• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Why no 6980?

stulid said:
haha. nice one.

a 6950 never gets close to a GTX570 too many fanatics in this forum.
Click to expand...

Sigh http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/293?vs=306

Should I highlight where the 6950 is ahead of the 570 or will you choose to ignore that too? :) "Never gets close" ... evidence suggests that is also not true.

Not a fanatic by a long shot but let's keep it real for those that may be thinking of purchasing a new card, eh? ;)
 
Last edited:
burrell said:
Well they are...

If you've got less that £100 to spend then you don't count, if you've got £150 then a GTX 460 is the best card, £200 - the GTX 560 £300 - GTX 570, £400 - GTX 580
Click to expand...

The cheapest GTX570 i see on overclockers is £285, the cheapest 6950 on overclockers is £210 (or £215 normally). If you consider the fact that most 6950s will run at 6970 speeds, your paying roughly £75 less for a card that if flashed / unlocked, runs pretty much the same. Some games the 6970 wins some the GTX 570.

Also, 2x 6950's cost £420 - £430. A GTX 580 costs £375. If you compare the performance of the two, http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/299?vs=305, then to be honest the 6950 crossfire is spanking the GTX 580 for only £50 more. Then you can even add in flashing to 6970's. Fanboys are annoying.
 
Last edited:
6970 was made with the intention of putting two chips on a single card. They haven't shown any intention to produce the fastest single GPU card because producing bigger less cost effective chips and cutting them down/suffer lower yields is much less profit then producing competitive chips at competitive prices with loads of units shipped.
 
No dirty nvidia cards for me, but I will admit I am biased against nvidia ( different to biased for ATI )

Even if I wasn't, 2x 6950 really do spank the 580
 
Stulid I was actually talking about the power consumption, where the 6950 is lower at load and thus better...

I understand why you would want to defend your purchase, as I probably go on about m phantom the same way :)

Nothing I said was meant as a personal attack to you, the trolling comment was actually aimed at the person who said complete bs ;)

I just think this forum needs to calm down some :)

Oh and I'm doing a degree in maths, so I'm pretty sure I can count, if only in letters... I swear high end maths doesn't use numbers anymore :(
 
Last edited:
Its pretty obvious why amd don't compete with nv for the single gpu crown and it was called the 2900xt. After the complete failure of the 2900xt amd decided that they would produce smaller gpu's and use 2 of them to take the top end performance crown which they have done every series since the 3 series. It seems to be getting harder for nv to produce a dual gpu card with there gpu's getting bigger and more power hungry so imo amd are competing very well and it shows in the dramatic market share turn from nv to amd.

Amd could easily compete with a gtx580 if they wanted to as they have plenty of space left on there die to add in more shaders but as they seem to have a winning strategy atm i don't know why they would want to.
 
Last edited:
TheRealDeal said:
Its pretty obvious why amd don't compete with nv for the single gpu crown and it was called the 2900xt. After the complete failure of the 2900xt amd decided that they would produce smaller gpu's and use 2 of them to take the top end performance crown which they have done every series since the 3 series. It seems to be getting harder for nv to produce a dual gpu card with there gpu's getting bigger and more power hungry so imo amd are competing very well and it shows in the dramatic market share turn from nv to amd.

Amd could easily compete with a gtx580 if they wanted to as they have plenty of space left on there die to add in more shaders but as they seem to have a winning strategy atm i don't know why they would want to.
Click to expand...

Did the 4870X2 beat the GTX295 ?

I seemed to remember that a friends GTX295 beat my 4870X2 in most things, but saying that it could be my memory :eek:
 
Stanners said:
Did the 4870X2 beat the GTX295 ?

I seemed to remember that a friends GTX295 beat my 4870X2 in most things, but saying that it could be my memory :eek:
Click to expand...

The 4870x2 was released 5 months before the gtx295 but yea the gtx295 was the faster card and it had to be as releasing a slower card 5 months after amds dual card would be pointless. Amd probably had the option though to release a 4890x2 but as the gtx295 was much more expensive and not that much faster they never bothered.
 
TheRealDeal said:
The 4870x2 was released 5 months before the gtx295 but yea the gtx295 was the faster card and it had to be as releasing a slower card 5 months after amds dual card would be pointless. Amd probably had the option though to release a 4890x2 but as the gtx295 was much more expensive and not that much faster they never bothered.
Click to expand...

I am not going mad then, thats more of a relief :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom