• 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.

Big mistake to buy a 6950 or 6970 today?

ALXAndy said:
Prices at a guess?

What did the 5870 launch at? £350? which soon rose to £400?

What did the 6970 launch at? £400?

£300 no chance. At all. Since when has a high end fastest single GPU card in a range released at £300?

470 £350 480 £450.

570 £350 580 £450.

Repeat to fade.
Click to expand...

Sorry, what?

5870 retailed at 320 on launch.

6970 around 280-300

580 around 380

470 around 300

480 around 400

I don't have a clue where you pulled those figures from, but I have bought every one of these cards around launch date (not just for myself obviously).
 
ALXAndy said:
Prices at a guess?

What did the 5870 launch at? £350? which soon rose to £400?
Click to expand...

Funny cause I got my 5870 in the first week or so of launch and paid the following from OcUK.

5870.jpg
 
Shayper said:
Sorry, what?

5870 retailed at 320 on launch.

6970 around 280-300

580 around 380

470 around 300

480 around 400

I don't have a clue where you pulled those figures from, but I have bought every one of these cards around launch date (not just for myself obviously).
Click to expand...

http://*****.net/tech/news/graphics/20366-amd-ati-radeon-hd-5870-launch-day-pricing-availability/

That was what they were supposed to cost. They didn't, though.

Firstly original stocks lasted about two minutes. Then there was a delay, then they came back and cost more. Most probably because Nvidia had no response.

580? you can barely get one for that much now. For a while prices were far higher. (£450)

590? how much was that supposed to be? £500 for about a week?

Go find me one now for that "launch price". What are they now? £650? more?

I can remember when my friend got his 5870 from here. He waited nearly two months for it (sapphire vapor X?) and paid nearly £400 for it. A stock one was going for around the same.

What they say and what happens are usually two completely different things.

The 5850 was supposed to cost sub £200. It ended up at £250 after the first month (when stock vanished and then came back).

I wanted a pair of 5770s. They were supposed to be £100 each, I ended up paying £130.

One example -

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/09/24/ati-radeon-hd-5850-launch-date-confirmed/1

Which is what they ended up charging for a 5830.
 
rolypolyman said:
Now now, behave. I would have agreed with you until I saw an LG 42" passive 3D telly in John Lewis. Gobsmacked, blown away it was so emersive I wanted one right away. Sorry to OP for going off topic.:D
Click to expand...

that's alright I have the 47 inch LG passive 3d and it's lush


Thing is I have about £900 to spend on parts this week on the business, if I don't spend it on a GPU but spend it on other parts, then when I buy a GPU in a month I will be buying it myself.
 
If you want a PC now (and I wouldn't blame you, waiting is no fun) then just make sure you get a card with lots of vram.

I read a study on BF3 the other day and on ultra with 4xFSAA it used over 1500mb of vram.

And, that leaves benchmarks etc worthless, because it does not dictate what is actually happening in a game.

GTX 470 755 linked I had. And I had to sell it and buy a 6970L 2gb in order to get BF3 to what I would consider a playable state. It was, to all intents and purposes, unplayable on a 470. It will also be unplayable at that res on a card with a lack of vram. As textures load (looking around you etc) it will pause. It's really, really annoying man.

Thankfully though the engines are all out now. Nothing new (gaming engine wise) is on the horizon so at least I feel kind of safe for now. There's a new Dirt game coming out, but that uses EGO II it seems, so no worries there :)
 
ALXAndy said:
If you want a PC now (and I wouldn't blame you, waiting is no fun) then just make sure you get a card with lots of vram.

I read a study on BF3 the other day and on ultra with 4xFSAA it used over 1500mb of vram.

And, that leaves benchmarks etc worthless, because it does not dictate what is actually happening in a game.

GTX 470 755 linked I had. And I had to sell it and buy a 6970L 2gb in order to get BF3 to what I would consider a playable state. It was, to all intents and purposes, unplayable on a 470. It will also be unplayable at that res on a card with a lack of vram. As textures load (looking around you etc) it will pause. It's really, really annoying man.

Thankfully though the engines are all out now. Nothing new (gaming engine wise) is on the horizon so at least I feel kind of safe for now. There's a new Dirt game coming out, but that uses EGO II it seems, so no worries there :)
Click to expand...

If this is all true then why does a 570 beat the 6970 in BF3?
 
kissenger said:
If this is all true then why does a 570 beat the 6970 in BF3?
Click to expand...

Does it? wouldn't know, don't have a 570.

I do know that a friend of mine has a GTX 480 @ 850. And he had the same problems I did (especially in multiplayer).

I also know that on this forum a couple of days ago some one calculated what BF3 takes from Vram when in ultra @ 4xFSAA @ 1900x1200 and it ate 1600mb or so of Vram.

If you don't think Vram is important then hey, I guess that's up to you. But, with games like Flatout 3 demanding either a 6970 or 590 for ultra settings and an install size of 20+gb? your call.

What I also found strange was the benchmarks I have read on BF3. Apparently my card drops to 33FPS. But last night I played single player (the Iranian city storm to the bank) and my card never dropped below 39FPS. I then overclocked it to 1ghz 1.3v and it never dropped below 44.

They really ought to make these benchmarks clearer, explaining *exactly* under what circumstances they were performed (multiplayer? single player? what level? because the flying one I never saw below 60 FPS).

Edit. My bad, that was a stock 6970. Forget that mine is 940 now on stock and 1ghz if I feel like it.
 
ALXAndy said:
Does it? wouldn't know, don't have a 570.

I do know that a friend of mine has a GTX 480 @ 850. And he had the same problems I did (especially in multiplayer).

I also know that on this forum a couple of days ago some one calculated what BF3 takes from Vram when in ultra @ 4xFSAA @ 1900x1200 and it ate 1600mb or so of Vram.

If you don't think Vram is important then hey, I guess that's up to you. But, with games like Flatout 3 demanding either a 6970 or 590 for ultra settings and an install size of 20+gb? your call.

What I also found strange was the benchmarks I have read on BF3. Apparently my card drops to 33FPS. But last night I played single player (the Iranian city storm to the bank) and my card never dropped below 39FPS. I then overclocked it to 1ghz 1.3v and it never dropped below 44.

They really ought to make these benchmarks clearer, explaining *exactly* under what circumstances they were performed (multiplayer? single player? what level? because the flying one I never saw below 60 FPS).

Edit. My bad, that was a stock 6970. Forget that mine is 940 now on stock and 1ghz if I feel like it.
Click to expand...


Here you go mate:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/22/battlefield_3_multiplayer_performance_iq_review

Multiplayer

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-3-graphics-performance,3063.html

Single player (sick jet mission, Going Hunting)


According to both of those, it does seem that the 6970 beats the 570 by a noticeable margin and that the 570 is more competing with the 6950.

I was surprised tbh, not sure if it's the VRAM or not but still surprised. Happy though :)
 
Last edited:
kissenger said:
Sorry that's ******. 570 is faster in BF3 than 6970:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2011/11/10/battlefield-3-technical-analysis/4

The 6970 will beat the 570 in some games but in BF3 and the (slight) majority of games the 570 is faster.
Click to expand...

I dont really care either being honest but at the same time, you can't really say that two benchmarks are "bull****" and justify that by linking one more benchmark. I would expect and generally believe that the 570 and the 6970 are literally 6 of one half a dozen of the other, very similar performance - hence very similar pricing.

Like I said, I was surprised at the results that Toms Hardware got and HardOCP and I say again, I don't really care lol.
 
Last edited:
@kissenger, You better star out all of the 'bull....' or you'll get a yellow!(you too [WU-TANG]GZA):p

Sorry mate but the bit-tech b/m is not a true indication proper in-game gameplay it's a scripted b/m , :


'Instead we opted for a FRAPS-recorded, 90-second scripted sequence at the start of the campaign's fourth mission - Going Hunting. '

@[WU-TANG]GZA, Yes totally agree, ultimately it's a moot point depending on what card of the two you have, it's six and half a dozen of both and you wouldn't even notice the difference between the two anyway in game!
 
Skidder said:
I am pushing the button on a parts for a new system later today. 2500k based, 16gb ram, SSD

Have HDDs, Enrermax 1000w PSU and optical drives.

I run three monitors but game on one at 1920x1200

Is it a horrible idea to pick up an AMD GPU today (in terms of the impending release of the 7000 series)? Realistically how long will it be before the new GPUs are out? And realistically will one of the cards I mention above allow me to max out games for a while anyway?

Intend to play BF3, star wars mmo in short term

I have the budget through work to buy the whole system today. I could hold off on the GPU and use some 8800gtx s I have sli for a bit but would end up buying new GPU myself that way. What you good people do?

I have a set budget so could delay the card and spend more on 2600k/2700k, better cooling or whatever so not a loss as such to delay.
Click to expand...



Don't get sucked into the interminable 'wait' cycle - buy something, play games in the short window you have, and be happy. Why pay top dollar in a month's time when you have no time to play games anyway?
 
Darujhistan said:
Don't get sucked into the interminable 'wait' cycle - buy something, play games in the short window you have, and be happy. Why pay top dollar in a month's time when you have no time to play games anyway?
Click to expand...

There is always that...... But on the other hand there is the inevitable teaser attached with new cards being released.... If i buy now will the card i just bought suddenly drop in price when new stuff released :P..

If you dont really need to get it then wait to see what prices do... I'm in that boat... have a great 5850 but i feel i need to upgrade to something a bit newer.... Just playing the waiting game at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom