680gtx 680 GTX in SLI

[barbary]

I have just installed 2 680GTX in sli as a replacement for 2 480GTX in SLI. And the difference is just massive. Putting aside the difference in FPS the difference in noise is astounding.

When you gave the 480's anything remotely graphical to handle it was like somebody had started a jet engine in the room.

I've been running them for an hour playing with Battlefield 3 and Unigine Heaven and they are as quite as the 480's are just running the desktop.

It really is a leap forward.

Powered by Unigine Engine

Heaven Benchmark v2.5 Basic

FPS: 81.5

Scores: 2053

Min FPS: 35.1

Max FPS: 192.7

Hardware

Binary:

Windows 32bit Visual C++ 1600 Release Mar 1 2011 Operating system:

Windows 7 (build 7601, Service Pack 1) 64bit CPU model:

Intel? Core? i7 CPU X 980 @ 3.33GHz CPU flags:

4200MHz MMX SSE SSE2 SSE3 SSSE3 SSE41 SSE42 HTT GPU model:

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 8.17.13.110 2048Mb

Settings

Render:

direct3d11 Mode:

2560x1600 fullscreen Shaders:

high Textures:

high Filter:

trilinear Anisotropy:

4x Occlusion:

enabled Refraction:

enabled Volumetric:

enabled Tessellation:

normal

[Muhammad Farrukh]

I thought it was a paper launch, and actual products wouldn't make it to consumers until early April :s

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

I thought it was a paper launch, and actual products wouldn't make it to consumers until early April :s

released yesterday - i ordered mine yesterday too

OP - you might want to post other results as a comparison. seeing just 1 score doesnt mean much to anyone.

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

NVIDIA had a reputation for making powerful but power-hungry video cards. For a long time, you wouldn't consider their high-end cards to be power efficient. It looks like they changed that with the Kepler architecture. And for the first time since 2003, I'm actually thinking of buying a NVIDIA video card. I made the switch to ATI (now AMD) after I purchased a GeForce FX series video card. Since then, I've had numerous ATI video cards because they were generally cheaper and offered more bang for your buck. I'm really interested in the progress NVIDIA has made with their AA methods (like TXAA). Also, I despised NVIDIA for PhysX because it only worked with their video cards. Unfortunately, I haven't seen anything good from AMD in the physics department so that's another thing that has my interest.

I have a feeling that NVIDIA will release something to replace the GeForce GTX 560/560 Ti. If they do, then they may grab the mid-range performance crown.

[barbary]

released yesterday - i ordered mine yesterday too

OP - you might want to post other results as a comparison. seeing just 1 score doesnt mean much to anyone.

I know what your saying but I've not got these results from when I had the 2 480's in there in fact I installed Heaven to prove that the second 480GTX was faulty and hasn't been in my system for a month now. It's one of the resons I rushed to buy the 680's because I've been running on one card for awhile.

With just 1 480GTX on the same settings I was getting 16.4 FPS avg.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

With just 1 480GTX on the same settings I was getting 16.4 FPS avg.

my god that is a massive increase :|

[Vice]

I reckon in a month or 2 from now a GTX 685 is going to launch with an 8 Pin + 6 Pin config with 4GB of memory on board and a 1.2GHz clock speed.

Just a hunch I have but I think they saw the HD 7970 expected it to be faster and released what would have been the GTX 670 as the GTX 680 because it was so much faster that it would shock everyone to deliver that card with such a low power consumption.

There are a few clues that bring me to this conclusion. The main one being that the PCB the GTX 680 uses has pin points for an 8 Pin and two 6 pins. Meaning it was designed from the start to use an 8 Pin. This is characteristic of the GTX 470/480 and the 570/580 where by these cards share the same PCB but different power connectors, two pins simply go unutilised on the 470/570 similar to how the GTX680 is only using its twin 6-Pin connectors and not the 8Pin connectors.

Another clue would be that the cards overclock easily to 1.2-1.25GHz without any voltage tweaking and are quite stable at these speeds. I would surmise NVIDIA intended originally to ship the GTX 680 at these higher speeds but at release time lowered them so it wasn't as-fast as any future card they intend to ship with full clocks.

And finally, in previous iterations they have released the GTX 260 / 270 at the same time. Same with 470 / 480. The release of only one high end card would be uncharacteristic. The only exception to this would be the GTX 570 but that card was announced within the same month as the 580.

It is undeniably an amazing card though. For my setup I need more than 2GB of memory but if I didn't I'd buy two in a heartbeat.

[ApuBo]

I reckon in a month or 2 from now a GTX 685 is going to launch with an 8 Pin + 6 Pin config with 4GB of memory on board and a 1.2GHz clock speed.

