• 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.

Graphics card up to £240

mmm..yes the 1gb limit on the cards I saw were a concern @ 1920 res, thanks for the input.

mmMMMM lots of thoughts..that is on Battlefield with 60 players.

I wonder what other games would be like..specifically single player..

_______
I guess you guys still recommend a lower spec card but as it has 2gb ..its the better card as the 570 looked tempting..
 
Last edited:
@mike306, yes the exact same card.

@VortexA1, @1080p the 570 is faster than the 6950 in BF3, but is the small amount of extra performance available worth £46 more than the cheaper 2Gb MSI frozr III PE?

Only you know the answer to that question as it's your cash, tomorrow at lunchtime the price will go back to £217 on the frozr.

This card specifically oc's like an absolute champ:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=gx-142-ms&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1341

according to this review:

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/4...er_edition_video_card_overclocked/index1.html

So I would think about this one too, it will also go back up in price tomorrow morning about 9am!
 
Last edited:
yes..i looked on a review of the GTX 570 DirectCU II 1280MB at 1920 compared to the slower 2gb cards and it beats all of them.
However 60 + people on battlefield i read there isnt enough vram(how often would that happen)..for me that isnt sufficient to get the slower 2gb cards.. that is my view atm ...
Yes i totally understand where you're coming from."is the small amount of extra performance available worth £46 more than the cheaper 2Gb MSI frozr"....is the extra performance worth it..?
___________________
ok.thank you for that input about the GTX 560s
 
Last edited:
valkynaz said:
Not to mention you could take a chance on flashing the BIOS to upgrade it for free to an HD 6970 without having to fork out an extra £50+. But that's far from guaranteed and there's a small chance of bricking the card in the process.
Click to expand...

Edited for you ;)

And it'd probably have to be flashed with a modified BIOS not a HD 6970 BIOS.
 
Last edited:
Surveyor said:
Edited for you ;)

And it'd probably have to be flashed with a modified BIOS not a HD 6970 BIOS.
Click to expand...

There's nothing in it performance wise regarding the modded BIOS and 6970 BIOS btw. Oh and it's simple with a BACKED UP BIOS (sorry for caps but it's painful to read your warning when people have been flashing their cards without a back-up BIOS for years now). So on top of having the BIOS that you can't overwrite, you also make a backup of your own BIOS before you even flash it.

It would have been nice of you to explain that on top of your "end is nigh" response :p.
 
J.D said:
There's nothing in it performance wise regarding the modded BIOS and 6970 BIOS btw. Oh and it's simple with a BACKED UP BIOS (sorry for caps but it's painful to read your warning when people have been flashing their cards without a back-up BIOS for years now). So on top of having the BIOS that you can't overwrite, you also make a backup of your own BIOS before you even flash it.

It would have been nice of you to explain that on top of your "end is nigh" response :p.
Click to expand...

You're wrong, there is a difference between a modded HD 6950 BIOS and a HD 6970 BIOS.

The VRAM chips are higher rated on the HD 6970 card so flashing a HD 6970 BIOS onto a HD 6950 card can cause problems as the lower rated HD 6950 chips can't cope with the settings from the HD 6970 BIOS.

A modded HD 6950 BIOS unlocks the shaders (if they can be) but retains the appropriate settings for the VRAM chips.

I said that being able to unlock the card was far from guaranteed and that's true.

I said there was a small chance of bricking the card. It happened to someone on this forum. No amount of trying to re-flash the card with the backed up BIOS would fix it so my saying "there's a small chance of bricking the card" is true.

Everything I said was correct and your response is wrong and an exaggeration of what I said.

:p
 
Surveyor said:
You're wrong, there is a difference between a modded HD 6950 BIOS and a HD 6970 BIOS.

The VRAM chips are higher rated on the HD 6970 card so flashing a HD 6970 BIOS onto a HD 6950 card can cause problems as the lower rated HD 6950 chips can't cope with the settings from the HD 6970 BIOS.

