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

Benchmark Results: Sandra 2012 And LuxMark 2.0

For all of their alacrity in gaming, the Kepler-based GeForce products demonstrate an evolutionary step forward in FP32 throughput and a more jarring slow-down in double-precision floating-point math. Meanwhile, AMD’s GCN architecture propels Tahiti forward in compute workloads.

Sandra 2012 helps quantify AMD’s gains and Nvidia’s willing compromise. The only cards GeForce GTX 670 beats in floating-point math are older Fermi-based boards. Meanwhile, the new 670 takes last place in FP64.

Leaning on this diagnostic tool again shows us bandwidth between the GPU and its memory, along with throughput over the PCI Express bus. Extremely low data transfer numbers across the board represents poor performance from the X79 platform. Meanwhile, internal bandwidth reflects on the 384-bit aggregate memory bus AMD uses on its Radeon HD 7900-series cards, along with the 256-bit interface Nvidia’s employs on its GeForce GTX 600s. GeForce GTX 690 seems to break this test, returning a bad GP call.

Applying those theoretical numbers from Sandra to a real-world-based test like LuxMark paints a pretty telling picture. AMD’s cards absolutely dominate. The slowest, Radeon HD 6990, even manages to beat the fastest Nvidia board—ironically, the old GeForce GTX 590.

Truly, we’re interested to see how Nvidia plans to address compute on the desktop after making such a big deal about it last generation. Might the company have plans to sell you a separate compute-oriented upgrade?

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
5 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • Maximus_Delta
    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.
  • bemused_fred
    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.
  • tracker45
    gtx 670 and 680 performance is too similar !!!!! 680 is pointless !!!! don't buy it !!!
  • sam_p_lay
    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.
  • johnners2981
    Where did all the comments go???