Just a hunch I have but I think they saw the HD 7970 expected it to be faster and released what would have been the GTX 670 as the GTX 680 because it was so much faster that it would shock everyone to deliver that card with such a low power consumption.

It is undeniably an amazing card though. For my setup I need more than 2GB of memory but if I didn't I'd buy two in a heartbeat.

in my thoughts too, since 680GTX have code name GK104(kepler) (typically mid-range product, compared to GF104(fermi) was 460GTX) so they will probably release one with

384-bit memory interface and/or 512-bit one, name it with GK110 or something.

edit: or release them as 780GTX, kinda like improved 8800GTX and name it 9800GTX.

[barbary]

Bit more running around on Strike At Karland and it holds about 90 FPS most of the time although when a tank shell took out the wall next to me it did get down to 57fps.

Thats at 2560x1600 on Ultra settings. Bit unscientific it was just multiplayer on a random 64 person server and me just running around shooting.

[Muhammad Farrukh]

Bit more running around on Strike At Karland

Strike At Karkand

:p

[MillionVoltss]

Quad core benchmarks http://nl.hardware.info/reviews/2641/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-quad-sli-review-english-version

[xirtam]

Looks impressive, Thinking of getting one!

Any chance you could check the FPS using just one card in BF3 @2560x1600 on ultra?

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

Quad core benchmarks http://nl.hardware.i...english-version

quad SLI

it seems to me that the nvidia drivers need some polishing. the 3-way and 4-way SLI dont scale correctly in most games.

[Lucas]

quad SLI

it seems to me that the nvidia drivers need some polishing. the 3-way and 4-way SLI dont scale correctly in most games.

Always happens at first with new video card releases, next update will probably have it fixed. :D

[barbary]

Looks impressive, Thinking of getting one!

Any chance you could check the FPS using just one card in BF3 @2560x1600 on ultra?

There are just loads of reviews on the web for one card in BF3 you don't need me to do this.

I really did post just to comment on how quiet the cards are compard to the 480's I had before. It is very noticable the 480's were fine when playing something like BF3 with lots of explosions but something like Tropico 4 and they would really anony.

[cullwbaa]

Bit more running around on Strike At Karland and it holds about 90 FPS most of the time although when a tank shell took out the wall next to me it did get down to 57fps.

Thats at 2560x1600 on Ultra settings. Bit unscientific it was just multiplayer on a random 64 person server and me just running around shooting.

Karland and it holds about 90 FPS most of the time although when a tank shell took out the wall next to me it did get down to 57fps.

[Muhammad Farrukh]

Karland

Its Karkand, damnit. :D

[TEX4S]

Bit more running around on Strike At Karland and it holds about 90 FPS most of the time although when a tank shell took out the wall next to me it did get down to 57fps.

Thats at 2560x1600 on Ultra settings. Bit unscientific it was just multiplayer on a random 64 person server and me just running around shooting.

Holy Crap that is impressive.

barbary, that is some high dollar hardware you have there - is this just for gaming ?

[Raa]

I remember a lot of complaints about the stock 470/480 cooling, I got a customised (Galaxy KFA, IIRC 470 and it was great. Replaced it with an again customised 570 and it too has been great.

I read the 680's run "quiet" and use less power, so one is definately on my shopping list. :)

[barbary]

Holy Crap that is impressive.

barbary, that is some high dollar hardware you have there - is this just for gaming ?

Yes just for gaming. I write software on the PC as well but that doesn't need 2 680's. There just for fun.

[Vice]

I remember a lot of complaints about the stock 470/480 cooling, I got a customised (Galaxy KFA, IIRC 470 and it was great. Replaced it with an again customised 570 and it too has been great.

I read the 680's run "quiet" and use less power, so one is definately on my shopping list. :)

My 480's in SLI were so loud that I water cooled them just to get rid of the sound they made. I'm not exaggerating when I say that if I left a game on pause and went downstairs in my house I could still hear them. They really were as loud as a vacuum cleaner.

[TEX4S]

Unfortunately I have a 480GTX as well - if it was a benchmark-slaying beast - I could handle the noise - but it is not, and its annoying loud & unless I crank the fans up, it runs about 60 degrees

[barbary]

My 480's in SLI were so loud that I water cooled them just to get rid of the sound they made. I'm not exaggerating when I say that if I left a game on pause and went downstairs in my house I could still hear them. They really were as loud as a vacuum cleaner.

Thats it thats exactly what they were like a vacum cleaner. I would always have to turn the speakers up.

Now if Tropico 4 would stop crashing that would be great.