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

Performance summary charts & graphs

Here are the summary charts of 24 games and 3 synthetic tests. The highest settings are always chosen and it is DX11 when there is a choice; DX10 is picked above DX9, and the settings are ultra or maxed.  Specific settings are listed on the Main Performance chart at the end of this page.  The benches are run at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600 with separate charts devoted to overclocking, PhysX, 3D Vision, 5760×1080 Surround and Eyefinity resolution as well as dividing games by their DX pathway.

All results, except for Vantage and 3DMark11, show average framerates and higher is always better. In-game settings are fully maxed out and they are identically high or ultra across all platforms.  We see some very impressive results with the EVGA-clocked 448 core generally beating or trading blows with the GTX 570 and HD 6950. Most game benchmarks show it even than the HD 7970 and especially convincing at 1920×1200 resolution.  Let’s break down the chart into several smaller charts.  First up, let’s look at OpenGL, DX9, DX10 and DX11 games separately.

Futuremark & Heaven synthetic tests

3DMark11 is Futuremark’s latest DX11-only benchmark and here are the default benchmarks detailed results.

Unfortunately, scores are completely meaningless when they are presented in this way but they do offer supporting data to accompany our game benches.  Here is the chart with Vantage, 3D Mark11 and Heaven.

Here is the same information presented in two charts – first up, Vantage and 3D Mark11

Heaven 3.0 is a very demanding benchmark and here it is expressed in a chart.

Again, synthetic tests are interesting but they are not necessarily indicative of real world gaming performance.  In all three cases, the GTX 680 “wins” over the HD 7970.  Next up, let’s look at DX9 and OpenGL games.

DX9 and OpenGL

Wolfenstein is our only example of OpenGL.  Unfortunately Rage is hard to benchmark so it will have to do until Doom IV is released.  Left 4 Dead 2 represents the very popular if aging Source Engine and Serious Sam 3 BF3 is a very new and demanding DX9 game released late last year on the Serious 3.5 engine that provides impressive visuals and on ultra settings and high resolution, can slow the fastest video cards.

Here is the above chart expressed as a graph.

Wolfenstein is embarrassingly faster on the HD 7970 although it is quite playable on the GTX 680.  Both Left 4 Dead 2 and Serious Sam 3 BFE are faster on the HD 7970 than the GTX 680 although there is no practical difference in the gameplay experience.  Let’s check out DX10 games

DX10 Games

We test five DX10 games.  Here is the above chart expressed in a graph.

Out of these five DX10 games, only World-in-Conflict is marginally faster on the HD 7970 over the GTX 680; in Crysis the situation reverses with the GTX 680 a bit faster.  However, the other 3 games are noticeably faster with the GTX 680.  At 1920×1200 the performance gap is wider than at 2560×1600.

DX11 Games

Most of our testing emphasizes DX11 games and we bench 13.

And now the same thirteen DX11 games are expressed as two very long charts:

From the above 13 games, the HD 7970 is faster in 3 games – BattleForge, Aliens vs. Predator and Metro 2033.   In three games, they trade blows –  Call of Pripyat, F1 2010 and Deus Ex: Human Revolution, depending on the resolution.  Finally, the GTX 680 is faster in seven DX11games that we tested:  Lost Planet 2, H.A.W.X. 2, Crysis 2, Civilization 5, Shogun II, DiRT 3 and Batman: Arkham City.

Super-Widescreen 5760 x1080, Surround vs. Eyefinity

Here is the GTX 680 benchmarked in 3-panel Surround versus the HD 7970 in Eyefinity on the same same system compared; first up is the chart:

Next up is the same information expressed as a graph:

At the highest widescreen resolution of 5760×1080 that we tested at, the HD 7970 trades blows with the GTX 680 as they each take half of our benches.  It generally appears that the GTX 680 shows its strength at 1920×1200 which diminishes a bit compared to the HD 7970 as the resolution goes way up.

Next up, let’s look at PhysX

PhysX

In each case the GTX 680 is faster than the GTX 580 that it replaces; in some cases enough to affect playability.  Let’s check out 3D Vision:

3D Vision

Just as with PhysX, the GTX 680 offers a better playing experience in 3D Vision compared to the GTX 580; some cases will make a definitely noticeable and better experience playing with the newer card.

Overclocking

(This section on overclocking was added March 23, 2012)

Here is the GTX 680 directly compared against the HD 7970 – both at stock clocks and then overclocked as far as they will go on stock voltage.

• The GTX 680 is clocked at 1006/3000 at stock and overclocked to 1156/3025MHz
• The HD 7970 is clocked at 925/1375 at stock and overclocked to 1100/1400MHz

The first chart is 1920×1200 and the same setting are used consistently throughout this evaluation:

The second chart is 2560×1600:

Now here is a very long graph with 1920×1200 resolution:

Next up is the 2560×1600 overclocking chart.

Both cards overclock superbly on stock voltage and fan profiles and the GTX 680 generally retains its performance advantage over the HD 7970.

 

Main Overall Summary chart

In the first three columns of the main performance summary chart, the GTX 680 is tested at stock and overclocked; next is the GTX 580 and then the GTX 590.  Next we see the 3GB HD 7970, stock and overclocked; then the HD 6990 and the HD 6970.  This is the master chart and it has not been made into a graph as there would be too much information to put onto a single graph.

(Typo: Catalyst 12-2 was used for testing all Radeons)

No matter how you add it up, the GTX 680 is generally faster overall than the HD 7970.  Both overclock superbly so neither card has much of an advantage over the other with headroom on stock clocks and with the stock fan profile.  As the resolution increases, the performance advantage of the GTX 680 diminishes a bit over the HD 7970 and the gap narrows.  AMD would have to significantly increase the clocks of the HD 7970 to catch the GTX 680.

Let’s head for our conclusion.

«1. Introduction2. Kepler Architecture & Features3. A Look at the GTX 6804. Test Configuration5. O/C'ing. Power Draw & Temps6. 3D Vision, PhysX and Surround7. Performance Summary Charts8. Conclusion & The Verdict9. View All»