AMD 7970m vs GTX 680m

weww..finally its on track again..been reading/skipping d past few pages with all sort of theories n formula n sarcasm/fanboyism wondering when will it ends..anyway at the moment 7970M is d way to go

 

Red team brings the best bang for the bucks most of the time, they win me this time with my next notebook P150EM.

 

deff has to be less than 195w which is the tdp of the desktop 680,thus 150w sounds more than reasonable.

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

 

If gtx680 comes out faster than 7970m, then you better not hope it be cheaper than amd card. Most likely the same cenario happens what happened with desktop market. 7970M price will be cut and gtx680m stays bit more expensive.
If i´d know the release date would be soon, i would pass buying 7970m now.
Just cant count on this. Could be more than couple of months away...

 

I don't believe it'd be less than 4 months

 

In certain benchmarks, it's pretty close to 2x as powerful. But in games, the difference will be closer to 60% more powerful.

 

What?

An overclocked 7970M just reaches stock 580M SLI in Vantage/3DMark11.

So whilst gaming, a moderately overclocked 7970M will perform as well as stock 6990M Xfire / 580/675 SLI. Maybe slightly better in DX11 games.

 

*Looks at price of 675M* yeah it's not going to be cheap LOL.

 

Yeah because it is fair to compare a bigger Fermi card to a 28nm GCN card when Nvidia haven`t any high end 28nm Kepler cards to compete with price.

GTX 675M is 56% bigger than HD 7870. Its not even remotely fair comparison you made

 

*Looks at GTX560 die size of 360MM^2*
*Looks at GTX680 die size of 294MM^2*
*Looks at price of 28NM wafers*
*Looks at yields of 28NM wafers*
*Remembers Nvidia pays per wafer, not per chip*
*Remembers the price difference between a GTX560 and GTX580M regardless*
*Looks at price desktop 680s and 670s are going to be*
*Chuckles and walks away*

 

GPU size is not what matters here. Theres plenty of cream cutting behind those prices anyway.
But if you want to compare, then GK104 is also considerably bigger than Pitcairn core. 38,7% to be exact.

 

GTX 580M was 332mm, 6990M was 255mm. 30% difference. 580M was much more expensive
GTX 680M 294mm (say its a GK104), 7870 212mm. 39% difference

Looking at desktop GPUs we have this:
GTX 680 294mm, 7970 365mm. $20 price difference.
GTX 670 294mm, 7950 365mm, $30 price difference.

But since GTX 580M is 332mm and GTX 680M is 294mm, shouldn`t 680M be cheaper?

Looking at the die size, GTX 680M looks to be more expensive than 7970M but less expensive than 675M imo, but if Nvidia only pays for wafer they can end up competing against 7970M for the price after all then? Thanks Meaker

 

The 680M looks to be around £450-600 (IMO closer to the latter) based off the desktop prices.

It would be a nice card and would likely get a bit more than the 7970M, but you will pay for it, trust me.

 

AMD Radeon HD 7970M Crossfire - Notebookcheck.net Tech

Eurocom Racer 2.0 3820QM 8192 MB 31127 vantage p score

Know that is one beast of a system.

http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/zardon/asus-gtx680-graphics-card-review/6/
Similar to a desktop 7970 or gtx680.

 

Could you be any bigger of an Nvidia homer??

As of right now there is no competition to the 7970m, ZERO! Stop making assumptions that one card is going to be better based on history.

Its obviously going to be better as it will come out later, but guess what... AMDs next card will be better then Nvidia's and so on and so on.

Right now the GTX580m or w/e doesn't exist so this thread shouldn't either.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

 

So yeah.... GTX 670 review is out
It's basically 95% power of GTX 680 but uses much less power and the card itself is so tiny
NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 670 2GB Video Card Performance Preview - Power Consumption Test :: TweakTown USA Edition

If Nvidia 680m is based on this card they have a winner (if priced correctly)

That's the size of the desktop card not mobile lol

 

This test is linked already many pages ago.
The actual card size is much bigger. Thats only PCB whats short.

We dont know anything about the card power consumtion yet. On TT test, the gtx 670 test system actually used more than hd 7970 test system as you see. Thats probably peak consumption and not to be taken seriously.
Need to wait 4 more days to get decent rewievs.

 

This 670 performs pretty much like 680 and is within the margin error. I don't understand how Nvidia could release identically performing card to GTX 680 and give it a different name? Either they just shot themselves in the foot (which I doubt) or something is wrong with the tests.

 

The actual card is not "bigger" we already saw real screenshots of the card, it's nvidia reference design that make it seems bigger (Fan on the side) this card is tiny

 

Yes. Its seems bigger, but thats just an illusion. I mean lol?

