NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 Review Feat. EVGA: Bringing GK104 Down To $400
by Ryan Smith on May 10, 2012 9:00 AM ESTCrysis: Warhead
Kicking things off as always is Crysis: Warhead. It’s no longer the toughest game in our benchmark suite, but it’s still a technically complex game that has proven to be a very consistent benchmark. Thus even four years since the release of the original Crysis, “but can it run Crysis?” is still an important question, and the answer continues to be “no.” While we’re closer than ever, full Enthusiast settings at a 60fps is still beyond the grasp of a single-GPU card.
If GTX 680 had one weakness in particular it was Crysis, and that certainly hasn’t changed with GTX 670. The good news is that the GTX 670 does relatively well compared to the GTX 680 because of its memory bandwidth – GK104 in general seems to be memory bandwidth constrained here – but that’s where the good news ends. GTX 670 can’t otherwise tie the Radeon HD 7950, let alone beat it or threaten the 7970.
Overall performance isn’t particularly strong either. Given the price tag of the GTX 670 the most useful resolution is likely going to be 2560x1600, where the GTX 670 can’t even cross 30fps at our enthusiast settings. Even 1920x1200 isn’t looking particularly good. This is without a doubt the legitimate lowpoint of the GTX 670.
As for gamers looking to upgrade, the GTX 670 looks decent here compared to the GTX 570, but nothing fantastic. The memory bandwidth limitations mean that performance has only gained 33%, which isn’t particularly great for an 18 month span.
Finally, EVGA’s first performance here is decent, but nothing spectacular. Thanks to a combination of being TDP limited and Crysis’s memory bandwidth limits, the GTX 670 Superclocked is at best 3% faster here.
The story with minimum framerates is much the same. The GTX 670 can closely trail the GTX 680, but it’s still not up to the caliber of the 7950 let alone the 7970.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
414 Comments
View All Comments
SlyNine - Saturday, May 12, 2012 - link
I'm starting to think you're alittle crazy.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". xDHe'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.CeriseCogburn - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link
This should make the amd fans happy, immense amd bias by the reviewer, again.TWS2
" 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.
ROFL
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.