Hardware Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4GB Review

No SLi comparison of two GTX 680 2GB's just to see how efficient the on-board SLi link is- or if there are any differences in it's implementation re: drivers, etc?

 

This review was in the mag hence the delay id imagine

It got slaughtered in the mag for its price

They actually did have the sli results so you could compare. If your looking at sli 680 it's about 5% slower while been a touch cheaper using less power and producing less heat

I'd prob be willing to sacrifice 5% for the above benefits personally

 

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.

 

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.

 

As The_Crapman says - VAT. US pricse are quoted before sales tax; EU prices (including UK) must be quoted inc VAT.

$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.

Argue if you will about the unfairness of UK VAT being so high, but you can't blame Asus for the differential pricing.

 

No, it's not my machine, it's the horrifically annoying adware spawning all over the bit-tech site, as discussed here:

I'm afraid "the team" have lost out to the marketing dept. on this one.

 

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).

 

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!

 

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?

 

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

 

I swear the 690 was released a LONG time ago. What changed?

 

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.

 

See Baz's post 3 above....

 

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

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

 

hahaha, i love my BlackWidow Ultimate. Best keyboard I ever owned.

 

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.

 

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