News from OcUK about timeframe for GTX670 GTX660 and the rest of the Kepler stack

[VulgarDisplay]

Since the news somehow got to [H], I don't think it matters anymore that it is a secret or whatnot. Only 1 person asked, you didn't spread it right. :hmm:

That is some nice photoshop work on the box art they have there, but they misspelled displayport.

 

[railven]

That is some nice photoshop work on the box art they have there, but they misspelled displayport.

Seems that will be a feature:

 

[Phynaz]

I sure hope the 660 isn't that far out. If it is I'll have to go with a 7850.

 

[dma0991]

That is some nice photoshop work on the box art they have there, but they misspelled displayport.

Of all things to mess up, do you think that they would spell Displayport as Dispalyport just to give away the idea that it is fake? Can you imagine the extra work that it would take just to Photoshop a misspell that is correct? Let me say this, it is LEGIT.

 

[3DVagabond]

That is some nice photoshop work on the box art they have there, but they misspelled displayport.

That "scene" (box, card, etc..) is real. Photoshop is a great program, but even the extended version can't do that. While I won't say it's impossible to CG it, the person doing it would be truly, truly gifted at rendering. If those pics aren't real, I'll eat dirt.

 

[jmgamer]

I sure hope the 660 isn't that far out. If it is I'll have to go with a 7850.

660 is 6 months away. Nvidia will be using 570 as 7850 competitor.

I just ordered a 7850 now, hearing this info from overclockers forum.

No way I'm waiting for that sitting on a 9800gt.

 

[ShadowVVL]

Im sitting on my 260 until 2013 and will probably pick up a amd hd 8xxx when they come out.

 

[tviceman]

No buddy, u saturate the memory controller based on the data.If a scene demands ,it will be bandwidth constrained regardless of cuda cores.If it has same bandwidth of 680 then it will behave exactly like 680 but with less horsepower.

Sigh. You said it yourself. The gtx670 will not be able to process as much data in the same amount of time as the gtx680, so therefore since it has the SAME BANDWIDTH being fed data at a slower rate, it will be less (or not at all) bandwidth constrained.

I feel like a broken record, but you obviously don't seem to understand these very easy principles. If an 8 lane highway (memory bus) serves 1,000 cars (data) per minute at a particular bottleneck, and then suddenly the number of cars drops to 800 but the number of lanes remain the same, then the bottleneck will be alleviated.

 

[Jaydip]

Sigh. You said it yourself. The gtx670 will not be able to process as much data in the same amount of time as the gtx680, so therefore since it has the SAME BANDWIDTH being fed data at a slower rate, it will be less (or not at all) bandwidth constrained.

I feel like a broken record, but you obviously don't seem to understand these very easy principles. If an 8 lane highway (memory bus) serves 1,000 cars (data) per minute at a particular bottleneck, and then suddenly the number of cars drops to 800 but the number of lanes remain the same, then the bottleneck will be alleviated.

Wrong.If a 8 lane highway serves 1,000 cars then its throughput is 1,000.If it serves 800 cars now its throughput is lower and it needs to increase its speed to match the previous throughput.Got it now?Its like saying 570 is less bandwidth constrained than 580,they have to display the same scene remember?

 

[blastingcap]

Not sure what you guys are talking about but imbalances happen on cards sometimes when the GPU or memory bandwidth are too small. You can take two extreme examples to see:

Holding memory chips and amount of memory constant:

Fast GPU, 2-bit memory bus. You are memory-bottlenecked.
Slow GPU, 1024-bit memory bus. You are GPU-bottlenecked.

If you're already pretty evenly matched then cutting down the GPU or memory bus by a little bit probably won't be a major problem.

 

[Jaydip]

Not sure what you guys are talking about but imbalances happen on cards sometimes when the GPU or memory bandwidth are too small. You can take two extreme examples to see:

Holding memory chips and amount of memory constant:

Fast GPU, 2-bit memory bus. You are memory-bottlenecked.
Slow GPU, 1024-bit memory bus. You are GPU-bottlenecked.

If you're already pretty evenly matched then cutting down the GPU or memory bus by a little bit probably won't be a major problem.

I understand that,but as i said the 680 is weak in only one area memory bandwidth.Even if a card has same memory bandwidth but has less cuda cores it will take more time to process the same data.So 670 will need higher memory clocks to match 680.Well it will be priced < 680 so yeah it makes sense.

