660ti or a 7950 for 1920*1200 gaming?

[tommybhoy]

That'll be nice (Witcher 2 mods). Really like the game and it's superb in 3D.

At the end of the day it's up to the user to decide what's more important: paying a large price premium for an extra 2GB (rip off prices I think actually from Nvidia); getting the AMD equivalent (if it has higher VRAM; or not running the unofficial mods.

I know what I'd do but I know as I say that it's down to individual users to decide

I'm sure you'll agree.

I certainly do.

 

[Rusty0611]

Also for what its worth, I dont think the tomshardware review is that fair ir typical of expected use. A lot of games tested and benched there are run at 8X MSAA, which I think is unreasonable and unnecessary, especially on a mid-high end graphics card.

If tomshardware did all the tests at 4XMSAA Im sure the 660ti would have fared slightly better.

At its typical resolutions and settings, which I believe would be 1080p, high-ultra, 2-4X MSAA I believe the 660ti is as fast if not very slightly faster than the 7870 whwn both at stock.

They are close enough that we can call them equal though at these settings.

Exactly. The test packs used are stupid as they use settings which are not playable for mid range offerings.

Low FPS is still low FPS even if one is slightly higher than the other.

 

[andybird123]

Sorry mate but the info Humbug posted from Toms is pretty much bang on. Yes yours was an average of many reviews but an average of many biased reviews, Toms used reference cards versus reference cards then took an average of all tests, its the best average anyone has produced so far.

I think what you mean to say is that it's the best average because it supports your predetermined point of view

 

[humbug]

Exactly. The test packs used are stupid as they use settings which are not playable for mid range offerings.

Low FPS is still low FPS even if one is slightly higher than the other.

Ah... come on guys, for the 7870 other than Crysis 2 and Metro @ 2560 x 1600 there isn't a single game there with Avg FPS under 45, all are over 50 FPS @ 1920 x 1080, most 60 + some over 100.

I play everything at full settings and 1920 x 1080: all the AA's maxed, including BF3 with Ultra Preset and Fraps benching Avg 60+ FPS on 64player air maps.

If you can't max everything what is the point of a ~ £250 GPU?

 

[psychodil]

You play bf3 all ultra with max MSAA? FXAA maybe but not MSAA.

The point is 8xMSAA is overkill, most people will use 4xMSAA maximum. Its not realistic settings, I doubt many people with 7850/7870 cards game at 8xMSAA.

 

[humbug]

You play bf3 all ultra with max MSAA? FXAA maybe but not MSAA.

The point is 8xMSAA is overkill, most people will use 4xMSAA maximum. Its not realistic settings, I doubt many people with 7850/7870 cards game at 8xMSAA.

Just a straight Ultra Preset, but i do run a 20% overclock lol.....

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The HD7870 is having a price cut soon AFAIK and you can get cards for around £210 already.

The HD7870 seems to slightly better with AA applied,but the GTX660TI with less intensive AA does seem ahead.

AA is not the only issue with the GTX660TI - you also need consider what happens in the next two to three years too,as there will probably be games which push memory bandwidth too and moreover higher resolution monitors are going to start getting cheaper. Most people spending £250 to £300 on a graphics card expect at least two perhaps even three years out of a card - it is unlike on forums where people probably will upgrade every year.

If the GTX660TI was a £200 card or less,it would not be a concern,but it isn't!!

With the GTX670 and HD7950,I see the GTX660TI being more like the 8800GT 256MB against cards like the 8800GT 512MB,9600GT 512MB and HD3870 512MB. Ultimately,the 512MB cards have had a longer lifespan.

As Anandtech said in their review, the issue is the HD7870 and HD7950 effectively bracket the GTX660TI.

The problem is that if the GTX660 is close to an HD7870 it will be close to a GTX660TI,and basically makes it a bit redundant IMHO and the GTX660 probably a better value card.

Either way,a £200 HD7870 would be better value for me than a £250 GTX660TI,and I have a feeling AMD there is more room for AMD to manoeuvre with regards to price regarding the HD7800 series too.

 

[humbug]

^^^^ Looks like i bought mine a month to early... ha....haha... *despair-sob-sob*

Can i have a £30 refund? please, come on, i built all the most expensive parts in my Rig from you lot.

 

[Rusty0611]

You don't get 60 FPS average with a single 7870 OC on full ultra at 1080. If you do your benchmark run wasn't that intensive.

 

[humbug]

You don't get 60 FPS average with a single 7870 OC on full ultra at 1080. If you do your benchmark run wasn't that intensive.

Go away

 

[Rusty0611]

Well it's true.

My 680 at stock dips under 60 regularly enough to only average a small amount above 70. And that's supposedly the fastest GPU for BF3.

With an overclock it probably averages around 80-90.

I'm not questioning the truth of your results or anything I'm just saying the benchmark probably wasn't representative of gameplay that much to score so highly.

