Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

7950 vs 760

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 7, 2013 6:45:15 AM

Hello, im wondering, since the 7950 performs around 10 fps better in most games, should i go for it as it has only a 20 dollar price diffrence but also comes with the never settle bundel

More about : 7950 760

August 7, 2013 6:47:44 AM

i would go with the 7950
m
0
l
August 7, 2013 6:50:00 AM

John Bong said:
i would go with the 7950


the 760 is better for overclocking, also it features newer components and draws less power. and with the new 9000 series coming out in october is it worth it getting a last gen. card?
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

a b U Graphics card
August 7, 2013 6:52:02 AM

Georg Suits said:
Hello, im wondering, since the 7950 performs around 10 fps better in most games, should i go for it as it has only a 20 dollar price diffrence but also comes with the never settle bundel


If you like PhysX , stay with 760 GTX .

If not go for the faster card.

for me I prefer PhysX ofer some few fps.
Share
August 7, 2013 6:53:52 AM

avilash98 said:
I will go for 760 because gaming wise its a bit ahead and also the latest with latest OPENGL and drivers, though computing performance is better for AMD

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-7950-vs-GeForce-GTX-7...


im looking to later upgrade to SLI or crossfire and i guess going with the 760 is a better option there, i mostly play demanding games like arma 2 and arma 3
m
0
l
August 7, 2013 7:06:37 AM

avilash98 said:
660s/760s are better for slis...go for that.
AMD + XFire = Epic Fail


also is there any point in getting the 4 gb version of evga or gigabyte, for multimonitor would be awsome, i plan on having them on a triple monitor setup, all of them a 1080p
m
0
l
August 7, 2013 7:18:12 AM

avilash98 said:
3X monitor + 1080 definitely will require 4 GB atleast.

but ill have the 760s sli 4 gb both, does it matter where i plug in the connectors? should i use all the dvi first and then evreything else?

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 7, 2013 7:47:29 AM

Georg Suits said:
avilash98 said:
3X monitor + 1080 definitely will require 4 GB atleast.

but ill have the 760s sli 4 gb both, does it matter where i plug in the connectors? should i use all the dvi first and then evreything else?



Nvidia has a tool http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/3dvision-sur... and 4GB is arguable from both ends, so depending on price make your best judgement.
m
0
l
August 7, 2013 8:14:30 AM

CF was a no-go until last AMD driver, now it becomes an atractive solution for the few titles that you cant hit 60fps @ 1440p+. you can't use Cf for multimonitor gaming reliably. So 3x1080p is still NVIDIA turf, just remember that you can't mix and match monitors in surround. The only stable NVIDIA setup is 3 identicals monitors. CF, while not perfect is much more flexible.

But NVIDIA solution did not showed great numbers against AMD cards in 1600p and above; 760 is neck to neck with 7950 boost at 1440p, bt loses more often than wins at triple 1080p setups. Not that any card is viable for triple monitor gaming, as you will be running out graphics juice way before memory size becames an issue.

760 launch price was USD250, now expect to pay a bit more. if you wanna any game on the never settle bundle, it is a no brainer to go with AMD. Power is about the same, as is performance. 760 is a bit faster for low-end resolutions like 1080p, they tie at 1440p and 7950 "wins" by a large margin in 3x1080p, but you will not get playable frame rates there.

A fanoy stated above that AMD is about to launch next generation cards, so piking a 7950 now would put yopu on a last generation card. i say the reason to buy a new card is that you need it to play a game NOW. 760 is also a rebadge of an old generation card, so it pure fanboyism to argue that 760 is newer tech than 7950. if anything, a 7950 would last you longer: lower thermals and larger memory grants it least that.

If i would pick one card today, it would be a 7950 boost. if my gaming needs required more than a 7950, i would up the ante until a 780, not SLI a 760 or CF a 7950.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 7, 2013 9:11:49 AM

geok1ng said:
CF was a no-go until last AMD driver, now it becomes an atractive solution for the few titles that you cant hit 60fps @ 1440p+. you can't use Cf for multimonitor gaming reliably. So 3x1080p is still NVIDIA turf, just remember that you can't mix and match monitors in surround. The only stable NVIDIA setup is 3 identicals monitors. CF, while not perfect is much more flexible.

But NVIDIA solution did not showed great numbers against AMD cards in 1600p and above; 760 is neck to neck with 7950 boost at 1440p, bt loses more often than wins at triple 1080p setups. Not that any card is viable for triple monitor gaming, as you will be running out graphics juice way before memory size becames an issue.

760 launch price was USD250, now expect to pay a bit more. if you wanna any game on the never settle bundle, it is a no brainer to go with AMD. Power is about the same, as is performance. 760 is a bit faster for low-end resolutions like 1080p, they tie at 1440p and 7950 "wins" by a large margin in 3x1080p, but you will not get playable frame rates there.

A fanoy stated above that AMD is about to launch next generation cards, so piking a 7950 now would put yopu on a last generation card. i say the reason to buy a new card is that you need it to play a game NOW. 760 is also a rebadge of an old generation card, so it pure fanboyism to argue that 760 is newer tech than 7950. if anything, a 7950 would last you longer: lower thermals and larger memory grants it least that.

If i would pick one card today, it would be a 7950 boost. if my gaming needs required more than a 7950, i would up the ante until a 780, not SLI a 760 or CF a 7950.


Sorry, but the story isn't all there. In depth, that driver isn't the complete solution, merely a big step in the right direction. Nvidia cards have hardware that works while AMD is trying to push the problem off with software. Sli is still a good option, CF is not. And budget requirements may cause him to get a 760 now, another later. The re-branding thing is true for the chip only. The PCB, VRM, Thermal Output, Clock Speed and reference design have all been modernized. Yes, New tech.
m
0
l
August 7, 2013 11:45:17 AM

I say go with the 760, mainly because I've never had a good experience with ATI, and I like my better graphics at the cost of frame rate
m
0
l
October 27, 2013 7:12:58 PM

Georg Suits said:
avilash98 said:
I will go for 760 because gaming wise its a bit ahead and also the latest with latest OPENGL and drivers, though computing performance is better for AMD

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-7950-vs-GeForce-GTX-7...


im looking to later upgrade to SLI or crossfire and i guess going with the 760 is a better option there, i mostly play demanding games like arma 2 and arma 3
arma 2 + 3 are CPU demanding, not so much gpu

m
0
l
!