Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

I need your help,GTX 670 or HD 7970!

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 30, 2012 6:51:41 PM

Hello everybody,so im currently in the progress of my first build,and i have a question.Here is the build so far


Intel CPU Core i7 2600k
Gigabyte GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 Motherboard
Corsair TX750 V2 750W Power Supply
16GB 2X8GB Corsair DDR3 Vengeance Ram
Seagate 2TB Barracuda 6GB/s 64MB
Samsung SH-222BB/RSMS 22x DVD Writer SATA
Antec KUHLER H2O 620 CPU Liquid Cooler 2
NZXT Phantom White/Red LED Full
Graphics Card = ?

So as you can see the graphics card is what i cant make my mind up about so i came here for some help,should i get the

2GB Gigabyte GTX 670 Windforce 3X
or
3GB MSI Radeon HD 7970 OC

Forget about price just tell me what you guys would go with,alot of people i have asked said get the GTX 670,im on the fence.

Thanks!

More about : gtx 670 7970

a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 6:57:41 PM

I would go for the GTX 670. The 670 is more efficient. It depends on what type of games you play and the resolution. The 7970 is slightly better but also that depends on the games you play. About the price, it is more worth to get a GTX 670 than the 7970 but since you don't care about it, you should check out some benchmarks about the games you play on those 2 gpu's and make the decision yourself ;) 

-Fastreaction
July 30, 2012 7:07:35 PM

1-2 monitors, i'd lean towards the 670. 3+ monitors, probably 7970. also agree with fastreaction
Related resources
July 30, 2012 7:10:40 PM

fastreaction said:
I would go for the GTX 670. The 670 is more efficient. It depends on what type of games you play and the resolution. The 7970 is slightly better but also that depends on the games you play. About the price, it is more worth to get a GTX 670 than the 7970 but since you don't care about it, you should check out some benchmarks about the games you play on those 2 gpu's and make the decision yourself ;) 

-Fastreaction


Yeah,i was looking at benchmarks and they trade blows.7970 will get more FPS on one game and then 670 will get more on the next game.And as far as games goes i will be playing everything really to be honest.Thanks for the help!
July 30, 2012 7:11:59 PM

doct3rphil said:
1-2 monitors, i'd lean towards the 670. 3+ monitors, probably 7970. also agree with fastreaction


I'll be using 2 Monitors,and im leaning towards the 670 myself at the moment,just trying to get everyone's opinion.
a c 643 U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 7:17:15 PM

Go with the 670 so you can play some games with PhysX enabled.
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 7:33:52 PM

Before deciding, make sure that you check benchmarks with the most recent drivers for each card. Anandtech has a review of the 680 Classified that includes benches of the 670 and 7970 running on more recent drivers; most benchmarks are from just after release and fail to account for some improvements, especially on the AMD side: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6096/evga-geforce-gtx-680... and http://www.anandtech.com/show/6096/evga-geforce-gtx-680...

The 7970's 3GB of VRAM, and its wider memory bus, will matter most for hig-res gaming, so it gets a relative advantage above 1080p, at higher AA settings, and on more modern games. OTOH, the 670 has a consistent edge in some titles and is undeniably more efficient. If you're using a single 1080p monitor (including a 120Hz monitor), I would probably decide based on specific games. (That includes matto's point about physx, which is game-specific.) If you're going beyond 1080p, I'd go for the 7970.
July 30, 2012 7:46:48 PM

motorneuron said:
Before deciding, make sure that you check benchmarks with the most recent drivers for each card. Anandtech has a review of the 680 Classified that includes benches of the 670 and 7970 running on more recent drivers; most benchmarks are from just after release and fail to account for some improvements, especially on the AMD side: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6096/evga-geforce-gtx-680... and http://www.anandtech.com/show/6096/evga-geforce-gtx-680...

The 7970's 3GB of VRAM, and its wider memory bus, will matter most for hig-res gaming, so it gets a relative advantage above 1080p, at higher AA settings, and on more modern games. OTOH, the 670 has a consistent edge in some titles and is undeniably more efficient. If you're using a single 1080p monitor (including a 120Hz monitor), I would probably decide based on specific games. (That includes matto's point about physx, which is game-specific.) If you're going beyond 1080p, I'd go for the 7970.


Thanks for letting me know about that as that is what i use for bench mark tests,i play on 1 1080p monitor and have extended over to a small 1600x1200,but i do plan on buying another 1080p anyway,at 1080p do you think the GTX670 would perform on par with it!? And as i said before its very hard for me to specify what i will be playing,as i will be playing anything and everything :)  On the website im buying off the MSI 7970 is €1 cheaper,would you still go with the GTX even tough the 7970 is same price roughly!? Thanks for the help.
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 7:52:05 PM

My personal preference would be for the 7970 if the prices are the same. But I don't think either card would be the "wrong" decision. My sense is that the 7970 is slightly more future-proof because of memory quantity and bus, and I also share recon-uk's thirst for overclocking.
July 30, 2012 7:58:48 PM

Quote:
If PhysX is not bothering you, go with the HD 7970, it has a wider memory interface (384-Bit) this will allow longer life span vs the GTX 670 in future games, the more AA you apply the further away the 7970 pulls ahead, also the same when increasing resolution beyond 1200p.

I am going for the 7970 myself with my new build, based on the fact that i can overclock the 7970 more than i can a GTX Kepler, plus i do not like turbo Boost or the fact that Kepler is not as strong when overclocked.

I am an enthusiast when it comes to overclocking GPU's, be it water or air, i will go for the highest clocks i can possibly crank out of it, and be 24/7 stable.


Thanks for your help,really from what everyone is saying there pretty much the say only 7970 is going to last me longer,and i am a noob when it comes to "overclocking" but i plan on doing my research and over clocking it in due time.
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 8:36:41 PM

Is everyone here serious?? Please 7970>670 all day long. Matto com'on Physx really?
July 30, 2012 8:50:35 PM

redeemer said:
Is everyone here serious?? Please 7970>670 all day long. Matto com'on Physx really?



Give me reasons to get 7970,just wanting to know why everyone says why i should get what they said!Thanks!
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 8:57:45 PM

you don't need a GPU....
on-board FTW.!

:lol: 
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 9:01:28 PM

7970 has more bandwith and RAM, which is more important if you load up texture mods and/or if a game needs that grunt. Also, if you find a "GHz" edition of a 7970, you can overclock it even more to murder a 670 and 680.
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 9:06:45 PM

WantedChaos said:
Give me reasons to get 7970,just wanting to know why everyone says why i should get what they said!Thanks!



The gtx 670 doesn't compete with the 7970, it competes with the 7950 which is also faster once overclocked. The 7970 has more vram, wider bus, more shader power and compute if needed. Futhermore the pure performance gains from overlocking the 7970 are astonishing, even an OC 670 680 cannot catch it. If you need 3D than go with Nvidia but the price for a 7970 is $ 429 which makes it the best high end card right now
July 30, 2012 9:12:05 PM

redeemer said:
The gtx 670 doesn't compete with the 7970, it competes with the 7950 which is also faster once overclocked. The 7970 has more vram, wider bus, more shader power and compute if needed. Futhermore the pure performance gains from overlocking the 7970 are astonishing, even an OC 670 680 cannot catch it. If you need 3D than go with Nvidia but the price for a 7970 is $ 429 which makes it the best high end card right now



Thanks alot for explaining,do you know if the "3GB MSI Radeon HD 7970 OC" is good!? Why would it be cheaper than the reference card itself!?
July 30, 2012 9:41:13 PM

Quote:
Better than anything NV has right now IMO, the only thing they have is PhysX, but i can run a GTX 480 as a dedicated PhysX card :D 


I wont have a PhysX card then :( 
July 30, 2012 9:49:11 PM

Quote:
PhysX is not a thing you will care about, you will not miss something you have never had :) 

But i will be honest, the effects are sometimes stunning, even if only a few games support it.



Thats true,never had it how can i miss it lol.I take it its not worth getting the GTX 670 just for the PhysX!?
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 9:55:03 PM

€1 cheaper? Go for the 7970. Not a lot of games support PhysX.

- Fastreaction
July 30, 2012 10:00:40 PM

fastreaction said:
€1 cheaper? Go for the 7970. Not a lot of games support PhysX.

- Fastreaction


Yes the MSI version of the 7970 is €1 cheaper,and i think thats what i will be going with! :) 
July 30, 2012 10:01:56 PM

GTX 670 IS GOOD BUT 7970 IS BETTER
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 10:03:35 PM

ahmad naeem said:
GTX 670 IS GOOD BUT 7970 IS BETTER


Hmm can't say that. Depends on the circumstances but since it is €1 cheaper the 7970 is highly recommended.

