nvidia GT 650m vs GTX 670m

[ahnman341]

thanks so much for all the responses. I'm gonna be ordering a laptop by may 1 regardless. hopefully the 7970M comes out by then. otherwise, i'm gonna end up with a 670M. thanks for all the clarifications.

[saincteye]

hmmm .... come to think of it .... I really wonder how will the 660m end up compare to 670m and 675m since those 2 are rebadged 570m and 580m .
according to Notebookcheck

660m = 28nm , 384 unified , 128 bit GDDR5. Core @ 835, Memory @ 2000, shader @ 835
670m = 40nm , 336 unified , 192 bit GDDR5. slowest core speed (598mhz) memory speed same as 675m @ 1500 , shader @ 1196 mhz.
675m = 40nm, 384 unified , 256 bit GDDR5. Core @ 620 mhz , memory @1500, shader @ 1240

Now as we all know that 28nm compare to 40nm is lower power draw resulting in lower temp . But question is since 660m have the same unified (shader/cores) as the 675m so their processing power shall be really close not considering the bus bandwidth and shader speed , right ? And now the memory speed is up from 1.5K to 2K so memory shall be faster . Now the question is will the 192 bit bandwidth save the 670m considering a less shader slower core speed slower memory speed and a bigger die . 660m @ 28nm shall have a bigger potential to shader overclock (maybe not as much as 1196) than a 670m @ 40nm ?

but then again ..I guess we really will have to wait for real world result . I am waiting for the Lenovo Y480 with 660m see how that comes out . Looking at clevo P151EM1 with 670m right now . But considering Y480 @ 14" with a 1366x768 and P151 @ 1920x1080 , I guess the 660m will shine really well .

[thomasw333]

I know xotic says that the sager np6165 has two hdd bays, but i dont think that is right, it is an update to the 5165 and that one only has on hdd bay. Also looking at the 9130, you get, msata slot, and a built in subwoofer. I would wait until ivy bridge, and get the 9130, it is much more of a gaming laptop over the 6165.

[gavinh]

Can't the 9130 be converted to hold two harddrives with a caddy for the optical bay anywaY?

[TwinTurbo]

if you are a hardcore gamer you will not want old gen technology rebadged and wait for something like the 7950m or 7970m or gtx680m which will take less power consumption and mae the gtx670m look like a basic card.

Its like saying to someone what would you prefer a 2.4ghz 65nm core 2 duo with 90nm high end graphics or a 3ghz 45nm core 2 duo with 65nm midrange graphics. Now the mid range would easily be better as it will have a higher Overclock possibility and draw less power power consumption.

Put it this way I would expect the gtx660m to smoke the gtx670m once overclocked as the gtx660m would overclock so much more. I have no idea why people want to get power hungry old gen cards when new gen cards are coming in a month. I don't care if a 670m beats a 660m easily.

At the end of the say if you like a car that does 0-100 in lets say 10 seconds and does 40mpg = gtx670m vs a car that does 0-100 in lets say 11.5 seconds and does 80mpg and you can add tune it like overclocking graphics card and have head room to make it go 50% faster gtx660m vs the gtx 670m which has not much head room as it is already at its peak with lets say care wise stage 4 turbo.

My point is who cares if the gtx670m is faster after all it is basically 2 and a half year technology. You might as well buy a gtx 480m afterall you won't notice any difference really. By the way a gtx 660m beats a gtx 480m on 3dmark11 and the gt 650m is about equal to a gtx480m and these 65/60m cards only take 35-45w.

This is the worst analogy I've ever heard, and your post makes zero sense. I'd rather drive a 2004 E46 M3 than a 2012 Prius, even though the Prius has "newer technology." Why? The ///M has more power and will be more fun, technology be damned.

[TwinTurbo]

Lower power consumption, under load, has to be the most overrated stat being tossed around.

If both systems use Optimus, load draw matters why? Don't say lower temps. edit: Smaller PSU is something I'll grant as a definite positive.

I couldn't agree more.

[Meaker]

Same heatsink: Lower fan noise
Different heatsink: Lower weight

Kepler shaders run at core speed, so you need twice as many at the same speed (not counting arch improvements).

[Cloudfire]

660m = 28nm , 384 unified , 128 bit GDDR5. Core @ 835, Memory @ 2000, shader @ 835
670m = 40nm , 336 unified , 192 bit GDDR5. slowest core speed (598mhz) memory speed same as 675m @ 1500 , shader @ 1196 mhz.
675m = 40nm, 384 unified , 256 bit GDDR5. Core @ 620 mhz , memory @1500, shader @ 1240
.

Kepler cores are weaker than Fermi cores!

I made a math comparison earlier and I belive I found out that 1 Kepler core = 42% Fermi core.
Look at the official specs @ nvidia. There you can see that 670M cores do a Texture fill rate of 33.5 billion/second while 660M with Kepler cores can do 30.4 billion/second. Even though there are more cores in 660M and they are clocked higher. Plus the memory bandwidth of 670M is 72GB/s while 660M is 64GB/s. The difference between 660M and 675M is even bigger. So yeah, 660M does not compete with any of these GPUs

[Meaker]

Well the 680 has a 50% effective shader advantage.

It then has a 25% clock advantage.

This translates into a 50% performance increase.

The 660M has an effective disadvantage of 43%, but it has a 40% clock advantage.

Using this very loose logic you would assume a stock difference of around 30% between the two in favour of the 670m.

However it does point to the 660M using about half the power of the 670M. TDP of 50W perhaps, but real around 45W.

You could technically see a 660M and quad ivy using a 90W adaptor. More likely to ship with a 120W but still.

[KernalPanic]

if you are a hardcore gamer you will not want old gen technology rebadged and wait for something like the 7950m or 7970m or gtx680m which will take less power consumption and mae the gtx670m look like a basic card.

Its like saying to someone what would you prefer a 2.4ghz 65nm core 2 duo with 90nm high end graphics or a 3ghz 45nm core 2 duo with 65nm midrange graphics. Now the mid range would easily be better as it will have a higher Overclock possibility and draw less power power consumption.

Put it this way I would expect the gtx660m to smoke the gtx670m once overclocked as the gtx660m would overclock so much more. I have no idea why people want to get power hungry old gen cards when new gen cards are coming in a month. I don't care if a 670m beats a 660m easily.

At the end of the say if you like a car that does 0-100 in lets say 10 seconds and does 40mpg = gtx670m vs a car that does 0-100 in lets say 11.5 seconds and does 80mpg and you can add tune it like overclocking graphics card and have head room to make it go 50% faster gtx660m vs the gtx 670m which has not much head room as it is already at its peak with lets say care wise stage 4 turbo.

My point is who cares if the gtx670m is faster after all it is basically 2 and a half year technology. You might as well buy a gtx 480m afterall you won't notice any difference really. By the way a gtx 660m beats a gtx 480m on 3dmark11 and the gt 650m is about equal to a gtx480m and these 65/60m cards only take 35-45w.

Can we keep it real please?
Your comparisons are extreme and frankly not applicable.
The real reason to pick either a GPU or a car is NOT because its newer, but because of what it can do.

The 660m and 670m are aimed at two different markets.
A hardcore gamer (with sufficient funds) is not going to choose a 660m as its aimed at a balance of power consumption, price, and potency. The 670m sacrifices power consumption, and gets decent performance/price.

The use for a laptop with an enthusiast-class mobile GPU is usually:
1) gaming while plugged in - the primary concern is performance, of which the 670m wins...
2) battery life while not plugged in - the primary concern is power draw, but since its likely optimus, it isn't that big of a deal. Both the 660m and 670m will be turned off while the Intel integrated GPU handles the video.

The 660m will likely overclock, but once again, it will be hard pressed to reach the 670m.

Where the 660m will shine is in balanced value-priced laptops and lighter and thinner laptops focused on mobility. (and just how much gaming you can do on it...)

The 660m will also find a market in those people (like me) who have moved their gaming to the desktop, (where the real hardcore gamers are honestly) but still want to have their laptops perform well without having to deplete their "new desktop GPU" fund.