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 - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
The amd 7850 is getting beaten in sales by the low supply GTX680 - not only that - add in the 7870 and it's still getting beaten in sales.What you see "on the amd 7870 and 7850" is FAIL.
Now, I will go to NewEgg and CHECK the 560Ti sales, which my guess now is they are actually more than the GTX680, which beats the 7870 and 7850 sales combined...
---
Yes, the 560Ti wins against 7850 by a MASSIVE amount of sales. amd is failing, or pick some other cards from amd, because 7870 and 7850 are really sucking for sales.
Ananke - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
How are you exactly going to CHECK the sales? Because, you know, I am using distributors' and retailers' sales out data, and I can tell you that sales action is in the $200 and lower tier, where NVidia has nothing new yet.NVidia makes A LOT of money in the HPC market, this is their major focus now, hence we wait to see the GF110. But that will be pro card with a pro price, and no consumer application.
So yeah, I expect prices of consumer GPUs to keep going down, because now there are no products where the volume sales is.
CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
The gtx560 is already below $199, not sure where you've been for a long time. After you name one in the price tier, you claim there are none in the price tier, and you left out the entire 460 line up as well, just to name another quite easily.You already have an answer to your other question and your credibility is zero in any case.
" in reality sales happen under the $200 mark...I see only AMD 7850 and NVidia 560ti where the actual money is made "
The 7850 is $250+, and it's not selling. You're another clueless person who repeats talking points they heard from someone else, and of course you heard the pro card talking point from me earlier in the thread.
You scored a zero. You're a TP repeater.
versesuvius - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
I am certain that this point is very irrelevant to an enthusiast's frame of mind, but based on personal experience, AMD cards live longer. GeForce cards just stop being useful after a while. It has always been the case, ever since early ati cards. AMD gives a playable frame rate, while GeForce just gets stuck. And another point that I am not going to insist upon is that with NVIDIA cards I always get the feeling that a few frames are skipped on random, but it is done in such a smart way that the game play is not hindered, nonetheless it is always there.Anyway, 7970 is a superior product over 680 if only for the compute performance it offers. You are really not missing much losing 5 frames per second at ultra high settings, which at best estimates only 5% of users have the required hardware for, and super frame rates, but the almost 100% gain in compute performance is nothing that those who need compute power can ignore, and there is more of them each day. Accordingly, AMD can sell a lot of GPUs at current prices and if inclined can trounce NVIDIA if it chooses to lower the prices on the strength of its sales.
just4U - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
I disagree.. Cards live longer based upon cooling designs and overclocks. In my experience cheap low end cards don't last all that long, Nor do some of the overclocked products.. and it don't matter Amd/Nvidia .. it's all the same. Depends on what the partners do with the chips is all.Ananke - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
In my experience with electronics, the most likely to malfunction thing is the bearing of the fan, regardless of the price of the GPU card...Hence, it is sad to pay $500 for something that in reality should've been $200, and will eventually crap out within 2-3 years anyway.I work for such a company, I live across AMD campus, all my friends are in the semiconductor business, including at NVidia, etc...so a lot of experience/
CeriseCogburn - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
Clean the dust, dismount the fan, clean the shaft (by pulling the little white split plastic retaining and shoving the fan out of the armature bearing) - clean the thick black grime, add a drop or two of $1.29 motor 3 in 1 walmart available oil, and put her back together.There's another 3 years of running, silent bearing and like new.
Crapping out means you forgot to clean the radiator and change the oil - so burning out a $25,000.00 brand new overpriced car is just as easy.
CeriseCogburn - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
I don't like all you people who wind up killing so many cards that you go off on an insane tangent about this or that card companies cards crapping out. You're the reason we have to pay for two freaking cards when we're buying one - because a bunch of knotheads like you destroy cards and then turn them in for a replacement, driving up all our costs to near double what they should be.I further cannot stand the endless number of persons who squirm and squiggle demanding someone on the other end of the phone for "tech support" and instant turn around after destroying the cards they've bought with their own stupidity.
I have two close friends, one always destroys amd cards, and the other always destroys nVidia cards.
I'll fire up several functioning Voodoo2 cards and ati mach 64's right now - along with an endless stream of both in between, stll functioning, including many agp models.
If you overclock your card, forget to turn the fan to 100%, crank up the voltage, fire up furmark, then jam the dang thing into extreme burn mode, and red eye pass out drooling on the desk, don't expect anything but a burned out card when you wake up your hangover kicks in.
It's not that hard to figure out.
versesuvius - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
Sorry guys, but I do not mean the fan not working anymore or overclock burnout. I am not a fan of overclocking the GPU at all. The gains are not worth the trouble. At best is like overclocking the memory which at best give you a 5% advantage overall. I am talking about the chip. I said that GeForce cards get stuck. That does not mean that it has burned or that the fan is gone.Yeah, go ahead and fire up old cards. NVIDIA cards do play the games that were out when the card came out, but not the games that came out three years after. Not the case with AMD cards. AMD (ati) card still start the game, and play, with lower frame rates.
I said that I have always had the feeling that GeForce cards skip frames, and I still do. Is there a way to count for frames that should be there and are not?
CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
The problem is, it's "your feeling", instead of reality.NVidia drivers often increase frame rates for older nVidia cards and often add features prior unavailable to those same cards.
I've seen it since the first nVidia Ti series, which had some awesome driver upgrades even back then, that allowed them to play games they couldn't properly render since they were so old by the time games came out.
Now for instance, let me give you a modern example.
I just recently installed and played BF3 on an nVidia 9500 just for kicks.
It was 12-15 fps about on one of the extra core 2 systems.
---
Your "frame skip" feeling is just that, your fanboy feeling, and not reality.
+
Another example is the 7600gs SLI - that plays everything there currently is that I tried on it ( just goofing around) - not only that, but the SLI ran flawlessly in XP, win7 32 and win 7 64 bit.
+
All 8 series nvidia + cards are still valid from all my experience, and some 7 series.
---
Count frames ? Count it with fraps.