Just like your brilliant post here!
What a rubbish website you look at, I only look at reputable etailers.
Last edited:
-
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.
**AMAZING VTX3D 7970 X EDITION DEAL - £359.99 Inc. VAT!!**
- Thread starter Gibbo
- Start date
Just like your brilliant post here!
What a rubbish website you look at, I only look at reputable etailers.
Why go and do something stupid and earn yourself an infraction over a site that is out to con people?
It's a scam site.
Go to the contact details and there are none. No address, no phone number, not even an email address. Just a contact form. Add it to the cart?
The item you specified, , is not eligible to be added to the cart. Check the item's availability to make sure it is available.
Oh look ! they don't have any
So, it's quite simply what is referred to as a Google trap. They list a product for peanuts which gets them to the top of the search engine, yet don't have the product.
IMO this is the one to get now, nice OC, MSI warranty (3years) and a slightly different cooler all be it - it's still reference.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-155-MS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=938
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-155-MS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=938
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 431
Splitting hairs with terminology? They are not terms, they are words that you have no clue how to use. "Similar" is drastically different to "equal". If you can't see that, then that's your problem, not mine. You can claim it's "semantics" but really it's just your misunderstanding of the English language.
Here are some overclocking review results for you then. Here's a hint, the 680 is still faster.
Tweaktown
HardOCP
And FYI, you're the one that reduced this thread to a word slinging match rather than a presentation of the facts. It was a nice attempt to try and turn it around, but you're the one throwing around statements like "kiddo".
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 431
This is hilarious, bravo sir. I think the best one has to be the complaint about "Nvidia 680's dynamic clocks", a stock feature that is on by default. I was going to mention this earlier but it wasn't mentioned as an unfair practice until now.
Changed my mind.
You mean that evidence from the HardOCP review where it's 2 wins for the 680, and 2 wins for the 7970? Not to mention the previous, other listed review where the 7970 has a paltry overclock to 1130? Yep, fair comparisons right there. For the record, I never said "equal" - but thanks for the dictionary lesson, it was well needed.
Now, please let the thread continue, not only are you boring me but likely everyone else in here. You love the GTX680, great, happy for you, please feel free to move on.
Last edited:
I asked this before, DO YOU own any of these cards in question?
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 431
Incredible, absolutely incredible. So I provide overclocked reviews of both cards, and the 680 is shown to be faster than the 7970, but apparently that's "garbage". I didn't know it was possible to win arguments by just doing the equivalent of shouting "lalala" with your fingers in your ears.
For everyone that is sensible, they will look at the reviews and see that the performance of the 7970 is good, especially when overclocked, and that it is close to the 680 in both scenarios. They will also see that the reference models are now much better value due to the release of Nvidia's new card. They will also realise that the 680 isn't worth the current inflated prices over the 7970, but when the prices settle to their original point then the 680 will be the better buy if the 7970's price does not decrease any further.
I don't get a rise out of this, as I said: facts are facts. You, through either misguidance, lack of knowledge or blind loyalty were stating otherwise. I merely seek to correct this error on your part so that other members don't fall for the same fault.
Hopefully you will stop with the insults and move on. Ideally you'd actually look at the facts but one step at a time I guess. After all, it's not as if you have provided any information to the contrary.
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 431
No, I have 2x 6950s in crossfire and another machine with a GTX 560 Ti. What's your point?
People should know better than to suggest the GTX680 is faster, within a 7970 thread. It's like leading horses to water.
At £360 this WAS a great deal. At ~£400 it is merely the ugliest catd in it's price brackrt.
£419 now.
So you are taking the opinions of reviewers for better or worse over the very people who have owned both cards?
The same reviewers who sway results depending on who gave the best kick back and use **** drivers to nerf either cards full potential?
The best reviewers are the very people on these forums who own and had both cards.
Even the people that work at ocuk who have plenty of both through there fingers every day that there is nothing in it.
I edited my post, perhaps I should have broken that down to your ramblings about terminology and English language as being garbage before addressing your other points.
I'd ask you to explain how a review that shows the 2 trading blows over 4 scenarios, coming off as 50/50 equates to the 680 being faster as 'fact', but I fear i'm wasting my time.
Secondly the very fact you're attempting to make it out to be me being insulting is ironic indeed. You still actually believe we're arguing? and that someone is the victor? That's interesting to say the least.
Plenty of people are already asking the thread to be returned to OT, so please let it do so, after all, you're offering the thread nothing whatsoever.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 431
Here's a clue, look at the minimum frame rates. Stop making sweeping statements please. And yes, it was you with the insults, absolutely. Just because I may not dress up my posts to be all sweetness and light does not mean I was insulting you, that's just how you chose to interpret them. Shall I put smiley emoticons at the end of every sentence so you feel better?
I'll think you'll find I did return to the OT before you replied taking it off topic again. Oh you.
Here's a clue, look at the minimum frame rates. Stop making sweeping statements please. And yes, it was you with the insults, absolutely. Just because I may not dress up my posts to be all sweetness and light does not mean I was insulting you, that's just how you chose to interpret them. Shall I put smiley emoticons at the end of every sentence so you feel better?
I'll think you'll find I did return to the OT before you replied taking it off topic again. Oh you.
Yet my comments were insulting to you? Surely it's how you interpreted them? One rule for one, one for another no?
As for the review, so it's all about 'Min' frame rates now is it? So, what you're saying is, stats can be delivered in a way to suit whatever viewpoint you have? Thought so.
As for returning the thread on topic, I believe I will thanks, I actually have something to contribute.
Managed to get my 7970 up to 1250/1600 stable @ 1.281 pretty much constant now. Had to move the voltage up step by step, pretty sure this is the limit of the card though as anything higher instantly crashes Heaven.
How are people getting on with the Ram on these? Can use unofficial overclocking mode to get a bit more than 1600, but I don't really like using it as it seems to disable the power saving function.
Last edited:
I made the point earlier that the only way you can bring one out clearly as a winner is to twist things to your advantage.
So it's hardly surprising he's doing it. That's the only foolish way to have one card a clear winner.