First GTX 670 review(s) up (tt & oc.net) * TT OC review added*

[aaksheytalwar]

GTX285 was from HD4890 generation. Fermi was delayed by 6 months but a real competitor to the HD5850 was GTX470, not GTX285. Although HD5850 cost less so it really didn't have a direct competitor until GTX470 fell in price later in its life.

Didn't know this.

No. HD6970 competed against GTX570 not 580. You can say all you want that HD6970 competed against 580 and it's not correct since $370 videocards don't compete against $500 cards. Also, the performance of the 6970 was similar to the 570 and the price was as well.

I know 6970 traded blows with 570, but it was amd's top card while 580 was released overthrew it from nvidia. You got me wrong, I know 580 was 15%+ faster at stock


GTX570/580 launched 1 month before HD6950/6970 series (November 9 for NV, December 14 for AMD).

GTX480's competitor was HD5870. Fermi got delayed by 6 months though. See above.

Got confused here, had forgotten


No.

GTX285 Launched January 15, 2009
HD5850 Launched September 23, 2009

again, forgotten

Totally not true. It might be so starting with Fermi, but going back to GeForce 2, you can't make such a blanket statement.

This I am certain of. Happening since GeForce 8800 series which is all of recent times. You are wrong here


Winning means 63% desktop discrete market share despite launching 6 months late with Fermi. Also, having single fastest GPU with 8800GTX, 280/285, 480/580 can also be considered winning. Although I think having amazing price/performance is also winning (GTX460/5850/6950 did that).

Overall, NV is has clearly been winning the desktop discrete based on profits and market share while AMD has been doing better on the mobile/laptop side.

And now $400 GTX670 will trade blows with a stock 7970. Not looking good for AMD.

Market share wise nvidia always wins, that isn't the point. The better performer is the point. Anyway, since the cycle isnt the same, you need to buy whatever is better when you buy

And if this is really a 670 which I am sure it isn't then yea amd needs to get pricing down to 400. Prolly a 680 pulled by tt, and the real 670 stock will prolly not be close. But this is just speculation

 

[Silverforce11]

No BF3 tests? This would be amazing if this pushes amd card prices even lower.

BTW this card at 399.99 smokes the 7970 at 479.99

We'll have to see whether the reference design with the crap pcb can turbo boost as high as custom pcb such as windforce triple coolers.

But frankly, @$419 for a factory OC model thats nearly a gtx680 due to dynamic turbo is going to remove any reason to purchase a gtx680 or 79xx.

AMD can lower their prices, but what of the gtx680, will NV lower its prices??

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I'm not responding to that guy anymore; he is a man on a mission, even claiming that "for most games a 5770 may not be faster but for many games it is" (compared to gtx285).

You really don't understand. You don't have any recent benches to back you while I have numerous. Clearly, 5850 pwns 285, it may be true that it was to compete with 4890 where 285 may be better. But as of today 5850 pwns 285 and I know for a fact that at games available during launch 5850 was just 10% better.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

We'll have to see whether the reference design with the crap pcb can turbo boost as high as custom pcb such as windforce triple coolers.

But frankly, @$419 for a factory OC model thats nearly a gtx680 due to dynamic turbo is going to remove any reason to purchase a gtx680 or 79xx.

AMD can lower their prices, but what of the gtx680, will NV lower its prices??

Where is the gigabyte custom model mentioned in the review?

 

[f1sherman]

Hey fish what is the fastest graphics card you own btw?

 

[Don Karnage]

We'll have to see whether the reference design with the crap pcb can turbo boost as high as custom pcb such as windforce triple coolers.

But frankly, @$419 for a factory OC model thats nearly a gtx680 due to dynamic turbo is going to remove any reason to purchase a gtx680 or 79xx.

AMD can lower their prices, but what of the gtx680, will NV lower its prices??

Still believe a reference 670 will be slower then a reference 680. Amd NEEDS to drop prices. 179.99 7850's would be amazing

 

[Silverforce11]

Where is the gigabyte custom model mentioned in the review?

From the positioning of their power plug and the length of the white-out card, matches the leaked Gigabyte card very well.

