• 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.

6950 Vs 570

Associate
Joined
7 Feb 2011
Posts
140
Location
Edinburgh
Hi Guys,

My set-up is:

600W PSU
I5-2500K OC 4.5GHz
4GB Ram
MSI Twin Frozr 6950 2GB Ram OC

The graphics card is faulty so I have been offered a direct replacement or a MSI GeForce GTX 570 OC Twin FrozR III Power Edition 1280MB.

I have no experience of this card, so can anyone comment on which would be better? I mainly use for videos and gaming, currently playing Skyrim on 2560x1440, Ultra with 60fps (dipping sometimes but genereally stable).

I have tried the Mass Effect 3 demo (my next purchase) and get the same kind of performance.

Should I stick with the 6950 (any experience OC this one to 6970?) or will I see enough of a difference to go with the nVidia card?

Thanks.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Apr 2009
Posts
11,973
Location
Cheshire
Considering your resolution, I would ask for a card with large amount of Video RAM (ie a direct replacement). The GTX 570 GPU usually beats the HD 6950 in tests, but at 2560x1440 resolution playing current and upcoming games the 1.28GB on the GTX 570 is likely to limit you, so a HD 6950 is a better bet imho.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Apr 2010
Posts
11,896
Location
West Sussex
Faster card or more VRAM? Hmmm... I'd take faster card any time:) 570!

There's a fundamental flaw in that logic, though.

The 6950 can run anything on the market at 1080p on max.

The 570 will run short of vram.

The frames from the faster card are all completely pointless if the card doesn't have enough vram. So you will either be lowering settings or at worst (if you don't want to compromise) not be playing the games.

I know this myself from owning a pair of EVGA 295 co op single PCB cards. In benchmarks they tore flesh from bones. In NFS : The run and BF3 they were about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

Quite simply because even with everything lowered to minimums they still did not have enough vram to cache the textures, so it was caching from the hard drive making both games completely unplayable.

Thus *if* the card with 2gb has enough horsepower from the GPU (and the 6950 does) to run any game *and* comes with more than enough vram it's the far safer choice.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
10,049
I would take the gtx570 and run. The reason being is that by the time memory is the limiting factor at your resolution your fps would already be to low for it to matter. The gtx570 with its lower memory is definately the better single card solution unless it unlocks to a 6970 then its debatable.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Apr 2010
Posts
11,896
Location
West Sussex
I would take the gtx570 and run. The reason being is that by the time memory is the limiting factor at your resolution your fps would already be to low for it to matter. The gtx570 with its lower memory is definately the better single card solution unless it unlocks to a 6970 then its debatable.

currently playing Skyrim on 2560x1440, Ultra with 60fps (dipping sometimes but genereally stable).

Memory is a problem in BF3 @ 1920x1080. So it's already an issue, let alone running BF3 @ 1440p.

Had I realised that earlier (his res, I should have read it) I would totally advise against anything less than 2gb vram. Infact, I would save up and buy a 7950.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
10,049
Memory is a problem in BF3 @ 1920x1080. So it's already an issue, let alone running BF3 @ 1440p.

Had I realised that earlier (his res, I should have read it) I would totally advise against anything less than 2gb vram. Infact, I would save up and buy a 7950.

The gtx570 will still be a better option at playable setting than a 6950. Bf3 runs better on a nvidia cards when comparing fermi to 6/5000 series.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
24 Jul 2005
Posts
483
Don't forget the GTX 570s have a good amount of overclocking headroom too. 850mhz is pretty easy, and 950mhz+ is possible if you get very lucky.

I have my current Phantom 570 at 870mhz at 1013mv. Good blend of high power and low noise/heat :)
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
10,049
@ 1440p?

Don't think so. I saw vram usage over 1.4gb @ 1080p.

Its a fact. You wont be able to pump the settings up enough to use the vram as the frame rates would not be playable. The gtx570 is a definate winner against a 6950. If it was to crossfire or sli then i would consider the 2gb memory.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
7 Feb 2011
Posts
140
Location
Edinburgh
thanks for all the input guys, but it seems that the camp is split. Still not too sure what to go for :(

Will mny PSU be able to handle overclocking the 570, or even a 7950 if I go the upgrade route?
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
6 Dec 2008
Posts
401
Tough call, the 2GB vram would be useful, but the point made above by TheRealDeal is a good one.

Edit:

Whats the make of the PSU?
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Mar 2010
Posts
13,008
Location
Under The Stairs!
It's six and half a dozen after 1080p, stick the 6950 onto stock 6970 clocks and it will perform similarly, although the 570 can oc too, whether vram becomes an issue is game dependant.

Personally, I would be going for 2Gb for future proofing and for the lovely mods that can be slapped onto the likes of Bethseda's titles that can eat away at the vram.

Most BM's don't show any evidence of microstutter whatsoever when it occurs which can be due to the frame buffer hitting it's limits.

There is also the factor of changing vendors, some don't like the difference in transition/styles between the Control panels as there may be features missing that you are used too, for some it's better the devil you know.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Apr 2010
Posts
11,896
Location
West Sussex
Its a fact. You wont be able to pump the settings up enough to use the vram as the frame rates would not be playable. The gtx570 is a definate winner against a 6950. If it was to crossfire or sli then i would consider the 2gb memory.

For raw muscles? I completely agree. However, muscles ain't everything.
 
Associate
Joined
20 Feb 2012
Posts
562
I'd go for an 6950 and hope you can unlock it.

I've just sent back a 6870 purely because when playing BF3 it ran out of vram. And my current res is only 1280x1024 atm. I found that playing at that resolution it had the power to run some settings at high and some at ultra, however, it used all the vram and then became stuttery at certain points in the map, fps didn't drop though. A 570 with 2gb would be just the ticket :D

The 6950 will also use less power than the 570.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Apr 2010
Posts
11,896
Location
West Sussex
I'd go for an 6950 and hope you can unlock it.

I've just sent back a 6870 purely because when playing BF3 it ran out of vram. And my current res is only 1280x1024 atm. I found that playing at that resolution it had the power to run some settings at high and some at ultra, however, it used all the vram and then became stuttery at certain points in the map, fps didn't drop though. A 570 with 2gb would be just the ticket :D

The 6950 will also use less power than the 570.

Even with everything on low and all of the frills disabled BF3 still did not work properly on my pair of 295s.

Now some of that was down to drivers, some of it was just that the game is quite poorly coded IMO. But the fact remains that it was, even with everything switched off, unplayable.
 
Back
Top Bottom