770 or 7970?

spoffle · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:19

whyscotty said:
None at the the moment, unless you play skyrim with loads of mods.

Hitman Absolution does.

whyscotty · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:24

spoffle said:
Hitman Absolution does.

Proof, no good saying it does without providing evidence

never gone over 2gb when I played it

spoffle · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:30

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/02/21/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_video_card_review/4#.UfKHx23kyI9

We also dropped the resolution to 1920x1080 to see how the TITAN performs on 1080p displays. We really wanted to push the video cards, so we opted to run the game at the highest 8X MSAA level at 1080p to see if it would be playable. The only two video cards that could even do this were the 6GB TITAN and 3GB 7970 GE, the 2GB GTX 680 was not capable of running this setting due to its small memory footprint.

At 8X MSAA at 1080p this game is playable on the GeForce GTX TITAN. Our minimum framerate never dropped below 34 FPS. The GTX TITAN is 37.7% faster than the HD 7970 GE video card. This is another game the TITAN can max out at 1080p.

It puts to rest the "herp derp memory usage is intrinsically linked to GPU power".

I really don't get people's reluctance to entertain the notion that 2GB@256bit is just not suitable for high end gaming now and in the near future.

teppic · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:37

spoffle said:
I really don't get people's reluctance to entertain the notion that 2GB@256bit is just not suitable for high end gaming now and in the near future.

Not much over a year ago people were saying a GTX 570 with 1280mb was more than enough. Look at that now.

spoffle · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:41

Exactly, I've said it before, for me one of the biggest let downs with games is low resolution textures.

Shipping games with high res textures will not impact GPU performance, and will only fill up VRAM and it's something more developers should be doing as it'll make such a big difference to the way games look.

Kaapstad · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:47

We also dropped the resolution to 1920x1080 to see how the TITAN performs on 1080p displays. We really wanted to push the video cards, so we opted to run the game at the highest 8X MSAA level at 1080p to see if it would be playable. The only two video cards that could even do this were the 6GB TITAN and 3GB 7970 GE, the 2GB GTX 680 was not capable of running this setting due to its small memory footprint.

At 8X MSAA at 1080p this game is playable on the GeForce GTX TITAN. Our minimum framerate never dropped below 34 FPS. The GTX TITAN is 37.7% faster than the HD 7970 GE video card. This is another game the TITAN can max out at 1080p.

IIRC in that review you quote from doing the above gave totally unplayable fps on the HD 7970 which made it a totally pointless exercise unless of course you are advising the OP to get a Titan.

OP please don't get a Titan, for 1080p it is not worth it. Grab whichever card you want GTX 770 or HD 7970 they will both do the job @1080p.

Also OP I would suggest you walk away from this thread and don't read anymore posts. Just have a good think about what you want to buy and go for it.

Good luck with whatever you buy.

Suarez7 · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:48

wow ^

When did the OP even suggest he was thinking about a TITAN? Also since when did you obtain the right to tell people when they should stop reading their threads?

teppic · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:52

52fps is totally unplayable? Or am I missing something?

TheRealDeal · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:53

Kaapstad said:
IIRC in that review you quote from doing the above gave totally unplayable fps on the HD 7970 which made it a totally pointless exercise unless of course you are advising the OP to get a Titan.

OP please don't get a Titan, for 1080p it is not worth it. Grab whichever card you want GTX 770 or HD 7970 they will both do the job @1080p.

Also OP I would suggest you walk away from this thread and don't read anymore posts. Just have a good think about what you want to buy and go for it.

Good luck with whatever you buy.

Kaap he said it was playable on the 7970 or did you miss that part or is it just bad english on the reviewer part. He said he was running the game to see if it was playable and then said the 7970 and titan could. Moved house and only mobile internet atm so cant check numbers as 3g here is pants.

spoffle · 26 Jul 2013 at 15:55

Kaapstad said:
HERP DERP HERP DERP HERP .

It shows that RAM usage isn't intrinsically linked to available GPU power, and that 2GB is a bottleneck already.

Also, The 7970 had a minimum of 26, and average of 53, it's showing that to get playable FPS NOW on a GTX680, settings are needing to be turned down.

So tell me more about how GPU usage is linked to RAM usage, and when the time comes that you need to turn settings down, neither card will be able to give playable FPS.

teppic said:
52fps is totally unplayable? Or am I missing something?

As it seems, anything that contrasts his claims is wrong and bad.

TheRealDeal said:
Kaap he said it was playable on the 7970 or did you miss that part.

I suspect it was missed on purpose, as he seems to feel the need to gloss over stuff that he finds inconvenient to his "opinions".

Ian Evey · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:07

What visual difference does 8xmsaa vs 4xmsaa at 1080 make anyway on Hitman ? On farcry 3 it looks exactly the same on my 670 as does msaa x2. Infact with it turned off it still looks the same.

And also dont forget that Hitman Absolution is an "amd's way its meant to be played" title.

spoffle · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:14

Ian Evey said:
What visual difference does 8xmsaa vs 4xmsaa at 1080 make anyway on Hitman ? On farcry 3 it looks exactly the same on my 670 as does msaa x2. Infact with it turned off it still looks the same.

At 1080, it'll be visible, though 4 and 8 would likely look very similar.

However the issue isn't really that, it demonstrates that a game released at the beginning of the year is already caining 2GB of VRAM.

It's just pointing to if you're buying now, why would you choose 2GB@256bit when you can get 3GB@384bit with a similarly powerful GPU for what is essentially less money with free games factored in.

That's it really, and you yourself have even said if you were buying now, you'd go for 3GB@384bit.

Ian Evey said:
And also dont forget that Hitman Absolution is an "amd's way its meant to be played" title.

I'm not forgetting, but AMD knows it's poor marketing to have games gimped so that they run badly on nVidia hardware because nVidia has been doing this for so long now, everyone hates it.

It's not conducive to a positive customer attitude.

LtMatt · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:16

Tommy mentioned this a hell of a long time ago as well. I can remember him bringing up this breach of 2gb vram limit probably a year ago or slightly less, as well as him linking the actual benchmark review. If i remember correctly though it was rubbished at the time by the usual suspects.

spoffle · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:25

The usual suspects indeed, who incicentally are stuck with 2GB graphics cards, and instead of just admitting and accepting it have to go on delusional rants about how it's fine.

It reminds of me comical Ali.

Ian Evey · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:31

spoffle said:
At 1080, it'll be visible, though 4 and 8 would likely look very similar.

However the issue isn't really that, it demonstrates that a game released at the beginning of the year is already caining 2GB of VRAM.

It's just pointing to if you're buying now, why would you choose 2GB@256bit when you can get 3GB@384bit with a similarly powerful GPU for what is essentially less money with free games factored in.

That's it really, and you yourself have even said if you were buying now, you'd go for 3GB@384bit.

I'm not forgetting, but AMD knows it's poor marketing to have games gimped so that they run badly on nVidia hardware because nVidia has been doing this for so long now, everyone hates it.

It's not conducive to a positive customer attitude.

More fps in the games people play now at there res will be the reason people choose 2gb cards.

There is a handful of reasons for not buying a 2gb card, and a handful of reasons to buy one.

I was told last september on 2 forums to get a 7950 and not a 670 as all games run better on the 7950, i bought a 670, now 9 months later its still fast enough to run most games at ultra settings ( disregarding msaa ).

If the next gen consoles make PC Gfx cards need silly amounts of vram and bus speed then all but the titan owners will need a new card, Or we just buy the PS4 cheaper than a 780 currently is.

Kaapstad · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:34

Here is the part of the article

He said it was playable only on the Titan

They got it to run on the HD 7970 but sadly it did not have the GPU grunt to produce an average of 60fps which most people would class as playable.

Kaapstad · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:35

spoffle said:
The usual suspects indeed, who incicentally are stuck with 2GB graphics cards, and instead of just admitting and accepting it have to go on delusional rants about how it's fine.

It reminds of me comical Ali.

Yes I am stuck with my 6gb cards but being unbiased I am just as happy using my 2 and 3gb cards on a single screen.

whyscotty · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:43

spoffle said:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/02/21/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_video_card_review/4#.UfKHx23kyI9
It puts to rest the "herp derp memory usage is intrinsically linked to GPU power".

I really don't get people's reluctance to entertain the notion that 2GB@256bit is just not suitable for high end gaming now and in the near future.

Fair point, as at those settings it was unplayable.

IIRC the was a furore over those results and a few ppl on here benched some games themselves to see how much vram was used/cached

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18497413

Hitman: Absolution

1,800MB - 1920x1080 - Ultra (8xMSAA) - 7970 CF

So this is my problem, these test's where done after that reveiw.

You can see crossfire 7970's didn't use over 2gb vram

Pgi did the Hitman test

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=23962963&postcount=69

I'm not being awkward, if I'm wrong I'm happy to be proved wrong

I've always preferred users reviews/opinions over official reviews

spoffle · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:44

Kaapstad said:
Here is the part of the article

He said it was playable only on the Titan

No he didn't.

They got it to run on the HD 7970 but sadly it did not have the GPU grunt to produce an average of 60fps which most people would class as playable.

Ah, I see you're changing your argument now.

It's not at all playable on the 680 so settings will have to be turned right down.

Your previous argument was that you'd have to turn settings down equally on both.

Captain consistency over here.

Kaapstad said:
Yes I am stuck with my 6gb cards but being unbiased I am just as happy using my 2 and 3gb cards on a single screen.

You're not unbiased and you need to stop pretending that you are.

Kaapstad · 26 Jul 2013 at 16:59

spoffle said:
You're not unbiased and you need to stop pretending that you are.

Do you think I should see all my AMD cards and replace them with NVidia

Yes or no ?

Perhaps I should get a couple of MSI GTX 780 lightnings what do you think ?

And my argument has been that the HD 7970 and GTX 770 will become obsolete at the same time as they will both run out of GPU grunt.

I would hardly call an average 52 fps a good selling point for any new card.