7970 vs 680 thread.

[ALXAndy]

Spot on.....What a hypocrit.

So you are trolling too? or incapable of seeing reason?

Mind you what am I saying? you already showed that you are incapable of seeing reason.

So, once again I am going to ask you politely.

Please go away and stop posting in this thread. Because if I decide to start posting in your threads (the who ordered a 680 one) then you are going to like me even less.

I really can't put it any more simply than that. Show some intelligence, and if you want to discuss anything maturely then hey, the thread is here. If not? then don't bother. Because all you are doing is showing how you can jump in head first without doing your homework first.

And it shows.

 

[ALXAndy]

The only one digging here is you Andy, and that hole is getting mighty big!

Do you know what's going to happen in a minute?

I am going to go back through this thread and post an enormous wall of discussion and links that you haven't bothered to look at.

Because if you had you wouldn't be here acting like a child, trying to score points on me that have been discussed over and over.

So, like Greg, if you don't like the thread and CBA reading it then you are clearly trolling.

 

[ALXAndy]

So you don't overclock your cards yet spend an entire thread whining about how your card performs the same as the latest and greatest when you over clock it?

Trololololol.

Did you just miss what I said? or were you closing your eyes again?

 

[ALXAndy]

I may not be the sharpest tool in the box but I dont need to lie to make myself correct.

You do what you feel you have to do and if it involves going into that thread, then crack on brother.

You have been caught out and if anybody now reads your comments, they will know what a hypocrit you are.

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.

 

[ALXAndy]

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.

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.

 

[ALXAndy]

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

You are still here arguing on the last two pages.

And I'm sorry I'm in no mood to waste my time digging up the other links and posts.

You are posting merely on your own ignorance, and that is why you are digging a hole for yourself. Quite simply every one who has read the thread properly and paid attention knows what has gone down. You don't, but you are posting any way.

It doesn't take a genius to see it.

@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

That last line of yours is probably more desperate that Katie Price is for attention.

You quite clearly haven't even read the review, yet here you are pointing out things you think you saw and read in it.

The best part of the review, of course, is that Tom clearly states that it is a very good time to be a geek. It is. But, it's not a good time to be ignorant. That will be expensive.

Also, the fact you are trying to slur the review is quite hilarious. Tom has been reviewing hardware for years. He's one of the few who had the MARS II, and not only did he have one he had two. He also had the ARES, where he tried to point out that Crossfire did not work with two cards. People didn't listen.

His equipment is there for all to see. He has professional software costing thousands of pounds, and video making equipment to match.

So say all you like, I don't care. The fact is that both cards were put into his test rig and benched in the same way.

Also, please lay off the childish attempts to say things like - Tom said the 680 is the fastest ! because you are now clearly, clearly lying.

And lying will get you into trouble.

 

[ALXAndy]

Everyone who has paid attention and is capable of reading knows that the GTX680 is the fastest card ever!

Carry on.

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.

Right now (at least for the next week or two) people are going to say whatever they can to rubbish the 7970. It's just natural human nature.

 

[ALXAndy]

So anybody who disagrees with you andy is digging a hole? I implore you to see sense and realise that the 7970 is a great card however the 680 beats it.

No, you are digging a hole because you keep trying to convince the world that the 680 is faster.

It isn't.

Never mind. Give it time and you will learn to accept it.

 

[ALXAndy]

I think TTL's review was the only one I've read / seen that put them on par with each other. Love his videos though, the banter between him and Mr.Strawberry makes me laugh loads.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/asus-gtx-680-2gb-overclocking-review-win-some-lose-some/15322-6.html

It's becoming more official by the day.

We're pretty sure that most (sanctioned) reviews that you'll read on the Internet today will unashamely proclaim that the GTX 680 is the best single card around, but the truth is most users who buy these cards are going to overclock their cards to the limit and then both Nvidia and AMD flagships are going to trade wins at the top. The lackluster compute performance and inferior memory bandwidth will hurt the GTX 680 in multi-screen, maxed out image quality, high end gaming. We also estimate that the BOM (Bill of Materials) cost on the HD 7970 is higher, given the higher end VRMs/more phases and larger cooling system.

