Ah, but you never actually answered the specific question either.
A £400 7970 isn't the best 7970 to go for when it's price to performance.
-
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.
What's the best card out of the 7970 and 680 factoring in mature drivers?
- Thread starter kissenger
- Start date
Ah, but you never actually answered the specific question either.
A £400 7970 isn't the best 7970 to go for when it's price to performance.
It is when it's a under £400 and is the best 7970 there is to buy. But i suppose that's heavily opinionated.
One thing to remember with all these new drivers is that in most cases that elusive 25% gain in game XYZ will only be under one particular set of circumstances. both sides have released new drivers promising great gains in different games, but for the majority of us the gains will be fairly small.
Saying that the AMD 7970 has certainly been released as far as BF3 is concerned and its proper potential has been realised.
As to which is better the 680 or the 7970, well at stock the 680 is faster hence why AMD released the 7970GHZ ED which evened the playing field somewhat, once overclocked it seems to be a bit of a silicon lottery as always as to whether you will get a great clocker or not and then either could end up quicker.
There is no doubt about the cost though, the 7970 are cheaper although slightly slower at stock and the cheapest official GHZ ed is slightly dearer than the cheapest 680. ( although there is an overclocked 7970 for 329.99 this week).
So after all that which is better, well you pays your money you takes your choice.
Saying that the AMD 7970 has certainly been released as far as BF3 is concerned and its proper potential has been realised.
As to which is better the 680 or the 7970, well at stock the 680 is faster hence why AMD released the 7970GHZ ED which evened the playing field somewhat, once overclocked it seems to be a bit of a silicon lottery as always as to whether you will get a great clocker or not and then either could end up quicker.
There is no doubt about the cost though, the 7970 are cheaper although slightly slower at stock and the cheapest official GHZ ed is slightly dearer than the cheapest 680. ( although there is an overclocked 7970 for 329.99 this week).
So after all that which is better, well you pays your money you takes your choice.
Yes, it ran better for me at the time, idk if one runs better than the other now with newer versions out, though they were both good.
Opinionated aside, it's not an answer to the question asked. That £400 doesn't have a good ratio of performance compared to the price.
This isn't an opinion, it's just fact. Cheaper 7970s offer the same performance for less money. It's that simple.
However, as I said, 7950s represent much better value for money than 7970s, and the £400 7970 doesn't offer any value for money at all really.
Yes, it ran better for me at the time, idk if one runs better than the other now with newer versions out, though they were both good.
Thanks. I haven't actually used either, but wanted to get a general opinion from people about what they prefer.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,375
- Location
- Billericay, UK
I've never understood this logic. Why would you hit a vram bottleneck with two cards if you weren't hitting it with one card?
7970 ia the better buy now imo even without the game bundle the free gamea make it a no brainer. It's about time Nvidia started lowering prices on their top end models.
I didn't see the OP ask what is the most sensible soloution. He asked:
You start on Rossi for giving his opinion and yet go off on a tangent with what you would do. Answer the OPs question and stop picking fault with any answer that doesn't tally up to your way of thinking.
Personally I feel the Asus could be the best 7970 out at the moment price to performance because if it was me who was the OP and asking this question, I would want the best performing 7970 at a decent price and I have been told (but no proof) that they are using binned chips for this card. I love overclocking to the max and this could save me a few quid by getting a poor clocking cheaper card and then selling it on as I want a good clocker.
Maybe you have difficultly reading?
That bit you quoted, it was in response to something some one else said, not the OP.
I also didn't "start on" or go off on a tangent at all. Bloody hell you're really a proper baby aren't you?
I pointed out that Rossi's response wasn't a direct response to what the OP had asked because Rossi claimed it was a direct response.
That 7970 really doesn't give the best performance to price ratio out of 7970s. It won't give £100 more performance compared to £300 7970s would it? So pointing this out is "starting on" some one is it? You need to get a grip.
Me neither, I think it's nonsense to be blunt about it.
A GPU will use as much as it needs, an increase in frame rate doesn't require more RAM.
I have no difficulty reading and was quoting the guy who Rossi answered. You had no trouble understanding that fact and yet felt the need to point it out. Calling me a baby is real mature. I can't see a single 7970 for sale for £300 on here but that is nothing to do with what the OP asked. As you clearly seem to have trouble reading questions, I will point it out for you again:
Where in that question does it ask about 7950s? If I do have trouble reading, could you point it out for me. What you consider "won't give £100 more performance" is open for debate. If it clocks up like a binned chip should, for me it is worth an extra £100. That is my opinion and not yours or the guy who asked the question. This is why we debate things and you telling me to get a grip is you making yourself look silly.
Where in that question does it ask about 7950s? If I do have trouble reading, could you point it out for me. What you consider "won't give £100 more performance" is open for debate. If it clocks up like a binned chip should, for me it is worth an extra £100. That is my opinion and not yours or the guy who asked the question. This is why we debate things and you telling me to get a grip is you making yourself look silly.
Me calling you a baby has nothing to do with maturity, you were having another whinge as you do, exaggerating what happened quite a bit.
I wasn't even having a go at Rossi anyway. Which is another reason why I said get a grip. It's like disagreeing is some how rude to you or something.
Oh yeah, I forgot this was the only UK store that sold graphics cards.
The difference is that I wasn't claiming to have directly answered the question. You seem to be struggling with this part.
The reason I said what I said is because they were asking about price versus performance, something the 7970s don't really have.
I told you to get a grip because you were having another whinge.
@ spoofle
I have made my point and you can't give a straight answer! You feel the need for constant belittlement of anyone who disagrees with your way of thinking. I have no wish to fuel your trolling and will leave you to your drama.
I have made my point and you can't give a straight answer! You feel the need for constant belittlement of anyone who disagrees with your way of thinking. I have no wish to fuel your trolling and will leave you to your drama.
Because sheer GPU power will be the limiting factor with one card. With 2 cards you may have the GPU power needed, but VRAM becomes the new limiting factor at this higher performance level.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,226
I think the logic goes like this. Say you have a gtx680 2gb and manage to play a game on ultra but without aa as the frames get to low with it on. You are gpu limited and add to this you were also using 2gb of your vram at these settings. Now adding another gtx 680 would not allow you to up the aa level as you were already on the vram limit. So all you would be gaining is more fps. Now change the gtx680's to 4gb versions or to 7970's and you can have the maximum detail and good fps.
It's not really about games that you can already max out with your single gpu.
You have to factor in the frame rates you're getting at the same time. If you're hitting the VRAM limit with average FPS of 10 it's a moot point anyway as no-one is realistically going to play with that average.
Hence dropping settings to increase the average FPS also decreases the amount of VRAM usage moving you away from the VRAM limit anyway.
A second/third card doubles/trebles your GPU power but not your VRAM so potentially you could hit the VRAM limit with what would otherwise be acceptable FPS.
