.Nvidia 60%
amd 40%
Not like the very data here means anything to you.
Nfarce - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
One of my SLI 570s crapped out last month. Knowing the 670 was on the horizon but not willing to wait, I grabbed a 680 for $520 (EVGA Superclocked 2682 model - the only one that I could grab with F5 tapping). Looking at how close the 670 is to the 680, and (as of right now) looking at all the stock of 670s on Egg, I overspent by $100 when I could have had the Superclocked 670. I had no idea the performance was going to be that close.And who would have thought these things would actually be available? Kicking myself...kicking myself...
CeriseCogburn - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
At least you didn't spank out $579.99 plus tax and fees on the 7970 - which had a value drop off like rock from a cliff while official drivers were still absent.$130 plus tax and fees, crappy mismatched and total fail drivers, the usual strange and inexplicable crashing with ten fixes per incident any one of which may work "for a while" or with ones fingers crossed but you never know which one...
Yeah dude, I'm not feeling sorry for you.
Burticus - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
I like what I'm reading about the 670's performance and huge overclocking ability... but I'm sorry $400 is just too much for a video card for me. I am not the hardcore gamer I used to be, and sad to say I do a lot more on the console now than the PC. I mean when a card costs more than my car payment, that is just sad. For what? Bragging rights? 10 fps faster in Skyrim? Anything over 60 fps is pure gravy, people.Needs to get to $200 or less for this kid to get into the game. And I doubt 660 gets under that. I have a sneaky feeling they are going to make the 660 $299 and the 650 will be $199. Assuming a TI something doesn't pop up in the $250 range which probably will.
My "old" GTX 460 768mb can limp along for a few more months. Heh, that has been a good little card and it was only $150.
Nfarce - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
Well that's fine and dandy for you. But others have invested in 3 monitors and are running 5760x1080/1200 resolutions or one expensive one at a 2560x1440/1600. Older cards and especially sub-$400 cards just aren't going to run those kinds of resolutions with details up, which defeats the purpose of getting said monitors in the first place.PC gaming to play the latest and greatest maxed out never has been, nor will it ever be, cheap. I also am an avid console player (PS3). Dirt 3 and Crysis 2 on my PS3 and 55" LED looks like a PS2 game compared to it running DX11 on my PC with a 27" 2560x1440 LCD monitor and maxing out things with my 680.
SlyNine - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link
I can get this 680GTX below 60FPS at 1080P. Op doesn't know what he's talking about.As far as console gaming. Its funny, you see screen shots and think that looks close. Than you actually play the games on both platforms and go, yea they look nothing alike.
dunce - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
I would like to see a 7970OC comparison? I was trying to find a 680 but gave up and got an 7970oc for $499 it's running at 1025Mhz and should be faster than a 680.