6GB RAM

[wavehunter]

Still doing some research into what to upgrade my x2 560ti SLI to in order to game at 2560x1600 and came across the 7970CF vs 680SLI thread.

In this, there was mention of some 6GB cards and a quick search found the Sapphire HD 7970 6GB.

Now, if I read the thread correctly, RAM is unlikely to be a limitation over GPU so, is the 6GB overkill compared to the 3GB version?

Would a standard 7970 waterblock suffice?

 

[Tonester0011]

6GB is total overkill for that res, with a single card...there's no way you'll ever need it.
The topic that spurred 6GB was gaming at 7680x1600(or 1440) on two games - Tomb Raider and Crysis 3.

3GB is more than enough, 2GB is enough.

 

[LtMatt]

Still doing some research into what to upgrade my x2 560ti SLI to in order to game at 2560x1600 and came across the 7970CF vs 680SLI thread.

In this, there was mention of some 6GB cards and a quick search found the Sapphire HD 7970 6GB.

Now, if I read the thread correctly, RAM is unlikely to be a limitation over GPU so, is the 6GB overkill compared to the 3GB version?

Would a standard 7970 waterblock suffice?

Whoever suggested you need 6Gb for 1440p was trolling. 3gb is plenty.
At 1440p you want a 7950/7970 ideally. A 7970ghz edition is between 5-45% faster than a 680 (depending on the game) at this resolution. It will lose in a few select titles but in most games the 7970ghz edition is clearly faster at this resolution.

 

[wavehunter]

And for 1600p?

 

[LtMatt]

And for 1600p?

Expect similar results or the gap to widen slightly because of the larger memory bus on the 7970.

 

[Gregster]

Still doing some research into what to upgrade my x2 560ti SLI to in order to game at 2560x1600 and came across the 7970CF vs 680SLI thread.

In this, there was mention of some 6GB cards and a quick search found the Sapphire HD 7970 6GB.

Now, if I read the thread correctly, RAM is unlikely to be a limitation over GPU so, is the 6GB overkill compared to the 3GB version?

Would a standard 7970 waterblock suffice?

6GB is overkill for that resolution but 5760x1080 it isn't and modern games are seriously pushing VRAM about.

I would look to a couple of 7950's for your resolution if I am honest. Cheaper than 670's/680's and nearly as fast as 680's/7970's.

LtMatt does like to exagerate slightly and Both AMD/Nvidia win some games and lose some games, so let the price do the talking

7950 CF for roughly the price of 1 680. hmmmmm

 

[LtMatt]

6GB is overkill for that resolution but 5760x1080 it isn't and modern games are seriously pushing VRAM about.

I would look to a couple of 7950's for your resolution if I am honest. Cheaper than 670's/680's and nearly as fast as 680's/7970's.

LtMatt does like to exagerate slightly and Both AMD/Nvidia win some games and lose some games, so let the price do the talking

7950 CF for roughly the price of 1 680. hmmmmm

Those figures came from a couple of recent titan reviews greg.

 

[Rusty0611]

6GB is overkill for that resolution but 5760x1080 it isn't and modern games are seriously pushing VRAM about.

I would look to a couple of 7950's for your resolution if I am honest. Cheaper than 670's/680's and nearly as fast as 680's/7970's.

LtMatt does like to exagerate slightly and Both AMD/Nvidia win some games and lose some games, so let the price do the talking

7950 CF for roughly the price of 1 680. hmmmmm

Stop it! My sides are going.

 

[Gregster]

Those figures came from a couple of recent titan reviews greg.

Cool and the OP said he read that CF Vs SLI thread, so he will have seen all the tests but just in case he missed them, I will post the 2560x1600 results.

9 wins for Nvidia and 9 wins for AMD

 

[LtMatt]

Look at the standard of the games the 680 wins in though Greg, they're all rubbish Lol. Even so some of the fps figures in those graphs you keep quoting are at odd with what i see on other sites plus there's a fair few decent games missing from that. I don't believe you can argue the 680 is equal to a 7970ghz edition.

Taken from Anand, a well trusted site.

"Looking first at NVIDIA’s product line, Titan is anywhere between 33% and 54% faster than the GTX 680. In fact with the exception of Hitman: Absolution, a somewhat CPU-bound benchmark, Titan’s performance relative to the GTX 680 is actually very consistent at a narrow 45%-55% range."

"Moving on, while Titan offers a very consistent performance advantage over the architecturally similar GTX 680, it’s quite a different story when compared to AMD’s fastest single-GPU product, the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. As we’ve seen time and time again this generation, the difference in performance between AMD and NVIDIA GPUs not only varies with the test and settings, but dramatically so. As a result Titan is anywhere between being merely equal to the 7970GE to being nearly a generation ahead of it."

"At the low-end of the scale we have DiRT: Showdown, where Titan’s lead is less than 3%. At the other end is Total War: Shogun 2, where Titan is a good 62% faster than the 7970GE. The average gain over the 7970GE is almost right in the middle at 34%, reflecting a mix of games where the two are close, the two are far, and the two are anywhere in between. With recent driver advancements having helped the 7970GE pull ahead of the GTX 680, NVIDIA had to work harder to take back their lead and to do so in an concrete manner."

If you want to play the latest and greatest dx11 capable games the 7970 offers much better performance and even more so as the res increases. If you like playing world of warcraft at 1600p go for a 680 Lol.

7970Ghz % Faster at 1440p - Gap will increase at 1600p

dirt - 44%
total war shogun 2 - 12%
hitman - 16%
sleeping dogs - 32%
crysis - 33%
farcry 3 - 3% faster

 

[Rusty0611]

Well I don't think you can just discount other games because they don't fit into your mould of what is a decent games. Greg's graphs appear to me to be a fair sample whereas you've got 5 out of 8 GE titles.

 

[Gregster]

Sorry Matt, I will only pick out Gaming evolved titles in the future

I have been told time and time again that Anand is useless but now it isn't?

 

[LtMatt]

Well I don't think you can just discount other games because they don't fit into your mould of what is a decent games. Greg's graphs appear to me to be a fair sample whereas you've got 5 out of 8 GE titles.

Diablo 3, world of warcraft, starcraft. Real cutting edge stuff hey.

Well sure if you like playing the above, go with a 680 over a 7970. If you like playing any decent, new, directx11 games, most of which happen to be gaming evolved titles go with a 7970. Cheapest 680 here £400. Cheapest ghz here £335. I wonder which one will over clock more, and the gains will increase even more with the over clock.

Sorry Matt, I will only pick out Gaming evolved titles in the future

I have been told time and time again that Anand is useless but now it isn't?

You should do Greg seeing as they're all Directx11 latest and greatest games. The most demanding and graphically pleasing titles. Still the 680 runs borderlands 2 on the highest details i suppose.

 

[Rusty0611]

Diablo 3, world of warcraft, starcraft. Real cutting edge stuff hey.

Well sure if you like playing the above, go with a 680 over a 7970. If you like playing any decent, new, directx11 games, most of which happen to be gaming evolved titles go with a 7970.

You're doing it again though: decent, new and DX11 don't all necessarily perfectly fit together in the way you're portraying. What is decent to you isn't always decent to others.

I'm not really on about what to get... I'm just on about the sample of evidence used. One is fairly comprehensive, one is not. At least by giving a large sample OP can decide based on what games he plays what is the best option for him.

 

[LtMatt]

You're doing it again though: decent, new and DX11 don't all necessarily perfectly fit together in the way you're portraying. What is decent to you isn't always decent to others.

I'm not really on about what to get... I'm just on about the sample of evidence used. One is fairly comprehensive, one is not. At least by giving a large sample OP can decide based on what games he plays what is the best option for him.

Do you think the OP is going 1600p and watercooling to play World of Warcraft, Diablo 3 and starcraft? I'm betting he'll be overclocking his gpu and playing the latest and greatest games. All of which are gaming evolved titles and all of which will run better on 7970 hardware. We'll see, maybe he just wants to play boarderlands 2 or the above games at 1600p and if he does then i suppose the 680 would make sense. In every other sense, 7970ghz all day long. I haven't even mentioned the price difference or overclocking headroom much yet either.

EDIt

Just realise Tomb Raider is not even in that list. Another victory for the 7970.

 

[Rusty0611]

Do you think the OP is going 1600p and watercooling to play World of Warcraft, Diablo 3 and starcraft? I'm betting he'll be overclocking his gpu and playing the latest and greatest games. All of which are gaming evolved titles and all of which will run better on 7970 hardware. We'll see, maybe he just wants to play boarderlands 2 or the above games at 1600p and if he does then i suppose the 680 would make sense. In every other sense, 7970ghz all day long. I haven't even mentioned the price difference much yet either.

Maybe not exclusively but you're putting words into his mouth now to fit your argument.

Again, latest and greatest is just too simplistic and exclusive an argument. If, for example he plays a couple of the GE titles but primarily plays Warcraft then what...?

The point is we don't know so your sample of 5/8 GE titles is flawed and Gregster's sample is superior.

On the point in question I would say a couple of 7950s for that resolution but it's important not to be misleading and remember that there are enthusiasts who do play games other than the latest batch of Gaming Evolved titles.

 

[LtMatt]

Maybe not exclusively but you're putting words into his mouth now to fit your argument.

Again, latest and greatest is just too simplistic and exclusive an argument. If, for example he plays a couple of the GE titles but primarily plays Warcraft then what...?

The point is we don't know so your sample of 5/8 GE titles is flawed and Gregster's sample is superior.

On the point in question I would say a couple of 7950s for that resolution but it's important not to be misleading and remember that there are enthusiasts who do play games other than the latest batch of Gaming Evolved titles.

The 7970 provides more than enough performance in the few games the 680 does win, he should still go 7970ghz all day long. Even more so if as you say he plays a couple of GE titles.

Unless he has a specific reason for wanting a 680 like wanting less performance for a more expensive card i guess, or perhaps he wants Physx, or maybe even the game bundle to get world of tanks or whatever it was called.

Considering the fact hes's going water cooling, he will want to be overclocking and over volting that gpu to the max. Can't see him increasing voltage on a 680 or getting any where near the overclocking headroom that a 7970 will offer. That will be much needed at 1600p. Jeez, no brainer.

 

[Rusty0611]

The 7970 provides more than enough performance in the few games the 680 does win, he should still go 7970ghz all day long. Even more so if as you say he plays a couple of GE titles.

Unless he has a specific reason for wanting a 680 like wanting less performance for a more expensive card i guess, or perhaps he wants Physx, or maybe even the game bundle to get world of tanks or whatever it was called.

Considering the fact hes's going water cooling, he will want to be overclocking and over volting that gpu to the max. Can't see him increasing voltage on a 680 or getting any where near the overclocking headroom that a 7970 will offer. That will be much needed at 1600p. Jeez, no brainer.

That's more like it. A better argument.

I don't disagree with what I would get in his situation it's just important to provide comprehensive information and not mislead (intentionally or not) and then let him decide. It's just too neat and tidy to say 7970 better card for you, end. There ARE other factors to consider and games played is one of those.

Momentum on the relationship between game dev's and driver dev's is definitely one of the reasons I didn't get a 680 back when I went back to single screen. Although my 7950 is slower I stuck my eggs in the AMD basket that 12.11 was a sign of momentum shifting rather than a one off thing. I was lucky in that I was proved right .

 

[LtMatt]

That's more like it. A better argument.

I don't disagree with what I would get in his situation it's just important to provide comprehensive information and not mislead (intentionally or not) and then let him decide. It's just too neat and tidy to say 7970 better card for you, end. There ARE other factors to consider and games played is one of those.

Momentum on the relationship between game dev's and driver dev's is definitely one of the reasons I didn't get a 680 back when I went back to single screen. Although my 7950 is slower I stuck my eggs in the AMD basket that 12.11 was a sign of momentum shifting rather than a one off thing. I was lucky in that I was proved right .

Fair enough Rusty, ill drink to that.

 

[Diagro]

A 7970 will run 1600P nicely. You may find a few games struggle with the maximum settings with AA, so you may want to turn that down.

Memory isn't an issue, I don't go over 2.5GB, and the times where it might go over are not worth mentioning because the game runs like balls and needs AA turning off.

tbh i would wait for the next gen cards to come out, But if you cant then a 7970 overclocked to 1200/1700+ will do well until they do.

I sometimes wonder about some of these peeps on here who argue about the performance @ 2560x1600... Do they even have a monitor of this size? Hmmmmm