 

[dave_beast]

There's no advantage of going Nvidia over AMD for BF3 since the latest 2 drivers btw.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

This video tests the MSI GTX660TI Power Edition against the Sapphire HD7950 OC in B3 MP:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTujzlj11I8&feature=player_detailpage#t=232s

Look at the video from 3 minutes and 50 seconds onwards. However,it is unclear which drivers were used for each card. The CPU used was Core i7 3930K AFAIK.

Details of the cards:

http://www.msi.com/product/vga/N660Ti-PE-2GD5-OC.html

http://www.sapphiretech.com/presentation/product/?cid=1&gid=3&sgid=1157&lid=1&pid=1450&leg=0

The MSI card has a clockspeed of 1015MHZ against the stock clockspeed of 915MHZ although it could boost much higher. The HD7950 has a clockspeed of 900MHZ against the stock clockspeed of 800MHZ.

The GTX660TI scores 61.2fps and the HD7950 scores 58.4FPS,with the same minimum framerates for both cards.

In the US the GTX660TI is cheaper than the HD7950 although in the UK it is not so clear cut.

If you include the overclocking headroom of the HD7950,it means even in BF3 it will be a better choice it seems.

 

[humbug]

@ dave_beast, yes, vast improvement going 12.2 to 12.3, and again 12.5 to 12.6, and a small bump going 12.6 to 12.8.

AMD have been working hard at the drivers since they looked at what kepler did to the 7### way back then, the drivers have closed the gap right down. and well done to them.

@ Rusty0611, so overclock the bloody thing, what are you doing man? its a monster card, so monster it.

@ CAT, the 7950 has a miserably low base clock, 900Mhz is still miserably low, stock for stock there is only a marginal difference vs 7870 in a lot of games, including BF3, why do you think they are updating the BIOS to 1050Mhz on them?

 

[ubersonic]

@ CAT, the 7950 has a miserably low base clock, 900Mhz is still miserably low, stock for stock there is only a marginal difference vs 7870 in a lot of games, including BF3, why do you think they are updating the BIOS to 1050Mhz on them?

Can't speak for him, but AMD have already updated the bios on them to 925mhz (update released last Tuesday).

 

[humbug]

Can't speak for him, but AMD have already updated the bios on them to 925mhz (update released last Tuesday).

Yeah, AMD have given some other forums the BIOS to host so users can flash there existing 7950's with the new BIOS.

There is also supposed to be a follow on Ghz edition like the 7970 later on. (apparently, who knows with famously tight lipped AMD)

Probably no makeover for my card given its base clock is already 1000Mhz.
But it would be nice to get a new BIOS for it if there are some optimisations with it.

All this is a little mute though, rumours of the 8970 are already starting to circulate it never ends does it?

 

[psychodil]

Dont pay too much attention to rumours.
The bios for the 7950 has already been updayed to 925Mhz on boost, dont think they will release another one at 1050MHz like you say.

At 925mhz it is a good bit ahead of a the 7870/660ti.

http://http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/645?vs=548

 

[Rusty0611]

@ dave_beast, yes, vast improvement going 12.2 to 12.3, and again 12.5 to 12.6, and a small bump going 12.6 to 12.8.

AMD have been working hard at the drivers since they looked at what kepler did to the 7### way back then, the drivers have closed the gap right down. and well done to them.

@ Rusty0611, so overclock the bloody thing, what are you doing man? its a monster card, so monster it.

@ CAT, the 7950 has a miserably low base clock, 900Mhz is still miserably low, stock for stock there is only a marginal difference vs 7870 in a lot of games, including BF3, why do you think they are updating the BIOS to 1050Mhz on them?

I have??? Signature. I was making a point showing that a 680 at stock struggles to push much further than your 7870 allegedly does which shows that your benchmark probably wasn't that strenuous.

 

[humbug]

Dont pay too much attention to rumours.
The bios for the 7950 has already been updayed to 925Mhz on boost, dont think they will release another one at 1050MHz like you say.

At 925mhz it is a good bit ahead of a the 7870/660ti.

http://http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/645?vs=548

Your probably right. no-one stick's at sub 1000Mhz anyway, there only doing this to correct those review numbers.

I never did get why they sold them with such ridiculously low clocks considering what they will actually do even on stock volts, seems insane but at the time they only had the GTX 580 to beat, which was to easy, yet they must have known Nvidia don't stand still.

 

[psychodil]

Your probably right. no-one stick's at sub 1000Mhz anyway, there only doing this to correct those review numbers.

I never did get why they sold them with such ridiculously low clocks considering what they will actually do even on stock volts, seems insane but at the time they only had the GTX 580 to beat, which was to easy, yet they must have known Nvidia don't stand still.

I dont know why they did it either, but as an overclocker I love it
It gives me a good feeling running my card over 50% faster than reference speeds.

There is a school of thought that AMD left the cards with a lot of overclocking headroom so they could upgrade the bioses as an easy counter to nvidias releases, but we will never know.