A modded HD 6950 BIOS unlocks the shaders (if they can be) but retains the appropriate settings for the VRAM chips.

I said that being able to unlock the card was far from guaranteed and that's true.

I said there was a small chance of bricking the card. It happened to someone on this forum. No amount of trying to re-flash the card with the backed up BIOS would fix it so my saying "there's a small chance of bricking the card" is true.

Everything I said was correct and your response is wrong and an exaggeration of what I said.

:p
Click to expand...

I'm not wrong lol. You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

Yes, memory timings are different due to the different VRAM but obviously you couldn't comprehend English as I wrote "PERFORMANCE WISE". So I'm sorry to inform you again, there is NO difference PERFORMANCE WISE.

Everything you said was from what experience?. Reading or actual hands on?. That's why I bothered to write as you're highlighting the miniscule posibilities without mentioning that over 95% of the cards (with dual BIOS before AMD caught on) flash fine with no problem. If you cared to explain these things in your initial post then I wouldn't feel the need to respond. As a user of this card and having invested a lot of time in the beginning regarding flashing, brands, failure rates, safe voltages etc, then seeing what you're writing I'm just pointing out to the OP that there is very LITTLE chance of your advice being true. So how good is your advice then?. That's what I'm trying to get at.

If you cared to be more specific in your response to the OP rather than try to fix someone else's advice in a quote, we'd not be having this discussion. Yes, what you said is correct regarding there being a SMALL chance of a BIOS mess up but it's TINY and you didn't care to explain that. Yes they are different VRAM chips but once the shaders are unlocked to 1536 there is NO difference in performance. Again, no explanation just a short handed edit of someone else's quote that makes the purchase and flash of a 6950 more daunting than it actually is. All I'm doing is changing your stickman drawing into a beautiful portrait ;) hehe.
 
J.D said:
Yes, memory timings are different due to the different VRAM but obviously you couldn't comprehend English as I wrote "PERFORMANCE WISE". So I'm sorry to inform you again, there is NO difference PERFORMANCE WISE.
Click to expand...

There is a difference in performance between a modded HD 6950 BIOS and a HD 6970 BIOS as the memory timings and speed are different.

It may not be a massive difference but there's still a difference.

There may be very little in it but your statement that there's nothing in it is wrong.


J.D said:
Everything you said was from what experience?. Reading or actual hands on?. That's why I bothered to write as you're highlighting the miniscule posibilities without mentioning that over 95% of the cards (with dual BIOS before AMD caught on) flash fine with no problem. If you cared to explain these things in your initial post then I wouldn't feel the need to respond. As a user of this card and having invested a lot of time in the beginning regarding flashing, brands, failure rates, safe voltages etc, then seeing what you're writing I'm just pointing out to the OP that there is very LITTLE chance of your advice being true. So how good is your advice then?. That's what I'm trying to get at.
Click to expand...

I stated there was a small chance of problems in flashing the BIOS.

That means that in the majority of cases there aren't any problems in flashing the BIOS.

If I stated, for example, that there was a problem in 0.1% of cases do I really need to explain that means there was no problem in the other 99.9%?

Perhaps in your case it does need explaining.


J.D said:
If you cared to be more specific in your response to the OP rather than try to fix someone else's advice in a quote, we'd not be having this discussion. Yes, what you said is correct regarding there being a SMALL chance of a BIOS mess up but it's TINY and you didn't care to explain that. Yes they are different VRAM chips but once the shaders are unlocked to 1536 there is NO difference in performance. Again, no explanation just a short handed edit of someone else's quote that makes the purchase and flash of a 6950 more daunting than it actually is. All I'm doing is changing your stickman drawing into a beautiful portrait ;) hehe.
Click to expand...

As above.

There is small chance of messing the BIOS up.

There will be difference in performance even if it's only small (or tiny as that seems to be your word of choice).

I created a beautiful mimimalist artwork. It conveyed all the relevant points:

  • unlocking not guaranteed
  • it's better to use a modified BIOS
  • a small chance of it going wrong
All you've done is try to scribble over my masterpiece with your crayons.
 
