Ok, so we got a new bit of info.... crossposting this partially from the 680 oc thread:
Doesn't sound bad to me at all .
I agree, in perspective it's actually pretty darn solid for a stock card, stable. There's this pervasive myth out there that all 7970's hit 400mhz oc's all day and night long when it's not the case, most of them are 150-200mhz(at most) bumps for 24/7 stability (for a ~1075-1125mhz operating speed) without making the card into a vacuum cleaner on noise (and even then most of them don't respond to much further voltage bumps, anyway). If we can really expect +150-200 on the GTX 680 as a typical average, that makes clocks of ~1250-1300 generally achievable from a stock of around 1100 max turbo. The OC percentages aren't really going to be that different typically it appears.
We may get a little more from further drivers/tools as well. Assuming the quote above is correct (which I'm sure it's pretty accurate), you're talking an average of say 15% oc (1270 turbo) on a GTX 680 vs. 19% on a Radeon 7970 (1100). With the gtx 680's performance advantage and $50 lower price, it's still a huge contender even for oc'ers using their rigs for gaming/24-7 usage.
Most of that^ is a non-issue though...
We are talking about a stock card @ $499. How well it OC doesn't really matter until you get away from the non-reference designs. Stock for Stock, don't even acknowledge their argument for "Well you can always overclock the R7970 ($559) to the GTX680's ($499) levels.."
It is^ laughable..
But your point is well made. Even though it will go unheeded/noted. The only drawback to the 680 is it's 2GB of VRAM. Yet, we don't see that being a problem on too many benchmarks. Most who go multi-monitor will wait for 4GB cards (I am), but that is not a "con", because it a choice. (Just hope we start to 4gb 680s in the next few weeks.)
The GTX 680 is a win/win. All the consumer needs to do is keep these cards cool, nvidia will do the rest.