OC: Gaming Performance

We’ll keep the running commentary short here, but depending on how shader bottlenecked any individual game is, it’s possible for GTX 670 to beat a stock GTX 680 with just an increase of the power target. Without that pesky 8th SMX drawing power this leaves more power for increasing clockspeeds, which helps games that are more bottlenecked by the ROPs and/or GPCs.

Conversely, if a game is extremely shader bound (such as Portal 2), then only a full overclock can make up for that 8th SMX on GTX 680.

OC: Power, Temperature, & Noise Final Words


View All Comments

  • SlyNine - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

    I'm starting to think you're alittle crazy. Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link

    Say it 3 more times ( as you have already), it certainly invalidates all the reasons why the amd card loses badly.

    Nice, desperate try there. Not.
  • medi01 - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    Let me guess: because you can actually get either 680 or 670 at the announced price (if at all), eh?

    So you can't? And when you will be able to get one, street price would probably be higher than MSRP, eh?

    So what are you buzzing about?
  • CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    Oh that's too bad, you're wrong again. 670 still 399 at the egg.
    Order, go ahead in STOCK.

    How about someone ban you for just being a smart aleck, isn't that what a zealout of no use whatsoever really is ? Are you going to claim this is your joke and rip on others place ? Why didn't you check availability or read about it in the article the reviewer in fact went into quite some detail and extrapolation on the differences between this and the 680 and 690, but you never read the review did you ?
    You just come here to attack others and smart off for amd points.
  • SlyNine - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

    I got a GTX680 for 499$, but still he needs to chill. If someone bought a 7970 before the 670GTX came out it might have been the fast card they could find for the money.

    Not counting dual GPU solutions of course ( I hate those).
  • CeriseCogburn - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link

    I wonder who that someone would be, yours truly.
    I guess your comprehension skills are not really up to par.
  • Spunjji - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    Trololol "viral marketing group". xD

    He's just pissed off because he thinks the other side are getting paid for being mindless bigots...
  • CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    No it's clear none of you are being paid a dime, not even a single housefire amd 7970 woodscrew. Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    This should make the amd fans happy, immense amd bias by the reviewer, again.
    " The GTX 570 and it’s increasingly puny 1.25GB of RAM can’t even run this game with our 2560 benchmark settings "
    What the reviewer forgets to mention is that at 2560 and their benchmark settings not a single card present is playable, all under 29 fps and the majority under 20.

    That might be entirely different without the new game patch bug that affects only nVidia, but the very fact that the reviewer moans about "the 570" "puny ram" problem while noting a COMPLETELY UNPLAYABLE GAME BENCHMARK FROM THE HIGHEST TIERED 3G RAM AMD FLAGSHIP CARD...
    Where exactly is the brain ?

    This is the kind of crap we have to put up with here, at least we who have a brain and can see what's going on.
    I guess the amd fanboys can thank the reviewer for further perpetuation of the ram bottleneck MYTH.
    What a JOKE ATTACK on the nVidia card.
    Worse yet, on the very next page, the very same GTX570 beats the amd opposition 2G ram 7870 at 2560 but it can't be mentioned.
  • SlyNine - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link

    lol, the 7970 runs it at 28. Which is playable in a game like that.

    Funny the 7970 is by far more playable at that res. thanks for pointing that out.

    Of course once Nvidia fixes the bug they should rerun the test.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now