• 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.

GTX 670 or HD7950 ?

Rusty0611 said:
I would get a 670. It's faster at stock and has the benefit of not using an external program to get some games smooth.
.
Click to expand...

humbug said:
I don't understand that, why would he need and external program to get some games smooth?

The 7950 is just as smooth as the GTX 670. your also getting more GPU with the 7950.
Click to expand...

Yes thats a strange one, Farcry 3 is the only game I've ever had to use RadeonPro to make it smooth.

Rusty must be suffering from PEBKAC. :D
 
farcry is terrible you mean :p

also just to mention some places give you crysis 3 , bioshock infinite, farcy and farcy blood whatever and tombraider. so it makes a big difference if sold.
 
humbug said:
I don't understand that, why would he need and external program to get some games smooth?

The 7950 is just as smooth as the GTX 670. your also getting more GPU with the 7950.
Click to expand...

Skyrim needs RP to make it smooth. As does Bioshock in places. And Civ 5. That's just ones I can think of. Most of it is OK but you're looking at minor differences either way so you look at things like this.

Then you've got the whole Crossfire thing. :)
 
Rusty0611 said:
Skyrim needs RP to make it smooth. As does Bioshock in places. And Civ 5. That's just ones I can think of. Most of it is OK but you're looking at minor differences either way so you look at things like this.

Then you've got the whole Crossfire thing. :)
Click to expand...

Well one thing I do know is Bioshock is stuttery on Nvidia GPU's, its like a slideshow at times. Skyrim isn't that much better, though not bad, about the same as it is on AMD's GPU's.
Don't know about Civ 5. never played it.

Nvidia's last couple Drivers have also had a lot of bad GFX corruption in a few games, and then theres Nvidia's Drivers killing GPU's.

You don't want problems, buy a Games Console :p
 
Last edited:
Op has already stated he is getting a 670 as he feels its a better / faster card than a 7950, as do i.

I dont think any amount of talk about overclocking a 7950 will change his mind, nor would it mine.
 
Where are everyone getting these issues with amd cards? I haven't had any issues with my 7970, Farcry at near max settings runs perfectly, skyrim runs perfectly with 80mods running.

I haven't had these amd related issues so far, guess im lucky.
 
Ian Evey said:
Op has already stated he is getting a 670 as he feels its a better / faster card than a 7950
Click to expand...

Not quite what I said ;)
TBH I am a little indecisive which is why I asked opinions.
Right now I am leaning Nvidia's way, but that may change when it comes to ordering in a week or so :p

Fact is, every review I have read, the NV card edges out the AMD in most games, but they were done on older AMD drivers, and from what I have read the performance of the newer cards has improved a decent margin with newer drivers.
I don't think there is an awful lot in them performance wise now.
Both makes have had / do get flakey drivers every so often, and both are running similar temps (I am looking at improved cooling versions of whichever card I get). As far as I can see, its about even all round.

Decisions, decisions ... :D
 
If you really can't decide, toss a coin, you will know what you want when the coin is in mid air.
But for me in this one, which ever is the cheapest
 
humbug said:
Well one thing I do know is Bioshock is stuttery on Nvidia GPU's, its like a slideshow at times. Skyrim isn't that much better, though not bad, about the same as it is on AMD's GPU's.
Don't know about Civ 5. never played it.

Nvidia's last couple Drivers have also had a lot of bad GFX corruption in a few games, and then theres Nvidia's Drivers killing GPU's.

You don't want problems, buy a Games Console :p
Click to expand...

You're missing the point, I'm not interested in going down the AMD/nVidia justification route: the point was more that I feel the overall the package is slightly better with nVidia and because they're so close in price - and the 670 is faster at stock - then it's little things like this that matter.

Darujhistan said:
More VRAM too, better future proofing. Better value.
Click to expand...

Please entertain me and attempt an explanation as to why the extra VRAM is beneficial. :D
 
Last edited:
Rusty0611 said:
You're missing the point, I'm not interested in going down the AMD/nVidia justification route: the point was more that I feel the overall the package is slightly better with nVidia and because they're so close in price - and the 670 is faster at stock - then it's little things like this that matter.



Please entertain me and attempt an explanation as to why the extra VRAM is beneficial. :D
Click to expand...


It just is...and MUCH MUCH better value, for example a 7950 and 670 are v close in performance, but the 7950 is cheaper and has 3GB of VRAM whereas the more expensive 670 has 2GB.

The 7950 is a far better value card, if value isn't an issue - then fair enough. Just pointing out the undeniable fact, that the 7950 is far better value. In terms of 'future proofing' the 3GB card is better, who knows what demands will be put on VRAM in the next couple of years.


Just common sense really for the value orientated consumer!


:D
 
My argument for a graphics card is exactly this thread.

Gigabyte/ASUS 7950 or Gigabyte/MSI GTX670

I really don't know. Not built my PC yet but I think this is the spec I am going for unless you can recommend otherwise:

i5 - 4670
8GB RAM
1TB HDD
650w PSU
Triple Copper Heatpipe Intel CPU Cooler

Just need the GPU; unless you can advise on Spec to make it better. Got a budget of about £750 inc VAT minus the GPU. About £250 give or take for the GPU to make it to £1000.
 
So based on that logic a 8GB 670 (if priced the same) would be a better option? :D

The extra 1GB sits largely unused (discounting caching) so although it's not bad having more, you need two GPUs anyway to push settings at high resolution which begin to eat into that extra 1GB at 2560*1440. You are getting more hardware for your money with the 7950 but you have to overclock it to get 670 levels of performance and deal with the quirks like needing RP in some games.

Neither of those are REALLY an issue for me, hence me having 2 7950s, but it is worth pointing out for people to make their own mind up.
 
Mv5g91V.jpg


The bottom line interested me. Would explain the massive lead Radeon cards have in Sleeping Dogs when using SSAA.
 
Rusty0611 said:
So based on that logic a 8GB 670 (if priced the same) would be a better option? :D

The extra 1GB sits largely unused (discounting caching) so although it's not bad having more, you need two GPUs anyway to push settings at high resolution which begin to eat into that extra 1GB at 2560*1440. You are getting more hardware for your money with the 7950 but you have to overclock it to get 670 levels of performance and deal with the quirks like needing RP in some games.

Neither of those are REALLY an issue for me, hence me having 2 7950s, but it is worth pointing out for people to make their own mind up.
Click to expand...

So the 670 has better performance? I'll only be running off one monitor so I don't think I would need the extra 1GB the 7950 offers?
 
Pinder2807 said:
So the 670 has better performance? I'll only be running off one monitor so I don't think I would need the extra 1GB the 7950 offers?
Click to expand...

If you don't plan on overclocking the gpu, yes the 670 is faster than the 7950. If you do plan on overclocking go with the 7950 as they will overclock to and surpass 7970ghz speeds with very little effort. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom