6950/560ti - two cards enter, only one can leave!

gettothechopper · 23 Jun 2011 at 15:15

ok new graphics card time - keep going in circles over green vs red

Asus ATI Radeon HD 6950 1GB £174
Asus GeForce GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1024MB £174

Coming from a GTX260
Power supply is a silverstone 500w
gaming at 1920x1080
not worried about phyx or eyefinity or 3d
sli / crossfire not an option in the near future

mostly playing bad company 2, arma II

guess FPS is the main thing I care about - only other thing is that my
case doesnt have superamazing ventilation so the cooler running of the two could help as well

should set up some ITV premium rate phone vote numbers for this maybe?

TheFool · 23 Jun 2011 at 15:23

I'd get the 560 ti, either the asus or the MSI twin frozr ii.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/331?vs=330

They perform virtually the same with the 560 running quiter and cooler (just) but with slightly more power draw.

Or you could stretch to £199 and get the 2gb version of the 6950.

Number_25 · 23 Jun 2011 at 15:28

The 560ti is slightly faster if I am correct?

gettothechopper · 23 Jun 2011 at 16:05

first card to 5 recommendations wins!

nvidia winning at 2 - 0 so far!

danyulland · 23 Jun 2011 at 16:11

6950 - ive had both, had some bad experiences with the 560Ti and now very happy i RMA'd and got a 6950 instead.

xsistor · 23 Jun 2011 at 16:16

But then, getting a faulty 560Ti that you had to RMA and then basing your assessment on that makes your assessment invalid: of course if you were unlucky enough to get a bad card you will have a low opinion of it.
Surely I don't think you're suggesting that RMA'd cards are the yardstick by which to measure a graphics card.

A more useful opinion for the OP would come from someone who used proper versions of both cards and then preferred one over the other.

Helios1234 · 23 Jun 2011 at 16:30

GTX560Ti is better.

Cleeecooo · 23 Jun 2011 at 16:31

The 560ti is slightly faster.
I would get the MSI twon frozr 560ti as Asus have crappy CS.

arc@css · 23 Jun 2011 at 16:33

560ti, by either Gainward, Gigabyte or MSI.

harmony · 23 Jun 2011 at 16:35

Not going to the 2GB version of 6950 for merely £20 is unwise. It's just because both cards you listed are 1GB cards (which I have been trying to get rid of since last year), in such case I'd say go for the GTX560 Ti.

Jay85 · 23 Jun 2011 at 17:36

Neither, wait for the 7 series cards which isn't too far away now.

Scon · 23 Jun 2011 at 17:37

Jay85 said:
Neither, wait for the 7 series cards which isn't too far away now.

I'm sure that's what they said about bulldozer 6 months ago.....

Mojo · 23 Jun 2011 at 17:39

as was said above, spend a little extra and get the 2gb 6950. Otherwise, get the 560ti, and hope that coming releases don't use more than 1gb of Vram at max graphics (which they almost certainly will)

Xelene · 23 Jun 2011 at 18:07

6950 2GB->560 ti 1GB->6950 1GB

FrenchTart · 23 Jun 2011 at 18:08

burrell said:
I'm sure that's what they said about bulldozer 6 months ago.....

CPU delays != GPU delays

*hopefully stating the obvious...*

daveash · 23 Jun 2011 at 18:12

560ti, they overclock like a beast.

tommybhoy · 23 Jun 2011 at 18:49

harmony said:
Not going to the 2GB version of 6950 for merely £20 is unwise.

That extra vram will probably come in handy for DX 11 games especially BF3 which is an Amd 'Gaming Evolved' title so it may possibly run better on Amd hardware on release.

Jay85 said:
Neither, wait for the 7 series cards which isn't too far away now.

Probably 5-6 months to go, but why not wait for the next or the next refresh.... vicious circle!

sldsmkd said:
6950 2GB->560 ti 1GB->6950 1GB

Really sums it up.

My tuppence worth from another thread:

tommybhoy said:
Imo you must be bonkers picking a 1GB over a 2Gb card, if the 560 had 2GB then it would be a harder choice. There are more games(slowly but surely) getting released using DX11 which can be memory intensive.

You can add more IQ in the control panel which can give current/older games a better look and the extra vram gives more headroom when applying higher AA/AF levels.

The choice is yours though, both are great cards it's just the 2Gb 6950 is better than the rest for slightly more money!

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 23 Jun 2011 at 19:04

An HD6950 is around 5% to 10% faster than a GTX560TI when both are compared at stock speeds. The HD6950 GPU runs at 800MHZ and the GTX560TI GPU at 822MHZ. One of the GTX560TI cards pre-overclocked to around 900MHZ for the GPU should have similar performance AFAIK.

danyulland · 23 Jun 2011 at 22:22

xsistor said:
But then, getting a faulty 560Ti that you had to RMA and then basing your assessment on that makes your assessment invalid: of course if you were unlucky enough to get a bad card you will have a low opinion of it.
Surely I don't think you're suggesting that RMA'd cards are the yardstick by which to measure a graphics card.

A more useful opinion for the OP would come from someone who used proper versions of both cards and then preferred one over the other.

I wasn't giving an 'assessment' i was giving an opinion - my opinion, so please get off your high horse.

For the OP:- the card was a Gigabyte OC version (900mhz core). It wasn't stable at the rated speeds, although if downclocked to stock it would work OK(no artifacts or game crashing). However even at stock speeds it just didnt give me a smooth gaming experience. Lots of juddering in game play, i felt as though it was being pushed to its limits all the time even when downclocked - its a difficult one to describe but its ultimately what made me RMA it in the end. I've been a Nvidia fan for many years after having problems with 4890's a few years ago.

As soon as i started playing games on the 6950 it was a different experience completely and what i as expecting from an upgrade, stable game play, good frame rates. Great card btw very chuffed with it, great build quality, very cool, very quiet.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-128-MS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1752

Perhaps the 560 i bought had an underlying issues with it but.... i don't know.

All i can do is recommend a card that i own and am very happy with.

tommybhoy · 23 Jun 2011 at 22:59

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
An HD6950 is around 5% to 10% faster than a GTX560TI when both are compared at stock speeds. The HD6950 GPU runs at 800MHZ and the GTX560TI GPU at 822MHZ. One of the GTX560TI cards pre-overclocked to around 900MHZ for the GPU should have similar performance AFAIK.

The 6950 also has ample overclocking headroom too:

danyulland said:
However even at stock speeds it just didnt give me a smooth gaming experience. Lots of juddering in game play, i felt as though it was being pushed to its limits all the time even when downclocked - its a difficult one to describe but its ultimately what made me RMA it in the end. I've been a Nvidia fan for many years after having problems with 4890's a few years ago.

As soon as i started playing games on the 6950 it was a different experience completely and what i as expecting from an upgrade, stable game play, good frame rates. Great card btw very chuffed with it, great build quality, very cool, very quiet.

My brother bought a 560 over a 6950 due to Custom PC(he was a diehard) saying that it was better than the 6950. He loves playing Dragon Age and when DA II came out, it ran like a dog on Nvidia, so I offered him a go of one of my 6950's to try it in his rig. He said the same thing about having a better all round experience with the games he plays on the 6950 and now has one after selling on the 560.

Incidentally he wasn't happy with CPC and had a go at them in their forum(who had a go back and called him a fanboi :eek:

but then apologised to him) for being biased.