To be fair, we'll have to give it to Nvidia that the GTX 680 is still a very fast card and has significantly better energy efficiencies and clock potential than the Taihiti XT @ 28nm. It is also refreshing that AMD finally has some competition at the top, so we can stop paying ridiculous prices for single GPU boards. We also didn't cover the other features like TXAA and triple display support, but these are gimmicks that are also present in the Radeons. We would like to pit the GTX 680 again with the HD 7970 in multi-GPU scenarios, hopefully 4-way.

With an MSRP at US$499, the GTX 680 sits between the HD 7950 and the HD 7970. If you are just purely using it for gaming purposes, you can buy this card.


Look harder. I will save the other two for later.

That's a respost from about 1pm today.

It's been around since 2001 in both direct x (8, to be precise) and openGL. Back then it was called n-patch and the differing approaches from ati and nvidia, and the lack of gpu power to support, were ultimately what stopped it becoming a must-have feature.

That I did not know ! Still, you learn something new every day

 

[ALXAndy]

Of course he did, I even quouted it. The review is even named after the GTX680 being the new champion, and the entire conclusion clearly states that the GTX680 rofflestomps the 7970.

Green team +1, red team -1.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/asus-gtx-680-2gb-overclocking-review-win-some-lose-some/15322-6.html

It's becoming more official by the day.

We're pretty sure that most (sanctioned) reviews that you'll read on the Internet today will unashamely proclaim that the GTX 680 is the best single card around, but the truth is most users who buy these cards are going to overclock their cards to the limit and then both Nvidia and AMD flagships are going to trade wins at the top. The lackluster compute performance and inferior memory bandwidth will hurt the GTX 680 in multi-screen, maxed out image quality, high end gaming. We also estimate that the BOM (Bill of Materials) cost on the HD 7970 is higher, given the higher end VRMs/more phases and larger cooling system.

To be fair, we'll have to give it to Nvidia that the GTX 680 is still a very fast card and has significantly better energy efficiencies and clock potential than the Taihiti XT @ 28nm. It is also refreshing that AMD finally has some competition at the top, so we can stop paying ridiculous prices for single GPU boards. We also didn't cover the other features like TXAA and triple display support, but these are gimmicks that are also present in the Radeons. We would like to pit the GTX 680 again with the HD 7970 in multi-GPU scenarios, hopefully 4-way.

With an MSRP at US$499, the GTX 680 sits between the HD 7950 and the HD 7970. If you are just purely using it for gaming purposes, you can buy this card.

 

[ALXAndy]

I feel the masses who have rushed to but the 680 have learnt to accept it. I wont quote figures as I have no idea but surely you can admit that the 680 is selling faster than the 7970 did on release?

This seems to tell me that the buyers know what is what.

It could well be Greg ! and fair play, it's a bloody good card !

I think what you need to do mate is understand what is being discussed in this thread.

In the USA (edit, oops put UK !) the 680 is $50 cheaper than the 7970. So, if you were swinging from one to the other? no brainer ! 680 every time.

This thread was not put here to upset you or any one else. It was put here simply to find out the truth. Thankfully reviews went up that were completely honest, and we now have the truth.

It doesn't make the 680 a bad card, not in any way. It's a great card.

But, people did not wait for the truth of the matter and rushed out to sell their 79xx and buy a 680.

Do you think that was a good thing?

 

[ALXAndy]

dont feed the troll's

Don't feed the troll is.

 

[ALXAndy]

Hey im getting my count up for the free delivery! LoLz

Just kidding.. i live in S-O-T so i dont really need it

Post of the day. That really made I laugh

 

[ALXAndy]

I do find it hard to grasp why somebody would sell the 7970 to buy a 680. This makes little sense as the extra 1GB will help on multi monitor setups.

Anyways, regardless of what me and you think, at the end of the day, people will choose from reviews and own ideals. I chose the 680 as this suited my budget/needs best. TBH I don't care what is faster and only jumped on defending because of all the slating of the 680.

See you on the Battlefield

Sad fact is a couple of people today who are selling their 7970s have realised it. And they're not very happy.

I don't play Battlefield haha crap game. Crap single player (too linear) and it's no better in co op. Well, it's worse in co op. It's like a game of space invaders. Just stand there shooting waves of enemies

 

[ALXAndy]

Toms hardware - 'GTX680 is now the fastest single graphics card'.

Andy - 'Tom never lies'.

/thread.

Wait, is that post supposed to be serious ?

You did know that the guy who runs overclock3d is called Tom Logan yes?

 

[ALXAndy]

Now im thinking u confused him a few pages ago Andy lol

How did I confuse him?

I posted bloody benchmarks from his site. Some one said they were false, I said Tom never lies.

If any one is confused it isn't me !

Maybe some people need to lay off the drink.

 

[ALXAndy]

"If you're only here for pure gaming performance and number crunching then the GTX680 certainly has performance in spades. It's nearly identical to the HD7970 in the numbers we saw throughout our testing and only in a couple of instances was the HD7970 ahead" -- http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/nvidia_gtx680_review/19

Now Tom never lies, and here he is indicating that in most cases, the 680 is indeed the faster card.

Any talk of how the 680 overclocks is just plain silly until people have had a few weeks to play with them.

Now look at the benchmarks. I really CBA posting them all again.

And they were both substantially overclocked. The 680 was running @ 1250mhz. In the VR Zone article they could only get theirs stable at 1200.

Twist things all you like.

 

[ALXAndy]

The vr-zone article is also iffy Andy, they claimed the GTX680 would suffer in multi-screen without even testing it, but we all know that it actually doesn't, even when going up to 5760x1200.

Tom's video i'm not sure what to make of, he is claiming they are neck and neck when it comes to games but his results don't show that, and even that it's not that much faster than a 580 which is nonsense.

As for the games, why are so many tested at 8xAA when the game doesn't support 8xAA.
Why is Dirt 3 slower on the 680 than the 560, why the old version of Unigine.
Why is PhysX enabled on the 680, but not the 7970 and then be stupid enough to say it was strange that didn't give the 680 and advantage he was expecting, and speaking of PhysX to claim that the 3D Mark 11 score was higher because of PhysX when it doesn't use it is nothing short of idiotic.

It did look like he was using an older driver, so i will let him off for some of the results that differ from most other places, but the mistakes he made just aren't on, especially when your supposed potentially selling an expensive piece of hardware to someone.

So Linus is wrong too?

I strongly suggest you go back to the beginning and read very carefully.

 

[ALXAndy]

So was Tom lying when he said the 7970 only beats the 680 in a couple of places?

Every review I have seen puts the 7970 and the 680 performance practically neck and neck. With the 680 being slightly cheaper, cooler, quieter and less power hungry. The 680 is undoubtedly the better card, if only by a tiny margin.

I was waiting on the 680 before making a choice, I don't really care about 2fps better in one game or another, the 680 is cooler and quieter, I'm sold. Or will be come next payday unless AMD do something drastic.

If you're about to buy a card now? Get a 680.

It may be the better card to you, but technically it isn't. Heat? my 7970 even at 1125 ran cooler than the test sample. That reached over 80c, I've never seen my card over 76, not even in heavy 3D stuff.

As for the power draw? irrelevant. Don't use that one as an argument because you are literally saving pennies over the other card.

Mind you, if I'm completely honest I wouldn't buy either right now. For once in this generation it is an absolute foregone conclusion that a price war is coming. Predictions could be made before Kepler, now they are absolutely cast in stone. One of them has to flinch. If AMD undercut the 680 by £50 they will expose Nvidia, and vice versa.

 

[ALXAndy]

Doubt either 680 or 7970 owners are disappointed with their purchase apart from maybe high costs.

The way the 680 is overclocked seems a bit awkward though or have I read it incorrectly?
I have a 7950 which is just easy to OC so that's what I'm comparing to (the OC method I mean).

If I had to choose between the two atm the cost would perhaps swing the decision in the favour of green, but I still like how easy it is to OC the current AMD cards though

It is awkward IMO yes. However, I'm sure with a bit of tinkering it will be just as easy as anything before

Took me quite a while to get my head around overclocking a I7 950 when I came from a 940 BE. That thing was simple. Up the volts, up the clocks. Not quite as clear cut on 1366. Ram speed and all sorts of other things come into the equation.