• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

nVidia Kepler GTX700 (600?) series info here ->

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
when i look at those graphs i just kind of laugh.

1 it almost seems rigged.

but 2 it really shows the negative effects of amd clocking their cards so low when they could have been much more competitive at like 1100 core and say 1500 mem or so.
 
SF101 said:
when i look at those graphs i just kind of laugh.

1 it almost seems rigged.

but 2 it really shows the negative effects of amd clocking their cards so low when they could have been much more competitive at like 1100 core and say 1500 mem or so.
Click to expand...


I agree somewhat...I'll believe it when more reviews come out from sources such as Toms hardware and Guru3D. I just find it hard to believe only 5% difference when there's 15% less shaders at a lower clockspeed.

On the AMD clocks, well we've seen no 670 overclocking reviews yet either and I was really shocked at how well 680's overclock so I believe as far as overclocking they are at a level playing field.
And I'm not being a Nvidia fanboy here, just stating what I've noticed in my experiences....and that is Nvidia cards overclock seems to go further than AMD's....meaning just to throw some numbers out as an example a 100mhz overclock on a Nvidia card equals the same performance gain percentage wise as a 150mhz overclock on an AMD card. *Now I'm just using those numbers as an example nothing factual or legit about those numbers thats strictly a guess based on my experiences*.
 
87dtna said:
I agree somewhat...I'll believe it when more reviews come out from sources such as Toms hardware and Guru3D. I just find it hard to believe only 5% difference when there's 15% less shaders at a lower clockspeed.

On the AMD clocks, well we've seen no 670 overclocking reviews yet either and I was really shocked at how well 680's overclock so I believe as far as overclocking they are at a level playing field.
And I'm not being a Nvidia fanboy here, just stating what I've noticed in my experiences....and that is Nvidia cards overclock seems to go further than AMD's....meaning just to throw some numbers out as an example a 100mhz overclock on a Nvidia card equals the same performance gain percentage wise as a 150mhz overclock on an AMD card. *Now I'm just using those numbers as an example nothing factual or legit about those numbers thats strictly a guess based on my experiences*.
Click to expand...

If you going to make statements like nVidia overclocks further than the AMD and has higher scaling percentage then please back it up as so far that does not seem to be reality. :)
 
Frakk said:
If you going to make statements like nVidia overclocks further than the AMD
Click to expand...

WTF seriously? I totally explained what I meant after I said Nvidia overclock seems to go further than AMD's......NOT talking about ability to overclock further but that the same overclock in MHZ gives more gain on Nvidia cards.

I have no AMD cards to test right nowand show results with but having owned and benched over 60 cards I do remember this.
 
Last edited:
just stating what I've noticed in my experiences....and that is Nvidia cards overclock seems to go further than AMD's....meaning just to throw some numbers out as an example a 100mhz overclock on a Nvidia card equals the same performance gain percentage wise as a 150mhz overclock on an AMD card.
Click to expand...
 
I edited my previous post....you are taking my statement of Nvidia overclock goes further out of context. I NEVER stated that nvidia cards can overclock more mhz than AMD.

And also I noticed that you conveniently cut my disclaimer out of stating that these numbers are not factual just examples to show my point. I don't know what the exact numbers are I'm simply stating it's something I've observed benching so many cards the last 2 years.
 
87dtna said:
I edited my previous post....you are taking my statement of Nvidia overclock goes further out of context. I NEVER stated that nvidia cards can overclock more mhz than AMD.
Click to expand...

Not out of context, simply a miss read if you like :)
 
I haven't overclocked the 680's much yet, but i can say this i managed a easy 250+ mhz increase on air without even touching the voltages.

But there is one huge flaw right now with the 680's which might be part of the reason why the benchmark results between the two cards are so close. The 300 series drivers are extremely buggy. I am not sure if they are actually under utilizing the 680's or if there are reporting problems for monitoring stilll, but i have ran into alot of stupid power management glitching. (Ie card swapping to lower power states when it shouldn't be) I sent nvidia a email asking about it but haven't gotten any responses back yet.
 
TsunamiJuan said:
I haven't overclocked the 680's much yet, but i can say this i managed a easy 250+ mhz increase on air without even touching the voltages.

But there is one huge flaw right now with the 680's which might be part of the reason why the benchmark results between the two cards are so close. The 300 series drivers are extremely buggy. I am not sure if they are actually under utilizing the 680's or if there are reporting problems for monitoring stilll, but i have ran into alot of stupid power management glitching. (Ie card swapping to lower power states when it shouldn't be) I sent nvidia a email asking about it but haven't gotten any responses back yet.
Click to expand...
Unless you modded it, you cant touch the voltages as it automatically changes.
 
Just curious though it shows the core clock as 1202 and 1150 on GPU 1 and 2 for the ''stock'' testing. Is this the dynamic overclocking I hear about? I thought turbo was like 1006 core clock on a 670, maybe I just don't understand how it works but that certainly does bias the numbers towards Nvidia since it's practically a 300mhz overclock from reference design. But thats still 2000 points over a reference 7970 Xfire review (13k points) I saw on guru3D. So with more like a 1000 core clock, we can speculate it's about the same strength as a 7970? Just a guess. But either way sounds like a pretty nice deal for $399.
 
Turbo clock varies from temperature and load IIRC. The boost clocks you see listed are a minimum I believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
nVidia's Response to AMD 7000 series
Replies
7
Views
2K
notJUSTguitar
notJUSTguitar
Kohta
Nvidia 600 Series? [Search:| Nvidia 600 Series|]
Replies
9
Views
3K
Theocnoob
Theocnoob
4GHZ_or_bust
NVidia to discontinue 470 already??
Replies
3
Views
2K
wingman99
W
Back