Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!


Discussion on Article:
Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 2 GB Graphics Card Review

Started by: rrr | Date 06/05/12 01:34:22 AM
Comments: 18 | Last Comment:  06/11/12 02:21:58 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads


I do not get any of these "psychological pricing" argument. If it costs the same and outperforms competition card (7950), it's pretty well priced to me. People need to get rid of the notion that series should be priced on a model number and not on what they bring to the table. Sure enough, you can make the same argument against the competition (say, 6850 vs 7850 pricing). But ultimately, who cares? Kids, who want to be cool? (I have 7xxx series card, you have only 6xxx series, I'm better than you!)
2 1 [Posted by: rrr  | Date: 06/05/12 01:34:22 AM]
- collapse thread

Yes sir, you have a good point about it.

The price of the GTX 670 is BETTER than all of the rest of cards of "new generation" (all 28nm). The problem is about that the prices of all these cards is HIGH, doesn´t matter anything if the PCB is cheaper or more expensive.

The PCB of a GTX 260 was very complex, but the card prize was very low. Any of the PCBs of the "new generations" is "better" than the PCB of a GTX 280 (as a example), so the prices are all about the performance, not the "PCB/electronic quality".
3 2 [Posted by: er_wendigo  | Date: 06/06/12 02:43:18 AM]
The gtx280 came out at $499, not sure what planet of amnesia you flew in from
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/09/12 12:59:02 AM]
The author is somewhat right though. The flagship Kepler is GK110 and NV is going to sell it to the Tesla markets for > $3,000. Instead, for the first time ever, they are shoving us a mid-range Kepler GK104 chip as high-end when it really isn't. Most of us have accepted GK104 as high-end since NV has no interest in selling us a true GTX480/580 successor for $600. I don't blame them as a business since they are going to sell the same chip for $3k+ until demand drops off. Wouldn't you do the same?

However, that doesn't change the fact that psychophysically this generation is a rip-off. When was the last time NV's next generation high-end chip was just 30% faster than its previous high-end (GTX580 vs. 680)? It never happened.

Also, your point that HD7850 and 7870's pricing structure has increased from 6850/6870 is true. Higher 28nm wafer costs and lack of GTX600 competition are to blame imo.

I think 2 cards have emerged in this gen: $259 7850 and $399 GTX670. Little else makes sense at current prices. Problem is HD7850 is hardly better than GTX570/HD6950 OCed/unlocked. Therefore, in 1.5 years the performance has not really improved by a significant amount in any of the price segments < $300. There is still nothing as good as an HD6870-6950 for <$200. For anyone still using a GTX570/HD6950 OCed, the cheapest card worth upgrading to is the $400 GTX670. Not sure if that's good progress.

For those still running much slower or older cards, an HD7850/7870 may be attractive but it is not a good upgrade for HD6950/570 owners.

Can't argue with 670 based on other cards. For $400 it's the high-end bang for the buck, but it is a GF104 successor, which wasn't a $400 GPU.
2 1 [Posted by: BestJinjo  | Date: 06/06/12 09:26:04 AM]
The GTX580 was $499 solid until the 7000 series, there is no room for a bog kepler and the rest of the card tiers.
The 580 was a big leap so everyone is crying the 680 is not as big a leap, yet the very same will DIE to defend the 7970 and 3 fps in 2 games.

It's the biggest joke I've ever seen.

I hope nVidia NEVER releases big kepler as a gaming card so all you quackers can quack right to your graves. Yes, seriously.

I've never seen such a pile of garbage in my entire life spread so far from semi accurate's charlie D the biggest liar amd has on hire.

Since you all have believed his rumor from the day he launched it, the $299 GTX 680 as he said wins at everything... you people are so self deceived it's really unbelievable.

In what world does the GTX680 fit anywhere near that price point, what planet are you people on ?

All of you have forgotten the worldwide inflation rate as well. I am so sick of hearing it, because it's a big pile of lies.

$299 for the GTX680.... give us the rest of the line up then, one of you sour gurus, and of you... oh nevermind you'd never do it, none of you have ... not it's time for all of you to start TWADDLING your lips and saying GTX680 would be a "good secondary at $xxx " blah blah blah.

Meanwhile amd has "NOTHING" in the works at all - since you're all so BRAINWASHED and can't really pay attention at all, that is LITERALLY TRUE for all of you, even though it's absolutely incorrect. AMD is holding back "NOTHING" because they have nothing. LOL

You people are sad.
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/08/12 06:02:23 AM]

Why not included the 7970 card?? Also it would have been better to include the o.c. results the same as 680 at default.
2 1 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 06/05/12 06:08:11 AM]

Can i just ask why you choose to compare the 670 at 915 mhz against a 7950 running a mere 810 mhz?

The 7950 runs smoothly at 900-1000 mhz stock depending on which manufacter you choose.

Would it not be a better comparison if you included the 7950's "oc" cards as well? It's well documented that the 7950 runs at 1050 to 1100 mhz without tweaking voltage. The max is about 1200 mhz.

Im not saying you should compare a super clocked card - but at least include the 7950 running at the same speeds as the 670. Or at the very least the same price range, around here the 670 is priced 9-18% above the 7950. Otherwise it's not exactly a "fair fight".

