Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Advice on 6950 vs 560ti for a new build?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 6, 2011 6:47:20 PM

APPROXIMATE PURCHASE DATE: Christmas? sometime around then.

BUDGET RANGE: $250 - $300

USAGE FROM MOST TO LEAST IMPORTANT: Gaming. (BF3, Crysis, CoD, things like those.)

CURRENT GPU AND POWER SUPPLY: Since its a new build there is no current GPU/PSU. I'll list the PSU below.

OTHER RELEVANT SYSTEM SPECS: This is what I plan on building(Thats relevant at least.):

CPU: Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz (3.7GHz Turbo Boost) 4 x 256KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache LGA 1155 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor BX80623I52500K

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

PSU(power supply): CORSAIR Professional Series HX850 (CMPSU-850HX) 850W ATX12V 2.3 / EPS12V 2.91 80 PLUS SILVER Certified Modular Active PFC Power Supply

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Monitor: Acer S230HLAbii Black 23" 5ms HDMI LED Backlight Widescreen LCD Monitor 250 cd/m2 ACM 100,000,000:1 (1000:1)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

If there are other details need just let me know :) 

PREFERRED WEBSITE(S) FOR PARTS: Newegg.com or Amazon.com

COUNTRY OF ORIGIN: North America.

PARTS PREFERENCES: No preference really.

OVERCLOCKING: Maybe

SLI OR CROSSFIRE: Maybe

MONITOR RESOLUTION: 1920x1080

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: These are the 2 cards I've been comparing. I've read that the 6950 is slightly better than the 560ti? If it is only just a bit better I like how Nvidia keeps their drivers up to date and the ease of installing them. Also they seem a bit more reliable.

SAPPHIRE Toxic 100312TXSR Radeon HD 6950 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

MSI N560GTX-TI Twin Frozr II/OC GeForce GTX 560 Ti (Fermi) 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Thanks :D 
November 6, 2011 7:45:01 PM

Personally I would go for the MSI 560Ti. It's personal preference but i prefer less heat/ noise. BUT there are 2GB models available. Get that one.



But stock the 6950 is slightly faster and i think the saffire ones have dual bios which has a chance to unlock it to a 6970.


The MSI 560ti twin frozr can be overclocked substantially, to past a stock 570 if you push it hard with more voltage etc.


For anyone who tells you you do not need more than 1GB is wrong. BF3 uses a lot of VRAM with settings on ultra and msaa x4. approx 1.35GB

If you have 1gb you will get stuttering.


I have the MSI Twin Frozr ii 560 ti 2GB and overclocked to 925/1850 /2070 and it runs BF3 on ultra full everything @ 40 - 80fps.

BUT thats only at 720p. At 1080p might need 2 of them or just bump the MSAA off and run everything else ultra as msaa kills the frames.

m
0
l
November 6, 2011 8:31:36 PM

mc_conor said:
Personally I would go for the MSI 560Ti. It's personal preference but i prefer less heat/ noise. BUT there are 2GB models available. Get that one.



But stock the 6950 is slightly faster and i think the saffire ones have dual bios which has a chance to unlock it to a 6970.


The MSI 560ti twin frozr can be overclocked substantially, to past a stock 570 if you push it hard with more voltage etc.


For anyone who tells you you do not need more than 1GB is wrong. BF3 uses a lot of VRAM with settings on ultra and msaa x4. approx 1.35GB

If you have 1gb you will get stuttering.


I have the MSI Twin Frozr ii 560 ti 2GB and overclocked to 925/1850 /2070 and it runs BF3 on ultra full everything @ 40 - 80fps.

BUT thats only at 720p. At 1080p might need 2 of them or just bump the MSAA off and run everything else ultra as msaa kills the frames.



Thanks for pointing out the 1GB vs 2GB! I'll definitely get the 2GB one. I don't have to max out settings but I do love it to look nice lol :) 
m
0
l
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
November 6, 2011 8:34:57 PM

If you have the funds then by all means get the 2GB version. You may not be able to overclock is as far as the MSI card but the 2GB will serve you well, especially in BF3.
m
0
l
November 6, 2011 8:46:05 PM

No problem Derp, depending on where you are you can get it with a free game such as batman, sell that on ebay and the cost is near enough the same as the 1GB model.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 6, 2011 8:56:02 PM

Yeah AMD doesn't keep their drivers up to date so don't buy them. LOL

I gotta laugh at some of the uneducated stuff you see people post on this site.

Reality-

6950 1GB performs much better in BF3 than 560ti.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-3-graph...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-3-graph...

The 2gb version has no performance advantage over the 1gb card at 1080p, so don't waste your money.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6950-1gb-...


m
0
l
November 6, 2011 8:59:14 PM

geekapproved said:
Yeah AMD doesn't keep their drivers up to date so don't buy them. LOL

Reality-

6950 performs much better in BF3 than 560ti.

The 2gb version has no performance advantage over the 1gb card at 1080p.


That;s not true. Both companies(nvidia and AMD) have driver issues, don't decide on just that. Personally, if you don't mind the noise, go with the 6950.
m
0
l
November 6, 2011 9:03:12 PM

Cats.....just leaving it at that
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 6, 2011 9:06:38 PM

geekapproved said:
Yeah AMD doesn't keep their drivers up to date so don't buy them. LOL

I gotta laugh at some of the uneducated stuff you see people post on this site.

Reality-

6950 1GB performs much better in BF3 than 560ti.


+2

Also the Sapphire 6950 Toxic is a sweet card, it comes with a factory flashed 6970 bios, so theres a good chance it can rival the performance of a 6970.

m
0
l
November 6, 2011 9:33:31 PM

The frame rate at 1GB and 2GB will be minimal. But with ultra and msaa max and high res it causes stuttering and texture pop in in BF3. I have seen this with a 1GB model in BF3.

It depends what you want. Less noise and heat or slightly more power.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 6, 2011 11:56:16 PM

It might not be worth it to buy the 2GB card but if you have the funds there's no reason not to, especially for a little bit of future proof potential.
m
0
l
November 7, 2011 12:07:37 AM

And to all these smug remarks when i was offering advice: 384 bit etc.

I DID state the 6950 is slightly faster, about 8fps according to toms benchmarks.

That is a stock 560ti @ 822/1645/2000

The MSI stock is @ 880/1760/2004


This can be overclocked extremely well as it can unlock voltage etc.

without voltage can get to about : 950/1900/2100

with voltage +0.06mv bi-tech have got it to 1020/2040/2225

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/01/27/ms...



I stated anyway the 6950 is faster and could possibly unlock the shaders in my first post. And there is a VRAM issue at higher settings at BF3. I have seen this first hand with a friend's who got the 1GB claiming that it wasn't needed. He can't run at ultra @ 720p because of frequent stuttering due to the RAM being eaten up by bf3.

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=351549


So no i am not misinformed i stated the pros and cons of both cards and the actual need for 2GB if using ultra settings and 4x msaa.

It's just whether you want slightly more fps and more heat/ noise or overclock it slightly and have less heat/ noise with a couple fps less.



m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2011 12:39:42 AM

wont a gpu start pulling memory from system ram if need be? im pretty sure thats the case and if so the difference in speed isnt like the difference in speed when you run out of ram and have to start using the hard drive.

m
0
l
November 7, 2011 1:14:06 AM

mc_conor said:
The frame rate at 1GB and 2GB will be minimal. But with ultra and msaa max and high res it causes stuttering and texture pop in in BF3. I have seen this with a 1GB model in BF3.

It depends what you want. Less noise and heat or slightly more power.




i have a reference 2gb 6950, i can barely hear the fan noise on my system not as noisy as some say they are. my system has 3 200mm fans and 3 120mm fans. Temp does get to 70c during furmark stress and never over 65c during games.
m
0
l
November 7, 2011 1:23:00 AM

It still causes BF3 to stutter for a few seconds. Again as I stated it's down to personal preference. Both have marginal advantages/disadvantages. A i stated in the first place.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2011 1:47:00 AM

OP dont worry about noice. are you really going to notice a loud fan when your playing a game? i prolly have one of the noisest gpu's out there with GIGABYTE gv-r6950oc that has 3 fans at 52 decibels which is still below the reference model but i never see above 55* celcius.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2011 1:03:44 PM

mc_conor said:
The frame rate at 1GB and 2GB will be minimal. But with ultra and msaa max and high res it causes stuttering and texture pop in in BF3. I have seen this with a 1GB model in BF3.

It depends what you want. Less noise and heat or slightly more power.


If you saw this, you must have been dreaming. The 6950 runs out of juice long before it needs 2GB vram at 1080p.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6950-1gb-...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6950-1gb-...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2011 1:05:14 PM

WindowsDOS said:
That;s not true. Both companies(nvidia and AMD) have driver issues, don't decide on just that. Personally, if you don't mind the noise, go with the 6950.


I was being sarcastic about the person that posted this. Please read the entire thread before replying.
m
0
l
November 7, 2011 7:48:30 PM

Gotta agree that AMD is meh for drivers.

Although it angered me that Nvidia drivers had to be manually removed on my system using a software program, before installing new ones.. otherwise no drivers would load and hell would break loose every time.

Also Im stunned that with my old GTX 280, Crysis looked better than it does with my new 6950... Though that's the only game like that for me and it's a bit of a mystery.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2011 11:02:17 PM

jk47 said:
Gotta agree that AMD is meh for drivers.

Although it angered me that Nvidia drivers had to be manually removed on my system using a software program, before installing new ones.. otherwise no drivers would load and hell would break loose every time.

Also Im stunned that with my old GTX 280, Crysis looked better than it does with my new 6950... Though that's the only game like that for me and it's a bit of a mystery.


just in case you forgot your gtx 280 doesnt support dx11 so maybe that why it looks better if you mean your frame rates are better and more fluid.
m
0
l
November 7, 2011 11:05:03 PM

I almost picked up the 6950 myself. To be exact the 6950 Toxic by sapphire that's probably the card you want to get as its already flashed to the 6970 on the second switch setting. But then witched over to the MSI 560TI due to the fact that nvidia has physx something that you'll need to consider. For the 560ti get the Hawks version or the Frozer.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 8, 2011 1:17:40 AM

bestlink101 said:
why dont you sli this http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/ite...
its cheaper because of its open design but in performance it will be better than amd 6950 and gtx 560ti
or sli this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
i would probably sli the second option it is easily better than gtx 560ti
whats your motherboard and case?


in a year from now when games will be asking for more juice what does he do then? for the most part it is wise to only sli higher end cards not low end cards cause it leaves you no room for expansion later on.
m
0
l
November 11, 2011 2:14:10 AM

i give one vote for 6950.
m
0
l
!