It's ok Surveyor. The proper information is included in this thread now. My work is done ;). Enjoy creating masterpiece stickmen :p.
 
J.D said:
It's ok Surveyor. The proper information is included in this thread now. My work is done ;). Enjoy creating masterpiece stickmen :p.
Click to expand...

The proper information was already included before you came along ;)

But enjoy your delusion that you actually contributed to the thread :p
 
VortexA1 said:
yes..i looked on a review of the GTX 570 DirectCU II 1280MB at 1920 compared to the slower 2gb cards and it beats all of them.
However 60 + people on battlefield i read there isnt enough vram(how often would that happen)..for me that isnt sufficient to get the slower 2gb cards.. that is my view atm ...
Yes i totally understand where you're coming from."is the small amount of extra performance available worth £46 more than the cheaper 2Gb MSI frozr"....is the extra performance worth it..?
___________________
ok.thank you for that input about the GTX 560s
Click to expand...

I apologise about the little disagreement I've had in your thread. I'll move on from that now.

Wouldn't it be a safer bet with 2GB?. I think you should go through countless reviews of cards with less than 2GB of memory and see if the limitations you see through the games you'll be playing and then decide if that extra money is worth it?. Most likely the reviewers will be benching 2GB cards alongside the 1GB+ cards so should make it easier to compare.

Good luck :).
 
I have been looking through a lot of reviews lately for the GPUs, mainly the 560TI 1GB and 2GB and the 448 editions, I cba going back and linking to the reviews, but they were ones by hardware canucks, techpowerup etc.

And from my research there really doesn't seem to be any difference in FPS between the 1GB and 2GB (for the 6950), always the same FPS pretty much at 1080/1200 and this is for crysis 2 and BF 3 as well.

So surely it is going to be the same for the 560TI 1GB and 2GB.

As for the whole debate between 560TI 2GB VS 560TI 448 edition 1280MB, personally after looking through all the reviews, the 448 edition seems perfectly fine (especially the EVGA classified card, performs better than a 570 in nearly all games by a good bit and is cheaper than the MSI model and GB iirc), performs far better than the 560TI 1GB (and going by the difference between the 1GB and 2GB 6950, will be better than the 2GB versions as well), pretty much a 570 but with lower power draw, temperatures and noise (and in some reviews showed the 448 edition actually quieter and lower temperatures than the normal 560TI).

So if it where me, I would be edging towards the 448 edition, either EVGA, MSI or GB.

- EVGA performs far better than both and better than a 570 but draws a fair bit more power than the other 2 and of course runs slightly hotter and louder
- GB model is quieter and has lower temps than both, but is very long due to the cooler
- MSI is the dearest one, performs better than the GB model by a bit, and just slightly higher temps and noise

GB and MSI have roughly the same power draw.
 
I just went looking for them any way, to back up what I said there:


Here is a comparison between all 3 560TI 448 edition cards and you also see a 1GB and 2GB 6950 compared and as you can see, hardly any difference at all between the FPS:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...gtx-560-ti-448-roundup-evga-gigabyte-msi.html

Review of the 560TI 448 edition:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...idia-geforce-gtx-560-ti-448-cores-review.html

By Toms hardware, showing the same thing again essentially:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-560-ti-448-core-benchmark,3082.html

A review of the MSI model:

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_560_Ti_448_Cores_Twin_Frozr_III/1.html


So yeah, I would personally rather have a card that has less VRAM (still slightly more than just 1GB though), but performs better than a 6950 2GB etc. in terms of FPS for games with lower noise and temperatures and in some cases very near a 570 or in the case of the EVGA model, better than a 570 all the time pretty much and not to mention it costs the same roughly the same as the current 560TI 2GB models and the good models for the 6950 2GB cards.

EDIT:

And the 448 editions (MSI and GB) can be overclocked very well from what I have read, so you would be getting pretty much equal performance as a 570 or slightly better.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom