News about the upcoming GTX 680M

New NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M now available from ORIGIN PC

 

Holy moley &()^*&^%^(* if that translates into real-life performance I will probably go kill myself for getting the 7970m :O . But then again, this will probably be priced as a $300-400 upgrade?? I wouldn't pay that much anyway I'll be happy with my AMD.

The only thing that concerns me is how the 7970m can be so comprehensively beaten in every way imaginable, according to those graphs/benchmarks. I have to see it happen to believe it I guess

On another note, could those be due to PhysX being turned on in those games or something?

 

It is because nvidia made those graphs

 

the 680m on orgin pc's website is a 524$ upgrade.

 

Sager is charging an additional ~$300 over the price of the 7970m so there are considerations. So the 680m is a $524 upgrade

don't worry bro, 7970m is a beast as it is. Since availability will be spotty till july, AMD will have a response to this.

The glorious vid card wars continue lol

 

It is $286 for 680M over the 7970M @ Origins. Totally worth it with the good Nvidia drivers, Optimus and the 20% performance over the 7970M

 

I love the competition. The 680m was going to be a lower powered card but AMD came early to the playground and nvidia had to change some things, ie pull their fingers out of their butts.

 

It is a $524 upgrade right off the bat and $286 more than the 7970M. Dell will definitely sell it for much more on the alienwares, possibly like $350-400

I hope AMD releases drivers that make the 7970m perform better and we don't have to rely on dell's anymore. Problems in games like MP3 etc are not what we want to worry about. Drivers are known to improve performance..

That said, GTX 680M has 4GB of memory??? :O overkill, my friends?

And yeah haha nvidia good job with those graphs I still want proof

 

It's more like ~15% with spotty performance above that, and also ~5% in regards to BF3. Will be interesting to see how much performance increases on the 7970 with actual drivers as my guess is the 680 is already running on actual drivers.

The 680 still has a lot to prove for a +300 price tag, and 5%-15% performance increase sure isn't anywhere close enough to be justifiable..........at least for anyone remotely concerned about pricing.

 

Yeah like I said, I would love to see this happen personally. Competition is good for us and I cannot process the VAST difference between rumors that have been going around, and those charts that state that the gtx680m is so much better. I find it really really hard to just swallow it. What on earth did nvidia do to make that happen?? (besides taking their fingers outta their butts ) makes me wonder what technologies they're hiding, if this really turns out to be true. Looks like we'll have to wait at least a month though to see those Origin laptops to be received by buyers and then run through the benchmarks

 

Put it this way: GTX 560TI was our GTX 580M earlier. It draws around 160W.
GTX 670, which is our 680M, draws 8W (152W) less than GTX 560 TI, so I don`t think Nvidia had any problems making a mobile GPU out of it

 

I ordered the 7970m and am a stubborn b*&*& don't break my heart

 

7970M is an awesome GPU. No worries mate.

 

is it possible to put this on m17x r3 and get it working?
its priced about 660usd on eurocom. 100usd over 7970m

 

I'm not a firm believer in graphs, especially when the GPU hasn't had any benchmarks run across it yet.

You guys remember this graph from last year?



Perhaps Nvidia is trying to exact some revenge?

 

^^exactly.

 

you have a point. They were roughly neck and neck from what I heard, correct?

 

ok i did some math.

They are advertising a 80% increase in 3dmark11 in the 680m over 580m

so if a stock 580m gets 3500-3600 3dmark11's

you are looking at about 6300-6450 3dmark11's...which is what OC'ed 7970's easily get

The question for me is how far you can push the clocks. From the specs, the rated memory of 900mhz (3.6ghz effective) is low for a card like this. If this is the case, the card can be bandwidth limited

i too will wait for official numbers...but will definitely be running benches when i get one of these cards to play with

 

haha thanks bro, idc that much, I used to be an nvidia fan but am neutral now, best of both worlds haha. I'll be happy with my 7970m, got a great deal on the R4 so no worries

Okay, some quick number crunching. If the GTX 580M is 100%, then lets say, just for comparison, it gets a gpu score of 100 in 3Dmark 11 (the benchmark they used in the bottom graph). According to the charts, the GTX 680M should get 180, right? Okay, so that's a 180 - 100 increase, which is 80. So thus, an 80% increase in performance on average, right?
Now, in real life the GTX 580m on average nets about 3131 gpu score in 3dmark 11 (according to notebookcheck) so 80% more than that, the gtx 680m, should be ... 5635.8. The 7970m scores 5480.5 (again, according to notebookcheck). That is hardly much of an increase, 155.3 to be precise. Any thoughts? I am not experienced with running synthetic benchmarks and am more of a by-fps calculator , just saying, so please correct me if I'm going wrong somewhere!

SlickDude, sorry about basically posting the same thing you did lol, I was typing mine out at the same time I guess. I look forward to seeing your benchmarks and how it compares to the 7970m.

 

its cool lol

We were just typing at the same time

I can see from the number crunching that an oC'ed 7970m can easily match the stated 680m's numbers. I'm just curious how much room there is on the 680m card to boost the clocks

 

Interesting that Origin is showing a June 25 shipping date for a 680M-equipped EON17. That's a lot faster than I anticipated.

 

Haha great minds think alike

very true, the 7970m OCs like a pro... I've seen scores nearing 7k on the forums, almost a 1k increase from base clocks.. which puts it a teeny bit ahead of a base gtx 680m, according to these figures? guess we have to wait it out and see. Seeing as dell and originpc announced the ivy bridge refresh at around the same time, do you think dell is going the offer the 680m soon?

 

The bandwidth on the 680m if correct is less than the 7970m.
115.2 GB/s vs 153.6 GB/s

 

Ya, i just posted in the other thread the question:

How can the 680m with 115.2 GB/s have such great performance when the memory bandwidth is the same as the stock 580m?

i guess i'm missing something in my understanding of how current day vid cards work

 

Desktop 680 has the same bandwidth as the desktop 580, and both have far less than the 7970, but the 680 wins in nearly every game. I can only guess that with these laptops being limited to 1080p the bandwidth just isn't needed.

That being said, Im eager for benches!

 

With respect to the bandwidth of the 680m:

It doesn't need the extra bandwidth, like the HD7970m and GTX580m do. Nvidia's 600-series is quite a bit more memory efficient, and hence more memory bandwidth efficient, than anything that's come before it.

As for the 4GB... that's a gimmick. I have a GTX670 2GB in my desktop, and it runs anything at 2560x1600 without running out of memory; that's 4MP for reference. 1080p is 2MP. Even further, the GTX670/680 have been tested with 5760x1080 (3x1080p) and they still didn't run out of memory.

 

im really curious if i get this to replace my 580m if i will be able to use my same heatsink

 

You really should be able to, assuming no installation issues. The power draw and heat output should be the same or lower before overclocking.

 

Look, even if the 680m is faster, there's always going to be a newer/faster video card just around the corner....

Beyond that, until we see some actual benchmarks (and not nvidia's posturing on stock clocks), let's wait to jump to conclusions.

 

I'm thinking I might skip a generation here and keep my 580m for a while longer. The only reason I would consider going to the 680m is if ARMA III is too much for my current specs to handle...

 

Alright. 60% of processing power of the GTX 680 beating an uber-HD 7850 by 20%.

 

Is it possible to come a conclusion right now the desktop equivalent of GTX 680M.
We all know AMD 7970M is a desktop equivalent 7850 - 7870.
It would really help me if knew the same for 680m.

 

The 680m has 1344 shaders, the GTX 670 has 1344 shaders. But the 680m is severely downclocked. So look at 670 performance and minus 20-25%.

 

Why can't they make GTX680M exactly the same as GTX670? What is the main technological barrier from preventing it from happening? i.e Heat, power, they don't want lappy gamers to be too happy?

 

Well seeing as the MXM slot can only push 100w power and no more and the GTX 670 is a 170w card, plus the limited cooling capabilities of a laptop heatsink. Think about it, desktop graphics cards are that size for a reason.

 

With nano tech on the rise I hope we see laptops replacing desktops.
One day PC's will be ruled out from the tech food chain and laptops will have adaptive living cores that "grow" power to adapt to the games requirements to gain 60fps on whatever resolution/settings you ask it and we'll only need to change GPU's once in 10 years.

lol I'm talking like C grade comic book writters.

 

Man, it really irks me to see people actually gullible enough to put any faith in those ridiculous "charts". Use your frickin heads, people.

If history is any indicator, 680 will be a bit better than 7970 at most. Then 7990 will be released.

And I would say we already have what you wish for, to a degree... the 7970m is as powerful as a very high end desktop card. These machines are mostly just as powerful as a very beefy desktop.

 

meh, 7970m owners can relax...the 680m isn't getting better scores compared to an overclocked 7970m...plus the 680m has boost so its already overclocked slightly

 

That chart is a bit misleading, switching between different settings for scores. While I understand the value in providing FPS on lower settings, it's deceptive to the reader (especially when the titles are organized in the way they are).

Diablo III runs at 90.3 FPS, the 7970m (albeit just) clears 100. Not that it's the most demanding game, but it does suggest that the gap is not as large as nvidia is making it out to be, and even if it is, the title I want to play I can, so...

 

Guess we'll have to wait and see some real-life scores to decide how the two compare, charts are obviously inflated a little... and yes that chart above is a little confusing to read properly lol.

 

I'm waiting on you to provide us real, unfiltered scores slickdude80!

 

typical market schemes.

 

They use funky graphs and misleading statistics every year; every company does. It actually helps make sales or they wouldn't do it. It helps them sell to people who are too ignorant to actually understand the data or do their own research. People like that deserve to pay extra for something that in many cases isn't worth the premium. Lol... I'm going to be plenty happy with my 7970m and next year if more demanding games come out I'll give it a nice 15% OC and that should still play them fairly well; maybe on High in 2 years instead of Ultra; ohhh how sad. Haha jk.

 

You all just be glad you have moneys.

All I could afford was the 650M :'(

 

I like how this is to show the 680m's dominance but, there is one score on that sheet that is important to me. . . The Witcher 2. How can Nvidia not have good scores on a game they say "The way it was ment to be played?" Phenomenal it's scores are not. Pass for me because of it.

 

The Witcher 2 probably has UberSampling turned on which tanks the frame rate on all GPUs. Even on the GTX 680 it only scores around 30fps but once that is turned off then boom over 50fps on any modest GPU.

Alienware have just tweeted that the M17x and M18x will both be receiving the 680m later this month

 

Today at around 2 GMT the price of the 7970m upgrade on the M17x went from 260 euro to 170 euro.

Might this have something to do with the 680m coming?

 

=D I hope so! Great news on the price going down, so I can hopefully upgrade sooner. +Rep
Now if only I could find somewhere other than eBay to buy them from.

 

i think the graphs shows that with uber, it gets 20 fps, but at ultra (non-uber) it gets low 40's...

No difference from my 7970m

And just in case anyone is curious:

680m scores 5900 3dmark11's, and 21,900 vantage

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-680M.72679.0.html

That 25k vantage report we saw earlier from the vendor was baloney (physX enabled). That's why i dont' trust all this until I see it on my own computer. This is like me running without Tess in 3dmark11 and scoring 7200 3dmark11's then posting that's what the 7970m gets. It's very misleading.

 

Alienware M17x and M18x land new NVIDIA GTX680M graphics option -- Engadget

End of the month