Nvidia’s GTX 680 arrives! “Faster, Smoother, Richer” – is it enough to take the Performance Crown?

3D Vision Testing and PhysX

3D Vision 2

We evaluated 3D Vision with 80 games and determined that it will be the next big thing in gaming.  Even older games not specifically made for 3D can work very well with the added dimension of depth.  We also evaluated 3D Vision 2 and found it superior to the passive 3D HD3D used by AMD.  We are not going to compare performance again as HD3D lacks the robust support that Nvidia provides for 3D Vision but will instead focus on the GTX 680’s improvement over the GTX 580

All of the games were played with maximum settings with a single GTX 680 and GTX 580. Motion Blur is left off and settings are maximum except as noted on the chart.  We compare framerates in 2D with 3D Vision and note that there are further downward adjustments for smoother play.

Here are the results of our benching with 3D Vision enabled versus 2D with the GTX 550 versus the GTX 680. There is a significant performance hit because each frame is rendered twice – once for the left eye and once for the right.

First the chart:

And now the graph:

3D Vision is quite impressive as gamers now have an enhanced dimension of depth to immerse them even more into their game.  Best of all as you can see, 3D Vision is now playable on a single GTX 680.  In all cases, the performance is better with the GTX 680 over the GTX 580 – sometimes, enough to make a difference in playability.

PhysX

AMD has no answer to PhysX although they have promised physics support for years.  Nvidia has developed their own propriatary PhysX which is used in a few games to create extra immersion with particle, fluid and other physics calculations that previously usually required a separate video card just dedicated to geometry and PhysX calculations.

Due to enhancements in Kepler’s SMX architecture as well as higher clocks, it is now easier to run PhysX on high with the GTX 680 than with the GTX 580.  At GeForce Kepler Editor’s Day in San Francisco, the Gearbox CEO and founder, Randy Pitchford demonstrated Borderlands 2 running on a single GTX 680.  Gearbox uses PhysX for immersion by adding extra physics effects.  It was quite an impessive demonstration and this editor  is definitely looking forward to Borderlands 2.

In some cases where playability is marginal with a single GTX 580, settings had to be reduced to accommodate PhysX calculations without stalling framerates.  Mafia 2 and Batman: Arkham City framerates always benefitted greatly by adding a dedicated PhysX card.  Here are 4 games  that make use of PhysX comparing the GTX 680 versus the GTX 580 without any dedicated PhysisX card.  If there is a choice, PhysX is set to “High” (or “Off”).

Here is the GTX 560 compared with the GTX 680 at the same settings – PhysX On versus Off.  First the chart:

As you can see the GTX 680 is significantly faster.

We already covered 3D Vision 2 and the new Light Boost Asus VG278 27″ 120Hz second generation display and improved 3D Vision glasses in an evaluation featuring Batman: Arkham City and Trine 2.  Make sure that you stay tuned for regular 3D Vision driver performance testing and follow everything S3D in our forum.  We have also covered HD3D passive S3D versus 3D Vision 2 in our ViewSonic V3D221 evaluation and concluded that 3D Vision is by far the more robust solution over passive HD3D using TriDef software.

Surround vs. Eyefinity

Kepler has finally addressed the criticism that two cards in SLI were needed to run Surround – 3 matched displays spanned as a single display for super-widescreen gaming.  The GTX 680 is capable of driving 3 displays in Surround or 3D Vision Surround using the two dual-link DVI connectors plus a DisplayPort passive adapter to HDMI connector.  To use 3D Vision Surround, you must use an active DP adapter which is quite expensive, or you can use two GTX 680s in SLI.

Let’s check out Surround vs. Eyefinity performance in the next section, along with the rest of the performance summary charts and graphs.