bit-tech.net

Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB Review

Comments 26 to 50 of 51

Reply
m0ngy 13th June 2012, 16:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0ngy
Also, why does my browser get spammed with endless pop-ups and super annoying full-screen questionnaires whenever I visit your website?

Because you're machine has caught a nasty dose of malware or "super smiley search helper super duper plugin disease". BT has the very very occasional annoying advert which the team jump on as soon as it's spotted but nothing like the dross you're talking about.

No, it's not my machine, it's the horrifically annoying adware spawning all over the bit-tech site, as discussed here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyJoe
Maybe you've got an ad blocker then.

I'm afraid "the team" have lost out to the marketing dept. on this one.
Gareth Halfacree 13th June 2012, 16:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mclean007
$1,049.99 (Newegg price) at current exchange rate (1.55477 per xe.com) is £675.32. Add 20% UK VAT to this and you get to £810.38, which is less than 10% off the UK price of £879.99 quoted on Dabs. The rest of the difference is down to reduced volumes in the UK market, higher wages for staff in the UK supply chain than the US (i.e. we have a higher minimum wage) and the mandatory 1 year warranty that must be given in the UK, as against typical 3 month warranty in the USA.
Don't forget import tax, which can be as high as 15%. I tried to look up computer components on the Trade Tariff for the actual figure, but the site's on a total go-slow today.
xaser04 13th June 2012, 17:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
Don't forget import tax, which can be as high as 15%. I tried to look up computer components on the Trade Tariff for the actual figure, but the site's on a total go-slow today.

Import tax on the majority of computer "components" is 0%. Most fall within section XVI, chapter 85 section of the tariff which attracts by in large zero rates of duty from all preference groupings (with some exceptions - video recording or transmitting equipment (CCTV etc) attracts a rate of 13.9% MFN and 9.9% GSP).

Interestingly finding exactly what tariff code a Graphics card would fall under is quite difficult as it doesn't really fit in any of the headings (barring possibly under heading 8529 which is "parts" for headings 8525-8529).
Baz 13th June 2012, 17:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0ngy
I'm amazed Bit-tech even bothers to do a review of a product released more than a month ago. Alternatively, why is your review a month late?

The GTX 690 was released with zero notice, and on the same week as the 670. We prioritised the 670 as it had a larger appeal to have our launch coverage ready, and had to put the 690 review back a few weeks to meet other deadlines; check the 670 review and you'll see the 690 results there in the graphs. Why publish a review at all? Because it's still a relevant product for our readers, albeit a very niche one.

Bit-tech is run by a team of dedicated tech journalists who care greatly about the site, and we want to deliver as much content as possible to readers, even if it is a few weeks late!
maverik-sg1 13th June 2012, 17:48 Quote
It's nice to see a multi gpu card have a reduced number of issues than previous generations... far too expensive for what it is though (2x GK104's @ 2x GK110 prices)... with those sort of margins, it's no wonder that analysts are loving Nvidia again right now - buy buy buy!!!

Using the new 64bit client for for World Of Warcraft: Cataclysm what would the FPS be in a 'Looking for raid' group @ 5760*1080 or even Diablo III?
fdbh96 13th June 2012, 19:58 Quote
For a reference card it does look very nice, and although people say its overkill, if you look on some of the 5760x1080 benchmarks, then its the only card to return playable frame rates (which is 30-40 IMO).

However, doesn't look like supply is all that great, looking on Dabs, they say "1 due in more than 4 weeks" :)

Edit: Is there any chance of some Diablo 3 benchmarking, I've noticed other sites doing this and it is a popular game ;)
Aracos 13th June 2012, 20:37 Quote
I swear the 690 was released a LONG time ago. What changed?
rocknroll237 13th June 2012, 20:38 Quote
Insane performance.

I'm still going strong with my Asus Ares (despite some annoying driver issues). We paid £450 for it back in November 2010, when it was still being sold new for £800. The great thing is that if we sold it now, people would still be prepared to pay £400 for it. I'm thinking of replacing it with the Asus GTX 670 Direct Computer II. :D
fdbh96 13th June 2012, 21:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aracos
I swear the 690 was released a LONG time ago. What changed?

See Baz's post 3 above....
lysaer 14th June 2012, 00:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baz
Our current test rig, upon which we've tested for the last 18 months, doesn't support SLI, so no 680 SLI numbers just yet. We'll be rebuilding the GFX rigs this summer, along with fully updating the games and resolutions at which we test. Discussion thread regarding this soon.

