AMD 7970m vs GTX 680m

That's not from the nvidia hompage!
On their homepage you find nothing about turbo boost
!!!!!! The 720 and 1800 mhz are fixed!!!!!!!!!!!"
Nothing is written about up to 720 mhz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Max Payne 3 SLI numbers are going to be a real treat. AMD is losing by quite a margin when CFX is enabled.

Once the SLI numbers are in I believe nVIDIA will start to really pull ahead.

Evidence of this was seen with the 6990M CF vs. 580M SLi bouts. When it came to single cards the 6990M and 580M @ stock traded blows but nVIDIA pulled ahead with SLi enabled. I expect to see the same pattern with 680M SLi.

I think we're all in for a real treat this summer.

A quantum leap indeed...

 

You people realize the GTX 680M price is nearly that of GTX 690 right ? Price at which you can get a Xfire of 7970M and come out with higher performance than the one 680M , true, with some little extra money added in.

 

Really? I always thought that CF scaled better than SLI, but I guess I am wrong. Two of these GPUs will be so sick. You do know that you will have better than desktop 680 with two of these right? LOL

 

Your Far Cry numbers backwards.

 

Yeah sorry. 680M got better results in Far cry of course

 

Funny thing is I reckon the 680m will take around 20w more then the 7970m as nvidia always try to trump amd high end card by getting the most power hungry gpu they can fit in.

Judging from the 7970m m17x r4 on notebookcheck the 7970m is a card that is designed not to take a lot of electricity to run. The 675m takes around 30-50w more then the 7970m so I reckon the 680m takes just a little less then the 675m.

 

The 680m is pretty much on par with the 7970 according to the recent notebookreview tests..............and if you're willing to pay 50% more for nearly the same performance well then maybe you would also be interested in this bridge I am building, it's just not finished yet!

 

" PCIe 3.0 is now supported by the mobile Kepler series and an optional Turbo mode can automatically overclock the Nvidia card by a theoretical 15 percent if the laptop cooling system allows it."

Do you think the benchmarks provided by nvidia was with or without this feature enabled ?

 

not sure where some of you are getting this info from, but the 7970m is a 100 watt card.

and for those who dont know...you can check any mobile card against any other on their site using this link.
Mobile Graphics Cards - Benchmark List - Notebookcheck.net Tech
using synthetic benchmarks only

 

I wonder if now that the GTX 680 for the Sager NP9170 is out, we could expect a 3d 120 hz screen for it as an option..?

 

That sounds impossible.

Supposed to be coming soon.

 

100 watt CLASS is not 100 watt CONSUMPTION people the 7970m does indeed need way less power than a 580m/675m,its a fact (shown by nbr users here and also by tomshardware and notebookcheck).

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

 

7970M takes indeed about 30W less on full stress test. It was tested by someone in this forum. I dont have the patience to look for post again, but maybe someone has the link to it.

 

My bad, I just said AMD will pull ahead. But yes, nVIDIA's SLi is currently superior technology. CrossFire use to be the more efficient platform in terms of scaling but the tables have turned now. Although AMD is doing well in terms of single card vs. single card, dual cards is in favour of nVIDIA (desktop side).

If Max Payne 3 is any indicator of performance for GTA V then these 680M's will sell like hotcakes. And just as I said I would, I'm definitely going to be buying these cards.

 

You know the Xfire would be better than 680 as well ? For 590$ less than SLi. Is the variable performance increase of 15%~ worth it ? Until I see certain numbers on the difference between the two cards, no.
You could get a third 7970 from the price difference an still have extra $ left

 

yeah, we tested it.
the cards will do a max of about 110W because that is the max the pcie slot will allow.(10 w head room)

 

D-D-D-D-D-damn that's a hefty price the 680M has...

 

580 SLI is faster than single 7970 ?

 

Why is "GPU Boost" not listed in the Features section of Nvidia's 680M official website but in GTX670's features section it has it???

-680M GeForce GTX 680M - GeForce

-GTX670 GeForce GTX 670 - GeForce

 

How did you measure it?

 

Even if the technology is not included it's actually a bonus in my opinion for several reasons.

GPU Boost is non-predictable due to the complexity in the algorithms. The clock speeds can vary from game to game. Voltages also vary from card to card (desktop cards) at idle and when Turbo boosted. Power consumption is kind of all over the map (although still excellent), however, it's an obvious positive when the card doesn't use GPU boost for games such as Minecraft to keep the power consumption low. We'll know why (if it doesn't have it) when the power consumption is fully tested.

 

It has gpu boost for sure:

"PCIe 3.0 is now supported by the mobile Kepler series and an optional Turbo mode can automatically overclock the Nvidia card by a theoretical 15 percent if the laptop cooling system allows it. The implementation of this boost mode is done in the BIOS, but it is ultimately dependent upon the manufacturer of the laptop."

source

 

Hmm, why did Nvidia intentionally remove that from it's Features section? http://www.geforce.com/hardware/notebook-gpus/geforce-gtx-680m/features

 

the only way you can test it is using a kilo-o-watt meter. of course it's not 100 percent acurate because other factors factor in...but running over clocked it will do what it states.

just like the 580m/6990m/6970m will all run lower watts if not over clocked.

im only speaking on an over clocked nature. since all of them run far lower when not stressed. which is a given. the only person who can give an exact wattage per basis usage is Luis from dell.
and of course nvidia/amd...who arent telling..

 

Seing how the turbo boost is optional and is not a given unless the manufacturer supports it, it all should suggest the nvidia benchmarks were done without this enabled. This also means that a theoretical 15% performance boost is to be expected when OC'ing this card. So will we be seing p5700ish + 15% = p6500ish OC with this card?

It could be an indication saying the card still offers some headroom for an OC.. If that's the case I'm pretty sold for the 680m..

 

I will laugh my off if the boost turns on while playing minecraft


Sent From My Rooted EVO 3D

 

Can you stop posting BULLSH*T?

GTX 680M is $280 over 7970M. Find me a 7970M for $280. You can`t? Right, now go back to the hole you came from.
And 3x7970M or 3x680M is seriously ridiculous

 

Sh*t just got real son.
the butt-hurt is strong with this one, specifically a nvidia fan boi.

 

The 680M will actually consume less power than the 580M. Boy I wonder what consumption it will have. This is looking better for each day

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/introducing-the-geforce-gtx-680m-mobile-gpu/

 

Look at GTX 660M. It have GPU boost, yet that feature isn`t listed either

GeForce GTX 660M - GeForce

 

They won't list it as a feature unless it's a standard feature, which it is not. Only some builds will be able to support this boost safely because of ventilation etc.

 

ALL will support/have this boost. Stop confusing people

 

"The implementation of this boost mode is done in the BIOS, but it is ultimately dependent upon the manufacturer of the laptop."

 

Only interested in Clevo P170EM. I just hope they have it.

 

Yes but do you see this GPU going inside a Ultrabook? Do you see it going inside a 11 inch netbook?

No its going inside a gaming notebook so that statement means nothing. GT70 which have ONE fan, have it factory overclocked 12MHz higher.

 

All I'm saying is some builds might not have it.. If a 15" laptop doesn't provide enough venting, the manufacturer will have to disable the feature.. There is a reason why it's optional. And that means some builds housing the 680m will probably not be able to support the boost feature.

 

Once again, gaming notebooks will have this GPU and they have more than enough capable cooling.

Here is the notebooks which are going to feature the 680M. Find one that doesn`t have proper cooling
I can tell you which have the WORST of the bunch, its the MSI GT70 and they have factory overclocked the 680M...

 

yes I'm sure all of those can hold it fine. The point here was this feature is optional for a reason. And this is probably why they dont list it as a standard feature

full quote:

"PCIe 3.0 is now supported by the mobile Kepler series and an optional Turbo mode can automatically overclock the Nvidia card by a theoretical 15 percent if the laptop cooling system allows it. The implementation of this boost mode is done in the BIOS, but it is ultimately dependent upon the manufacturer of the laptop."

 

Yeah baby P170EM is a 17.3" laptop with pretty good cooling. Looks like different 680m owners will have more advantages over one another.

 

so the real question remains....is 720 the factory clock and then turbo kicks in?

 

speculations ofc

 

If this is the case then won't the boost clock be around 830-850 MHz ?

Sent From My Rooted EVO 3D

 

1) I used XoticPC price of 295$ over 7970M and doubled it to get 590$ which is the difference in price between Xfire and SLi NOT any total price of one or another. Where have I said the 7970M is 280$ ? NOWHERE. Read properly before dismissing and insulting.
2) I said about a 3rd 7970M to put it in context at how big the difference in $ actually is and make people understand it better, I did not say you should get a 3rd 7970M. I could have well said you can get a GTX 680 for the difference.

Please read properly before engaging in nvidia zealotry please. I still am of the opinion until the actual performance difference comes in this price is ridiculous even though I can afford any case. Just changing orders or deciding to buy something from marketing numbers is rushed and acting like sheep. I am sorry if this sounds harsh but I cannot see it otherwise.

 

You sir are a very angry person ...........Why is it so difficult for you to grasp the fact that the price premium on the 680m is absurd, even when you take into consideration the "better" driver support/CUDA.

Everything we have seen so far that isn't provided by Nvidia puts the 680m on avg ~5%-10% ahead of the 7970, we also see 7970 actually beating the 680m in several games.

 

Yeah cool story bro

Ok this is the last time I`m responding to you since nothing you ever post have any content.

First of all, 580M was 5% over 6990M and it costed $250-$300 over 6990M and tons of people bought it. Absurd price? Perhaps for you but not for many other people.

Tell me, where have you seen any results from 680M other from Nvidia? Yeah thats right, NOWHERE. You mean the SYNTHETIC benchmarks posted by Notebookcheck? First of all, its not notebookcheck that have tested it since they don`t have a sample. Second of all, they got it from Nvidia, third its SYNTHETIC.

The results from Nvidia have an average of 15% over 7970M. I calculated that myself. I suggest you do the same before trying to convince people otherwise.

Now go away and leave me alone. You been nothing but an annoying little fly on this forum posting nothing but things that have never been backed up but anything but your own biased opinion.

I love your recent damage control btw:
"There is something wrong with AMD drivers"

That made me chuckle

 

Why dont you cool down and stop being immature?
The gpu is out already so it wont take long before more reliable results about benches are out. No need wasting time arguing and speculating.

It is clear that there is a big difference between the price and many think even I that its a bit ridiculous. But regardless, I am planning to buy it as an upgrade for my 580M.

 

Its gotta be the turbo clock I think. I mean, any higher should have scored more than what it did at Vantage and 3DMark 11 in my opinion

 

just hope for delays from resellers. When I ordered mine, I got the 580M upgrade from 6990M for $99.

 

Cloudfire, please calm down. You're more than this. When I took you for an unbiased GPU enthusiast, and I still do, so please stop making an attempt to prove me wrong. The pricing IS absurdly high on the 680M, mind you. And this isn't because I've ordered for a laptop with the 7970M already. Instead, it's because if I were to get a laptop a month or so from now, I'd STILL pick the AMD over the nVidia, even though I'm sure I'd prefer the nVidia, since I'm extremely particular about the "performance/price" ratio, and to counter your comment about how many customers would not find the pricing to be absurdly high, knowing the market myself, I can assure you that many more would find it as such, regardless of whether they can afford to or are willing to spend the extra cash for it.