Geforce GTX 675m vs Geforce GTX 670mx

I found two laptops with similar prices. Which is the better card? I know the 675 is the fermi and runs hotter and takes more energy than the 670mx which is the new keplar. But I haven't been able to find any true comparisons other than notebook check which doesn't seem to go into detail with games on the 670mx. According to nvidia - the 675m is better. I don't care too much about energy savings - I just want the more efficient card. I also know that the 675 is 256 bit and the 670mx is 196 bit. However, the 670mx has 3 gigs of vram vs the 675m that has 2 gigs of vram.

Any opinions?

 

675m is slightly better if you dont care about power/heat. unless you are hooking up to multiple monitors, 2gb of vram is more than enough.

 

There is not too big of a difference to be honest. Your decision will be based on your own preference and usage.


Here are the complete specs for both....

670MX vs 675M

Hardware:
Kepler vs Fermi
28nm vs 40nm fab process
960:80:24 vs 384:64:32 (Shaders/Config)
600/600/1400 vs 620/1240/1500 (Core/Shader/Memory in MHz)
3GB GDDR5 vs 2GB GDDR5
192-bit vs 256-bit memory bus
67.2GB/s vs 96.0GB/s memory bandwidth
75W vs 100W TDP

Fillrates:
14.4 vs 19.8 (Pixels GP/s)
48.0 vs 39.7 (Texture GT/s)
1152 vs 952 (Power GFLOPS)

Features:
DX11.1 vs DX11.0
VP5 (PureVideo Gen 5) 670MX ONLY
- Core integrated Hardware Decoding up to 4k
Dedicated Video Encoding - 670MX ONLY

Benchmarks:
P15715 vs P14954 (Vantage 1280x1024)
22706 vs 20187 (3DMark 06 Default)

Personally it would really depend on the entire system and the price. I would not spend more money on one or the other just for the GPU if the rest of the specs are the same. If one has a faster GPU, more/faster RAM, etc I would base my decision on that. If you can get one of them for less money I would buy it and spend the extra on a SSD and/or RAM...

Out of curiosity which models are you looking at? I May be able to give you some alternatives as well. Let me know the price range you are looking at as well!

 

Always go Kepler...

 

This one for 1220:

1 PowerPro R 12:17-675-25 Gaming Laptops - $1,258.00
17.3" Full HD (1920x1080) MATTE LED backlit LCD
No Defective Pixel Guarantee - None
nVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M 256bit w/2.0GB GDDR5
Intel Core i7-3610QM (2.3~3.3GHz) w/6M L3 Cache - 4 Cores - 8 Threads
FREE IC Diamond Thermal Compound applied to CPU + GPU
8GB (4x 2GB) DDR3/1600 Dual Channel Memory
500GB SATA II 3GB/s 7,200 RPM Hard Drive
2nd HDD - None - 2nd HDD Bracket is Included
RAID Disabled
Combo Dual Layer SuperMulti DVDRW/CDRW Drive
Internal 7-in-1 Card Reader: SD/SDHC/SDXC/XD/MSPRO/MS/MM
Intel® Centrino® Wireless-N 2230 Wireless Card + Bluetooth 4.0 (Single Band)
Smart Li-ion Battery 9-Cell
Full Range 180W Auto Switching AC Adapter
3 Year Parts - Free Ground Shipping - 24/7 DOMESTIC Toll Free Support + Lifetime Labor
NO Backlit Keyboard
NO Caching Solid State Drives
NO Operating System
NO Microsoft Office Software
NO 12V Auto Adapter

Or this one for 1270 or less depending on the Max Discount:
15.6” Full HD 16:9 LED-Backlit MATTE Ultra Clear $0.00
NVIDIA® GeForce™ GTX 670MX 3GB GDDR5 Memory $100.00
NEW! 3rd Generation Intel® Core™ i7-3630QM Processor (6M Cache, up to 3.40 GHz) $0.00
Stock OEM Thermal Compound $0.00
No OS - Drivers & Utility Software Only $0.00
8GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1600MHz - 2 X 4GB $0.00
Sager Branding $0.00
500GB 7200rpm SATA 300 Hard Disk Drive $0.00
8X DVD±R/RW/4X +DL Super-Multi Drive & Software $0.00
No Extra Optical Bay Hard Drive Caddy $0.00
Integrated 802.11 b/g/n wireless LAN + Bluetooth $0.00
8 cells smart Lithium-Ion battery pack 76.96Wh $0.00
Integrated Fingerprint Reader $0.00
LIFETIME Limited Labor and 3 Year Premium** Parts Warranty $149.00
FREE UPS Ground (CONUS Only)

 

These are the max of my price range. I really can't go over 1300

 

Would you rather have 17" or 15" display?

That's the biggest difference. Games are going to play identically as far as perception.

 

I wouldn't mind having a bigger screen since portability isn't too large of an issue. More to look at. However, the more I research the more I realize the 670mx might be slightly better. Since it's Keplar I can overclock it a tad and it will run faster than the 675m at the same temp. Also, Kepler has a TXAA tech (not sure I understand) which from what I gathered if set through the nvidia control panel to force TXAA on games it can run antialiasing much easier than Fermi - which will help for games later down the road. Another choice that came into play is the GX60 with the Radeon HD7970. Although I love Ivy Bridge in these two laptops... the A10 Trinity might suffice if it doesn't bottleneck the 7970 which it seems like it doesn't in the GX60 owner thread on this forum.

Can anyone confirm that the 670mx may handle Antialiasing better than the Fermi 675m? I haven't heavily researched computers and GPU's since 2006, so I am a little rusty on the terms.

 

no idea about AA, but the 675m can also clock about 15~20% more ontop of stock. if the 670mx can do a 25% overclock, it would beat the 675m for sure

 

As far as I recall they are priced seemingly the same? So the 675M is a no-brainer here

 

i think 675m is like $200 or 100 cheaper than 670mx, depends on who you order it from

 

the a10 does bottleneck the 7970m, but it still delivers better performance than the 675m

 

Would overall performance in future gaming be better though with an Ivy Bridge 3630qm and an overclocked 670mx?

For clarification, the 675m and the 670mx are nearly the same price in this case (got a good deal!) So strictly on performance instead of a cost-performance ratio is what I am comparing. Although I have more room to overclock the 670mx, nvidia states that the 675m is that much better.

Also, how long do the GPU's typically last these days? My last GPU died 10 times in six years without OC'ing (thank god for 4 year warranty) with a notebook cooling pad (7900gs go) which is why I feel so strongly about the 3 year warranty while the GX60 only has a 2 year. Adding the 3 year will jump the price up 200 bucks. Otherwise, I probably would have purchased the GX60 already because of the 7970. But due to the lack of 3 year warranty, the gains in processor performance in combo with the other cards outweighs the pros of the gx60.

 

the 7900m was a pos, thats why it died so much.

sincerely what you are asking is based on what type of games do you play, if they need more cpu horse power, the 7970m will deliver less, if you need less cpu horsepower the 7970m will deliver more. But it doesnt matter much since its still going to be faster than both nvidia gpus + ivy. The best would be to get the np9150 with the base quad and the 7970m, thats going to be 1400 though

 

Good to know laptop GPU's improved since the 7900m.


Does anyone have any or know of any fps on a 670mx vs a 675m on games like skyrim, witcher, or metro? i know I probably could OC the 670mx higher than the 675m due to being kepler thus making it faster, but there is a solid price difference between the two (not huge, but still). I know vantage benchmark score is better in the 670mx, but I wouldn't mind seeing a little more in real gaming.

 

I dont know the 675m can really reach the 56ti that its based, overclocking possibilities are still out there for the 670mx

if you want some rough numbers for the 675m go check the aw lounge, the gpu you are looking is also called 485m and 580m for the 670mx we dont have any cards available, and you could check notebookcheck, but take those numbers with a huge sea of salt.

 

Yeah I know about where the 675m stands since it's been out for so long in it's other versions. According to notebook check the 670mx runs 1000 points higher in both vantage mark and 3dmark11. I just wanna see how much of a difference that transfers in real gaming, if it's significantly noticeable or not. Hopefully notebookcheck has the right numbers, as nvidia's site claims the 670mx is not as good as the 675m - although these scores beg to differ.

I also want to point out that on notebookcheck the 670mx score for vantage and 3dmark11 both have the same numbers for min, avg, max. Kinda worries me and makes me think that it's inaccurate.

 

Time to bring up some hard numbers instead of all the mambu jambu in this thread. The numbers Notebookcheck have of the 670MX are useless since they are the total score.

GTX 675M Vantage: 13700 Graphic score


GTX 670MX Vantage: 12900 Graphic score (- 6%)



GTX 675M 3DMark11: 3334 Graphic score


GTX 670MX 3DMark11: 3486 Graphic score (+5%)



Conclusion: Based on the synthetic benchmarks above, 670MX and 675M perform pretty much equal. 675M leading the DirectX10 games slightly, while 670MX is leading the DirectX11 games slightly.

However we have already seen the gigantic overclocking potential of Kepler (680M+675MX results) and 670MX is muuuch cooler than 675M. You must also note that the drivers that the 675M are using now, is the same drivers that the 580M have since they are the same GPU, meaning Nvidia had years of driver improvement on the 675M.
GTX 670MX is brand new, you have years of driver improvement AHEAD of you.

Your choice

 

My recommendation for longevity? 670MX and Intel i7 Quad Core. 670MX is newer architecture that is cooler running with decent overclock potential without overheating horribly or drawing a lot of power. The i7 quad will give you more breathing room for future games. The Trinity A10 isn't a true quad core, and it's general performance is much slower than most Intel i5 dual cores.

If you get a laptop witout Enduro, then the 7970m is definitely a viable option. I don't know that they've ironed out all the issues yet with Enduro. But if the laptop can turn off switchable graphics, then it's likely similar cost to 670mx machine with much better performance. It's a 256-bit GPU vs 192-bit of the 670mx which means the 7970m will fare better with higer resolution and/or FXAA.

 

Below I have provided links that show FPS in different games and different settings for each of the GPUs. If you are planning to play games at a native resolution of 1980x1020 then the 7970 is the better choice from a speed/FPS standpoint. Likewise at 1980x1020 the 675 shows better FPS then the 670. If you are going to lower the resolution and/or settings in the game then the 7970 will be less efficent.

7970:
AMD Radeon HD 7970M - Notebookcheck.net Tech

675:
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M - Notebookcheck.net Tech

670:
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M - Notebookcheck.net Tech

The links below show the 7970 compared to the 680, and you may find them worth reading as well:

Overclockers UK Forums - View Single Post - **OcUK EXCLUSIVE - MSI GX60 AMD TRINITY RADEON 7970M HARDCORE GAMING LAPTOP!!**
Overclockers UK Forums - View Single Post - **OcUK EXCLUSIVE - MSI GX60 AMD TRINITY RADEON 7970M HARDCORE GAMING LAPTOP!!**
Review GeForce GTX 680M vs. Radeon HD 7970M - Notebookcheck.net Reviews

Its worth noting that aside from the tests preformed on the overclockers forum (done in mid October) the other test were done quite a while ago, and results might be better with newer drivers and game patches that are out now that they didn't have during their tests. (The Witcher 2 which you mentioned earlier I suspect this to be particularlly true to, and I think you'd see higher FPS then what is shown in NotbookCheck's testing).

As for overclocking I wouldn't advise using that as a deciding factor. If you over clock the GPUs they'll run hotter, they'll wear faster (do to increased temputure on the components and cooling componds), and the fan(s) will activate more often (increasing both noise and power useage).

As far as price between the the 670 and 675 goes - last time I looked on XoticPc's website they had it where (the 9150 and 9170) you could switch between the two cards, and the price remained the same. PowerNotebooks usually has the same pricing scheme as XoticPC, so if you look back there again it may have them for the same price there too.

 

I think you misread what I wrote. I am not interested in the 670m. I am interested in the 670mx which is the kepler architecture and is MUCH better than the 670m.

 

The 670MX is better in the long run. I'm planning on snagging one if they start selling individually. Be a nice upgrade from the 6970M I've got running now.

 

I think I'll opt for a 670mx rather than the 675m thanks for the info!

 

Just OC the memory in the 670MX. 67GB/s memory bandwidth is so low... That should do the trick.

 

what will be the advantage if I OC the memory of 670mx and to what extent?

 

It would decrease the performance hit of playing at high resolutions, and enable things like textures, AA etc with less hit in performance. The extent I don't know, since we don't have the card info with OC and without OC.

 

Yeah I think it's such a newer card it's hard to find any benchmarks on it. Would be great to find someone who has this and can compare it to the 675m. I have a feeling notebookcheck's numbers are off and Nvidia might be right. That it might be slower at stock than the 675m although slightly. However, I bet the 670mx overclocked 10-15% it will run faster than the 675m and still be the same temp. Just a hunch though. I hope someone can get real numbers before I make a purchase later this week or the next.

 

sorry sir for a noob question... but what is "performance hit"? does it mean the FPS of games?

 

The performance hit is exactly what it sounds like.

It's a decrease in performance due to one or more factors. In this case that would be due to the low memory bandwidth. Physically speaking, the ONLY difference between the GTX 670MX and the GTX 675MX is the memory clock speed and the bus width. The number of CUDA cores remains the same with both GPUs. This in mind, the GTX 670MX has just as much room for improvement as the 675MX, probably moreso due to this.

