• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

[H] reviews GTX 680 DirectCU II / TOP

Ferzerp

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,427
105
106
I have one of these as my lower card. It typically sets at 1254Mhz with no OC required, though I've upped the memory 300Mhz.

The funny thing is, the card lets you provide more power than the others (159% vs 132%), but then needs so very very much less. In SLI it will be sitting at 80-85% power, while the other card is 110-120% power, while it's clocked higher. It also sits around 15C lower than the other card. I wish I could make it the primary, but putting it in the top slot where there is no gap for a triple slot card, makes it suddenly 98C or so in furmark.

It will do somwhere between 1300 and 1350Mhz, but in SLI, it doesn't really provide any benefit to make it faster than the other. What I've seen is just that the utilization on that card goes down instead of it helping.
 

wand3r3r

Diamond Member
May 16, 2008
3,180
0
0
Seems pretty cherry picked (or extreme "luck of the draw") at least on temperatures. 52c vs 81c reference. The 20% cooler then reference is either an extreme understatement, or they have great luck, but I'll reserve judgement until a greater consensus can be made.
 

guskline

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2006
5,338
474
126
Appears to be a great card that runs at a very cool load temp with nice OCing ability. Now if they were only in stock:wub:
 

Ferzerp

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,427
105
106
Seems pretty cherry picked (or extreme "luck of the draw") at least on temperatures. 52c vs 81c reference. The 20% cooler then reference is either an extreme understatement, or they have great luck, but I'll reserve judgement until a greater consensus can be made.

When making percentage comparisons, you're going to have to convert to kelvin ;) Technically, it's about 8% cooler.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY