I can't Forget that toms never lie, but the GTX680 is not the fastest card, so much epic lol.
-
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.
7970 vs 680 thread.
- Thread starter ALXAndy
- Start date
I can't Forget that toms never lie, but the GTX680 is not the fastest card, so much epic lol.
Caporegime
Silicon lottery mate some do some don't most the ones I have used have managed at least 6970 levels or more.
Caporegime
Price per performance I would go for the 680.
Stock = 680 by approx 15 - 20% (peak), overclocked = 680 but not by much at all. Both are very good cards. I'd consider what games the card will favour which suit you more than anything else, neither will give poor frame rates.
Last edited:
According to Andy they're both about the same, but only if you overclock the 7970...which apparently Andy may or may not do, as it might or might not be his philosophy?
Lol fan that fire why don't you
Soldato
99% of reviews point to the 680 being the better card in regards to performance, power draw and being the quietest.
Read them and make your own mind up.
Read them and make your own mind up.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Mar 2012
- Posts
- 49
Less than 10mins into that video from Overclock3D and i've already had my head in my hands.
Apparently the extra 1000 points in 3D Mark 11 could be down to PhysX, lol oh my god.
Apparently the extra 1000 points in 3D Mark 11 could be down to PhysX, lol oh my god.
Soldato
You might want to look up ATi TruForm.Tessellation has been around a lot longer than 4 years, and the reason it never caught on until now has nothing to do with nvidia/ati not wanting us to know about it.
How have I been caught out ?
Wait, because I said that right now I don't have anything in my PC overclocked?
So? so you think, well, assume that because of that I automatically don't qualify for some kind of logic?
I'll point it out again.
I bought my I7 950, Noctua NH-D14 and 7970 because I knew how well they overclocked.
When I bought both parts I was aware that they were the best available parts on the market. Thus, I wouldn't need to overclock them just yet. I have, just to make sure it all does what it should, and if and when I need to (and I will, one day) I will make full use of those overclocks.
Fact is they are both fantastic overclockers, but then I already knew that before I bought them. I made sure, see?
Unlike others, who have rushed out and sold their Radeons to buy, well, the same thing.
I've also had the "but you are trying to justify your purchase" rubbish, and I have responded to that also. No, I am not. I am trying to make people see that the 7970 and 7950 are just as good as the 680.
It's people like you, Greg, who just don't want to hear it. Do you know the funny part? no one can accept what I say. No one believes that I paid over £60 for a cooler based on how well it works when the CPU under it is overclocked to hell. No one wants to hear that I bought a 7970 because it overclocks very well and becomes quite an animal. Far more than the 580 it was up against when I bought it.
But your logic? that you bought a 680 because it was the faster GPU? is flawed. It's flawed, Greg, because it quite simply isn't true.
I don't care what other reasons you muster up, because quite simply you have made them clear. You believed that the 680 was the faster card so you bought one.
That is your reasoning and your logic, and you are in this thread trying desperately to hammer that home and make it true.
Hint - just because you keep saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it true.
You foolishly walked into this thread tonight and began telling me I was wrong and that the 680 was faster. The problem is you were very naive. Simply as ten pages ago we discovered through numerous websites and tests that that is not the case.
When I pointed that out to you you flat out ignored it, like many others.
That is when you started digging. Those benchmarks I showed you earlier from OC3D are the same ones I showed you yesterday. Your reaction to them then was just the same as today.
"But they must be wrong, they must be lying".
But the problem with your argument is that they have been repeated. Not once, but three times by other people. And, they came to the exact same conclusion, the one you are struggling to come to terms with.
That's not my problem. Nor is the fact that you keep on arguing over it when the facts are there for all to see, you just don't want to look at them.
But put quite simply? I would not buy a product that was slow or doesn't overclock. That is why I don't have an AMD Bulldozer.
I've also pointed out how tessellation is all a marketing ploy, as it has been available to developers for four years.
DX11 is merely a revision or an extension to DX10. Yet, they didn't need to use it to sell cards with DX10.
Soldato
Seems like a lot of people have "conveniently" forgotten how CPU's are benchmarked against each other.. clock for clock isnt it? I mean come on Nvidia are calling it a "boost" so therefor its overclocking just like my 2700k OC's to 4.6Ghz when it needs to.
So i wana see clock for clock benchmarks for the 7970 vs 680 considering its the "core clock" that is being overclocked here.
I guess some fanboi's dont want to see or hear this though
Btw those benchmark graphs @ OC3D.. u need to go to the website itself and hover ur mouse over the bars to see the numbers
If people had looked at that review in the first place they wud have known this already
Caporegime
or underclock the 680 to make it fair.
Stock 680 as it OC's itself, OC'd even depending on the games although I'd give a slight advantage to 7970 when OC'd properly. If you favour Vram or some of the 680 features would be the only difference. The people who think power draw is as important as some have made out in this thread have issues.
@Andy
Sorry but numerous links and cases prove that the 680 is the faster card. Only one that you posted suggests that is isn't, yet this is also the worst written and least professional review out of them all.
You said yourself that Tom doesn't lie, therefore the 680 must be the fastest card
Sorry but numerous links and cases prove that the 680 is the faster card. Only one that you posted suggests that is isn't, yet this is also the worst written and least professional review out of them all.
You said yourself that Tom doesn't lie, therefore the 680 must be the fastest card
If you don't overclock then the 680 is your best bet, if you aim to keep it more then a couple of years then vram might be a issue.
Oh of course. I was merely demonstrating that it had been around since 2008 in DirectX, yet wasn't used as any kind of demonstration or selling point
When DX11 came out it was all about tessellation. That was the new thing, the thing that we must have and could not be without.
People were going around banging on about it, saying how they had to have it.
But once again it was already there, it just hadn't been used on us yet.
It's quite amazing how many revisions happen in the GPU market that turn out to be absolute nothing. Kind of like Physx and Havok. Not that they aren't used of course, but until they land in a console they'll never be used very much.
I'd imagine both are quite hard work and extra for the people developing the games, so you would really have to care about the games and the pride rather than the money at the end.
And of course, that's what it's all about now. Money.
The 2GB Vram over your 1GB on the 5850 will help. BF3 uses a good 1.2GB and because of lazy programming more games will start to use more Vram. You can pre-order a 2GB club 6950 for £169 which is a cracking price paired with the 2500k and 8GB of DDR3 you will have a superb 1080p gaming machine. Upgrade the gpu a bit later in the year when the prices of the latest gpu's have calmed down a bit..
That's what I would do anyway....
Thanks again mate for your help, one last thing tho i have never actually come across the "club" brand are they any good? Its just that 6950 seems very cheap compared to all the others