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.
This post by Gibbo got me seriously banging my head thinking if I should just order a Asus 7970 Matrix and be done with it:I would like an upgrade, but there still don't seem to be any concrete details on specs and pricing
I really really want to consider the Nvidia options as well (for PhysX), but their GTX670/GTX680/GTX770's 256-bit bus (much lower potential memory bandwidth) and less vram is a huge put off for me, particularly for the GTX770 which is now "overpriced" IMO.
Nope, 670 sli for me until 20nm.
Well, the thing is 2GB is not exactly giving people peace of mind at the moment, and for memory bandwidth it's not really only a matter to do with resolution use, but it can directly reduce the amount of performance hit when using memory intensive options, such as AA and high texture etc. GTX770's memory clock overclocked to 8000MHz on the 256-bit bus would only reach 256Gb/s, whereas a 7950/7970 memory clock overclocked to 7080MHz on 384-bit bus would be hitting 340Gb/s. It's really only a matter of time before the the GTX770 need to have AA on x2 in order the match the performance of the 7970 with AA on x4 (for example, may be when BF4 comes out).Also the 256-bit bus and 2gb vram is fine if your gaming at 1080p. No need to go overboard unless you rez higher the 1080.
Well, 2GB is not exactly giving people peace of mind at the moment, and for memory bandwidth it's not really only a matter to do with resolution use, but it can directly reduce the amount of performance hit when using memory intensive options, such as AA and high texture etc. A 770 memory clock overclocked to 8000MHz on the 256-bit bus would only reach 256Gb/s, whereas a 7950/7970 memory clock overclocked to 7080MHz on 384-bit bus would be hitting 340Gb/s.
That's not what I meant. You are already losing more frame rate (in %) going from 0xAA to 4xAA than you would had your 770 got higher memory bandwidth.I've not had one performance hit ever. I doubt I will for some time to come.
That's not what I meant. You are already losing more frame rate (in %) going from 0xAA to 4xAA than you would had your 770 got higher memory bandwidth.
It doesn't matter. It's just my opinion you don't have to agree with it, but what I said about memory bandwidth and it's relation to reduce the amount of frame rate lost when using AA etc is true though.
I think you are may be taking what I said the wrong way.I've used AA on games and without and haven't noticed any drop with frames? Me thinks you haven't used any of the 7xx cards to even make that statement.
I think you are may be taking what I said the wrong way.
Let me put it this way...forget about AMD for now, just try comparing the frame rate of your 770 between the memory clock at 1500MHz (192Gb/s) and the highest memory overclock you can get (at least 2100MHz- 268.8Gb/s if possible) on games with 4xAA, then you might see what I meant about the memory bandwidth's relation to reducing performance hit, rather than it being AMD vs Nvidia.
I think you made the right choice Retro. 256bit/2gb cards are well suited to 1080p. Unless you're going to be upgrading your monitor there seems little point in changing to an AMD card with similar performance.
Waiting to see what the range offers its either:
Nvidia Gtx 780 or amd 7990 or r9xxx
I have no loyalty to either brand
The 780 is a rip off. Not worth tbh.
Hardly a rip off, you have to pay high for the best single GPU's on the market, bar titan, look in the heaven thread, 780's are nearly touching 1700 score, your comment above about a clocked 770 hitting 780 level is rubbish, whyscotty clocked the nuts of a 770 and it only scored 1100 or something, 780's get around 1200 stock.