Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Single 7970 and 32" display

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 3, 2012 5:16:50 PM

Will a single 7970 run modern games (bf3, etc) maxed out with good fps on a 32" 1080 tv?

Ive been looking at 2 6970's but they cost quite a bit more than a single 7970

More about : single 7970 display

February 3, 2012 5:30:57 PM

get two 6950s for $500 and overclock them and you will be faster than a 7970 for less money spent.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 5:31:50 PM

Yea You should be ok. I wouldn't go as far enough to get the Crossfire 6970's. Because then you might as well get a 6990. now is what i would do is get a 7970 now. get a 7990 later. Sell the 7970 on ebay for a deal. then with the left over money get a 7990 the 6970 is a Hot set up both performance and temp wise. SO you gotta ask your self do you feel lucky? well do you punk? haha i just had to throw that in haha :sol: 
m
0
l
Related resources
February 3, 2012 5:33:34 PM

yes. the 7970 is a better buy than two 6970's. it is as fast/ faster than 2 6950's once it is overclocked! and will have more consistent frame rate! the best part is that your second pcie slot will still be open and it consumes less power! so a couple of years down the road when the 7970 performs like an 6850 you can get a second one and be back on top!
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 5:33:44 PM

Yes. Right now the 7970 even beats the GTX 580 usually by about 15-25% depending on game. Although they trade blows depending on game - the 7970 has a newer architecture that uses less power and outputs less heat.

In actuality though where the 7970 shines is very high resolutions - above 1080P.

What is your currernt system set up? (RAM, CPU , PSU, HDD, motherboard)

Heres a great review of the 7970:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/01/25/asus_radeon_h...

You might even want to look into getting a 7950 - about the same performance of the GTX 580, but is cheaper, runs cooler, and like the 7970 has a newer architecture.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 5:35:47 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
get two 6950s for $500 and overclock them and you will be faster than a 7970 for less money spent.


The 7970 overclocks way better than two 6950's and will be at par or faster and consume less power and only one pice slot
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 5:41:25 PM

nagol567 said:
The 7970 overclocks way better than two 6950's and will be at par or faster and consume less power and only one pice slot

stock for stock 6950CF is faster than a 7970 and OC for OC 6950CF is faster than 7970 so until 7970 goes on sale to under $500 6950CF is an all around better deal.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 5:43:55 PM

Chainzsaw said:
Yes. Right now the 7970 even beats the GTX 580 usually by about 15-25% depending on game. Although they trade blows depending on game - the 7970 has a newer architecture that uses less power and outputs less heat.

In actuality though where the 7970 shines is very high resolutions - above 1080P.

What is your currernt system set up? (RAM, CPU , PSU, HDD, motherboard)

Heres a great review of the 7970:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/01/25/asus_radeon_h...

You might even want to look into getting a 7950 - about the same performance of the GTX 580, but is cheaper, runs cooler, and like the 7970 has a newer architecture.

7950trades blows with GTX 580 7970 is consistently faster than GTX 580.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 5:48:42 PM

If he's "only" gaming at 1080P I can't really reccomend him getting the 7970 especially since it's so expensive. The 7950 would do just fine and would be enough to put most games on ULTRA at 1080P.

However it depends on his set up...we need the OP to tell us what he has.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 5:51:32 PM

For 1080 HD7950 is more than enough no need for CF or 7970. Unless you have 2560x1600
there is no need for CF or SLI
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 5:54:40 PM

at 1080p the 7950 will play battlefield at ultra settings without dropping below 30fps which is considered constant smooth gameplay averages around 45-50fps.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 5:57:24 PM

maxinexus said:
For 1080 HD7950 is more than enough no need for CF or 7970. Unless you have 2560x1600
there is no need for CF or SLI

Not true there are a number of games that need CF/SLI to maintain 60fps @ 1080p Metro 2033, Crysis, Crysis 2, Lost Planet 2, BF3, The Witcher 2, and there are more that's just what I can remember right this min.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 5:59:16 PM

nagol567 said:
at 1080p the 7950 will play battlefield at ultra settings without dropping below 30fps which is considered constant smooth gameplay averages around 45-50fps.