"ooh my 20% more expensive graphiccard performs 20% better than your's!" - yes great comparison..
1 2 [Posted by: Irathi  | Date: 06/06/12 02:28:40 AM]
- collapse thread

Why? Do you have some problem with the standard clocks of DIFFERENTS cards?

I don´t get your "argument".

The 670 runs smoothly with 1200 MHz with turbo in almost everycard in the market, too.

What about a 670 with 1200 MHz vs a 7950 with 900-1000 MHz?

If the 7950 "needs" cocaine for the test, then the "cocaine" for all of them.
2 2 [Posted by: er_wendigo  | Date: 06/06/12 02:37:01 AM]
Ok then, screw the clock speeds and compare equally priced cards..
1 1 [Posted by: Irathi  | Date: 06/06/12 02:42:54 AM]
Ok, but the "scene" wouldn´t change much. And with the OC equation inside, we can´t get a precise image of the relative performance of each card (only a especulation about some OC results in particular units, the OC is variable in each unit, the standard clocks isn´t variable at all).

Your proposal is only useful for the OC users, as a guide (with a lot of "ifs" there).
1 2 [Posted by: er_wendigo  | Date: 06/06/12 02:51:06 AM]
Fair enough friend. I agree that the comparison of stock clocks might be best for a relative comparison if you leave price out of the picture. Tho for the kicks and curiosity we could include an "factory OC vs 670" that cost the same as a factory 670? Just to see the bang/buck.

2 1 [Posted by: Irathi  | Date: 06/06/12 03:24:17 AM]
The nVidia cards had lower core clocks for like the past 4 generations in a row, and had some mighty overclock gains, and we NEVER heard this amd fan line from the other side then.

Chalk it up to amd fans SEVERE LOSS this time around - every metric has STOMPED THEM INTO THE GROUND - now they're 7 features of drivers behind nVidia - and some of those are AWESOME, besides losing the framerate contest, the only contest that ever matters for those people - unless of course they can scream eyefinity while they own just a single low rez monitor and don't have the hundred dollar dongle for 2 years...

It's really, really sad. I'm amd fan boys all go to heaven though - they probably won't ever die they will just float up because they hated evil and supported good and Jesus will smile and wave them by as St Peter hands them their Radeon Gaming Evolved Worship Lamp.
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/08/12 06:08:57 AM]
What's next? Let's compare a Bulldozer at 4.8ghz against a stock i5 3570K?

The point of comparing cards at stock clocks is because that's how every user will get the card out of the box. GTX670 also has overclocking headroom. Not many people are going to pay nearly $400 for a 7950 and play the overclocking lottery when GTX670 delivers that level of performance guaranteed out of the box for $400.

Remember GTX460? It was clocked at 675mhz but many overclocked to 900mhz+. Would it be fair to compare a 900mhz+ GTX460 against a stock HD6870?

In BF3, one of the most popular shooters right now, GTX670 is 40-50% faster than an HD7950:

No one in their right mind who plays this game would get a 7950.
1 0 [Posted by: BestJinjo  | Date: 06/06/12 09:32:00 AM]
None of that matters they are fighting evil while they lap up underdogs every nook and crannie.
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/08/12 06:12:03 AM]

This article just revealed how much out of sync HD7950's pricing is. At stock speeds, GTX670 = HD7970 for 1080P:


AMD really needs to lower the price of the 7950 to $320 or something similar and get 7970s to $400-420, while releasing a 1.15-1.2ghz stepping 7970 to compete with the 680.

The 670 is such a good card for single monitor users, that frankly it obsoletes all of the 7950/7970 and 680 series, unless one simply has to have the best or is watercooling in which case a 1.3ghz+ 7970 will certainly pull away at higher resolutions. Arguably though, none of these cards are fast enough to max out the most demanding games at 1600P though (Metro 2033, Crysis 2, Witcher 2, BF3). So I still think they are best for 1080P, where the performance difference between the 670 and 7970/680 is too little for $100 extra those other cards cost.
2 0 [Posted by: BestJinjo  | Date: 06/06/12 09:10:41 AM]
- collapse thread

I like the HD7970, but its price is against its market niche. If AMD decides to stop dreaming and put the prices that apply to its product, It might have more customers that are dissatisfied or dislikes the cheap appearance of the GTX 670.

The GTX 670 is a great card, but the reference card has a very "dirty" design for a 400$ card (all of its design are reasonable, but not fashionable).

If you can buy a HD7970 for the same prize that the GTX 670, you have a card with extras as 3GB of VRAM, better GPGPU capabilities, and a lot of bandwith for some "sensible" aplications (and best or more "fashionable" design).

And AMD needs these extras, they don´t have the nvidia extras as PhysX, CUDA, or a better brand/drivers image.
0 2 [Posted by: er_wendigo  | Date: 06/08/12 03:55:15 AM]
That's really great. You put the card in a closed in case, you almost never look at it, no one ever sees it, and how you think it achieves a "look" as if it's a tiny black party dress is very important.

I thought I've heard every amd stretch in the book the past month or so but that's a new one.
Congratulations I'm dialing Richard Huddy right now so you can be ushered into amd's PR campaign wealthbook.
0 0 [Posted by: SiliconDoc  | Date: 06/08/12 05:51:50 AM]

That is a real smackdown.
0 0 [Posted by: beck2448  | Date: 06/08/12 11:14:59 AM]


Back to the Article

Add your Comment