Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [twitter]EVGA 4GB 680s coming in may!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[twitter]EVGA 4GB 680s coming in may! - Page 6

post #51 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xyxyll View Post

How about they stock their 2GB models before they tease us with 4GB models that won't be fulfilled till October?

I'm not sure where your buying them from but NewEgg has them daily but very limited and sells out in a few mins of being offered. Got campers on the site and though it can be ninja'd before you can get through the process it's delivered within a few days.

Wherever you're ordering them from that puts them on backorder and put you on the list is doing a disservice to you to tell you you have to wait till October.
     
  hide details  
Reply
     
  hide details  
Reply
post #52 of 74
Thread Starter 
If you play metro you need 4gb.
post #53 of 74
Can someone explain why more than 2GB VRAM is being needed when the 680 2GB compares very well with a 7970 3GB card with an extra 1GB VRAM even at 5760x1200 resolution?

Single GTX 680 2GB vs Single Radeon 7970 3GB


368

369

368

368


So explain how this is possible? If 3GB isn't making a difference from 2GB, is 1 GB more VRAM on the 3GB card actually going to improve the FPS when the 2GB card is actually keeping up easily with 3GB? I'd need to see some proof before we can confirm this and so far I'm just not seeing it.

HardOCP - Source
Quote:
While gaming at 2560x1600 was fantastic, we wanted to push the video card to its limits, and so next we configured an NV Surround triple-display configuration and gamed on three displays from the single GeForce GTX 680. We wanted to be able to run at the native resolution of 5760x1200 and compare the performance to the Radeon HD 7970. We figured if any resolution is going to show the advantages of AMD's memory capacity and memory bandwidth edge it would be 5760x1200. We were absolutely surprised that the GeForce GTX 680 had no trouble keeping pace with the Radeon HD 7970 at 5760x1200. We thought this is the resolution we might see the GTX 680 bottleneck, but to our surprise no bottlenecks were experienced.

Set aside Metro perhaps being one of the most VRAM demanding games ever, question is, anyone even playing this old game or just using it as a benchmark tool?

I think some wrong info is being spread here and wanted to add a reason of doubt what's being said is not entirely accurate and back it up with proof.
     
  hide details  
Reply
     
  hide details  
Reply
post #54 of 74
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arizonian View Post

Can someone explain why more than 2GB VRAM is being needed when the 680 2GB compares very well with a 7970 3GB card with an extra 1GB VRAM even at 5760x1200 resolution?

Single GTX 680 2GB vs Single Radeon 7970 3GB


368

369

368
368


So explain how this is possible? If 3GB isn't making a difference from 2GB, is 1 GB more VRAM on the 3GB card actually going to improve the FPS when the 2GB card is actually keeping up easily with 3GB? I'd need to see some proof before we can confirm this and so far I'm just not seeing it.

HardOCP - Source
Quote:
While gaming at 2560x1600 was fantastic, we wanted to push the video card to its limits, and so next we configured an NV Surround triple-display configuration and gamed on three displays from the single GeForce GTX 680. We wanted to be able to run at the native resolution of 5760x1200 and compare the performance to the Radeon HD 7970. We figured if any resolution is going to show the advantages of AMD's memory capacity and memory bandwidth edge it would be 5760x1200. We were absolutely surprised that the GeForce GTX 680 had no trouble keeping pace with the Radeon HD 7970 at 5760x1200. We thought this is the resolution we might see the GTX 680 bottleneck, but to our surprise no bottlenecks were experienced.

Set aside Metro perhaps being one of the most VRAM demanding games ever, question is, anyone even playing this old game or just using it as a benchmark tool?

I think some wrong info is being spread here and wanted to add a reason of doubt what's being said is not entirely accurate and back it up with proof.

Has anyone tried 4800x2560 with a SLI of 2GB cards? That's what (eventually) I'm upgrading to, so anyone got any results for that res?
post #55 of 74
The reason the 2gb 680 can equal a 3gb 7970 is because it's more powerful. A 4gb 680 will make good use of the vram.
My ROG Rig
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8120 @4.2ghz  ASUS Crosshair V Formula Sapphire HD7870 XT 2x4gb Red Vengeance 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 1tb Lite-On iHas324 NZXT Havik 140 Windows 7 Profession 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS MW221 21.5in Monitor 1680x1050 Compaq Corsair AX-850 CoolerMaster HAF X 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Tt eSports Theron Razer Goliathus Control Audioengine A2 Audioengine DS1 
Audio
Xonar Phoebus  
  hide details  
Reply
My ROG Rig
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8120 @4.2ghz  ASUS Crosshair V Formula Sapphire HD7870 XT 2x4gb Red Vengeance 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 1tb Lite-On iHas324 NZXT Havik 140 Windows 7 Profession 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS MW221 21.5in Monitor 1680x1050 Compaq Corsair AX-850 CoolerMaster HAF X 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Tt eSports Theron Razer Goliathus Control Audioengine A2 Audioengine DS1 
Audio
Xonar Phoebus  
  hide details  
Reply
post #56 of 74
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentKilla78 View Post

The reason the 2gb 680 can equal a 3gb 7970 is because it's more powerful. A 4gb 680 will make good use of the vram.

I'm guessing it's dumping some to RAM. Anyone have a 680 and can monitor the RAM usage in AB?
post #57 of 74
Thread Starter 
post #58 of 74
Yep all ten are coming in May and 6 of those go to kingpin to destroy rolleyes.gif
Mostly For Gaming
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K EK cooled ASUS x79 680, EK cooled G.skill 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
512GB 840 Pro  ASUS DVD Burner 3 Loops which consist of 7 Waterblocks, 4 Radia... 8.1pro 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ZR30w S-IPS 2560x1600 Ɠ19 SILVERSTONE ST 1500W Custom 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Ɠ500 Ɍocketfish SENNHEISER 
  hide details  
Reply
Mostly For Gaming
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K EK cooled ASUS x79 680, EK cooled G.skill 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
512GB 840 Pro  ASUS DVD Burner 3 Loops which consist of 7 Waterblocks, 4 Radia... 8.1pro 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ZR30w S-IPS 2560x1600 Ɠ19 SILVERSTONE ST 1500W Custom 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Ɠ500 Ɍocketfish SENNHEISER 
  hide details  
Reply
post #59 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3930K View Post

Wait, just remembered this:
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/4666/palit_jetstream_geforce_gtx_680_4gb_video_cards_in_sli/index.html
It gives you benefits at 1080p.

Those comparisons tested the SLI STOCK 1006 Mhz GTX 680 4GB P17188 / E6307 vs Crossfire OVERCLOCKED 1075 Mhz Radeon 7970 3GB P16539 / E6231 - I guess the extra 1GB VRAM on the benchmark did help because those 7970's were over clocked 7970 3 GB 1075 vs stock 680 4GB 1006 MHz Core clocks more than just clock per clock and the 680 still beat it even though the 7970 3GB was 69 Mhz over clocked than the 680.


700

Interesting because on the 3DMark11 bench it's not really a VRAM intensive benchmark. I wished they would have done either BF3 or Crysis.

So let's compare the Metro 2033 benchmark that we know is VRAM intensive.


700


Here we have the same result where even the SLI Stock GTX 680 4GB @ 1006 Mhz (Max 151 FPS) beat the Crossfire Overclocked Radeon 7970 3 GB @ 1075 Mhz. (Max 136 FPS).


So it leaves me to ponder how the HardOCP benchmarks that I posted above in my previous post on high multi-monitor set up with 680 2GB beat the 7970 3GB when you'd think that the extra VRAM spread across three screens should have helped it even more. headscratch.gif

The HardOCP compared the stock 1006 Mhz vs the stock 975 Mhz. You'd think 31 Mhz difference wouldn't have made that much of a difference when you take into consideration that the 7970 had 1 GB VRAM over the 680 with less of a factory over clock on those tests HardOCP did? wth.gif
     
  hide details  
Reply
     
  hide details  
Reply
post #60 of 74
Well, the stock 7970 is 925mhz, so it;s almost 100mhz faster. That doesn't matter anyway, it's because, at those resolutions, you become power limited, not vram limited, so the vram was kinda irrelevant because of how intensive it is. It's because the 680s more powerful, that it beat it.
My ROG Rig
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8120 @4.2ghz  ASUS Crosshair V Formula Sapphire HD7870 XT 2x4gb Red Vengeance 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 1tb Lite-On iHas324 NZXT Havik 140 Windows 7 Profession 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS MW221 21.5in Monitor 1680x1050 Compaq Corsair AX-850 CoolerMaster HAF X 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Tt eSports Theron Razer Goliathus Control Audioengine A2 Audioengine DS1 
Audio
Xonar Phoebus  
  hide details  
Reply
My ROG Rig
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8120 @4.2ghz  ASUS Crosshair V Formula Sapphire HD7870 XT 2x4gb Red Vengeance 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 1tb Lite-On iHas324 NZXT Havik 140 Windows 7 Profession 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS MW221 21.5in Monitor 1680x1050 Compaq Corsair AX-850 CoolerMaster HAF X 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Tt eSports Theron Razer Goliathus Control Audioengine A2 Audioengine DS1 
Audio
Xonar Phoebus  
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [twitter]EVGA 4GB 680s coming in may!