People do not buy a high end card to play games @ 30fps they buy games with full intentions and aspirations of 60fps min frame rates and my GTX 275 plays BF3 without dipping below 30fps LOL.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 6:13:42 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
People do not buy a high end card to play games @ 30fps they buy games with full intentions and aspirations of 60fps min frame rates and my GTX 275 plays BF3 without dipping below 30fps LOL.


on ultra 1080p? 30fps will still look fluid on a 7950 but the 6970's might microstutter around that many frames causing it to feel and look unplayable compaired to a single card.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 6:14:31 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
Not true there are a number of games that need CF/SLI to maintain 60fps @ 1080p Metro 2033, Crysis, Crysis 2, Lost Planet 2, BF3, The Witcher 2, and there are more that's just what I can remember right this min.


Games are playable at 32+ FPS
you won't notice difference between 32 40 or 220 fps
You need 60+ FPS when you use 3D
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 6:20:43 PM

maxinexus said:
Games are playable at 32+ FPS
you won't notice difference between 32 40 or 220 fps
You need 60+ FPS when you use 3D

unless you crossfire or sli
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 6:24:18 PM

maxinexus said:
Games are playable at 32+ FPS
you won't notice difference between 32 40 or 220 fps
You need 60+ FPS when you use 3D

Anything near or around 30fps is playable but it is not fast or ideal like 60fps which you must of never tried cause if you did you would know. When you have been used to gaming at V-Synch 60fps min with no drops you get accustomed to it and you will feel a drop if it goes below 60fps and if it goes to 30fps it just feels slow and a bit choppy. Anyone whom games moderately seriously will concur and anyone whom buys a 79XX GPU would be a serious gamer mostly.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 6:26:36 PM

maxinexus said:
Games are playable at 32+ FPS
you won't notice difference between 32 40 or 220 fps
You need 60+ FPS when you use 3D

V-Synch 60hz/fps min is the gold standard for FAST smooth gameplay to put it simple.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 6:53:30 PM

Beitzel15 said:
Will a single 7970 run modern games (bf3, etc) maxed out with good fps on a 32" 1080 tv?

Ive been looking at 2 6970's but they cost quite a bit more than a single 7970



on a 32" 1080 tv

Screen size has nothing to do with how the video card will perform. The pixel size does matter, instead. No matter how big the screen is, the video card will recognize it by only the pixel size. Yes, your computer will tell you it is connected to 32" TV, but that doesn't affect the display performance.

Screen size matters to your eyes, however. I once played Batman Arkham City on 50" screen. All the performance was as smooth as on 21.5" LCD monitor, as their pixel size are the same, 1920 x 1080, but on that much big screen, I felt nausea.

For the video card, considering many reviews by professional reviewers and also by enthusiast users on various forums, I think 7970 on a single 1080 screen is overkill, if future proof is not at issue. I am playing on GTX 560 Ti 448 Core now, and it maxed out Crysis 1&2, Batman Arkham City, and Civilization V. I don't have PC version of BF3, but reviews show that they are on around 60 fps with this card. If less than $300 card can play around 60 fps today's demanding games on 1080 screen with max setting, why throw $500 for overqualified card? Again, this is from someone who is not interested in multi-display gaming.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 6:57:47 PM

MKBL said:
on a 32" 1080 tv

Screen size has nothing to do with how the video card will perform. The pixel size does matter, instead. No matter how big the screen is, the video card will recognize it by only the pixel size. Yes, your computer will tell you it is connected to 32" TV, but that doesn't affect the display performance.

Screen size matters to your eyes, however. I once played Batman Arkham City on 50" screen. All the performance was as smooth as on 21.5" LCD monitor, as their pixel size are the same, 1920 x 1080, but on that much big screen, I felt nausea.

For the video card, considering many reviews by professional reviewers and also by enthusiast users on various forums, I think 7970 on a single 1080 screen is overkill, if future proof is not at issue. I am playing on GTX 560 Ti 448 Core now, and it maxed out Crysis 1&2, Batman Arkham City, and Civilization V. I don't have PC version of BF3, but reviews show that they are on around 60 fps with this card. If less than $300 card can play around 60 fps today's demanding games on 1080 screen with max setting, why throw $500 for overqualified card? Again, this is from someone who is not interested in multi-display gaming.

Well 7970 still drops below 60fps @ 1080p so .... take it for what it is.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:01:56 PM

MKBL said:
If less than $300 card can play around 60 fps today's demanding games on 1080 screen with max setting, why throw $500 for overqualified card? Again, this is from someone who is not interested in multi-display gaming.


It takes two 6950's to compair to a 7970 overclocked not one. a 6950 may be able to play the game well but that is with MSAA and other filters like this disabled while the 7970 nd 7950 can play these games with max filtering too.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:07:52 PM

nagol567 said:
It takes two 6950's to compair to a 7970 overclocked not one. a 6950 may be able to play the game well but that is with MSAA and other filters like this disabled while the 7970 nd 7950 can play these games with max filtering too.

Nobody spends $600 on 1 GPU to play games at less than 60fps min. Consoles play games @ 30fps PC plays optimal @ 60fps min V-Synch cause of High Dpi Mouse and keyboard.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:24:12 PM

Can't tell about other games, but for Batman Arkham City, I've been playing between 50 ~70 fps with every adjustable setting max on the setup window, including PhysX. I didn't tinker with nVidia control panel. My single card OCed 840/1680/2000 @stock 1.025v. With higher OC @higher V, there is increased fps according to Afterburner, but I don't notice any perceivable difference, so I stick with the highest OC @stock voltage. Yeah, I can't tell difference between even 40 fps and over 70fps. Maybe I'm not as sensitive in that department. It seems that some people can tell them.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 7:30:41 PM

I'd say go with the 7970 for future proofing and 60 fps +Vsync gaming. Resolution is important, not the screen size. 1080p is usually the area where the 7970 won't disappoint you. There's no point buying high-end if you can't play high-end.

And there is a significant difference b/w ~30 fps and 60 fps.

Consult:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/508?vs=509






m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:35:45 PM

MKBL said:
Can't tell about other games, but for Batman Arkham City, I've been playing between 50 ~70 fps with every adjustable setting max on the setup window, including PhysX. I didn't tinker with nVidia control panel. My single card OCed 840/1680/2000 @stock 1.025v. With higher OC @higher V, there is increased fps according to Afterburner, but I don't notice any perceivable difference, so I stick with the highest OC @stock voltage. Yeah, I can't tell difference between even 40 fps and over 70fps. Maybe I'm not as sensitive in that department. It seems that some people can tell them.

How high is the Dpi on your mouse ?
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:38:34 PM

ojas said:
I'd say go with the 7970 for future proofing and 60 fps +Vsync gaming. Resolution is important, not the screen size. 1080p is usually the area where the 7970 won't disappoint you. There's no point buying high-end if you can't play high-end.

And there is a significant difference b/w ~30 fps and 60 fps.

Consult:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/508?vs=509

http://media.bestofmicro.com/C/1/324433/original/battlefield%203%201920.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/C/4/324436/original/crysis%202%201920.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/D/9/324477/original/skyrim%201920.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/C/9/324441/original/dirt%201920.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/D/E/324482/original/wow%201920.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/D/2/324470/original/metro%202033%201920.png

Ya BF3 is a real Stickler on the graphics hardware cause if you put it max out setting with full AA/AF it even cripples the 7970 down to well below 60fps min.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:49:02 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
How high is the Dpi on your mouse ?


I play with controller, not mouse.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:52:39 PM

Ill be using a i5 2500k, oc to 4-4.2ghz

8gb 1600 ram

1050watt corsair psu

1tb HDD

havent decided on a mobo yet, just curious if i'd be able to max games out on a 32" screen.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 7:52:50 PM

Alright well before you guys reply any more.....we should really wait until the OP responds, otherwise this thread is getting hijacked! lol.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 7:55:32 PM

That should be a good setup beitzel15. If you have the cash go for the 7970 - if you want to save some cash go for the 7950.

With either of those 2 cards you can max out games - more so with the 7970.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:56:24 PM

so the 590 out does the 7970 in most games by 3-7fps?
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 7:58:45 PM

wow, the 590's ive seen are $900+!! and the 7970 is $500$600
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 8:00:38 PM

MKBL said:
I play with controller, not mouse.

That explains all.
m
0
l
February 3, 2012 8:02:55 PM

Chainzsaw said:
Alright well before you guys reply any more.....we should really wait until the OP responds, otherwise this thread is getting hijacked! lol.

As long as OP gets the info he seeks and we are all learning something is that not enough ?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 3, 2012 8:04:33 PM

I don't know if you can even get the 590 anymore...it was basically 2 GTX 580's one 1 card with slightly lower clocks. You might be able to find it on EBAY or some website like that.

I would go against getting the 590 though...it outputs tremendous heat and consumes massive amounts of power.

What is your price range beitzel15?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 4, 2012 10:42:14 AM

Chainzsaw said:
I would go against getting the 590 though...it outputs tremendous heat and consumes massive amounts of power.

Exactly why i don't want to recommend it either. Same goes for the 6990. Plus the noise factor.

I'm very impressed by the efficiency of the 'Souther Islands' GPUs (esp. in CrossFire) and their raw performance.
m
0
l
!