- Fastreaction
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 10:09:43 PM

ahmad naeem said:
GTX 670 IS GOOD BUT 7970 IS BETTER

I'd say yes but me, I'm taking the GTX 680 so who cares... :p 
and no caps.

:non: 
a c 643 U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 10:18:34 PM

The PhysX point is actually a very important point, because it is one of the few things that actually set these cards apart (alongside Adaptive VSync, FXAA, TXAA, and better game compatibility). If you stack them up by only looking at performance numbers, they are basically the same. There are no absolutes "one is better than the other", in terms of pure Frames Per Second across a variety of games. That is a simplistic assessment that misses out on the big picture.

So then what else is there to choose from to get some separation? Well, one has PhysX, the other does not. Even if you don't currently play any PhysX games, it's still better to have the option available. I realize that this hits a nerve with those who defend AMD, but there can be no doubt that this is a rational point.

Borderlands 2 is one of the latest games to feature PhysX. You tell me if you would rather have the AMD card that performs the same, but can't render these effects.
Quote:
"The PC version of Gearbox Software's upcoming Borderlands 2 is set to support many PhysX enhancements. These include water that reacts accurately to a player's movements, rippling and splashing around the environment as you walk through it. Borderlands 2 also makes use of PhysX to render destruction. For example, fire a rocket launcher into the ground, and huge chunks of earth and gravel fly into the air. The resulting debris settles on the floor, where you can kick it around by walking through it."
http://physxinfo.com/news/7865/borderlands-2-will-be-en...
http://kotaku.com/5898292/borderlands-2-pc-does-amazing...
July 30, 2012 10:22:07 PM

17seconds said:
The PhysX point is actually a very important point, because it is one of the few things that actually set these cards apart (alongside Adaptive VSync, FXAA, TXAA, and better game compatibility). If you stack them up by only looking at performance numbers, they are basically the same. There are no absolutes "one is better than the other", in terms of pure Frames Per Second across a variety of games. That is a simplistic assessment that misses out on the big picture.

So then what else is there to choose from to get some separation? Well, one has PhysX, the other does not. Even if you don't currently play any PhysX games, it's still better to have the option available. I realize that this hits a nerve with those who defend AMD, but there can be no doubt that this is a rational point.

Borderlands 2 is one of the latest games to feature PhysX. You tell me if you would rather have the AMD card that performs the same, but can't render these effects.
Quote:
"The PC version of Gearbox Software's upcoming Borderlands 2 is set to support many PhysX enhancements. These include water that reacts accurately to a player's movements, rippling and splashing around the environment as you walk through it. Borderlands 2 also makes use of PhysX to render destruction. For example, fire a rocket launcher into the ground, and huge chunks of earth and gravel fly into the air. The resulting debris settles on the floor, where you can kick it around by walking through it."
http://physxinfo.com/news/7865/borderlands-2-will-be-en...
http://kotaku.com/5898292/borderlands-2-pc-does-amazing...


Thank you for giving a great and valid reason.I am really on the edge here,i cant decide.argg!
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 10:33:39 PM

17seconds said:
The PhysX point is actually a very important point, because it is one of the few things that actually set these cards apart (alongside Adaptive VSync, FXAA, TXAA, and better game compatibility). If you stack them up by only looking at performance numbers, they are basically the same. There are no absolutes "one is better than the other", in terms of pure Frames Per Second across a variety of games. That is a simplistic assessment that misses out on the big picture.

So then what else is there to choose from to get some separation? Well, one has PhysX, the other does not. Even if you don't currently play any PhysX games, it's still better to have the option available. I realize that this hits a nerve with those who defend AMD, but there can be no doubt that this is a rational point.

Borderlands 2 is one of the latest games to feature PhysX. You tell me if you would rather have the AMD card that performs the same, but can't render these effects.
Quote:
"The PC version of Gearbox Software's upcoming Borderlands 2 is set to support many PhysX enhancements. These include water that reacts accurately to a player's movements, rippling and splashing around the environment as you walk through it. Borderlands 2 also makes use of PhysX to render destruction. For example, fire a rocket launcher into the ground, and huge chunks of earth and gravel fly into the air. The resulting debris settles on the floor, where you can kick it around by walking through it."
http://physxinfo.com/news/7865/borderlands-2-will-be-en...
http://kotaku.com/5898292/borderlands-2-pc-does-amazing...



