Associate
- Joined
- 26 May 2012
- Posts
- 387
- Location
- Belfast, UK
I run my GTX 670 at stock, it's the WF3 version. Don't see much need to OC when all I play is COD.
Main regret is the price difference, plus the free games with the 7950.
-
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.
[TechSpot] The Best Graphics Cards: Nvidia vs. AMD Current-Gen Comparison
- Thread starter Final8y
- Start date
I run my GTX 670 at stock, it's the WF3 version. Don't see much need to OC when all I play is COD.
Main regret is the price difference, plus the free games with the 7950.
I thought the 670 did pretty well v the 7950 / boost (better than I expected). There's so little in it, you'd be unlikely to even notice the difference anyway.
Don't take this the wrong way but to those guys who are now saying (and I felt this way for a bit), "I wish I had got that now instead" needs to take a reality check (which I had to). The 670/80/7970/50 are so close, it takes a fps monitoring tool to tell them apart. I was guilty of doing the same but now realise that my 680 or both of them are more than capable cards and I did have 10 months of stomping on the 7970s 
(last bit for you Tommy)
(last bit for you Tommy)
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 16,126
- Location
- London
^This.
Way too easy to get caught up in barcharts and benchmarks.
Way too easy to get caught up in barcharts and benchmarks.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 10,263
- Location
- UK
I thought the 670 did pretty well v the 7950 / boost (better than I expected). There's so little in it, you'd be unlikely to even notice the difference anyway.
The only diff you'll notice is the whopping price.
Nvidia surely must be noticing a decline in sales now, so either they need to bring out an almighty driver set for all the 6x cards or start reducing their prices bringing along decent games bundled with their cards.
Don't take this the wrong way but to those guys who are now saying (and I felt this way for a bit), "I wish I had got that now instead" needs to take a reality check (which I had to). The 670/80/7970/50 are so close, it takes a fps monitoring tool to tell them apart. I was guilty of doing the same but now realise that my 680 or both of them are more than capable cards and I did have 10 months of stomping on the 7970s
It's only really relevant to people buying now, HOWEVER you could sell your GTX680s and get 7950s, make a profit and have more performance.
So in that regard, I think it's relevant for people to say, though I know it's very unlikely that you'd consider selling your 680s anyway.
Only skimmed it so far, seems like a decent article.
One thing to note tho 310.61 are not performance drivers, these are product compatibility/support updates - the performance gains are mostly incidental. No idea if nVidia has a performance driver planned or if there is even anything more they can squeeze out the 600 series.
One thing to note tho 310.61 are not performance drivers, these are product compatibility/support updates - the performance gains are mostly incidental. No idea if nVidia has a performance driver planned or if there is even anything more they can squeeze out the 600 series.
Last edited:
I don't see a smiley or anything else to indicate that your not serious, so I will respond in kind.
Did you actually look at the review posted, the standard 680 beats the 7950 in all but a few tests, so with gregsters 680's being some of the faster varieties with a good overclock just how is he suppose to get more performance out of slower cards?
Yes he does your quite right.
So lets look at some extra high resolution results from here
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/1.html
hmm it would seem that at 5760*1080 out of the 16 Game tests run at that resolution the 680 beats the 7950 12 to 4.
So once again I say you are wrong in saying he could change to 7950's and get better performance.
(yes I know you only posted such a thing to get a response which of course i jumped into feet first......oh well....what else are forums for
)
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 6,586
Yes he does your quite right.
So lets look at some extra high resolution results from here
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/1.html
hmm it would seem that at 5760*1080 out of the 16 Game tests run at that resolution the 680 beats the 7950 12 to 4.
So once again I say you are wrong in saying he could change to 7950's and get better performance.
(yes I know you only posted such a thing to get a response which of course i jumped into feet first......oh well....what else are forums for
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18455827
^Unbias comparison, 3x1080 - 680 SLI vs CF7950.
One of the main reasons for Greg not to even think of switching is he enjoys benchmarking, you wont get anywhere near his scores with 7950s.
Single GPUs...
As above.
As above
(yes I know you only posted such a thing to get a response which of course i jumped into feet first......oh well....what else are forums for
No I didn't, I'm going by Rusty's reviews really. I don't understand why you linked that techpowerup review really. It doesn't list the clockspeeds that the cards are at (implying reference, which for a 7950 is 800Mhz) and it's single GPUs, which I wasn't talking about.
Yes they are single gpu's your quite right, but that is what I was going by, just as in the review posted in the start of this thread. I am not aware of Crossfire scaling massively better than SLI with this generation.
I do concede that Rusty's results certainly do favour the 7950's.
And you say you didn't post expecting a response. yeah right, you love a good GPU discussion just like the next man, or did you expect the thread to close after your comment
I do concede that Rusty's results certainly do favour the 7950's.
And you say you didn't post expecting a response. yeah right, you love a good GPU discussion just like the next man, or did you expect the thread to close after your comment
Yes they are single gpu's you're quite right, but that is what I was going by, just as in the review posted in the start of this thread. I am not aware of Crossfire scaling massively better than SLI with this generation.
I do concede that Rusty's results certainly do favour the 7950's.
And you say you didn't post expecting a response. yeah right, you love a good GPU discussion just like the next man, or did you expect the thread to close after your comment
I think you're having a little difficulty with posts tonight.
I didn't say that I wasn't expecting a response, I said I didn't post to get a response.
It suggests you think I think I'm posting something controversial, you then try to tell me that I'm wrong and show me examples that aren't what I was talking about.
I'm going by what Rusty's reviews said, confirmed unbiased (in fact he's been accused of being AMD biased because of the results, the results he admits surprised him too).
Since I'm just essentially reiterating what Rusty's been saying since he did his benchmarks, I hardly believe what I've said is controversial like you seem to think, because otherwise you wouldn't be acusing me of posting what I did to get "a" reaction (which I know you really meant a negative reaction).
I agreed with that part. I'm talking about you claiming I was posting to get a reaction, which implies I think that what I said was controversial or warranted a reaction.
Based on Rusty's review, I don't believe anyone would view what I said as me baiting for a reaction. It doesn't back up your other point because I'm simply responding to your other point.
Based on Rusty's review, I don't believe anyone would view what I said as me baiting for a reaction. It doesn't back up your other point because I'm simply responding to your other point.
The 7950s are so much faster at triple screen and overclocked it's pretty shocking. The 680's gain less from overclocking at this resolution too due to a bottleneck on the memory bus.
The 7950s were overclocked pretty timidly as well whereas the 680's were both very heavily overclocked. On a pair of good working 7950s the difference could be even larger.
The 7950s were overclocked pretty timidly as well whereas the 680's were both very heavily overclocked. On a pair of good working 7950s the difference could be even larger.