Best graphics card for around £200?

[J.D]

My 4870x2 died yesterday and i had to choose between the GTX 480 or the 6950 (6970).

I looked at the benchmarks for both and compared and found that it was pretty much 50/50 on which one was best.

So i decided to go for the 480, purely because the 4870x2 was my first ATI card and the drivers where a pain and it's died on me in 2 years, yet my 6800GTS is still going strong.

Nvidia wins!

Sorry to hear about the 4870 X2 . I was nearly going to buy one of them (4870X2) before buying the card in my sig. Also I've heard a lot of conflicting reports with crossfire. Some it works fine, others have endless problems. I think this is like the GTX 460 not being compatible with some motherboards. More testing has to be done from either company so situations like these happen less often. Nvidia IMO have been better stability wise for multi GPU systems over AMD. I'm basing this from problems read on this forum from various users over the years. Single card though, well both are fine here for me stability wise on both Nvidia and ATI. My last Nvidia card was the 8800GTX and that was perfect, just like ATI have been for me too.

Even though I slightly favour the 6950 (unlocked) over the GTX 480 due to heat, power draw and being new over the EOL GTX 480. I'd still be happy with one if I had it in my rig. I wouldn't swap my card for one now but for £20 cheaper than I paid for my 6950 when the GTX 480 deal was on, I'd have bought it easily as I would get my true resolution out of my CRT gaming monitor as well as be performing similarly to what I am now.

Enjoy your card as it's a really great performer. I've been gaming on my friends i7 @ 4Ghz with a single GTX480 and now SLI as he bought another one. I think it's a brilliant card. Heat doesn't bother me that much but power draw does slightly and being EOL. Apart from that, both cards overclock well and perform closely.

What I'm really interested in seeing is a 900Mhz core GTX 480 vs a 950Mhz core unlocked 6950. That would paint the picture I'd like to see.

 

[bru]

AMD added dual BIOSes to facilitate safe BIOS flashing, it doesn't invalidate the warranty.

well seeing as you are so sure about this i asked OCUK.

dear OCUK
could you please tell me if i was to buy one of the AMD6950's you sell and then flash the bios with a non official bios that unlocks the extra components would it still be covered by the warranty of the product.

their response

Good morning,

I can confirm that if you do this it shall void the warranty completely, so you will not be covered if it ever goes wrong.

so as i said originally if you flash your card to unlock the extra performance you will invalidate your warranty.

 

[J.D]

so as i said originally if you flash your card to unlock the extra performance you will invalidate your warranty.

Yes but you can flash your original untouched BIOS back in 30 seconds and who will know the difference other than the person doing it?.

If the card has no problems then I see no problem in doing this. If a user has damaged the card due to using the 6970 BIOS instead of just unlocking the shaders then I believe that they should pay for their mistake and let it be a lesson learned.

 

[Brumboy]

I'm most likely going to purchase a 6950 soon and flash it to 6970. I was reading my motherboard manual and unfortunately it doesn't support SLI, but it does support quad crossfire so it makes sense to go for the 6950 for crossfire in the future.

The 480 is very tempting still because you can overclock it to near 580 performance which beats a 6970, but then you have to include power consumption/heat/noise and reliability when overclocking/unlocking.

Cheers for the help everyone.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Yes but you can flash your original untouched BIOS back in 30 seconds and who will know the difference other than the person doing it?.

How do you propose to do that if the video card dies? I've only ever had one video card fail on me and once it was gone that was that - it plain didnt work. I wouldnt have been able to reflash it!

 

[J.D]

How do you propose to do that if the video card dies? I've only ever had one video card fail on me and once it was gone that was that - it plain didnt work. I wouldnt have been able to reflash it!

Well if it dies or even is damaged from prolonged use on the 6970 BIOS which I highly recommend to stay away from then if you quoted my full post then you'd have my answer which I'll provide underneath .

If the card has no problems then I see no problem in doing this. If a user has damaged the card due to using the 6970 BIOS instead of just unlocking the shaders then I believe that they should pay for their mistake and let it be a lesson learned.

If the card is working fine and the user has not damaged it, I don't see a problem in sending back a fully working card with original BIOS and locked shaders just like when bought.

I've heard of the 6950 flashed to 6970 damaging cards but that is due to the different memory timing. I noticed the artifacting and changed back to stock as soon as I seen anomalies on the first day I had the card and have never touched the 6970 BIOS again. So if people are sensible and just unlock the shaders and keep the memory timings of the 6950 then the only problem would be if a flash messes up. Oh wait, no there isn't (dual BIOS) .

 

[Ezyryder]

If it doesn't work AT ALL Fox and you set the switch back to original how are they going to know that you unlocked it?

 

[kylew]

well seeing as you are so sure about this i asked OCUK.



their response





so as i said originally if you flash your card to unlock the extra performance you will invalidate your warranty.

Yes, but some of the webnote staff aren't known to be particularly accurate, and have probably saw "bios flash" and thought "Uh, no warranty". AMD would not include dual BIOSes if it wasn't to flash your card's BIOS, the whole reason the "flash your BIOS = no warranty" is because of people who would break their card due to a bad flash, this is impossible with 6900s due to their dual BIOSes, so it's no longer relevant.

 

[Tute]

I'm utterly astounded. Did I really just see a 560 recommended over a 480 or 6950 (which, presumably, can be flashed to 6970)?

Good grief.

 

[Rroff]

Oh so from 800Mhz up to 1000Mhz with only 1.225v. Also I'd push that up to 1.3v to go further which I haven't even tested yet. Yeah, so only my card can do this?. I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you due to time spent on various forums and seeing people with their overclocks. Most people don't even push their card as long as they can run 6970 clocks with their unlocked shaders 6950 BIOS. Those that do are easily going further than a 7% overclock.

I'm just sharing my experience as well as the amount of reading I've done rather than leaving it to you assuming which isn't really beneficial to the thread. Now if it was anything GTX 470 related then I'd listen to what you had to say as I know you have got these cards and have had them for a while. I'm just not putting up with claims like you have made regarding the 6950 overclocking ability though as they are wrong.



Realworld?. Are you being serious here?. I can hit 1000Mhz core and that's at 1.225v as I mentioned above. Next time I'm benching I'll see if I can get further than 1000Mhz on the core with up to 1.300v. Air cooling btw.

I'm sorry Rroff but you're wearing your green shades again and you've actually been pretty fair lately regarding the graphics card section (Kudos ). If you are going to promote, do it fairly as you put no limitation on the GTX 480 but don't apply this to the 6950.

I know you mention the 6970 but the OP is interested the 6950/GTX 560/GTX 480 (similar price points).

If you really don't know about the 6950 and the overclocking potential then please don't post like you do. You would do the exact same to me if I spouted nonsense about the GTX 470 and the overclock potential of the card, now wouldn't you?.

It's not an argument. Just a disagreement .

I'm talking about how they overclock over the stock 6970 clock, which is what counts when comparing to the GTX480 once you start unlocking/overclocking each.

1000MHz is still only a 13% overclock over stock 6970 clocks (granted its 25% over 6950 stock clocks but thats irrelevant here) and from what I've seen - and I hang out on quite a lot of hardware forums - the majority of people aren't hitting 1000MHz even tho some do - you seem to be in the minority that are hitting 1gig on just over stock voltage. Also 1.3v is quite a bump in voltage - I'm talking whats attainable on safe voltages for 24x7 useage stable.

Hit up a few reviews on google - granted they tend to be a little conservative overclocking wise - and even the enthusiast ones are only hitting ~980MHz, and most are ~940MHz and thats after discounting the ones that didn't seem to be aware you could clock past the 950MHz limit in CCC.

EDIT: That said 1.3v is probably just within the limits for safe 24x7 operation, wouldn't wanna go much above that if I wasn't prepared to potentially replace my card tho.

 

[TheRealDeal]

I'm talking about how they overclock over the stock 6970 clock, which is what counts when comparing to the GTX480 once you start unlocking/overclocking each.

1000MHz is still only a 13% overclock over stock 6970 clocks (granted its 25% over 6950 stock clocks but thats irrelevant here) and from what I've seen - and I hang out on quite a lot of hardware forums - the majority of people aren't hitting 1000MHz even tho some do - you seem to be in the minority that are hitting 1gig on just over stock voltage. Also 1.3v is quite a bump in voltage - I'm talking whats attainable on safe voltages for 24x7 useage stable.

Hit up a few reviews on google - granted they tend to be a little conservative overclocking wise - and even the enthusiast ones are only hitting ~980MHz, and most are ~940MHz and thats after discounting the ones that didn't seem to be aware you could clock past the 950MHz limit in CCC.

EDIT: That said 1.3v is probably just within the limits for safe 24x7 operation, wouldn't wanna go much above that if I wasn't prepared to potentially replace my card tho.

The same is still being said off the 6870 but i have had mine run at 1050 on 1.3 volts. Some people are unlocking the volts and pushing above 1.3 on stock cooling. I think people see the reviews and the word bad overclocks and just don't bother. It seems without voltage tweaks amd cards are pretty weak and nvidia cards tend to be pretty good.

 

[J.D]

I'm talking about how they overclock over the stock 6970 clock, which is what counts when comparing to the GTX480 once you start unlocking/overclocking each.

1000MHz is still only a 13% overclock over stock 6970 clocks (granted its 25% over 6950 stock clocks but thats irrelevant here) and from what I've seen - and I hang out on quite a lot of hardware forums - the majority of people aren't hitting 1000MHz even tho some do - you seem to be in the minority that are hitting 1gig on just over stock voltage. Also 1.3v is quite a bump in voltage - I'm talking whats attainable on safe voltages for 24x7 useage stable.

Hit up a few reviews on google - granted they tend to be a little conservative overclocking wise - and even the enthusiast ones are only hitting ~980MHz, and most are ~940MHz and thats after discounting the ones that didn't seem to be aware you could clock past the 950MHz limit in CCC.

EDIT: That said 1.3v is probably just within the limits for safe 24x7 operation, wouldn't wanna go much above that if I wasn't prepared to potentially replace my card tho.

It doesn't count here though as it's at a different price point so the 25% clock you stated is correct. If it was the 6970 price then the GTX570 would have been included but has it?. This is what the thread is about and you're talking about a card that is just about as expensive as the GTX 570?. What is the point or need of using the 6970s overclock potential when it's not even included at the price point?. Focus on the 6950 not the 6970 please. Also you included 6950/70 and 6970 in post#54 so why not address the overclocking potential of the card that is being considered which is relevant to the OP and relevant to the price point?.

So it's completely relevant here regarding the 25% overclock, even at 950Mhz which I've seen many do on various forums is just under 20% .

A lot of people are not pushing and happy at 950Mhz core with 1.175v, so it's not a case of most won't or most can't, it's a matter of most have not tried to push it beyond stock 6970 voltages. Those that have have managed it or tried yes I agree, there has been varied results to reach 1Ghz and yes, I've been lucky possibly (card is still young to really know the potential). If most 6950s can do just under 20% and you stated averagely that the GTX overclocks 20-22% then again we're talking about a card that is EOL, generates more heat, draws more power and people debate if it's more audible than the 6950 when ramped up although I'm not convinced either way. Anandtech had it louder but I'd like to hear side by side (my friend has GTX 480 SLI). So when you add it all up. The 6950 is more than a contender here for the reasons I have mentioned.

