Nvidia 'Kepler' GeForce GTX 680 Specifications Leaked

[rubix_1011]

They didn't say anything about the power consumption. Then again, I guess it's a job that review sites like Tom's covers

Can't wait for the benchmark.

The card will utilize two 6-pin PCIe power connectors and has a TDP of 195W.

I'm pretty sure this would be the missing power consumption you are referring to?

 

[_Pez_]

Looking at that graph shows that its gtx 680 is 8x faster than the gtx 580. of course this is not real.

 

[slabbo]

release date??

 

[Guest]

What makes this all the better though, is I believe the 680 can reach close to 1300 or something on the core clock when OC'd... don't ask me to quote because I can't remember where it was, but I saw it on a few sites. something along the lines of "the cores themselves will be able to reach 1411MHz"... I don't know if they're referring to the core clock and how far it can OC... but I think we can expect good things from the 680. Can't wait for the 780 though... that's gonna be sweet, or the dual-680.

 

[masterofevil22]

How much will this card cost? Will it do three monitors at once and multiple simultaneous discrete audio outputs like the 7000 series??

I wonder if AMD will release a higher clocked version (7975??) of their woefully under-clocked Tahiti XT chip.. or something else..?? U know they're HOLDING ANOTHER CARD OR TWO in their hand while they play the waiting game for Nvidia..

 

[JOSHSKORN]

But can it run...oh...damn...:::Homer Drooling:::

 

[masterofevil22]

I love how companies 1st party comparison slides always use arbitrary values and never show anything but the very top of the chart..

Everybody does it, including AMD,,,still, it's funny non the less

 

[bluekoala]

Keep in mind that this is more than likely using FXAA which nVidia does better and in my opinion is far from the best type of AA. I think FXAA should only be used for low end cards that lack the muscle to use other types of AA.

I'm suspecting the GTX680 really gets creamed by the 7970 when not using FXAA and some nvidiots will have wasted 2000$ on a quad-sli that will be matched by a GTX790@900$ months later.

We'll see.

 

[Pinhedd]

How many of those benchmarks are using a 680 with FXAA against a 7970 with MSAA?

 

[bystander]

I believe there may be 1. BF3.

 

[Guest]

[citation][nom]bluekoala[/nom]Keep in mind that this is more than likely using FXAA which nVidia does better and in my opinion is far from the best type of AA. I think FXAA should only be used for low end cards that lack the muscle to use other types of AA.I'm suspecting the GTX680 really gets creamed by the 7970 when not using FXAA and some nvidiots will have wasted 2000$ on a quad-sli that will be matched by a GTX790@900$ months later.We'll see.[/citation]

As opposed to all the AMD fanboys who just spent $600 for a 7970 that will drop to $400 in price within 2 months! And the FXAA argument will only hold true if the image quality is noticeably worse; and of course Nvidia actually used it for this slide which was leaked and not from them directly.

Though I do agree with you that Nvidia definitely has something a lot more powerful coming soon, as this 680, if true, seems far more like a mid range card then high end with its size and power usage. Though I don't expect Nvidia to price gouge with it like AMD has done with the 7970 and releasing it above their last generation parts instead of replacing them and giving the consumer the proper increase in performance per dollar a new generation should provide.

 

[rockermike7]

[citation][nom]bejabbers[/nom]why is the memory bandwidth only 256-bit? the 580 have 384-bit. It seems strange that they would go backwards in terms of RAM[/citation]
I was wondering the same exact thing. I find it odd that they've reduced the bus width and added 0.5 Gb RAM. Maybe they're not telling us something.

 

[chinuhark]

We will desperately be needing a GTX680 max stable OC vs 7970 Max stable OC Benchmark. Otherwise it is impossible to tell which is better with AMD having underclocked their 7970 and I'm pretty sure Nvidia has set their clock too high fearing failure.

 

[kinggremlin]

[citation][nom]shahrooz[/nom]its a damn good card but the chart is a little bit misleading 0.4 is way longer than 1[/citation]

The chart was obviously not meant for public consumption, so it was most likely intended to be read by smart people who understand what normalized means. Based on the 3 cards being compared here, anything under 80% (labeled as .8) is worthless information. If you're pulling out a ruler and measuring the bars to try and determine the relative performance of the cards rather than reading the axis labels, then you are a retard and deserve to be left in ignorance.

