• 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.

dave_beast said:
Heaven and 3DMARK11 stress the cards way more than any game, still can't see any Keplers in here to beat my score....

You know why?

Because they can't, because Kepler is overclocked mid range derp.
Click to expand...

Would you have the 680 compete with the 7950 then, the AMD mid range offering?

Thought not. The NV "mid-range derp" AT LEAST keeps up (and in the majority of cases beats) with the top end red team offering - stock or overclocked - end of.

It's OK, you can turn off your internal dialogue. It really does.
 
bhavv said:
I'm an AMD / ATI fanboy based on my GPU history actually.

G104 / G114 / GK104 are all I've ever been interested in from Nvidia.

Fanbois actually wont listen to or agree with industry standard testing, results and conclusions, and will never change their opinion regardless of the evidence.

The GTX 680 is a faster card than the 7970, get over it and accept the truth.
Click to expand...

If you run at stock I don't disagree with you, but for everybody else who doesn't there's not a lot in it, especially at high res, so price becomes more of a factor, but that's also broken on both sides at the minute until one of them blinks.
 
Rroff said:
I know what a 7970 gets on the every day 24x7 overclock that most people are going to attain - and your result is ~14% higher which to me suggests you either have a card that does atleast 1300MHz somehow or your using non-standard tessellation or AA options. Now I fully admit I don't have as comprehensive experience of overclocking AMD cards as I do nVidia and might be wrong but your replies so far aren't really convincing me of that.
Click to expand...

This is with the tessellation slider cheat at the same settings, and it's at 1200/1600mhz at 1.25v

00001.jpg
 
TheRealDeal said:
It looks pretty poor in sli, barely beating out 7950cf or gtx580sli. Could be down to early drivers.
Click to expand...

It could be. But then it could be the memory bandwidth or some other bottleneck caused by the fact that this is a pretty weak spec card.

Without starting the argument again the 680 is very mildly specced. This is because it's clearly not a high end part. In gaming it performs amazingly, however, sooner or later with a mid ranged part you are going to come across some problems.

Honestly, if Nvidia really are pretending this is their high end card then they need help. Low memory bandwidth, pretty low memory for a £400+ card and so on all point the other way.

As for drivers? absolutely, it could well be that. But, Nvidia are usually much better at AMD with drivers. And they have had three months to work on them and improve them, and I imagine that that's exactly what they did.

Personally I would like to see unique non unified drivers. I am only too aware of problems when you try and mash everything all into one. Fix one thing, it breaks another (hobbyist programmer, worked with a friend on an emulator).

Let's say we fixed the payout code on one technology, that would then lead to the payout code becoming broken on another.

MAME is very similar. As they gleefully bolt on all these new techs they unknowingly break something else.
 
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.
 
Just to back up daves score in heaven heres one dazboots done in the heaven 3 thread. He had 1250 core so a little more than dave but his score was also higher.

Dazboots said:
i7 cpu 4.6ghz 1866 memory.
gigabyte windforce 7970
gpu- 1250 memory 1701

just shy of 2500 1 card only.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Click to expand...

I think 1300mhz core would see a single card with over 100 fps average which is pretty nice.
 
TheRealDeal said:
Just to back up daves score in heaven heres one dazboots done in the heaven 3 thread. He had 1250 core so a little more than dave but his score was also higher.
Click to expand...

Cheers dude, not too fussed anyway, pretty happy here with the fastest single GPU that I got for £416 on day back in January.

Comparing the 680 and 7970 to cars

The 680 is a remapped Golf GTI 1.8t, and the 7970 is a Mustang.
 
ALXAndy said:
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.
Click to expand...

You *did* read the bit where the 7970 is OC'd to 1250Mhz on the core in that review, right? How many cards do you see in the wild pushed that far?

Real world overclocks please, not *golden chips* that are like hens teeth. 1150 is what most folks can achieve.
 
DamoTourettes said:
You *did* read the bit where the 7970 is OC'd to 1250Mhz on the core in that review, right? How many cards do you see in the wild pushed that far?

Real world overclocks please, not *golden chips* that are like hens teeth. 1150 is what most folks can achieve.
Click to expand...

Tom Logan did a review yesterday on lower clocks.

This is something you are either going to accept, or you are not.

Same goes for everyone else.

Here we go. Clock per clock test. Is that fair then yes?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1232948/7970-vs-gtx-680-who-is-the-real-king

So who really is the Clear winner? Clock per clock the battle gets really close, and maximum overclocks are very close as well.. I dont see why so many review sites jumped the gun to say its the clear victor, when the stock clocks are so high when compared to the 7970. If for instance, Sapphire does release their 1335 Mhz 7970 (here), this would be the victor just based off its clocks alone. With this in mind, there isnt a clear winner.
 
ALXAndy said:
Tom Logan did a review yesterday on lower clocks.

This is something you are either going to accept, or you are not.

Same goes for everyone else.

Here we go. Clock per clock test. Is that fair then yes?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1232948/7970-vs-gtx-680-who-is-the-real-king

So who really is the Clear winner? Clock per clock the battle gets really close, and maximum overclocks are very close as well.. I dont see why so many review sites jumped the gun to say its the clear victor, when the stock clocks are so high when compared to the 7970. If for instance, Sapphire does release their 1335 Mhz 7970 (here), this would be the victor just based off its clocks alone. With this in mind, there isnt a clear winner.
Click to expand...

3DMark 11 - L2N Results, GTX 680 vs AMD 7970 - Performance Setting

First Corner: AMD

Intel i7 3960x @ 5.2 ghz
MSI 7970 @ 1800 Mhz
4Gb DDR3 @ 2314 Mhz

Score: P15035

Link

---

Second Corner: Nvidia

Intel i7 3930k @ 5.5 ghz
EVGA GTX 680 @ 1842 Mhz
4 Gb DDR3 @ 2400 Mhz

Score: P14912

Link

--

WINNER : AMD
 
You know, I would actually like to feel sorry for people that jumped the gun and rushed out and replaced their 7970 with a 680. I would.

But I can't. Any one stupid enough to believe everything they read at a first glance deserves to be shafted.

The absolutely crazy part is that even if the 680 did win and was faster (which it doesn't and it isn't) there would still be no logical sane reason to replace one with the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom