Nvidia Card Specs

I've been watching a lot of threads regarding the throttling problems on the 580m and where nvidia are going with the 6xxm series. Which ones are really new and which are just a rebadge.
The guys here are helping a lot to ease the confusion but I came across this link which I've not seen posted: Comparison of Nvidia graphics processing units - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Of course the 680m still has a lot of question marks but the info seems good and the notes column makes interesting reading. HTH.

 

There's a few other threads on here regarding Kepler.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/gam...660m-release-information-cuda-core-count.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/gam...bridge-nvidia-geforce-gt-640m-discussion.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/gam...-hurray-nvidia-600-series-not-just-fermi.html

 

yup that chart is a good summary...

essentially:

670m = 570m (100% rebadge)
675m = 580m (100% rebadge)

the 660m is true kepler but will not be faster than a 570/670m

 

i think the 570 will be just slightly faster than 660M, but 660M consumes less power

 

that's a very good way to look at it...the 660m will work in smaller form factors because of the lower power requirements, which also means less bulky heat dissipation is needed

But when i look at the specs, the 660m kepler will have upto 384 kepler cores which is about 2 kepler cores to 1 Fermi core.

So really, its only at about 192 equivalent cores to the 336 Fermi cores of the 570m. i don't know how this will play into performance.

plus i don't know how the 128 bit memory bus on the 660m will play into it. They could try and circumvent the smaller bus with beefier vram, but still

in the end, after looking at the numbers, it looks like 570m will still trounce the 660m kepler

 

570 will certainly be faster than 660, but it shouldnt trounce it, should just be slightly faster. I think this is because 660 is operating at a higher frequency (835Mhz, with 384core), while the 570 will be running at 575mhz with 336 cores, so it evens out to the point that 660 may be more attractive because of a lot less heat and power consumption, while 570 still retains a bit of performance over 660.

edit:570 has a 192 bit bus width, while 660 is probably at 128 still (depending on what source you look at). so 570 would have a noticeable performance over 660, but the heat/power advantage of the 660 should still make it more attractive to most laptop consumers

 

Most of this has been discussed in previous threads and the linked site isn't really more info. (not that it's bad info, it's just repeated info)

The 660m will have very fast 128-bit GDDR5...
The memory bandwidth (the only thing that really matters) will be between the 192-bit 560m and the 570m.

The 660m is pretty much on target to perform between the 560m and 570m as planned.

The big difference will be the lesser power requirements, lesser cooling requirements, and thus lesser size requirements.

 

Yeah, after I did my comparison yesterday I also think that 660M will perform less than 570. But the good news is less heat and better performance than 560M. But to summarize, GK107 is directly aimed at ultrabooks and thin notebooks. I am pretty shure Nvidia could easily have added more cores to the 660M than just slap on a little bit higher frequency with the 660M. After all, 640M,650M and 660M is the exact same chip. But they chose not to. God knows why..

It have been an exiting month with speculations and comparisons with every tidbit of information we could find about the new Keplers. But to be honest, I can`t help to feel a little "Meh" now that the fog have cleared.

We are gonna have to wait for GK106/GK104 to see the real replacement for GTX 570M and above. 680M is rumored to come out in late June. 7970M in late May.

So its another 2 months before we (atleast I) pop upen the champagne.

 

for me it might be till decemeber before i buy a new laptop, so right now i am just enjoying the information

 

I actually am interested in the 660m personally as 560m+ performance really is a reasonable level.

While I am not really interested in ultrabook-thin-light, I am interested in lower heat and more room for things like dual hard disks in 14-15" laptops that focus on performance and cooling.

Such a mid-grade laptop could offer the best of all worlds in an affordable and effective gaming laptop that handles its heat well, isn't overly bulky, looks professional, and still can travel in and out of server rooms with ease.