 

This could happen if Nvidia make GTX 680M out of GTX 670 and they are able to get the same performance out of CUDA as AMD did with their cores

3DMark11 7870: P6619
3DMark11 7970M: P5600
18.2%

3DMark11 GTX 670: P9075
3DMark11 GTX 680M: P7691
18.2%

Yes a very weird release indeed. They have benchmarked the Gigabyte OC version, which is rumored to cost $50 under the 680, and it performs better than 680 on stock. People are talking about building SLI with 670 instead of 680. Lower power consumption, lower heat, and cost less. Can`t see I blame them

 

I mean looking from specs, even 660Ti will destroy 7870 for sure.. but I don't think nvidia can beat 7970m that bad, I think they will end up being a little slower than 7970m.. (still will buy it )

 

I've read a lot of reports that put the 670 as a competitor to the 7950, rather then the 7870. Based on prior nvidia release patterns, it seems like the nvidia 660 is the card to look at for ball parking the mobile parts performance.

I'd certainly love it if this was the reference for the 680m, but everyone had enough trouble believing the 7970m numbers, much less something that blows it away by 37%. Kepler seems like a solid design by nvidia and I don't doubt it'll be king of the hill at some point, but just like the late desktop parts, I'd bet mobile Kepler is still at least 4-6 months away. Especially if the rumors of a delayed 660 desktop card are true.

 

37% better performance for 74% higher price?

but if they indeed chose to use the 670 as a 680M base wed definitely be in for a VERY hot summer/fall indeed!

 

^^ indeed bro! after all I don't get this war at all, the better the cards, the better the gaming, WE WIN!!! anybody employed by amd or nvidia? I guess not..

 

Yes, 660 Ti may be our 680M, but I think it will trade blows with 7950.

I don`t think 680M is far away. According to the people who got their hands on 680M several pages ago, 680M have reached late production. Which perhaps means Nvidia had a finished desktop version to work on?

I don`t know, just speculating

If those scores are true, I`m willing to pay a lot for it. Would you pay, lets say $150-200 extra for it?
Edit: Oh I see you already have your eyes on the 7970M. Nevermind

 

sure buddy, id deff pay the premium price tag if those scores proved to be true, but only when buying a new laptop. as for a gpu upgrade, im rather aiming for the best bang/buck, thus the red team

cheers

 

After a few weeks pondering on how technology is evolving in this moment, ive come up with some thoughts.

I have a 485m that i overclock based on what im planning to game. Lately im not overclocking at all, appreciating the power of the card at stock clocks with some high/maxed out details in some games, albeit most of them without AA or simply using FXAA.

But when i want to squeeze the most performance-eye candy wise, i hit my stable OC.

Now connecting my laptop to my brand tv, made me appreciate gaming on bigger screen, without worrying about crazy detail settings, leaving me impressed and satisfied with my "old and chunky" 485m.

What im saying is that, considering how games are running now on this old card, without pretending to run uber-ultra-marvelous-astonishing-max details, its still enough.

I dont know what nvidia is cooking, and what it will come up next. But for the first time, im intrigued by AMD and its 7970m, because theres so much power gain that hardly something even better will be needed.

I mean, once you get your laptop to run Witcher 2 with ubersampling on, what you achieved? Maybe youll be running around for half hour praising the huge power and huge detail but...then?
Isnt fine to play the game at decent settings, lets say very high, and still have a good blast with it?

The best is awlays the best, granted. But this time i will not wait for nvidia to make his move if a powerful card such the AMD beast can deliver up to 30% increase in perfomance - even in those games im currently playing that meet perfectly my taste of performance and graphic appealing.

Ive ran again Crysis 2 at 1080p with Extreme preset, while having Very High on water only, DX11 on and high res Texture pack installed. And god, that was a blast, on my new tv. My framerate was between 45-60 vsynched and im totally satisfied.
I dont regret a desktop at all if i can be satisfied.
And having my favourite titles such Dirt 3 running with a mix of ultra and very high with 8xCsaa while being vsynched at 60fps makes me drool all the time, and im not using my stable oc, a mild one does fine.

Probably we will see those new cards getting used alot in the next months/years, because supposedly newer games will require better hardware, and so on. But taking a look at the current situation, even our current top end hardware does the work perfectly, and does it fine.

Ive seen people arguing with arguments like "this is better than that etc etc" i think the best way to face a revolution, wheter its a technology or human one, is to first appreciate to full extent what we have now, and then move on.

Probably i will regret my own way of thinking with Max Payne 3 seeing that it needs a gtx 680 and an hexa core to max it out - but time will tell i guess. Im sure our current gen will be able to make its name proud even at high details.

Sorry for the long post but as always i wanted to share my pov with you guys. For what is worth, considering that pc gaming is currently on idle speaking of graphic-intense things (because most of the sku's are based on consoles, and you know that you cant push consoles that much, they have limits), AMD wins this round with the best bang for the buck, price and performance wise.

Ill be more than happy to own one if it turns out to be compatible with my HM, now we only need some serious work on drivers like nvidia does, and we're sorted.

But one last thing: if its either 580m, 6990m or 485m, this generation gave us alot of fun, and sometimes we're always pretending too much from those cards. And i think its wrong, because if everything is used or approached in the right way, youll find your hardware more than capable of anything you throw at it.

Thanks for reading ^^

 

Damn, i wish this GTX680M to come out next week. I need my 7970M cheaper!

