Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£20VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):170 W

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670
4.2/10

Overall score

Score
4.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

90%

3.8

Technical score

10%

7.8

User score

â–¼Worse than 95% of graphics cards
5.9

Value for money

Value for money
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

4.2

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 93%
3.8

Technical score

Technical score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

44%

1.8

Performance

24%

3.2

Memory

12%

7.3

Power & Cooling

11%

5.9

Platform & Features

5%

8.6

Design

4%

6.7

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 95%
7.8

User score

User score
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

7.8

User ratings

30%

7.7

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
â–¼Worse than 86%
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-670
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-670
nvidia-geforce-gtx-670
nvidia-geforce-gtx-670
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670

Technical score
Technical score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

44%

1.8

Performance

24%

3.2

Memory

12%

7.3

Power & Cooling

11%

5.9

Platform & Features

5%

8.6

Design

4%

6.7

Connectivity & Media

3.8
User score
User score
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

7.8

User ratings

30%

7.7

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
7.8
Popularity
Popularity
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Popularity:
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 has a popularity score of 7.7 points, which is higher than that of 71.7% of products in this category.
7.7
Value for money
Value for money
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

70%

4.2

Overall score

30%

10

Price

5.9
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
2,200 points
This graphics card scores 2,200 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 95.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to 16.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
5,366 points
This graphics card scores 5,366 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 93.3% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,373 points
This graphics card scores 2,373 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 93.9% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
2.63 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 2.63 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 93.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
2 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.5% of graphics cards and equal to 3.8% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
GDDR version
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.9% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 49.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.9% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
192.2 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 192.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 86.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.7% of graphics cards and equal to 20.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 23.4% of graphics cards and equal to 76.6% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 95.1% of graphics cards and equal to 3.7% of graphics cards.
vendor-name or prompt-tail contamination removed; Vulkan version unresolved.
OpenGL version
4.3
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.3, which is older than on 99.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 8.3% of graphics cards and equal to 88.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
4096x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096x2160, which is lower than that of 92.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.4% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.7% of graphics cards and equal to 8.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
5.4 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.8% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
170 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 170 W, which is lower than that of 63.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.9% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
170 W
This graphics card draws 170 W under peak load, which is lower than 66.4% of graphics cards and equal to 1.6% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
194 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 194 W, which is lower than that of 58.7% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
170 W
Show more
Size
241x 111x 38 mm
Length
241 mm
This graphics card is 241 mm long, which is shorter than 75% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Height
111.15 mm
This graphics card is 111.15 mm tall, which is shorter than 80.9% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2.5% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 53.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 42.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,360 g
This graphics card weighs 1,360 g, which is heavier than 67.2% of graphics cards and equal in weight to 0.7% of graphics cards.
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 44 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    241 mm vs 285 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 3 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    3 vs 0
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 26.5x cheaper
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£20 vs £530).
    £20 vs £530
  • 20.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (170 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    170 W vs 215 W
  • 26.5x cheaper
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£20 vs £530).
    £20 vs £530
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:24 vs 1:64).
    1:24 vs 1:64
  • 3 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    3 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 20.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (170 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    170 W vs 215 W
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 44 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    241 mm vs 285 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 60.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (980 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    980 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • 33 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (7 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    7 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 52.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (915 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    915 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 73.2% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (102 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    102 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 21.3% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.93 vs 7.2).
    5.93 vs 7.2
  • 2.8% lower user score
    User score
    7.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
    When it matters
    When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
    Score distribution
    ▼▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670
    the average graphics card
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 has a lower user score than the average graphics card (7.79 vs 8.000).
    7.79 vs 8
  • 60.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (980 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    980 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 33 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (7 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    7 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 52.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (915 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    915 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 73.2% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (102 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    102 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 83.2% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (27.4 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    27.44 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 72 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (112 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    112 vs 184
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 88.3% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (2.6 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    2.63 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 76.3% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (5366 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    5,366 points vs 22,653 points
  • 85% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2200 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    2,200 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 80.3% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2373 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    2,373 points vs 12,074 points
  • 88.6% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (2.6 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    2.63 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 77.1% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.11 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 3,008 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,344 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,344 vs 4,352
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 68.4% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (6008 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    6,008 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 57.1% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (192.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    192.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 87.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
    16 vs 128
  • 14.2% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1502 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    1,502 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • No FSR support
    This graphics card does not support FSR, the average graphics card does.
  • 11 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2012 vs 2023).
    May 2012
    2,012 vs 2,023
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3.0 vs 4.0
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (2 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    2 vs 8
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
    vendor-name or prompt-tail contamination removed; Vulkan version unresolved.
    1.2 vs 1.4
  • Worse SAM support
    This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 3).
    1.2 vs 3.0
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.5 vs 6.8).
    6.5 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • Older OpenGL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenGL version than the average graphics card (4.3 vs 4.6).
    4.3 vs 4.6
  • 84.5% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (3540 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    3,540 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1.0 vs 3.1
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1).
    1.4a vs 2.1
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/MPEG-2/VC-1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/MPEG-2/VC-1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (4096x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    4096x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
    No vs yes
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 73% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 20 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • 15 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (82 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    82 °C vs 67 °C
  • 7.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (43 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    43 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 24 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (24 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    24 dB vs 0 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

T
techpowerup.com
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
T
tomshardware.com
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
G
guru3d.com
09/05/2012
Summary of the review
W
wsgf.org
13/09/2012
Summary of the review
O
overclockers.com
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
D
digitalfoundry.net
16/08/2012
Summary of the review
T
techpowerup.com
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
P
pcmag.com
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
T
tomshardware.com
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
H
hardwareluxx.de
11/06/2012
Summary of the review
T
tweakpc.de
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
L
lesnumeriques.com
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
C
clubic.com
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
H
hardware.fr
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
P
profesionalreview.com
19/05/2012
Summary of the review
H
hwupgrade.it
29/05/2012
Summary of the review
T
tomshw.it
10/05/2012
Summary of the review
T
tweakers.net
10/05/2012
Summary of the review

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio, offering nearly identical performance to the more expensive GTX 680
  • Power efficiency is high for its era, with a typical gaming power draw of approximately 150W
  • Compact PCB design (7 inches) allows for installation in smaller cases
  • Quiet and cool operation compared to contemporary competitors like the Radeon HD 7970
  • Strong overclocking headroom, often allowing it to match or exceed stock flagship performance

What we don't like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670

  • Limited 2GB VRAM is insufficient for modern AAA titles, causing major performance issues at resolutions above 720p
  • Lacks hardware support for modern APIs like DirectX 12 (full support) and Vulkan, preventing some newer games from launching
  • Reference cooler quality and noise levels can be inconsistent, with some units exhibiting buzzing or ticking
  • Legacy driver support ended around mid-2024, limiting future compatibility
  • High idle power consumption (14W) because it lacks advanced power-saving features like AMD's ZeroCore

Verdict

The Nvidia GeForce GTX 670 is a high-end graphics card based on the 28nm Kepler architecture (GK104), featuring 1,344 CUDA cores, 2GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, and a base clock speed of 915 MHz that boosts up to 980 MHz. Its main pros include exceptional power efficiency with a TDP of 170W, strong price-to-performance value compared to its predecessor, and support for technologies like GPU Boost, Adaptive V-Sync, and up to four simultaneous displays. However, its primary cons are its limited 2GB VRAM buffer which can struggle with modern high-resolution textures, its lack of full DirectX 12 hardware feature support, and a reference cooling design that can become noisy under heavy loads.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found