Also same retail leak list the Gigabyte OC card @ $419. Not a coincidence if some AIB is sending out cards early.

A gtx670 may be rated for ~1ghz turbo (994?), but because its dynamic, it will go above that depending on the sample.
Think about how dynamic turbo works. Better PCB, better cooler = higher turbo clocks. A custom pcb gtx670 will end up ~gtx680 performance.

This is going to hurt the gtx680, since its reference and unlikely able to turbo as high as custom cards. By allowing AIBs to make custom gtx670 (with dynamic turbo), they've open a can of whoop ass on AMD as well as on themselves.

 

[blastingcap]

Cool, that is a good card and great overclocker.

 

[blastingcap]

Still believe a reference 670 will be slower then a reference 680.

Way to go out on a limb Don.

Here's another wild guess: an overclocked 670 will be faster than a stock-clocked 670. Just a guess.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

$419 is impressive pricing for it. The 7970 will need to come down to $425 for oc models and $400 for stock or $420 stock and $450 oc models, max pricing

 

[Don Karnage]

Here's another wild guess: an overclocked 670 will be faster than a stock-clocked 670. Just a guess.

How do you have such information?

 

[Don Karnage]

$419 is impressive pricing for it. The 7970 will need to come down to $425 for oc models and $400 for stock or $420 stock and $450 oc models, max pricing

The whole 7 series lineup needs to come down.

7970 - 399.99
7950 - 319.99
7870 - 269.99
7850 - 219.99

 

[blastingcap]

The whole 7 series lineup needs to come down.

7970 - 399.99
7950 - 319.99
7870 - 269.99
7850 - 219.99

I don't think street prices will support that, because I expect retailers to price-gouge and for the real street price of the 670 to be $450 or so. Plus the 7970's 3GB VRAM will have its adherents.

 

[Don Karnage]

I don't think street prices will support that, because I expect retailers to price-gouge and for the real street price of the 670 to be $450 or so. Plus the 7970's 3GB VRAM will have its adherents.

I don't believe newegg will gouge. They haven't with the 680

 

[Silverforce11]

The whole 7 series lineup needs to come down.

7970 - 399.99
7950 - 319.99
7870 - 269.99
7850 - 219.99

Agreed.

But a more realistic pricing scheme:

7970 = $419 (extra vram and its huge OC potential)
7950 = $349 (same as above, OC it will match/exceed gtx680)
7870 = $279 (should not be priced much higher than 7850)
7850 = $239 (sweet-spot!!)

 

[Mad_dawg]

All these potential of price reduction on AMD cards but didn't they already drop the prices recently? and the big question are, can they afford another price reduction and what happens when Nvidia reduce their prices...

 

[aaksheytalwar]

All these potential of price reduction on AMD cards but didn't they already drop the prices recently? and the big question are, can they afford another price reduction and what happens when Nvidia reduce their prices...

This. Amd may not be able to reduce pricing further. Nvidia won't because they don't need to

 

[tviceman]

It'll just be a price reduction, not so bad since both are similar sized dies.

IF NV can produce enough cards, AMD will just price-cut. No big deal since it was way overpriced to start with.

7950 = $319
7970 = $399

Still above the usual "mid-range" where these GPUs belong.

They are not the same size, and it's embarrassing for AMD when they have to keep making price cut after price cut to stay competitive. And it's especially bad for AMD's engineers when Nvidia's second tier binned smaller die outperforms AMD's best and bigger chip. Their area and power efficient strategy is basically failing them now, they are too slow to react to market conditions, and they are over pricing their mediocre chips.

They brought in less GPU revenue last quarter despite higher average prices. So yeah, it is bad. And if the gtx670 is any indication -and it is- the third tier chip will beat up on pitcairn as well.

 

[RussianSensation]

So shall we expect something like this?

Newegg prices:

680 - 500
7970 + Three for Free - 450
670 - 450
7950 + Three for Free - 400
7870 - 350
7850 - 250

^ Those are the current prices.

I think 670 will be $399-429 and HD7970 will drop to $429.
HD7950 will go to $349
HD7870 to $299
HD7850 will remain at $249 since NV has nothing here.

The 3 for Free promotion is lame. DiRT Showdown is an arcade spin-off of the Dirt series, and I would bet most Dirt 2/3 fans could care less about it. Deus Ex goes for $7-8 on Amazon Digital Downloads. The other game is .... no one has heard about it.

 

[Silverforce11]

They are not the same size, and it's emarrassing for AMD when they have to keep making price cut after price cut to stay competitive. And it's especially bad for AMD's engineers when Nvidia's second tier binned smaller die outperforms AMD's best and bigger chip. Their area and power efficient strategy is basically failing them now, they are too slow to react to market conditions, and they are over pricing their mediocre chips.

They brought in less GPU revenue last quarter despite higher average prices. So yeah, it is bad. And if the gtx670 is any indication -and it is- the third tier chip will beat up on pitcairn as well.

1. It's okay bro, AMD did it to NV with the 58xx. No big deal, just price cuts on a mid-range gpu being sold at enthusiast prices.. not as bad as an enthusiast gpu being forced to sell at mid-range prices, is it??

2. If its any indication, it means gk104's dynamic turbo + custom cooled pcb = no point in a gtx680. As to their "third tier" chip, you mean gk106? That's less than HALF a gk104 on specs, you think its gonna beat up on 78xx? Nah.

edit: See all the doom and gloom for AMD, you guys are smoking something I'm not? 79xx is a small chip, it's not meant to be competing/priced in the top-bracket, the fact that it has been doing so is a bonus for AMD, a price-cut on it is no biggie considering they have been getting away with ripping off customers for many months until they are challenged by NV.

 

[blastingcap]

^ Those are the current prices.

I think 670 will be $399-429 and HD7970 will drop to $429.
HD7950 will go to $349
HD7870 to $299
HD7850 will remain at $249 since NV has nothing here.

The 3 for Free promotion is lame. Codemasters fans could care less about Dirt Showdown. The other game is free for everyone. And Deus Ex goes for $7-8 on Amazon Digital Downloads.

Given the availability of the 680 that doesn't bode well for the 670 so I don't think it will exert much downward pressure for a while. Maybe in 2 months we will see prices like you listed, but I don't forecast more price drops for a while. Remember how stubborn 7970 prices were for a while; and when NV dropped the gtx460 prices suddenly on the day 6850 launched, AMD stubbornly clung to their 6850 launch pricing for quite some time.

 

[Arzachel]

The 3 for Free promotion is lame. DiRT Showdown is an arcade spin-off of the Dirt series, and I would be most Dirt 2/3 fans could care less about it. Deus Ex goes for $7-8 on Amazon Digital Downloads. The other game is .... no one has heard about it.

This is made even more ironic because DiRT is an arcade spin-off of the Colin McRae Rally series and even that didn't try too hard to be particularly realistic

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Who cares about crappy free games with a high end gpu, just cutting prices by $15 means much more

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

GTX285 was from HD4890 generation. Fermi was delayed by 6 months but a real competitor to the HD5850 was GTX470, not GTX285. Although HD5850 cost less so it really didn't have a direct competitor until GTX470 fell in price later in its life.



No. HD6970 competed against GTX570 not 580. You can say all you want that HD6970 competed against 580 and it's not correct since $370 videocards don't compete against $500 cards. Also, the performance of the 6970 was similar to the 570 and the price was as well.

GTX570/580 launched 1 month before HD6950/6970 series (November 9 for NV, December 14 for AMD).

GTX480's competitor was HD5870. Fermi got delayed by 6 months though. See above.



No.

GTX285 Launched January 15, 2009
HD5850 Launched September 23, 2009



Totally not true. I have no idea where you pulled this estimate from, especially if we go back to GeForce 2. You can't make such a blanket statement. Also, even in recent history your estimates are way off:

8800GTX 768 = November 8, 2006
9800GTX (refresh) = March 31, 2008 (that's way longer than 6 months for a first gen part)

9800GTX refresh only lasted a quarter before next generation appeared, not 18 months as you state.

GTX280 = June 16, 2008 (less than 2 years after 8800GTX)
GTX285 = January 15, 2009 (6 months after 280)

GTX480 = March 23, 2010 (that's 14 months after 285, not 18 months)
GTX580 = November 9, 2010 (that's about 8 months for a refresh not 6 months as you state).



Winning means 63% desktop discrete market share despite launching 6 months late with Fermi and in the process making more $ in any quarter in 2011 than AMD made in the entire 2011. Any company in the world can launch a product, undercut the competitor and lose $ quarter after quarter. Also, having single fastest GPU with 8800GTX, 280/285, 480/580 can also be considered winning. Although I think having amazing price/performance is also winning (4850/4870/GTX460/5850/6950 did that).

Overall, NV has been winning the desktop discrete based on profits and market share while AMD has been doing better on the mobile/laptop side. AMD was in the game with 4800/5800/6900 series because of lower power consumption and better price/performance. HD7800/7900 series offer none of those advantages and it shows as now a $400 GTX670 will trade blows with a stock 7970. Not looking good for AMD.

GCN architecture is overhyped. The main reason it looks good is because of the 28nm shrink. People kept comparing 40nm 580 to the 7970 and highlightning how much more advanced the 7970 was. In fact, what they were highlighting was how much superior 28nm node is compared to 40nm.

Now that Kepler has been manufactured on 28nm, it's clear that GCN is still just a 1st gen compute architecture for AMD while Kepler is a 2nd generation. As an architecture GCN 1.0 trails Kepler by miles in FP16 texture and tessellation performance as well as power consumption, performance/watt, performance/transistor, you name it. In terms of tessellation and texture performance, GCN is about a generation behind Kepler. NV is able to keep up despite just 192 GB/sec bandwidth and 1344 SPs. Ouch. I hope AMD delivers with GCN 2.0 i.e., HD8000 series or NV will sell us GTX760 for $400 next round.

No, it's pretty clear to me that Tahiti is very good when it comes to compute. If your preference for NVIDIA can't let you see that, too bad. AMD was able to blend gaming and compute performance almost perfectly, making a card that had comparable to higher compute performance than the GTX 580 while having high gaming performance, a reasonable die size, reasonable performance/mm^2, and good performance/watt. NVIDIA was only able to get high compute performance at the cost of the three last things that were mentioned. So, you are very much wrong because AMD was able to blend gaming and compute much better than NVIDIA did--and on the first try, which makes it even more impressive. The problem for AMD is that a very few amount of enthusiasts care about compute performance. NVIDIA obviously realized this, and took advantage of it: they made a card with next to no compute/FP64 performance and went all out for a gaming card, which is what AMD did to an extent with Pitcairn.

Your whole argument of "GCN is overhyped" falls to its knees when you consider AMD has cards with both great gaming performance and mediocre compute performance and cards with great gaming performance and great compute performance. The only difference is which market both companies decided to attack these segments: AMD decided Enthusiast for compute and gaming, and Performance for gaming. NVIDIA decided to target everything for gaming, on the other hand. It'll be very hard for GK106/107 (I think those are the arch codenames) to defeat Pitcairn when it comes to two of the metrics previously mentioned: performance/watt and performance/mm^2. In terms of die size it may well be smaller, but it'll definitely be slower.

 

[RussianSensation]

This card is too powerful for NVIDIA's own good.

What if NV intended to sell GK104 for $299-349 all along and now they are selling the mid-range chip for $399-499?

I mean look at the PCB of the 670. Does that look like a $400 NV card to you? NV pawned us.

I'm not responding to that guy anymore; he is a man on a mission, even claiming that "for most games a 5770 may not be faster but for many games it is" (compared to gtx285).

I vote HD5770 > GTX285 as comment of the year!

http://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/grafikkarten-vergleich_amd_nvidia_benchmarks_test/index24.php

HD5770 = 4870 < 4890 <= 275 < 285.

Not to mention DX11 features produce about a 1 generation performance hit. So HD5770 in DX11 would be about 50% slower than GTX285 in DX9/10. Frankly, HD5770 would choke with tessellation so it's a moot point.

MS and Sony Y U NO Fit GTX670 into PS4/Xbox Durango by 2014? (I know, I know price..)

A mobile version of GK104 inside PS4/Xbox next would have been sweet.