Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Two GeForce GTX 670s In SLI

GeForce GTX 670 2 GB Review: Is It Already Time To Forget GTX 680?
By

As you start sliding down the price ladder, adding a second card right away or somewhere down the road becomes a more attractive (and more realistic) proposition. Paying £660 for a couple of GeForce GTX 670s is still a lot of money, but £330 now and as much or less in a few months doesn’t sound as bad.

How, then, do a pair of GeForce GTX 670s perform compared to just one?

At 2560x1600 with graphics details cranked up, a second GeForce GTX 670 can turn marginal playability into a smooth experience. If you’re only gaming at 1920x1080, there’s really not much reason to add a second board. But as you start exploring 30” screens or multi-monitor gaming, a configuration like this makes a lot more sense.

Dividing those numbers into each other, we see that the best-case is Battlefield 3, where a second GeForce GTX 670 nearly doubles performance. Metro 2033 and WoW are both worst-case scenarios in our suite, where the second board boosts frame rates by 72 or 73%.

And now, the title match. Two GeForce GTX 670s against a pair of Radeon HD 7970s.

Five times out of six, the 670s are faster. The sixth is Metro 2033, where two Radeon HD 7970s are about 18% faster. Even in World of Warcraft, though, where Nvidia’s cards are more than 50% faster, performance is high enough on both setups that the experience is fluid.

One thing to keep in mind, though: Radeon HD 7970s are scalable up to four cards (as are GeForce GTX 680s). Nvidia is limiting its GTX 670s to three-way SLI. I don’t see that as a problem, since the market for four-card configurations is diminutive.

Display all 5 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 1 Hide
    Maximus_Delta , 10 May 2012 21:21
    I really think AMD should of set the 7970 clocks higher at default. Any 7970 owner knows with their card at 1125/1575 its much faster than the GTX 670 but this review paints a very different picture.
  • 0 Hide
    bemused_fred , 11 May 2012 03:05
    Shut up and take my money, NVIDIA!
    Maximus_DeltaI really think AMD should of set the 7970 clocks higher at default. Any 7970 owner knows with their card at 1125/1575 its much faster than the GTX 670 but this review paints a very different picture.


    AMD probably have very good reasons for keeping their cards at that level. I mean, if they could release them factory overclocked, they would be doing it as fast as they could, as it would give them a huge edge.
  • 0 Hide
    tracker45 , 11 May 2012 04:21
    gtx 670 and 680 performance is too similar !!!!! 680 is pointless !!!! don't buy it !!!
  • 1 Hide
    sam_p_lay , 11 May 2012 17:54
    Great job with the relative performance % charts on page 15 - would be great to start seeing this in all graphics card reviews (for example the upcoming GTX660 review comparing with GTX570 and GTX670!). Also good job re-running the numbers on all three GTX600 cards with the fresh drivers.

    You should be aware though when talking about availability issues that these don't necessarily apply to all markets. Over the past couple of years (since GTX470/GTX480) launch, I've observed quite a few cards with apparently poor availability actually being very easy to get hold of in the UK. Maybe it's easier to cater to the graphics needs of 60 million people than of 300 million :-) Something to keep in mind anyway.
  • 0 Hide
    johnners2981 , 11 May 2012 20:02
    Where did all the comments go???