If my memory serves me right, the memory chips on Kepler-based GPUs are VERY overclocking friendly. I kinda wanna get one now just to show off. X3

 

That's what I heard Which is why I am leaning towards the 670mx over the 675 As long as it has potential to be significantly better than the 675m for the price difference.

 

Fermi is dead. Stop buying that garbage

 

Oh come now, its not that bad...

For the right price, or for those who want to have Nvidia drivers AND some GPGPU its not a bad choice.

 

Go for Kepler

 

Raw price to performance, the 670MX still isn't worth the extra $100 over the 675M.

I myself am one who would probably take the 'X' anyway, but it's hard to ignore the the sense in spending that money elsewhere.

In this laptop which can keep both cards below 75C, the "it runs cooler" angle is moot, dropping some of the value.

 

benchmark of 670mx

benchmark of 675m

Glad I went with the 670mx. Same performance. New architecture. Less power. Lower temps. slight overclock to less than or equal to same temps of 675m= significantly better than 675m.

 

Until we see the 670mx's overclocking ceiling, this is kind of up in the air.
You still spend more for the 670mx right now and the 675m is essentially the same performance.
If you spend $100 more on other components, you may very well have an altogether superior laptop with the 675m.

The 675m OCs very well (~+30% performance increase) and the laptops it comes in handle heat very well.
If the 670mx OC's better than the 675m performance-wise, maybe it might be worth the extra $100.

Until we have some proof otherwise, the two are the same.

As mentioned before.... the 675m comes with the advantage of better compute performance. (as it isn't artificially nerfed)
The 670mx comes with the advantage of lower heat (its own advantage) and lower power draw (but lets face it, doesn't really matter unless you game on battery).

For me its a toss-up and I'd consider other points in deciding.
If the 670mx drops in price a bit, then it might get the edge.

 

Yeah, actually after scanning the laptops deals for weeks I managed to find cheaper laptops configured with the 670mx than with the 675m due to deals and my own personal preference in configs. Hence why the 670mx was a no-brainer in the sager 9130 over other laptops containing the 675m. I was thinking of going with the GX60 - but I like to play CPU heavy games and run CPU -based programs here and there.

 

EDIT: Nevermind, I think I'm skipping MSI since they're using florescent backlighting it seems. Still curious about these GPU comparisons though.

Huh...I'm looking at MSI's offerings and wondering the same thing, since either the 675m and 670mx are the same price, or the 675m is $100 cheaper.

I DON'T overclock-wouldn't on a desktop, let alone a notebook. The 670's memory bandwidth is really low compared to the 675 which is worrying, though on the other hand just having 28nm versus 40nm might mean it lasts longer.

Is it worth $400 for a 675mx over a 675m? $300 for a 675mx versus 670mx?

I don't care about anti-aliasing though would prefer to run at 1080p and with mostly maxed settings.

 

You're right, the 670mx bandwidth is lower. But what it sacrifices for bandwidth it improves in efficiency. Since the card is 28nm, I have heard and researched elsewhere that it is much more overclock friendly. I wouldn't overclock it to get an extreme performance. Just enough where the temp would max the 675m - Thus making it the same temp and then superior (if it it isn't already superior as seen by the benchmark scores). I am surprised at the efficiency of the 670mx compared to the 675m despite the lower bandwidth. As I stated, most laptops I have found with the 670mx in it are the same price as others with the 675m and I have searched for weeks!

There is only something like an increase of 16-18% in the 675mx over the 675m. So we are talking 5-8 FPS depending on the settings. Is that worth 300-400 bucks to you? Guess it depends on an individual's wealth. For 300 bucks I rather buy a 30 inch LED TV to hook up my 670mx to and lose 5 fps

 

Wow, 5-8 FPS? Is that at 1080p? The Fermi architecture must be crazy efficient?

Dang, I wish more notebooks used the GTX 670 and higher!

 

What hurts the 670MX is the cut in ROP count, 24 from 32, thus you are still likely going to see linear speed increases from overclocking the core as those 24 rops are sped up.

 

Not sure what ROP is.. but I am guessing what your saying is that because of the kepler architecture - the overclock improvements will be smaller than when overclocking fermi?

 

No, not because of Kepler. The ROPs are hardware units that perform several graphics functions regarding the pixels shown, including things like AA, merging pixels to perform filters or other end images etc.

A loss of ROPs count can be slightly matched with proper core speed, I believe.

 

Ooooh didn't know it had fewer ROPS. It's weirdly hard to figure out how many ROPS different parts have...like actually I don't know what the 650 and 660 have either.