Even check on here, a lot are running a decent overclock too, just like techpower as well as other forums but most importantly, from my own experience. Every GTX 480 can't promise you 900Mhz on the core, just like not all 6950s will reach 1000Mhz even with max voltages through Afterburner.

If I can game for 8 hours at 950/1450 on 1.175v with reasonable temps, 1Ghz isn't really going to kill my card with temps. It might be noisy if the fan needs to be sped up but the GTX 480 would be noisy too if you are pushing it as hard.

Rroff, I own the 6950, don't you think I've looked at review sites till I went blue in the face on more than one occasion? . Come on! lol. Most are decent clockers. People using the 6970 BIOS are just playing with fire IMO. The GTX 480 can't guarantee you a 25% overclock either though.

1.3V would be for benching purposes only until I had it under water or a decent aftermarket cooler that didn't sound like a hoover at high fan speed . It's the same with the GTX 480 again though. Some have to up their fan speed otherwise the card hits 105'C and the performance drops. It gets to a point where you want your fan to not be intrusive for both ATI and Nvidia.

 

[Rroff]

The percentage overclock is irrelevant, I'm talking about how far the GTX480 and 6970 (assuming for the sake of arguement that all 6950s will unlock to 6970 performance/stats) will go beyond the figures posted earlier in the thread once you start talking unlocking or overclocking the cards. The 6970 manages less than 7% increase on average over those figures in terms of actual performance gain (from a quick scrape of some reviews the actual gains based on ratio between clock and performance seems to be closer to 2.5%) whereas the 480 sees a much bigger jump up - which means in the context of the benchmarks posted earlier once you start talking unlocking and overclocking the 480 is the leader at 1920x and they roughly balance out at 2560x. Once the ~£200 480s are gone tho obviously this all becomes irrelevant.

No a 480 won't promise you 900MHz but most people are managing 840-850MHz (~20%) and a good number are hitting into the ~900MHz territory.

If your talking benchmark purposes only... 1.2v is quite attainable on the 480 and I've seen people hitting well over 900MHz clocks - once your talking higher end cooling, water cooling, etc. some people have even managed 1200MHz stable which is a 70% overclock.

 

[J.D]

The percentage overclock is irrelevant, I'm talking about how far the GTX480 and 6970 (assuming for the sake of arguement that all 6950s will unlock to 6970 performance/stats) will go beyond the figures posted earlier in the thread once you start talking unlocking or overclocking the cards. The 6970 manages less than 7% increase on average over those figures (from a quick scrape of some reviews the actual gains based on ratio between clock and performance seems to be closer to 2.5%) whereas the 480 sees a much bigger jump up - which means in the context of the benchmarks posted earlier once you start talking unlocking and overclocking the 480 is the leader at 1920x and they roughly balance out at 2560x. Once the ~£200 480s are gone tho obviously this all becomes irrelevant.

No a 480 won't promise you 900MHz but most people are managing 840-850MHz (~20%) and a good number are hitting into the ~900MHz territory.

If your talking benchmark purposes only... 1.2v is quite attainable on the 480 and I've seen people hitting well over 900MHz clocks - once your talking higher end cooling, water cooling, etc. some people have even managed 1200MHz stable which is a 70% overclock.

Stop using the 6970 for the sake of the argument please. It's NOT relevant. It's not in question to be bought by the OP and it's at a higher price. The overclock is from the 800Mhz to whatever clock it ramps up to. I can't believe I'm having to type this again............ Please stop talking about the 6970, a £270 card. The 6950 and it's overclocking potential is what matters here as there are only three cards being considered.

GTX 560
GTX 480
6950

No 6970!.

You're talking about benchmark sites and using them as your point which I'm not doing, I'm going by people that own, game and benchmark these cards on various systems on various forums. I'll go with what I know from owning one and the amount of time I've spent reading countless user reports than any review site. Also you posted that some review sites didn't even know how to go past 950Mhz so you're even throwing doubt into something you're advising me to take as proof of your explanation. I'll stick with my own knowledge rather than relying on that.

If the GTX 480 is leading at 1920x1200, it's game dependant. Also with the heat, noise, power draw on the EOL card for nearly the exact same performance depending on the game you play then is it worth it?. Also the OP has a 530watt PSU. Should be fine though.

Yes most are hitting 850-860, but I've not exactly seen anywhere of 50% of users with a 900Mhz clock?.

Start showing me users in here that have managed 1200Mhz benches. I mean a decent amount because it seems you're talking about it in regards to my 1Ghz clock on a little higher than stock 6970 volts and comparing it with watercooled cards . This is on air with a little voltage increase. Not a good comparison at all .

 

[Rroff]

I was talking about the benchmarks posted earlier in the thread by some as a guide to the OP as to which would be faster - 6950 unlocked (where they suggested looking at the 6970 figures) or 480 - the figures show the 6970 to be 4% faster at 1920x and 9% faster at 2560. Once you start talking unlocking and overclocking tho the 480 just manages to push ahead at 1920x and they are about even at 2560x.

How far the 6950 clocks over its stock clocks in terms of % or MHz competing against the 480 is irrelevant, we are talking about how the performance stacks up against a set of benchmarks posted here: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=18431386&postcount=41

So as I said in my earlier post it comes down really to how much you'd be bothered by the fan noise (or heat/PSU but thats less of an issue).

The last bit was a slight tangent - just saying once you start talking replacement cooling and really pushing the voltage the 69x0 can't even hold a candle compared to what the GF100 can potentially hit - with upto 1300MHz benchmark stable on the 480 and 1500MHz on the 580 being seen by more than one person and a few hitting 1200MHz every day stable.

 

[[TW]Fox]

(assuming for the sake of arguement that all 6950s will unlock to 6970 performance/stats)

This is the flawed assumption that led me to buy a GTX570 instead. It seemed more likely than not that it would unlock and OC to 6970 speeds but there was still a chance it wouldnt. The fact that even if it would it was about as quick as a 570 in some games and slower in others meant it just wasn't worth the agro in my opinion

 

[bhavv]

whats the pcb look like on the back, thats all you really see.

Meh. The Gigabytes are Fugly compared to the MSIs.

And I like to take pictures so nice looking cards are better

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/5839/dsc00752ei.jpg
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/3770/dsc00761ws.jpg

The Twinfrozr coolers are absolutely fantastic, super low temps, and they look great, as well as having a nice black PCB.

Gigabytes blue PCB cards are an eyesore in most builds, especially on their own latest black PCB motherboards.

I'm utterly astounded. Did I really just see a 560 recommended over a 480 or 6950 (which, presumably, can be flashed to 6970)?

Good grief.

Whats wrong with that? The 560s are completely silent, cooler, and are only very insignificantly behind the GTX 480.

 

[J.D]

I was talking about the benchmarks posted earlier in the thread by some as a guide to the OP as to which would be faster - 6950 unlocked (where they suggested looking at the 6970 figures) or 480 - the figures show the 6970 to be 4% faster at 1920x and 9% faster at 2560. Once you start talking unlocking and overclocking tho the 480 just manages to push ahead at 1920x and they are about even at 2560x.

How far the 6950 clocks over its stock clocks in terms of % or MHz competing against the 480 is irrelevant, we are talking about how the performance stacks up against a set of benchmarks posted here: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=18431386&postcount=41

So as I said in my earlier post it comes down really to how much you'd be bothered by the fan noise (or heat/PSU but thats less of an issue).

The last bit was a slight tangent - just saying once you start talking replacement cooling and really pushing the voltage the 69x0 can't even hold a candle compared to what the GF100 can potentially hit - with upto 1300MHz benchmark stable on the 480 and 1500MHz on the 580 being seen by more than one person and a few hitting 1200MHz every day stable.

Right, well using the 6970 as an example for performance, I'll give you that, but you kept on saying about a poor overclock in comparison but this is when you should have been using the 6950 and not the 6970. It's common sense really if the 6950 would be the only card bought from ATI. I don't care about graphs posted as this is a thread asking about three cards and what good is it to say "well the 6970 only clocks about 7%"?. That was pointless.

Again with the extreme overclock potential, sigh. I thought you've been reading on other forums about these cards?. If I can run at 1000Mhz on air with a little voltage bump on a stock cooler then it's not exactly a decent comparison, in fact it's a terrible comparison to your phantom 1200Mhz GTX 480 and 1500Mhz GTX 580. I'm not denying this, I'm just telling you that this is not normal and if you had read my last post you'd have given proof of these monster clocks from a high percentage of these cards owners. You've got to remember that I see these high clocking cards also, I see records being pushed. These cards, ATI or Nvidia are not the norm so I really don't understand why you have even placed them here?. The comparison is weak but you don't seem to understand what I'm saying .

This is the flawed assumption that led me to buy a GTX570 instead. It seemed more likely than not that it would unlock and OC to 6970 speeds but there was still a chance it wouldnt. The fact that even if it would it was about as quick as a 570 in some games and slower in others meant it just wasn't worth the agro in my opinion

To be fair though, a high percentage, in fact the majority of 6950s will reach 880/1375. If you look through the various forums you would see this also. But, as I mentioned, the 6950 fan might have bothered you if it ramped up. I don't think it would have but as you were less than happy with the GTX 480 noise then you have bought the right card. Yes it's about 33% dearer and nowhere near that in performance difference but at least you're happy.

I might actually start a thread asking others to post their clocks of their 6950 as this is getting tiresome. One card comes through that can't hit the 6970 clocks and now you throw doubt for the majority of cards TWfox?. When I've posted to you numerous times it makes me feel like you don't even listen to me because you feel as I'm defending the card I own and this is not the case. For my 6950 that I paid £215 for, I can hit 950Mhz/1500Mhz on stock 6970 1.175v. So you would most likely have surpassed 6970 speeds but yeah I just must be talking out where the sun doesn't shine....

I'm actually getting fed up of repeating myself. I'm not lying to people here. Neither am I a known fanboi. If people who don't own the card actually spent more time reading than posting their assumptions then I'd maybe not feel like a parrot as I wouldn't have to keep posting the same thing.

 

[Rroff]

Again with the extreme overclock potential, sigh. I thought you've been reading on other forums about these cards?. If I can run at 1000Mhz on air with a little voltage bump on a stock cooler then it's not exactly a decent comparison, in fact it's a terrible comparison to your phantom 1200Mhz GTX 480 and 1500Mhz GTX 580. I'm not denying this, I'm just telling you that this is not normal and if you had read my last post you'd have given proof of these monster clocks from a high percentage of these cards owners. You've got to remember that I see these high clocking cards also, I see records being pushed. These cards, ATI or Nvidia are not the norm so I really don't understand why you have even placed them here?. The comparison is weak but you don't seem to understand what I'm saying .

Google GTX 480 1200MHz - theres atleast half a dozen people who've hit those kinda speeds some of them with 2-4 card setups. I'm yet to find any one whos got a 69xx clock even benchmark stable at +70% let alone every day stable like some of these guys have managed - which tends to be a good sign for overclocking on these cards in more every day settings too.

While the sucess rate for 6950 unlocking is high (about 90% from other figures) and around 70-80% from my own experience I know of atleast 3 cards that have failed - 2 of which belong to people who post on these forums.

 

[TropicLightning]

Not sure what cards you have seen fail, but I have not seen a single card fail to unlock and run at 70 speeds that was unlocked properly, shy of one or two on the memory speeds.

Unless it was some of those that put 70 BIOS' on them and killed them. Which they derserved, but not a fault of the card.