That's a fairly shameful admission for a tech site to be honest.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baz
The GTX 690 was released with zero notice, and on the same week as the 670. We prioritised the 670 as it had a larger appeal to have our launch coverage ready, and had to put the 690 review back a few weeks to meet other deadlines; check the 670 review and you'll see the 690 results there in the graphs. Why publish a review at all? Because it's still a relevant product for our readers, albeit a very niche one.

Bit-tech is run by a team of dedicated tech journalists who care greatly about the site, and we want to deliver as much content as possible to readers, even if it is a few weeks late!

I'm sorry man but you put out a review a month late to a "niche" market, now that niche market is bleeding edge and the only real comparison they are going to be concerned with is SLI 680 and 670, which for some odd reason your board doesn't even do.

I mean Jesus if you are that hard up for an sli board I would of loaned you one.

In fact if you guys want I'm selling a very reasonably priced r3e system over in the marketplace which supports SLI
ssj12 14th June 2012, 05:58 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by shirty
We're looking specifically at you, Razer Black Widow.

hahaha, i love my BlackWidow Ultimate. Best keyboard I ever owned.
1-0-1 14th June 2012, 07:56 Quote
Quote:
Nvidia claimed the GTX 690 would deliver the performance of two GTX 680s and, for once, a manufacturer's boasts weren't entirely made of hot air.

The amount of hype and marketing fluff surround the GPU market is amazing. It is the fastest but it hardly double the performance of a GTX 680. This statement reminds me of the NVIDIA OPS suggestion which a most of the time cannot be any further from the truth since they you indicate maximum FPS but what is more important for you gaming experience, forget to mention the average FPS.
Elton 14th June 2012, 08:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1-0-1
The amount of hype and marketing fluff surround the GPU market is amazing. It is the fastest but it hardly double the performance of a GTX 680. This statement reminds me of the NVIDIA OPS suggestion which a most of the time cannot be any further from the truth since they you indicate maximum FPS but what is more important for you gaming experience, forget to mention the average FPS.

No offense (honest :) ) grammar aside:

Minimum framerates are far more important than Average. You can have a high average, but what's commonly known is that if your minimum framerates are abysmal, you stand to have a generally terrible gaming experience. Also if we were to combine this minimum framerate philosophy with the Multi-GPU problem of Micro-stuttering you would be hard pressed to be shown only average framerates. Also note that this review while limited in scope, records minimum framerates. Although truth be told I really miss old BT's reviews. Those things were ace.

Now with this aside: I can't say that Nvidia's marketing is lying. It almost nearly doubles the performance of the GTX680 which is no slouch itself. Sure at worst it gives no performance ups (SLI/CF has always had this issue) but in general the performance boost from the vanilla GTX680 is aroud 70-95% in framerate increase. That's phenomenal scaling given the extremely miserable diminishing returns of former SLI and Crossfire setups. So I'd say props for the progress.

Seeing as it costs almost as much as a closet full of clothes, months worths of food, or an entire rig, I'll give this a pass. But it's a testament to how much better SLI and Crossfire have gotten over the years. Especially in comparison to the early guys like the 6800GT/X800 era.
1-0-1 14th June 2012, 08:40 Quote
No problem - but I think then I am understanding something really wrong here about the double statement. Let's say for instance the minimum framrate for a 680 would be 60 FPS in a pseudo game. According to the double performance claim, the 690 should then have at least over 120 FPS?

But yes - point tanken about the minimum framerate being a better indication on gaming experience.

... and by the way I really hope you joked about the card costing a month worth of food as that amount seems closer to 10 months worth of food for a family of three here :|
xaser04 14th June 2012, 09:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1-0-1
The amount of hype and marketing fluff surround the GPU market is amazing. It is the fastest but it hardly double the performance of a GTX 680. This statement reminds me of the NVIDIA OPS suggestion which a most of the time cannot be any further from the truth since they you indicate maximum FPS but what is more important for you gaming experience, forget to mention the average FPS.

Note that the quote you are specifically responding to mentions "performs the same as two GTX680 cards" rather than "doubles 680 performance". The specific interpretation being that it performs the same as GTX 680 SLI rather than doubling the single cards peformance.
Elton 14th June 2012, 09:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1-0-1
No problem - but I think then I am understanding something really wrong here about the double statement. Let's say for instance the minimum framrate for a 680 would be 60 FPS in a pseudo game. According to the double performance claim, the 690 should then have at least over 120 FPS?

But yes - point tanken about the minimum framerate being a better indication on gaming experience.

... and by the way I really hope you joked about the card costing a month worth of food as that amount seems closer to 10 months worth of food for a family of three here :|

Well it is close. ;) I mean 80%~ is a good metric for near doubling. Not to mention this is at less than double the TDW. Also food in California is expensive for a family of 7 and more. It's a matter of interpretation though as in all honesty they probably (and most likely) mean 2 GTX680s, which in reality isn't 100% faster than 1 GTX 680.
general22 14th June 2012, 10:51 Quote
Late reviews are fine but why even do a late review if they are totally useless. There are no SLI/CF numbers here which makes it impossible to compare the GTX690 to its nearest competitors from either camp. Also on the power and thermals page the GTX690 isn't highlighted in the load temperature graphs.

It is also incredibly puzzling that the GPU test rig doesn't support SLI.
Elton 14th June 2012, 13:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by general22
Late reviews are fine but why even do a late review if they are totally useless. There are no SLI/CF numbers here which makes it impossible to compare the GTX690 to its nearest competitors from either camp. Also on the power and thermals page the GTX690 isn't highlighted in the load temperature graphs.

It is also incredibly puzzling that the GPU test rig doesn't support SLI.

Yeah this review feels relatively incomplete. Although it's nice to have an extra opinion, BT seems to have dropped the ball here.

On the other hand. The motherboard doesn't have to support SLI, it's already integrated into the GTX690 board. Just like the 590 and the 295 before it. All of the magic goes on the GPU's PCB.
Shirty 14th June 2012, 13:28 Quote
I'm sure Baz will correct me if I'm wrong, but CPC/Bit-tech has historically had a bit of an anti-SLI bent due to the potential driver issues and micro-stuttering, which is probably why SLI wasn't a consideration when putting the test rig together. However, times have moved on now, and SLI is a relatively trouble-free setup now, so I'm glad to hear that this will finally be addressed with the forthcoming test rig update.
Baz 14th June 2012, 16:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by lots of people
mean words

Thanks for your comments.

Sourcing the board obvious isn't be the issue; retesting 20+ graphics cards on it for comparison results would be. It takes 2-3 hours to test a graphics card, so that's 60 hours (8 days) of solid work, before you factor in multi-GPU (so that's another 60hrs, just for 2 card setups). Our time isn't infinite, so we tend to leave hardware updates to once a year at most.

Over the last 4 years, bit-tech has specifically not tested multi-GPU setups due to scaling, driver and reliability problems, not to mention the additional time required to test the various GPU setups (GTX 680, 2x GTX 680, 3x GTX 680 and 4x GTX 680 is at least 12 hours of testing). I'm looking to change this soon if time allows.

In the end though, you're all consumers of our content and the "I don't care principle" comes into play; you dont care about my explanations or excuses, you want content. In this case, we simply were not able to get this review up sooner, and I'm sorry its lateness has upset you so much. In the end, would it have been better not to publish a review at all? I don't think so.
Aracos 14th June 2012, 20:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdbh96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aracos
I swear the 690 was released a LONG time ago. What changed?

See Baz's post 3 above....

Yeah, I don't always fancy reading 30 odd comments XD
Elton 14th June 2012, 21:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baz
Thanks for your comments.

Sourcing the board obvious isn't be the issue; retesting 20+ graphics cards on it for comparison results would be. It takes 2-3 hours to test a graphics card, so that's 60 hours (8 days) of solid work, before you factor in multi-GPU (so that's another 60hrs, just for 2 card setups). Our time isn't infinite, so we tend to leave hardware updates to once a year at most.

Over the last 4 years, bit-tech has specifically not tested multi-GPU setups due to scaling, driver and reliability problems, not to mention the additional time required to test the various GPU setups (GTX 680, 2x GTX 680, 3x GTX 680 and 4x GTX 680 is at least 12 hours of testing). I'm looking to change this soon if time allows.

In the end though, you're all consumers of our content and the "I don't care principle" comes into play; you dont care about my explanations or excuses, you want content. In this case, we simply were not able to get this review up sooner, and I'm sorry its lateness has upset you so much. In the end, would it have been better not to publish a review at all? I don't think so.

Understandable. There are time constraints. This isn't a bad review, just a brief one. Mind you I miss the old teardowns of GPUs. Those were awesome.
silky 15th June 2012, 10:30 Quote
Can I have the one you used for the review? :)
MjFrosty 15th June 2012, 15:05 Quote
This is the first dual GPU card that isn't comedy. Although frankly, I still think it is.

Make a mint on initial single core variant, then release a dual gpu one month or so down the line.

Most people worth their salt on pioneer buying will have bought at least two 680s. And the people that haven't will not be interested in the 690 price point. The advertisement of 4GB is also comedy. Most people in here will know that SLi does not take GPU memory into account. It's no better than lying when you think about it.

Massively niche market. I know there are people that will disagree but it's definitely not far from the truth IMO.
ssj12 15th June 2012, 19:53 Quote
no overclocking test?
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums