OC: Power, Temperature, & Noise

Our final task is our look at GTX 670’s overclocking capabilities. Based on what we’ve seen thus far with GTX 670, it looks like NVIDIA is binning chips based on functional units rather than clockspeeds. As a result GTX 670 could have quite a bit of overclocking potential, albeit one still limited by the lack of voltage control.

GeForce 600 Series Overclocking
  GTX 670 EVGA GTX 670SC GTX 680
Shipping Core Clock 915MHz 967MHz 1006MHz
Shipping Max Boost Clock 1084MHz 1188MHz 1110MHz
Shipping Memory Clock 6GHz 6GHz 6GHz
Shipping Max Boost Voltage 1.175v 1.162v 1.175v
       
Overclock Core Clock 1065MHz 1042MHz 1106MHz
Overclock Max Boost Clock 1234MHz 1263MHz 1210MHz
Overclock Memory Clock 6.9GHz 6.6GHz 6.5GHz
Overclock Max Boost Voltage 1.175v 1.162v 1.175v

Because of the wider gap between base clock and boost clock on the GTX 670 we see that it doesn’t overclock quite as far as GTX 680 from a base clock perspective, but from the perspective of the maximum boost clock we’ve slightly exceeded the GTX 680. Depending on where a game lands against NVIDIA’s power targets this can either mean that an overclocked GTX 670 is faster or slower than an overclocked GTX 680, but at the same time it means that overclocking potential is clearly there.

We’re also seeing another strong memory overclock out of a GK104 card here. GTX 680 only hit 6.5GHz while GTX 690 could hit 7GHz. GTX 670 is only a bit weaker at 6.9GHz, indicating that even with the relatively small PCB that NVIDIA can still exceed the high memory clocks they were shooting for. At the same time however this is a luck of the draw matter.

The EVGA card meanwhile fares both worse and better. Its gap between the base clock and and maximum boost clock is even larger than the reference GTX 670, leading to it having an even lower overclocked base clock but a higher overclocked maximum boost clock. The real limiting factor however is that it couldn’t reach a memory overclock quite as high as the reference GTX 670 – again, luck of the draw – which means it can’t match the overclocked reference GTX 670 as it’s going to be more memory bandwidth starved more often.

Moving on to our performance charts, we’re going to once again start with power, temperature, and noise, before moving on to gaming performance. We’ll be testing our GTX 670 cards at both stock clocks with the maximum power target of 122% (170W) to showcase what is possible at validated clockspeeds with a higher power cap, and a true overclock with a maximum power target along with the largest clock offsets we can achieve.

Not surprisingly, since we’re almost always operating within the realm of the power target as opposed to the TDP on the GTX 600 series, our power consumption closely follows our chosen power target. Cranking up the power target on the GTX 670 for example to 170W puts us within 6W of the GTX 680, which itself had a 170W power target in the first place. This is true for both Metro and OCCT, which means power consumption is very predictable when doing any kind of overclocking.

This also means that power consumption is still 18W-30W below the 7970, which in turn means that if these overclocks can close the performance gap, then the GTX 670 still has a power consumption advantage.

As to be expected, with an increase in power consumption comes an increase in load temperatures. However the fact that we’re only able to increase power consumption by about 30W means the temperature rise is limited to 4-5C, pushing temperatures into the low 80s. This does end up being warmer than the equivalent GTX 680 however due to the 680’s superior heatsink.

Finally, when it comes to noise we’re also seeing the expected increase, but again it’s rather small. Under Metro the amount of noise from the reference GTX 670 rises by under 3dB when pushing the power target higher on its own, while it rises 3dB when adding in our full overclock. Again the smaller cooler means that the GTX 670’s fan has to work harder here, which means our gaming performance may be able to reach the GTX 680, but our noise is going to slightly exceed it. As a point of reference, in the process we’ll also exceed the GTX 580’s noise levels under Metro. Still, in both OCCT and Metro none of our GTX 670 cards exceed the Radeon HD 7900 series, which means we've managed to increase our performance relative to those cards without breaching the level of noise they generate in the first place.

Power, Temperature, & Noise OC: Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

414 Comments

View All Comments

  • Gastec - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link

    Your every comment is an attack at ATi/AMD video cards or people who seem to be using them( maybe). Why?
    You get payed to do negative publicity for AMD on the review sites? Because having a Ati card die on you in the middle of some important event in you gaming life( like raiding in WoW , am I close or am I close ;-) could not be the only reason.
  • shin0bi272 - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    I think the reason for the missing memory chips is because they will be releasing the 685 in aug or sep which is supposed to be 4gb and run on a 512bit bus. It could be possible to increase the size of the gpu core and double the amount of ram and stil have it on a card this length.

    30% faster than the 670 (685 is supposed to be 25% faster than the 680 and the 670 is 5% slower than the 680) on the same size card but using 2x8 pin connectors instead of 2x6pin. Now imagine an after market or water cooler on it... yeah.

    You'll get great FPS on all those brand new console ports.
  • KivBlue - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    $400 for a graphics card is just too much.
  • medi01 - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

    For me too. In 200$-ish range it looks like AMD 7850 / 7870 are the only reasonable options.

    PS
    Honestly I don't get all the hype about 680/670. Cards are only marginally better than AMDs offering (losing in some games, winning in some games).

    Power consumption difference according to techpowerup is only 2 watt in idle, about 9 watt at full load. Not a big deal either.

    Basically a slight price drop by AMD on 7950/7970 (for whoever really wants those) once these cards actually become available and that's it.

    I also wonder, how many "enthusiasts" with multi-monitor setups in the need of a faster card are out there.

    PPS
    Worst part of it would be nVidia releasing confusing mix of completely different cards lower end cards released under the same name, to confuse consumer.
  • CeriseCogburn - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

    I guess considering you think $200 equals $335 and that also equals $250, we can say your comment equals a big fat lie, and when a big fat lie is what one immediately starts off with, everyone knows something is WRONG.
  • Gastec - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link

    Again you attack someone who posted a comment about AMD cards, just because. You are obviously a troll and someone from this, STILL RESPECTED computer magazine should ban you.
  • Gastec - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link

    Yes but people who buy these have enough money to buy even the $3000-4000. Tesla K20 ones . Many of them have money from their parents, if you catch my drift.
  • RegEDDIT - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link

    I managed to buy one from Amazon before they went out of stock, and I must say, I am pleased. BF3 plays like a champ, Skyrim is smooth as butter, and Adobe Premiere edits like a champ now with Nvidia hardware acceleration. This is on a 1920x1080 monitor with an old q6700 quad core @ 2.666 GHz and 800Mhz RAM. I do not expect to buy another card for a long while.
  • CeriseCogburn - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link

    Here's COMPUTE SOFTWARE BASE in action.

    " Adobe Premiere edits like a champ now with Nvidia hardware acceleration "

    Nvidia wins. amd loses in compute.
  • Zebo - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link

    7950 has 40-50% OC potential being servilely down tuned @ 800Mhz.

    If AMD is smart they will release a 1100Mhz version and wreck 670s party.

    If you're an overclocked you'd be dumb to buy 670 with its limited control and potential of 7950. Let alone of you're on water.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now