 

[tomfreak]

[citation][nom]dragonsqrrl[/nom]gf104 and gf114 were mid range GPU's. So it's based on GPU naming convention, but also die size (roughly 300mm^2), TDP, and memory interface (since the Geforce 8 era, Nvidia's mid range GPU's have used 256-bit interfaces). All of these attributes are indicative if a mid-range GPU. There's also the fact that Nvidia is working on a higher-end Kepler derivative, with a wider memory interface and larger die size (gk110).I don't think anyone's trying to argue that the GTX680 is mid-range, because it obviously isn't. It's priced as a high-end card. But the GPU is almost without a doubt a mid-range offering, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the GTX680 drop to mid-range price points at some point in the future.[/citation]1. Nvidia Gk104 is suppose to target mid end card at about 10-20% faster than "the AMD card" Nvidia estimate what AMD mid end card would be. But the reality is it turns out that the stupid AMD clock their high end too conservatively @ 925MHz only, then 7970 is largely bottleneck by its limited 32Rops, just compare 7870 and 7950, they got 40%-50% diff in everything except ROP. This further proves that a superclocked 7870 can be as good as 7950, which original GK104 suppose to be at around this speed.

2. By knowing that GK104 is soo close 7970, Nvidia decided to bump the GK104 clock speed to match 7970 speed, then add quad SLI support rename it to GTX680. then Push the big chip 500m^2 GK110, to Q4 2012 allowing them to have more time to tweak and yields of 28nm gets better to make 500m^chip profitable. Its a double win for Nvidia, using mid end chip against high end AMD chip, priced @ high end price, then push the 500m^2 chip back to Q3/Q4 2012 avoid yield problems. One of the few reason why u hear Nvidia have yield issue with GK104 because they are pushig the limit of GK104 to beat 7970.

Remember they said they are disappointed about they performance of 7970? remember what they said they are "unbeatable"? its true obvious when they try to take GK110 and compare with the underclocked 7970. GK104 vs 7970 is not unbeatable, but GK110 is unbeatable vs 7970.

 

[monkeymonk]

[citation][nom]matto17secs[/nom]Beating the top AMD card with a mid-range GK104 chip, and doing it with less power consumption... not bad. Can't wait to see what the top tier GK110 has to offer.[/citation]
wait... I thought the 680 was going to be the top tier single gpu card. They are planning on making another single gpu card above it?

 

[chinuhark]

wait... I thought the 680 was going to be the top tier single gpu card. They are planning on making another single gpu card above it?

GK110 coming Q3 2012. It was originally going to replace 580 as the 680 but their mid range architecture ended up too fast allowing them to work on GK110 for longer. GK104 competes with 7970 and is going to be sold as GTX680.

 

[giovanni86]

Based of its performance against my 580 i either pick up another 580 and sli it or sale it and get a 680. Time will tell =D Can't wait, looks good on paper, can't wait for the benchmarks!

 

[Maximus_Delta]

its a short stubby card that GTX 680.

I think this is FXAA versus a 7970 running BF3 with 4x MSAA. Funnily enough the performance hit with MSAA set to 4x on a 7970 is about 40% !! Reading this, definitely going to water block my CrossFire 7970s and run them at 1200mhz.

 

[atikkur]

hmm.. exciting card.

 

[atikkur]

[citation][nom]santiagoanders[/nom]So they tripled the shaders to get less than double the performance of the GTX 580?[/citation]

remember, the architecture is different than gtx580. it derived from gtx560ti. the real keppler may expected in later this year, which has same architecture (or better) as gtx580.

 

[falchard]

Can't wait for this refresh. Looks like it might be my first nVidia product since 2002. If not that atleast I can save a bit on an AMD.

 

[esrever]

 

[shin0bi272]

This could help you guys

http://www.videocardz.com/30962/geforce-gtx-690-to-be-released-in-may

 

[hetneo]

It's very odd that GTX680 scores in BF3 this better than 7970 if you take a look at memory bandwidth, 192 GB/s versus 264 GB/s. Makes me wonder why there is same 40% difference as between G840+GT520 and E6700+HD5750 after the first patch. I think that GF will be beating Radeons only in applications designed to perform better on GF than on Radeon. In other words in games that have heavily tessellated concrete slabs and underground currents.