Kepler news and discussion

Page 57 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.

There should be a phone number on the delivery slip they left. Call and tell them to either re-deliver it today, or that you will pick it up at the warehouse when the truck returns. I've done this many times when I just couldn't wait for my package.
 

i *think* if you have the tracking number, just call them and you can pick it up . . .
 
I could say more about Radeon and being about speeds since it's tech is obviously behind Kepler.
but all the benches speak for themselves.

bottom line is HD Radeon might be a higher overclocking GPU but that's also a way to try and compensate for lack of tech...
Kepler visuals (graphical spectrum) are also more rich than Radeon.

(just saying....)
Click to expand...
Nvidia's boost clock has the 680 at higher speeds than the 7970 plus the 680 has a slightly higher memory speed and they both pretty much tie in [H]'s review. At the same speeds they're pretty much equal. Amd's cards use more energy gaming though.

Clockspeeds is part of the tech though...if Bulldozer overclocked to 7ghz on air while using the power it does at 4.5ghz now, it would be a decent cpu. That didn't happen. The tech didn't allow it.

Idk how either one can have better visuals unless one of the companies is limiting visuals for performance. Unless you mean Fxaa or physx, but the post processing AAs tend to blur more than rendered AAs and physx is ok...but can be done better on a cpu and is used often for clutter.

I know you're a fan of Nvidia and I'm not trying to change that. I sometimes can't stand the distorted view some people have of the technology though.

If I were to buy a GPU today, it would probably be the 670 out of the four top Gpus. I won't argue price/performance for Amd, especially with the risk of the overclock turning out low on any of the cards.

I guess we have 'technical' differences. I need to rant sometimes. :/
 
"If the PhysX code didn't thread well, and it does, GPU physics would run slower than a dishwasher controller on heavy painkillers."

*sigh* memories of that first job while in high school . . .
 

there won't be enough volume for a gaming card if they make it that large.
 

They made the 690 didnt they?
Im betting therell be more sold for for pro than for DT
Im thinking itll be expensixe, and cut down as far as DP goes, but it will be here
 
my take? gk110 will truly shine in hpc space but id expect some people will be dissappointed with its gaming performance compared to gk104. compute wise it is interesting how fare it will go against tahiti though it is more likely to compete with with amd 8k series since this big K expected to come at the end of year
 
I'm sure they will release a few into the wild. I stand by what I said a long way back though.
Most of the GK110 chips will go to the pro market as they don't need to sell them as gaming chips due to AMD not being competitive enough.
If I was making the decisions and supply was limited I know that my personal preference would be to sell as many of them as I could for as much as I could, which means without ripping the general public off with stupid prices that they will go as Pro chips.

There is enough of a market out there for a small run of GK110 to the public, I don't see them being in stock in volume every where though.

Mactronix :)
 
http://www.legitreviews.com/news/12803/

GTX 680 will really have big brother in septemper-october or it's just a rumor ? speces look really awesome ... idk does it worth wait or not ...
 
malmental

sad that you have only 1 gb verion of gtx 560 ti :) because on gtx 560ti sli 2gb vram i will not upgrade for sure :)

3 x 17" LCD's @ 3840 x 1024 resolution...

is vram hog .... even 2gb is not overkill for 1920x1080 .... for your resoution you need 4 gb minumum you know :)

but how do you think ... for me on 1920x1080 ... even gtx 670 will be enough ya ? 680 is bainless now as i know .. ony 5-7% difference and gtx 670 SOC will be like gtx 680 ... only 2% les....


 

Because at 1080p, Battlefield 3 for example, only uses 1.5 GB of vram for Ultra. Again 1080p. Most all my friends play BF3 on 1080p. Some use 480's/570's. Some use mid range cards like 560 ti and GTX 460. My friend with the 4 480s and 3930k runs the game maxed but its vram that gives him stuttering but with 4 480's the performance is fast enough. My other friend has 2 570's and he doesn't really have enough vram. I play on two 560 ti's and if i turn Ultra on, on Multiplayer i run the game currently on High because Multiplayer has more going on that single player. On singleplayer i can Max it out and get 70fps. SO Bottomline, Battlefield 3 needs vram most of all.

Reason: Its a console port and they just kept placing texture pack after texture pack. Why do you think Back to Karkand is so demanding?
 
I think you'll be fine with the GTX 670 @ 1080p.
my (N570GTX TF III PE/OC) @ GTX 580 reference speeds runs my 1080p flawlessly.
and the 1GB N560GTX-Ti's in SLi seem fine @ 3840 x 1024 resolution but yes, 2GB would have been better.
especially now..
Click to expand...
I get my GTX 670 Today!!, Be on Steam when i unbox it lol
 
Rockdpm's

i paln to get gtx 670 to :) can you upload video of battlefield 3 on karkand maps and moded skyrim with hd textures when you will have a time ^^ ?




bf3 will be no problem because of vram ... but moded skyrim , or GTA 5 maybe will use more then 2gb vram .... 😛
 
Ill test Skyrim when i get it. I have about 80 mods running on the game (Haven't had the time to clean it out) and as for GTA 5, Not sure yet but GTA 4 seems to be slightly demanding so..... But yea, ill be sure and post some vids of frame rates. Whats your system specs because performance could be irrelevant if you have a 2500K. My system spec's are posted below in my Sig
 
i have i7 950 at stock clocks and 6 gb vram ... crosair power supply 850 wat :) mainboard asus p6t se :)

friend gave me gtx 590 and it wasn't bottlenecked by any spec from my system :) i ran BF3 on 50-90 fps and i want to know how good is 670 ^^

my gpu usage on gtx 590 was alltime 100% on any game ^^


 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom