Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

7970 or 780 is it worth it to shell out the extra cash?

Tags:
  • Shell
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 20, 2013 1:40:27 AM

So i'm going to be building my pc in september/october and i'm on my last part and it is either going to be the 780 or the 7970 but is it really worth shelling out the extra cash? i can afford the 780 in my build but i'm wondering in your opinion is it worth the 200+ cash +the never settle bundle that amd offers, also i'm playing on a 120hz monitor if that plays a part in the matter.

More about : 7970 780 worth shell extra cash

June 20, 2013 1:49:20 AM

air tree said:
So i'm going to be building my pc in september/october and i'm on my last part and it is either going to be the 780 or the 7970 but is it really worth shelling out the extra cash? i can afford the 780 in my build but i'm wondering in your opinion is it worth the 200+ cash +the never settle bundle that amd offers, also i'm playing on a 120hz monitor if that plays a part in the matter.


If you are doing things like Crysis 3 on Ultra at 1440p etc, or trying to get the most frames, the 780 will be a much better choice, however the 7970 is cheaper, but it doesn't match the 20-30% better performance. http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2206/5/
m
0
l
June 20, 2013 1:58:41 AM

If you would purchase the games from the bundle separately otherwise, I would consider the 7970 to be the superior choice. If not, it's hard to call. The 780 is obviously more powerful, but if you're willing to turn a few settings down (and I do mean "a few", the 7970 is still an amazing card) when needed for 60 FPS, the 7970 is more efficient. Unfortunately, until AMD releases a CrossFire fix (which the recent 7990 article confirmed they're working hard on), the 7970 doesn't really have an upgrade path, while the 780 does. In your shoes, I'd pick the 780, but only if money wasn't a concern to any meaningful degree.
m
0
l
Related resources
June 20, 2013 2:13:02 AM

if it helps i'm going to be gaming on a 1080p single monitor once i get my build going.
m
0
l
June 20, 2013 2:18:27 AM

air tree said:
if it helps i'm going to be gaming on a 1080p single monitor once i get my build going.


That being the case, it's down to whether 60FPS on max or near-max is enough for you. If so, the 7970 would be great. If you demand a higher FPS count (which is pretty atypical, as the number of people who can even see the difference past 60 FPS is somewhat limited), or absolutely detest ever turning down settings, the 780 would be what you'd want.
m
0
l
June 20, 2013 3:10:57 AM

The question is: 20% more performance worth more 200$ ?

7970 ghz- 450$ (100%)
780 - 650$ (120%)

20% of 450$ is 90. Meaning mathematically speaking for 20% more performance you should pay 540$ max. . So now the question is are you willing to pay a overpriced GPU? Or you want the best bang for the buck?

m
0
l
June 20, 2013 3:24:23 AM

centaurius said:
The question is: 20% more performance worth more 200$ ?

7970 ghz- 450$ (100%)
780 - 650$ (120%)

20% of 450$ is 90. Meaning mathematically speaking for 20% more performance you should pay 540$ max. . So now the question is are you willing to pay a overpriced GPU? Or you want the best bang for the buck?



Well argued, though I have a comment: By that general logic, we should find the GPU with the single best price-to-performance ratio and compare everything to it. While that makes sense in theory, it ignores the practical application. In some cases, one simply does need the "less efficient" option as a prerequisite for their planned use, or for the performance they desire (in fact, all GPUs which can play games at max settings would be "inefficient", as there are much cheaper GPUs with only moderately worse performance). I should note, I don't disagree in this case. The 780 isn't by any means an efficient card. I'm just pointing out the risks of using price-to-performance comparison as your only point of comparison.
m
0
l
!