7950 vs the 670/680

Bioshock infinite http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/bioshock_infinite_graphics_performance_review_benchmark,6.html

Crysis3 http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-6.html

Battefiled 3 http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_670_Direct_Cu_Mini/9.html

Tomb raider http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/03/20/tomb_raider_video_card_performance_iq_review/5#.UWbe47XIs6Q

All done with latest drivers.

Right I'm inclined to side with cooldudesubho on this one here. A video card is only as good as it is stock. The way it comes out of the package and when its inserted within your machine. Furthermore what I'd like to say is this.

The 7870 is more poised to go against the 660Ti, The 670 is more poised to go against the 7950 however overtakes it in most cases and is poised against the 7970. And the 680 is such a poor value money wise that its often times better just to leave it out of discussion.

Also given the new light of frame latency slapped across AMD's face it becomes a more daunting task of figuring out who is honestly better. And what I mean by that is that even though AMD may have stronger frames in some areas to the idea that there could be a stutter or a lag between said frames creates an issue of what is the more smooth and consistent experience.

Now I'm not saying AMD is bad and I would most certainly say that there current cards are a very excellent value considering with a 7950 you get crysis 3 and bioshock infinite. However, I feel a bit more safe with going with NVIDIA here mainly because it consumes less power and less heat, typically they take up considerably less space within your case, and nvidia seems to be stronger driver wise although AMD has made great strides over the last little while.

In the end though I'd like to say that any of those choices and the games you currently are interested in playing will yield an experience where you couldn't tell much of a difference with the exception of a rare circumstance where maybe the stuttering would could out due to frames out performing your screens refresh rate.

I'm not necessarily skewing the product. Intel and Nvidia have always been companies to place there products slightly more expensive then there competition. Which is where I would give AMD the value crown. They are more poised to give a stronger offering at every price point. Does that make them better then every card on market most certainly not.

Also, furthermore not everyone overclocks there graphics card and by the same token not everyone overclocks there CPU or the RAM for that matter. Sure on the higher end of things people do, I don't feel comfortable overclocking my 670 but I certainly do with my intel 2500k.

In addition to that you also run into AMD having no restrictions in terms of overclocking where as with Nvidia you are bound by voltage restrictions. So sure if you want to make a stronger value of your card yes you are going to get a stronger contender with AMD. However, keep in mind as well that if your monitor is only a 60 hz or 120 hz monitor going beyond that is really not all that useful.

Right but notice how with linus he didn't go into how far he overclocked or what he overclocked to with each card. Also, he didn't go into the restrictions that a nvidia card has over a amd card in terms of a overclock. When a nvidia card is restricted for example metaphorically speaking able to only be overclocked to 40 percent of its potential and then you have AMD that can go far beyond that you run into a situation where what a normal easily obtained overclock becomes blown out of proportion.

I'm not particularly a Nvidia person nor a AMD person. There are things that both companies do very very well. I personally have games that use Physx and for me its nice knowing that the 4 games that I do have that use it I'm getting the game the way it was meant to be presented with the effects and graphics and all that jazz. I believe I've been plenty fair on both sides of the isle here. I've had over the years as many AMD/ATi cards as I have Nvidia cards i loved my 4770 as well as my 5770.

Furthermore I understand that not everything is going to match up perfectly price wise and Nvidia isn't at a point money wise where they have to be as super aggressive value wise with there product. Which sucks because I would love for them to be but there not. Also, I'm a person that goes a bit more in depth then what I believe toms did and to toms credit they went at it from the standpoint of best graphics card FOR THE MONEY at each price point which isn't the same thing that I'm talking about nor what the discussion of the card comparison is talking about. Certainly if you were going into what would get you the most performance per dollar why even bring Nvidia to the table. Just be sure when you call someone bias you are certain there is no bias here.

Overclocking: I was just painting a picture of a few things.

1. Not everyone overclocks not everyone cares about overclocking so when you overclock your results are very much skewed based on what your chip will allow you to do based on a couple of factors. Which is why I think a bit unfair as a comparison as AMD has always been the overclocking platform.

Also within reason means a lot of different things. I want to see voltages I want to see a lot of things things I never saw or heard in his videos. Furthermore again were at a crossroads here in opinion on platform if you want a overclocking card you go with AMD if you can care less about overclocking then its back to looking at things from a objective point of view.


1. platform amd v nvidia
2. heat/voltages
3. Silicon lottery

2. Fanboyism
You claimed that I was a fan boy because I was looking at things objectively you said that I had a Nvidia bias. I was just pointing out why I have nvidia at the moment that for me it works for others it may not. For those on a budget AMD will always be the stronger option. Furthermore if you are into things like multi monitoring then you may also be interested in AMD however if you are leaning towards tech like physx and 3d and adaptive vsync then you may be more drawn to Nvidia again its more about what a person intends on doing with there machine.

And yes AMD has and always has had that lead in terms of value for the money showing that hey a 3570k is 50 dollars more expensive then a FX 8350 and then discounting the 3570k because its more expensive doesn't make either good or bad do you see what I'm saying here. Its the same argument with the Titan card which isn't really poised to be a value card Nvidia doesn't make value cards historically they are a bit more expensive are they better no are they worse no.

Again I feel different products are poised to go against different cards respectively whether there price matches or not. And based on the frame latency debacle of late it could very likely throw out the lead or any lead that AMD may have at the price to performance point out the window.

I want AMD to well as I would any other company my first computer had a AMD chip in it. I like diversity in the marketplace. However I'm not of the mindset that I'm always looking at a black and white answer as to well the 7870 is at a better price then nvidias offering so it must clearly be better on merit as a hypothetical example.

In the end to the poster do your research don't just buy into what AMD or NVIDIA fan boys will say and find the best solution for you based on that. Because it may not be price related or it may who knows.

TTL: He overclocked that 7950 which doesn't necessarily make one card better then the other. Other than to say that he had to overclock the card to get to the point of the 680 where as the 680 runs cooler an uses less power on stock. Also furthermore that is without the 680 being overclocked. Which is why i think things get blown out of proportion here because essentially what I think is being compared here is the 7950's typically high threshold for overclocking. Which also is subject to luck like everything else that uses silicon called the silicon lottery which if you watch TTL's video's you'd know that he goes into to great depth on this all the time.

Well it can be relevant to the poster most certainly because. Just because someone has frames listed at an amount doesn't necessarily make them equal. If AMD has there 7950/70 posting at a frame every 3 seconds where as Nvidia is having there frames go at every one second really you are seeing more frames with Nvidia however its not being shown because FRAPS doesn't take into account latency between frames which is why I brought it up.

And furthermore given each chip makers feature set it may sway him one way or the other in what chip he picks up.

If it were me right now given the deal with the never settle brand I'd be swayed more towards the 7950/70 myself but again its good to look at things from an objective standpoint of covering all your bases and then making an informed decision.

Different things matter to different people. I've never been one to just say AMD's cheaper get that or Nvidia has this get that.

The 7950 OC and in the even that a 680 was OC'd isn't a apples to apples comparison. But either way the poster will make his own mind up.

Apples to apples in retrospect to overclock ability you are dealing with two separate dies which have different thresholds and also one platform is more open then the other at overclocking. Which again doesn't really mean much for the average user other than the 7950 has the "POTENTIAL" to be faster then then 680 "OVERCLOCKED"

Personally I prefer the 7950, has always done me good

Right and to each is own. It's pretty natural to recommend what you yourself have purchased. The 7950 is a solid card but so is every other card in that performance region.

Right and since you are more privy to overclock it just makes more overall sense to go that direction then. And I get what you are saying because AMD is partnering more with game developers that ports onto PC should favor AMD a little more but well see. I've been building computers long enough to know that the pendulum can swing either way. But nonetheless overclock check AMD and eyefinity over 3d surround check. Just seemed like the better overall choice with you plus you get those 2 free games the value + what you personally do with your hardware just completely put nvidia out of the picture. Hope you enjoy your card man

Well to be technical here the Titan card is Nvidia's top dog. It uses its strongest single gpu. But again what I'm saying here which I don't think you quite grasp is that because cpu's and gpu's use something called silicon the properties within that silicon are not created equal they have the ability to be effected with heat and power differently so you may have a chip that can get 3 ghz where as one that could get 5 ghz you never know where your chip stands in the lottery till you push it. Anyone who has overclocked and compared against others knows this more so then just reading a article or watching a video.

And furthermore when you have voltage locks that really limits your overclock-ability. As you increase the voltage you can push the frequencies a bit higher. But when you can't you are a bit limited.

But either way you slice it for him overclocking and eyefinity seem to be more of what he is after and its just more of a clear win for AMD for him in particular its bad when you argue you your point to show bias in a absolute standpoint of not taking everything into account.

And of course man enjoy your card and the two free games