GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 780 vs 680

Gaming

Real world tests using the latest 3D games

crysis: warhead (2013), battlefield 3 (2013) and Far Cry 3

Benchmarks

Synthetic tests to measure overall performance

Passmark, 3DMark Vantage Texture Fill, 3DMark 11 Graphics and 2 more

Compute Performance

General computing tests executed on the GPU

Civilization 5 Texture Decomposition (2013), Passmark Direct Compute and 1 more

Noise and Power

How loud and hot does the card run idle and under load

TDP, Idle Noise Level, Load Noise Level, Idle Power Consumption and 1 more

GPUBoss Score

Gaming, Benchmarks, Compute Performance and Noise and Power

Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 780  based on its noise and power.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of GeForce GTX 780

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780

Report a correction
Better passmark score 8,044 vs 5,712 More than 40% better passmark score
Better 3DMark vantage texture fill score 147 vs 106.1 Around 40% better 3DMark vantage texture fill score
Much more energy-efficient idle power consumption 62W vs 112W Around 45% more energy-efficient idle power consumption
Better 3DMark vantage graphics score 42,870 vs 33,025 Around 30% better 3DMark vantage graphics score
More memory 3,072 MB vs 2,048 MB 50% more memory
Better 3DMark06 score 35,080 vs 26,525.5 More than 30% better 3DMark06 score
Better 3DMark 11 graphics score 14,020 vs 9,861 More than 40% better 3DMark 11 graphics score
Higher memory bandwidth 288.4 GB/s vs 192.3 GB/s Around 50% higher memory bandwidth
Significantly more energy-efficient load power consumption 250W vs 356W Around 30% more energy-efficient load power consumption
Better floating-point performance 3,977 GFLOPS vs 3,090 GFLOPS Around 30% better floating-point performance
Higher texture rate 166.4 GTexel/s vs 128.8 GTexel/s Around 30% higher texture rate
Higher pixel rate 41.4 GPixel/s vs 32.2 GPixel/s Around 30% higher pixel rate
More render output processors 48 vs 32 16 more render output processors
More texture mapping units 192 vs 128 64 more texture mapping units
Quieter load noise level 48.1 dB vs 51.9 dB More than 5% quieter load noise level
More shading units 2,304 vs 1,536 768 more shading units
Significantly higher BioShock infinite framerate 95.3 fps vs 64.7 fps More than 45% higher BioShock infinite framerate
Higher far cry 3 framerate 58.6 fps vs 44.7 fps More than 30% higher far cry 3 framerate
Better passmark direct compute score 4,112 vs 2,927 More than 40% better passmark direct compute score
Higher crysis: warhead framerate 71.4 fps vs 53.5 fps Around 35% higher crysis: warhead framerate
Better CLBenchmark raytrace score 252,908 vs 176,118 Around 45% better CLBenchmark raytrace score
Wider memory bus 384 bit vs 256 bit 50% wider memory bus
Higher battlefield 3 framerate 141 fps vs 119.6 fps Around 20% higher battlefield 3 framerate
Significantly more SMX units 13 vs 8 5 more SMX units
Front view of GeForce GTX 680

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 680

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 1,006 MHz vs 863 MHz More than 15% higher clock speed
Significantly higher turbo clock speed 1,058 MHz vs 902 MHz More than 15% higher turbo clock speed
Lower TDP 195W vs 250W More than 20% lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 780 vs 680

Passmark Industry standard benchmark for overall graphics card performance

Further, 3DMark11 does not seem a good choice either, as it let me run much higher clocks than were stable in other tests.
GeForce GTX 680 | by techPowerUp! (Mar, 2012)

3DMark Vantage (Texture Fill) Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX performance

3DMark 11 Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 11 GPU performance

Crysis: Warhead (2013) 1920x1080 - Enthusiast Quality + 4xAA

GeForce GTX 780
71.4 fps
GeForce GTX 680
53.5 fps
Unfortunately, it leaves a less than satisfactory impression, which makes it a candidate that surpasses Crysis for highest hardware requirements.
GeForce GTX 780 | by techPowerUp!

Far Cry 3 1920 x 1080 - Ultra Quality + 4x MSAA + Enh. AtoC

GeForce GTX 780
58.6 fps
GeForce GTX 680
44.7 fps
It's with the triple-monitor 5760x1080 (3D Vision Surround), where the GTX 780 SLI really shines, as the second card provides a performance cushion that doesn't allow frame-rates to drop below playable levels on some of the more visually intense titles, such as Crysis 3, Battlefield 3, etc..
GeForce GTX 780 | by techPowerUp!

BioShock Infinite 1920 x 1080 - Ultra preset + DX11 (DDOF)

GeForce GTX 780
95.3 fps
GeForce GTX 680
64.7 fps

Reviews Word on the street

GeForce GTX 780  vs 680 

9.3
9.5
This configuration is good for up to 375 W of power draw.
GeForce GTX 680

Read more

Comments

Showing 14 comments.
MSI GTX 780 is only $479 now, and a Zotac GTX 680 SLI would cost around $770. Still the card hasn't went down enough even though it's way out-performed by a 1v1 match with the 780.
Then explain it to us, why Crysis Warhead: 2013... 2013???
it doesnt work for all. but it works for me :)
@Cam: Some applications, like Photoshop, don't benefit from SLI-configured video cards.
Yes, however, some OEM's like EVGA have a promotion to upgrade if you've purchased a 6xx series in the last 90 days. 70 bucks to upgrade to a 780 is a steal. Plus because of power consumption, and issues with SLI a single graphics card will always be better. There are situations of course like yours where it is cheaper to add an additional 680, but it isn't always that simple.
Then you also have to account for a larger power supple, higher energy costs, higher cost of upgrading in the future, etc etc. For that matter, you yourself wasted money getting two 680s already. The smart move would have been to get ONE nice 680 (like a DC2 TOP) and then get a second in 6-12 months when you need the extra performance, when prices will also be a lot lower
Nearly the same situation here and I'd like to know as well. I'm running 5760x1080 using a 670 FTW+ that I've OC'd as well.
my gtx 680 Superclocked x2 SLI destroys a 780 LOL. thing is you can get 2 GTX 680 for around $350-$400 each and the cost of a GTX 780 is roughly $750-$800. I am seeing close to 1.5 x the performance of a GTX 780. So for those of you who want to upgrade their 680 for 780... DONT! buy another GTX 680 and SLI them for half the cost with a lot more speed. I can play Tomb Raider with all the settins mexed as high as they go and get approx. 200 max FPS and approx. 150 average FPS. 1 GTX 780 cant do that...
Oh, my bad D:. I just thought they would make it so all the FPS games are on their game with the number 3. As in Far cry 3, Battlefield 3, and (thought to be) crysis 3. But i see now.
Hey Mystic, it's Crysis: Warhead. We use anandtech as a source for this particular gaming benchmark and that's one of their tests.
They mean Crysis 3, not Crysis: Warhead, right?
Would I see an in increase in performance in any and every game if I upgrade my 680 Classified to this 780? Will less memory make any difference in the near future (1-2 years)? I can take advantage of the step-up program to get one for $70 but the 680 does have a higher stock clock speed and more memory.
Thinking of upgrading my 680 but i guess its not worth it right now, probably need to wait another year.
Ehh.. I will wait around for Maxwell wanna see what a dedi arm processor adds to the mix for satisfied with the 670 i have
comments powered by Disqus