Tuesday, May 14th 2013
GeForce GTX 680 Can Be Flashed to GTX 770?
No you can't, but read on. When we learned that NVIDIA's upcoming GeForce GTX 770 uses a GPU not unlike the GeForce GTX 680 in specifications, we overlooked one possibility, that it uses the same exact chip, the GK104. We assumed that NVIDIA could release a new ASIC codenamed "GK114" or "GK204," which features higher energy-efficiency, and GPU Boost 2.0.
A Reddit user claims that a simple BIOS flash of the GeForce GTX 680 could turn it into a GeForce GTX 770. The BIOS ROM image, which probably works with reference-design GTX 680 boards was posted, along with a GPU-Z screenshot of a "GeForce GTX 770" obtained this way. The BIOS runs the card at 1059 MHz core, 1125 MHz maximum GPU Boost, and 1752 MHz (7.00 GHz GDDR5-effective) memory, yielding a memory bandwidth of 224 GB/s. The BIOS file can be found here (try it at your own risk). We tested the BIOS with some of our own GTX 680 cards, and found it to be nothing more than a modified GTX 680 BIOS (for increased clocks) with a modified driver INF file that makes the GeForce driver display a different model name. The BIOS just has made-up clock speeds that could run on some GTX 680 cards, but could be unstable on most.
We created four additional GPU-Z screenshots to serve as evidence that just by modifying the INF file, you can make the card appear as anything you want. The string from the INF file is used in Windows for display purposes only; the graphics driver does not use it for anything else; certainly not feature detection.
When your GTX 680 manages to be stable with the new BIOS, the higher clock speeds obviously work to get you that 5-7 percent performance increment. Third-rate companies often get away selling rebranded fake graphics cards in developing markets using this method. For example, they buy cheap GeForce 210 cards and sell them as GT 630 for twice the money. Even between officially rebranded NVIDIA graphics cards (such as GeForce 8800 GT to 9800 GT), the device ID is changed, so there's no reason why NVIDIA won't do the same with the GTX 770. In conclusion, this "GTX 770" mod is nothing more than a combination of a custom GTX 680 BIOS that adds higher clock speeds, and a custom INF file that changes the card's name string.
A Reddit user claims that a simple BIOS flash of the GeForce GTX 680 could turn it into a GeForce GTX 770. The BIOS ROM image, which probably works with reference-design GTX 680 boards was posted, along with a GPU-Z screenshot of a "GeForce GTX 770" obtained this way. The BIOS runs the card at 1059 MHz core, 1125 MHz maximum GPU Boost, and 1752 MHz (7.00 GHz GDDR5-effective) memory, yielding a memory bandwidth of 224 GB/s. The BIOS file can be found here (try it at your own risk). We tested the BIOS with some of our own GTX 680 cards, and found it to be nothing more than a modified GTX 680 BIOS (for increased clocks) with a modified driver INF file that makes the GeForce driver display a different model name. The BIOS just has made-up clock speeds that could run on some GTX 680 cards, but could be unstable on most.
We created four additional GPU-Z screenshots to serve as evidence that just by modifying the INF file, you can make the card appear as anything you want. The string from the INF file is used in Windows for display purposes only; the graphics driver does not use it for anything else; certainly not feature detection.
84 Comments on GeForce GTX 680 Can Be Flashed to GTX 770?
I'm not vouching for Nvidia or anything, just pointing out the fact that this is all bogus, and for now it's just speculation, so blaming them isn't fair.
But it was just a suggestion, and there's probably no point in bringing this up anymore as this was posted yesterday, so it's better to move on :)
But what is this 'fair' you talk of?
Maybe if you showed me where it exists I would understand better.
[/OT]
In fact, you could argue that the GTX 770/760Ti and todays "announcement" of the HD 8970M aren't that dissimilar...clock boosts of existing silicon touted as a new series.
whereas, SemiAutistic's HD 8970M coveragedoesn't even allude to the fact that the card is a rebranded Pitcairn based HD 7970M. One's the "Fastest Mobile Graphics Card" (presumably the capitalization is for maximum effect), and one's "Same old renaming scam, new silicon my *ss". And while Chas didn't write both articles, the 8970M fluff piece is on par with the earlier 7970GE piece...and he is the owner of the site.
/waits for inevitable counter-argument that mGPU "doesn't count"
:toast:
dang!
Thanks for clearing the sli lock, it'S just silly as people would buy new cards instead of getting the same card of ebay for sli if you want more performance... the next generation then should be equal to two cards from the old ones!
Bottom line is both companies have nothing new and need to have new sku's to generate interest. Apparently, nVidia didn't think just releasing a Titan Lite would be enough. They wanted something "new" :cough: to compete directly against AMD's current lineup, as well. They could have simply released the new cut down GK110 card and reduced pricing on the 600 series, but renaming them makes them appear as new and improved, and better value to the unwashed masses. It will probably allow them to be sold at higher prices, too. I understand this and it's a smart move. It is annoying though that people are trying to help nVidia's marketing by playing along, when they know better.
@M1dg3t....really. Seems like a case of Pot/Kettle/Black if ever I saw onelower spec & mobile cards ? There is actually a train of thought that goes something along the lines of the higher the market segment price, the more conversant with tech the user is likely to be. It's also generally held to be a truism that lower spec cards have higher sales- both of these factors would point to the rebranding of "lower spec & mobile cards" as carrying a reasonable importance.
As for increasing the price...can you post a link for that? Last time I checked, the GTX 770 (with ~GTX 680+ perf.) was rumoured to be $449, and the GTX 760 Ti (~GTX 670+ perf.) was $299-359 - which actually stacks up pretty well against the outgoing 600 series cards...and fairly reasonable compared to, say the 7970GE launch price of 10% more than the vanilla 7970 for 10% more performance.How so? What I said was:Did Chas actually comment on the 7950 Boost? I don't think so.
Taking the liberty of anticipating your next not-strictly-relevant-tangential-argument... Maybe, you're referring to AMD not making any PR points from introducing the SKU, and just slipping in the firmware with a minimum of fanfare- i.e. no big press release and slide deck presentation:
I don't think that happened either.You know the capabilities of the new cards? - do tell. From my understanding, W1zzard has postulated that the new series would likely be using a revised boost algorithm, and EVGA- usually a staunch adherer to the Nvidia reference design seem totease a marked change to the standard blower-fan. Personally I'd be inclined to wait until the performance is known before casting judgement...but for someone whose likely won't ever buy an Nvidia product (given that your contributions in SA's 7970GE review thread consisted almost entirely of knocking down the GTX 680 and its review numbers) I wonder why you bother.
As far as my post on s/a. If you think it doesn't matter that [H]'s review 680 boosted to 1200-1300 and I've yet to see anyone report a 680 they bought at retail boosted so high, I don't know what to say. I think it's worth noting. Also, nice to see I've got a fan. I'm flattered. Here's something for you to consider. I also have different user names at other forums. :eek:
EVGA Teases ACX Cooler for GeForce GTX 780 and GTX 770Seems to be quite a lot of your posts on the HD 7970 GE review thread - none of which actually address the card being reviewed...but an awful lot concerning Nvidia cards. Some people might deduce a fixation.Simple deduction and a rudimentary Google search. Try it, it's easy: [username] + Nvidia + [negative adjective]Me too. Here's a freebee for you. My name appears on the byline and my username at the end of the article. You'll have to dig a little harder if you're looking for my present SA title though.