[Kaotik]

Originally Posted by UniversalTruth

New Details about GTX 680 with Passive Cooling

Not that shocking, you can cool anything "passively", but put that in a case with no properly set up case fans for good ventilation, and you'll end up with fried card instead.

[EltonL]

Originally Posted by Kaotik

Not that shocking, you can cool anything "passively", but put that in a case with no properly set up case fans for good ventilation, and you'll end up with fried card instead.

Well it shows two things to me:

1) We need to improve our case orientation or at least develop things that can contain the power envelope of our GPUs.

2) We also have to figure out a way to not have the PCI-E slots snap off due to the weight of such ridiculous devices.

That is quite cool admittedly and if it's priced right, it technically is worth the expensive purely because you get that much heatsink space.

[Pressure]

Originally Posted by Kaotik

Not that shocking, you can cool anything "passively", but put that in a case with no properly set up case fans for good ventilation, and you'll end up with fried card instead.

I still find it weird that they design motherboards with the graphic card turned upside down.

It might just be because I am used to looking inside Mac Pro's.

[Kaotik]

Originally Posted by Pressure

I still find it weird that they design motherboards with the graphic card turned upside down.

It might just be because I am used to looking inside Mac Pro's.

Intel tried to push BTX when their Prescotts were just too damn hot chip, it had CPU facing upwards.

Then there's some ATX cases out there where you just install the mobo "upside down", and have the GPU facing upwards.

[CarstenS]

Or you have clever cases like the Silverstone Raven Series, where the board is rotaded 90 degress, with the exhausts of the cards facing upwards perfectly utilizing natural convection.

[Kaotik]

Originally Posted by CarstenS

Or you have clever cases like the Silverstone Raven Series, where the board is rotaded 90 degress, with the exhausts of the cards facing upwards perfectly utilizing natural convection.

Actually IIRC that has been proven to be worse than the "normal" position for at least some video cards

[Dr Evil]

Originally Posted by Kaotik

Actually IIRC that has been proven to be worse than the "normal" position for at least some video cards

Some have reported it being worse for coolers with long straight heat pipes, but for regular coolers there is no problem. I also saw great temps with Accelero Extreme plus on GTX 570 in Raven2 so at least it can work.

[UniversalTruth]

GeForce GTX 660 Desktop Coming in July

200-250...

[Dr Evil]

Originally Posted by UniversalTruth

GeForce GTX 660 Desktop Coming in July

200-250...

Nice non news "article"... Also GK104 400 is the GTX 680 chip.

[MadMaxtrox]

Originally Posted by Kaotik

Not that shocking, you can cool anything "passively", but put that in a case with no properly set up case fans for good ventilation, and you'll end up with fried card instead.

What about utilizing this for GPU cooling in some way?

http://www.popsci.com/technology/art...-modern-setups

[Kaotik]

Originally Posted by MadMaxtrox

What about utilizing this for GPU cooling in some way?

http://www.popsci.com/technology/art...-modern-setups

It's interesting concept, but I wonder how well it would work "hanging down", not to mention the pure risk of using such cooler, imagine the damage when that breaks loose

[Silent_Buddha]

Originally Posted by MadMaxtrox

What about utilizing this for GPU cooling in some way?

http://www.popsci.com/technology/art...-modern-setups

Cool design but all kinds of things wrong with their assumptions.

Because the entire thing moves, it also cuts down on dust buildup, which has a serious effect on a cooling system's efficiency. Oh, and due to its speed and the way it floats (sort of like hydroplaning), the system is much quieter than typical fans.

Dust builds up on fanblades, especially the leading edge. That's going to be even more of an issue for this setup. On a normal fan blade it just increases the turbulence and decreases airflow somewhat. High buildup on the setup in that article has the potential to close off a significant amount of airflow.

As well, most of the audible noise of a fan (unless it is quite large) comes from the turbulence created by the fanblades as well the airflow. I'm not sure this design would address that significantly.

But at least it appears to potentially address the issue of "dead spots" on traditional CPU fan/heatsinks which don't use blower fans.

Regards,
SB

[Rangers]

Originally Posted by UniversalTruth

GeForce GTX 660 Desktop Coming in July

200-250...

Another rumor said 660 had been delayed until August, because there were 120,000 GTX 570's backlogged (with similar performance and according to the rumor, possible better overclocking than 660 XX).

Then it was said 570's were due to fall under 200 euros, so I was hoping for some crazy USA sales, but theyre all still $250.

Anyways I'd trust Fudzilla's July more.

[Homeles]

Originally Posted by Rangers

Another rumor said 660 had been delayed until August, because there were 120,000 GTX 570's backlogged (with similar performance and according to the rumor, possible better overclocking than 660 XX).

Then it was said 570's were due to fall under 200 euros, so I was hoping for some crazy USA sales, but theyre all still $250.

Anyways I'd trust Fudzilla's July more.

At any rate, consumers desperately need the 660 to launch. There are 4 cards from AMD (7700-7800) that need a response from Nvidia. The 7750 would have a competitor, the 640, if the 640 were priced intelligently.

Anyways, performance per dollar is downright shameful this generation. This is because AMD and Nvidia are only butting heads with their highest end offerings.

Yes Nvidia, GK104 is a better gaming chip than Tahiti. However, it cannot serve all of your customers. It's time to wake up already.

[Rangers]

The real problem imo is AMD left a huge hole between, $240+ 7850 and $110-$125 7770.

While OTOH, countless 7870's, 7950, 7970, 670's, 680, even rumored 7930 crowd that $300-$500 market.

[UniversalTruth]

Originally Posted by Homeles

The 7750 would have a competitor, the 640, if the 640 were priced intelligently.

Not intelligently but less greedy. NV thinks people are so gullible they can charge whatever crazy price comes into their minds.

Radeon HD7750 is significantly faster than GT 640, depending on the game and settings the lead varies between 50 and 90%

At the same price. 110.

My point being is that those cards are in completely different performance segments, market segments too but I suspect that when NV realises how bad their sales are, they will fix the insane pricing.

[Alexko]

Originally Posted by Homeles

The 7750 would have a competitor, the 640, if the 640 were priced intelligently.

And if it had GDDR5. With its current DDR3, it doesn't stand a chance.

[Homeles]

Originally Posted by UniversalTruth

My point being is that those cards are in completely different performance segments, market segments too but I suspect that when NV realises how bad their sales are, they will fix the insane pricing.

Like you said, Nvidia thinks they can get away with it. And they do. A lot of people worship "Dear Leader" JHH.

Originally Posted by Alexko

And if it had GDDR5. With its current DDR3, it doesn't stand a chance.

Not sure why they made such a design decision... at the very least, wouldn't it make more sense to have a reference GDDR5 card to make the card seem more marketable, even if the DDR3 version is the only one you plan on supplying in substantial volume?

[Alexko]

Originally Posted by Homeles

Not sure why they made such a design decision... at the very least, wouldn't it make more sense to have a reference GDDR5 card to make the card seem more marketable, even if the DDR3 version is the only one you plan on supplying in substantial volume?

I really don't know. I guess DDR3 saves a few bucks, but in the end the GT 640 is still about $10 more expensive than the HD 7750, and considerably slower.

It does draw a little less power, and I suppose DDR3 helps with that, but the 7750 is a 75W card, which means it doesn't need any extra power connectors, so I'm not sure what difference it makes.

[UniversalTruth]

Perhaps they execute active contracts with GDDR3 manufacturers and that's why they are still obliged to use it.

But, hey, guys, GT640 is one of the slowest cards this generation, it's entry, low-end and as being such they don't have many options but to use entry level memory.

Plus, I'm not sure how that weak chip can benefit from higher bandwidth...
Don't whine about memory, whine about the price. The true price must not be higher than 50-60 of such a sucky card.

Originally Posted by Homeles

GDDR5 card to make the card seem more marketable

Which one would the 'average joe not enlightened' prefer? 512 MB GDDR5 or 2 GB GDDR3?

[Chalnoth]

Well, sounds like the 640 just isn't a good 3D card. But apparently it seems to be quite a good HTPC card:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5969/z...gt-640-review-

So yeah, I wouldn't suggest this card on anybody wanting a cheap 3D card. But if you're going to use it for other things...

[UniversalTruth]

Not like, HQV 2.0 score of 178 out of 210 is really underwhelming. Speaking of which... when will they offer a card with 200-210 score?

But if you're going to use it for other things...

Surely, Radeon HD7750 is your choice. It destroys it in absolutely everything, just look at compute too.

[Blazkowicz]

it may be sucky because of internal competition, they have to sell their Fermi card before 28nm production ramps up.
they have announced a card with four GPUs, that is like four gt640 with 4GB ddr3 each on a single card, for the thin client market : another reason to have that poor gk107 with ddr3 in the arena, for some limited marketing reason, though a not very good one.

on the mac book pro, they do pair gk107 with gddr5. I'm sure desktop cards will follow up, hopefullly 1GB gddr5 models at $110. then to pick up such a card and overclock it a bit is reasonable. it may still lose to AMD by some percentage but who care, you can buy it for the drivers and software support.

[xDxD]

http://translate.google.it/translate...unklar&act=url

[Dr Evil]

Originally Posted by xDxD

http://translate.google.it/translate...unklar&act=url

I think that makes sense. A top model GTX 660 ti with further disabled GK104 chip is imo what they need to have out there and it should be doable. Otherwise the gap between GTX670 and GK106 would be too large.