 

[Jaydip]

Sigh. You said it yourself. The gtx670 will not be able to process as much data in the same amount of time as the gtx680, so therefore since it has the SAME BANDWIDTH being fed data at a slower rate, it will be less (or not at all) bandwidth constrained.

I feel like a broken record, but you obviously don't seem to understand these very easy principles. If an 8 lane highway (memory bus) serves 1,000 cars (data) per minute at a particular bottleneck, and then suddenly the number of cars drops to 800 but the number of lanes remain the same, then the bottleneck will be alleviated.

Sorry bud forgot that 670 will be priced less than 680 so they mean it to be slower.Lets move on.:thumbsup:

 

[f1sherman]

Wrong.If a 8 lane highway serves 1,000 cars then its throughput is 1,000.If it serves 800 cars now its throughput is lower and it needs to increase its speed to match the previous throughput.Got it now?Its like saying 570 is less bandwidth constrained than 580,they have to display the same scene remember?

So you have come to conclusion that 670 will need more MHz to match 680.
Good for you :thumbsup:

BTW tviceman is right --> gtx670 being less bw constrained then 680
will have, at the very minimum, the same lead over the hd7950 as the gtx680 has over the hd7970.

What's so hard to understand there?

 

[Jaydip]

So you have come to conclusion that 670 will need more MHz to match 680.
Good for you :thumbsup:

BTW tviceman is right --> gtx670 being less bw constrained then 680
will have, at the very minimum, the same lead over the hd7950 as the gtx680 has over the hd7970.

What's so hard to understand there?

I forgot the price :$

 

[blackened23]

Seems that will be a feature:

Hell yeah! Military grade dispalyport. Solid capacitors too! :thumbsup:

 

[Jionix]

Nvidia is hurting for capacity from TSMC right now, and if the reports are true, and their yields are terrible and Nvidia needs a base layer change... Then the 680 will go down in history as the best chip to only get a partial release.

10,000 cards released, compared to 100,000+ from AMD?

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/05/01/why-cant-nvidia-supply-keplergk104gtx680/

 

[blackened23]

Nvidia is hurting for capacity from TSMC right now, and if the reports are true, and their yields are terrible and Nvidia needs a base layer change... Then the 680 will go down in history as the best chip to only get a partial release.

10,000 cards released, compared to 100,000+ from AMD?

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/05/01/why-cant-nvidia-supply-keplergk104gtx680/

Okay, 10,000 cards released? That isn't even remotely believable. Yeah right.

 

[Don Karnage]

Okay, 10,000 cards released? That isn't even remotely believable. Yeah right.

I could believe that. Stock has been non existent

 

[blackened23]

I could believe that. Stock has been non existent

Worldwide though? Seems far fetched.

 

[sontin]

Nvidia is hurting for capacity from TSMC right now, and if the reports are true, and their yields are terrible and Nvidia needs a base layer change... Then the 680 will go down in history as the best chip to only get a partial release.

10,000 cards released, compared to 100,000+ from AMD?

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/05/01/why-cant-nvidia-supply-keplergk104gtx680/

Yeah, sure. You should check Steam. GTX680 has a higher number than 7800 and after 5 weeks the same number like the 7970 after 7 weeks.

So good old Charlie is back. D:

 

[blackened23]

Yeah, sure. You should check Steam. GTX680 has a higher number than 7800 and after 5 weeks the same number like the 7970 after 7 weeks.

So good old Charlie is back. D:

[citation required]

nevermind found it

 

[Don Karnage]

[citation required]

GTX 680 isn't even on the steam hardware survey yet. Neither is the 7800. So while I don't believe Charlie's story, whats your basis for this steam comment?

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/directx/?sort=pct

GTX 680 is at .22%
HD 7970 is at .36%

 

[blackened23]

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/directx/?sort=pct

GTX 680 is at .22%
HD 7970 is at .36%

Oh got it, thanks. I did a chrome search for "7870" and "680" from the results and it didnt pick up anything for some reason....I was looking at the page with DX11 april 2012 GPU's. Nevermind then.

 

[Don Karnage]

I can't believe 110K people have played CS already today

 

[Keysplayr]

Oh got it, thanks. I did a chrome search for "7870" and "680" from the results and it didnt pick up anything for some reason....I was looking at the page with DX11 april 2012 GPU's. Nevermind then.

and

ATI Radeon HD 7800 Series 0.12%