 

The biggest change the shift to 28nm GPUs in desktops has brought about seems to be the performance per watt TDP. This seems to have translated to an ENORMOUS performance jump in mobile GPUs, as it seems the biggest limiting factor of mobile GPUs has been the performance output per watt.

A quick question to current AMD owners: I have owned Nvidia mobile GPUs since 2004, apart from a 5870M in 2010. The 5870M was a great card, however the lack of proper forced vsync and triple buffering in the amd catalyst driver control centre was a source of frustration for me.

Could any 5870M - 6990M (or possibly even 7970M) owners please confirm whether forcing vsync and triple buffering now works in the catalyst control panel? If so I would definitely considering purchasing a 7970M system now rather than waiting for the undoubtably more costly Nvidia counterpart.

As international companies typically ignore exchangerates (£1 = 1$ HURRR) i'll be paying 2200$ for a 1500$ system, so the price difference between Nvidia and AMD GPUs becomes more of an issue :/

Note: as I mentioned a few posts back, UK resellers are currently selling the 7970M around 30$ cheaper than the 675M.

 

Ok so if a single 7970m is equivalent of 580mgtx(is this really true?), then 7970m cf can play battlefield 3 max settings with max res at 70fps stable,right?

 

The 7970M outperforms the 580 M GTX heavily. It may be within a 20% performance bracket of the 580 GTX desktop card, in which case yes, two in xfire would slaughter BF3.

Regarding the 680M GTX: I heard that Nvidia were announcing a new GPU on the 15th May? And as apparently the 680M has entered its final stages of development, this articles release date and specs may be correct? GeForce GTX 680M PC Gaming Graphics Card Hardware For Game System Requirements

 

I heard the 7970m is equivalent to a 485m gtx sli.is this true?

 

I would say that is correct. Equivalent to GTX 485M SLI and 6970M Xfire. Probably better in some newer games thanks to it being a single card as well as next gen architecture and optimisations.

 

I don't think this warrants its own thread, so I'll ask here:

Are Alienware and Sager the only guys who put out laptops using 100W GPUs? From what I can tell, MSI and ASUS don't offer the 7970M in any of their laptops, and even the 675M from Nvidia is hard to find. Could anyone shed some light on this topic real quick?

 

Samsung

 

The card board as big as i posted, anything else is misinformation and lack of how graphic cards works

 

Yes but the chip still needs a big heatsink and fan

 

Still, that PCB is really small. Money saved

 

Still don't understand how people can compare two products when only 1 exists...

Seeing how I'm ordering my P170, in a week or 2, ill be getting the 7970m.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

 

were not really comparing just yet, only trying to gauge the perf. of the upcoming 680M since us computer nerds are not generally known for their patience when it comes to new hardware

 

Question, how's crysis 1 or battlefield 3 on your m17x with 7970m? Max settings that is.

 

People like to compare imaginary things, such as 680M to real life (that would be 7970M). They also tend to see such imagined things in better light than what's outside. Which, for some reason, seems to be more likely with Nvidia camp. Not too long ago, before anyone knew anything about 7970M people were saying that it would perform slightly better than 6990M, and when it was benchmarked there were a lot of surprised Nvidia fans.
There are way too many 'IFs' with 680M so that pure guessing gives you better result than many pages on this thread. I could say that 680M will be better than 7970M and be as right/wrong as the guy who says otherwise.

I personally have ordered 7970M based on what's available now and more or less reasonable expectations that I have from the card. It's the best bang for my buck and 680M may or may not be better/more expensive/pick your category. Never been fan of any company, only fan of a good product, so I prefer to buy the best performance/price and not blindly follow one company's promises.
This thread should really be renamed to 'Speculations: 7970M vs 680M' to accurately reflect its content.

 

Speculate is what we do. About Trinity, about Ivy Bridge, about Kepler, about GCN. This forum would be pretty dull without it

 

Im sincerely hoping that the 680m would smash to bits the 7970m, let it be the 670 downclocked

 

Ahh but how many hundreds of dollars more would it cost? That's the only thing that I see as an issue, nVidia likes to charge a lot for their nice stuff >_<

 

if 680m beats 7970m, it won't be by much. Both are limited to 100w's.

But i thought that kepler was not as efficient per watt as picairn?

 

well if we go by the 150w tdp, there is a good possibility that the 670 be the 680m, it will be one hell of a card. And from I can see I hope that it will be much faster than the 7970m

Another thing that I hope is that asus comes out of their high horse start doing gaming notebooks again

 

I don't get why there is all the doubt.

Nvidia must fire back to maintain competition.

For now, AMD surprised Nvidia and made an amazing entry into the mobile GPU arena.

Nvidia will find a way now that AMD raised the bar.
The question is... how long?

Either way we all win.
Even if Nvidia ships a 680m that is indeed a downclocked desktop 670, and it IS faster than a 7970m, people who buy a 7970m aren't exactly in a bad situation. (and you will still have your arm, leg, and other appendage which will likely be the price to pay to get a 680m)

 

7970m is a marvel, it is desktop 570 in a lappy, craziness.. and this is just a sign of great things to come, we will get really good stuff as soon as they perfect 28nm (well, P7k 3dmark11 is enough for me )