You have to base your decisions on overall gaming performance, TXAA is not available just yet, adaptive vsync is not a big deal at. Physx shouldnt be the deciding factor since is not really supported even by he most poplular games right now BF3. When enabled thre is a performance hit, and FXAA is very nice but MSAA is better.

a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 10:34:52 PM

7970, how many games actually PhysX apart from Borderlands 2? I can think of Mafia II and . . . nothing else. Personally I'd take speed over add on features.
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 10:41:13 PM

Smeg45 said:
7970, how many games actually PhysX apart from Borderlands 2? I can think of Mafia II and . . . nothing else. Personally I'd take speed over add on features.

there's more and more to come, go check the web-site and read (nVidia, PhysX) before you attempt to bash..
:pfff: 
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 11:01:17 PM

verbalizer said:
there's more and more to come, go check the web-site and read (nVidia, PhysX) before you attempt to bash..
:pfff: 


Still a niche feature as games are still console based. Still not worth it.
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 11:09:28 PM

Smeg45 said:
Still a niche feature as games are still console based. Still not worth it.

that's your opinion, realize that....
;) 
a c 186 U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 11:21:29 PM

redeemer said:
Is everyone here serious?? Please 7970>670 all day long. Matto com'on Physx really?
What is so much better about the 7970 not being a smart ass just wondering what i am overlooking ? P.S. I don't want to hear the tired power consumption type stuff that ATI/AMD fan boys go on about with ATI cards that's a dead issue for me i care about raw power and performance and oc i could careless about saving a few bucks on my electric bill every year com'on really? Lol.
July 30, 2012 11:24:36 PM

With the voltage unlocked the GTX 670 destroys the 7970. Not to mention AMDs driver support is garbage.
a c 643 U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 11:45:36 PM

redeemer said:
You have to base your decisions on overall gaming performance, TXAA is not available just yet, adaptive vsync is not a big deal at. Physx shouldnt be the deciding factor since is not really supported even by he most poplular games right now BF3. When enabled thre is a performance hit, and FXAA is very nice but MSAA is better.

Exactly my point, when mentioning "You have to base your decisions on overall gaming performance" and "the most popular games right now BF3". Not even the GHZ edition with the latest drivers wins over the $100 cheaper 670 in that game. There just is no saying one is "faster" than the other in all situations. In the end, 5 FPS either way just doesn't make a difference.




I don't think you can ignore or just off-hand dismiss the benefits of the Nvidia ecosystem. Here's just some of what you get along with that GTX 670: PhysX, FXAA, TXAA, Adaptive VSync, better driver support for new releases, and better relationships for better game compatibility with developers like DICE, Valve, Bethesda, Gearbox, Epic, Id, and so on.

The interesting thing that does come up whenever someone mentions the benefits of the Nvidia ecosystem is that no one ever offers a counter-point listing all the great elements in the AMD ecosystem. If you're trying to gain a complete overall picture, that information would be essential.
a b U Graphics card
July 30, 2012 11:55:32 PM



Uploaded with ImageShack.us



So what your saying is buy the GTX 670 because boardlands 2 supports physx even though the 7970 is a faster card in gaming and compute and eveywhere else?


Furthermore your charts show a gtx 680 with autoboost 1200 OC against a stock 7970?
July 30, 2012 11:57:27 PM

Quote:
Very unreasonable post, Nvidia have cocked up enough times with drivers themselves.
670 does not destroy a 7970, if it does, i want solid 110% proof, not just words from someones mouth.

Thankyou.


I don't think that word means what you think it means. There's nothing unreasonable about it. A gtx 670 with unlocked votlage can easily reach 1350MHz core with a +700 memory bump for $50 less than the cost of the 7970. Unless you're running multiple monitors over 1920x1080 the 670 easily destroys the 7970 on single monitor systems. In fact due to lower TDP it can reach a higher clock speed and equal or beat overclocked 680s WHICH have thoroughly trumped the 7970. If you don't believe me look at the 7970 GHz edition trying to beat an overclocked 680 and watch the fail. The only reason to invest in a 7970 is for the higher resolutions.

No, you will never get %110 solid proof because it doesn't matter what the premise it can be denied. Sorry but it's the truth in regards to speeds at 1920x1080. No, I'm not going to come over to your house and overclock your components for you.

Proof is the chart above, 75-79'C for 1200-1400 clock speeds, ROFL. 1350 with a 670 and it doesn't go above 65'C on full load. And the 7970 GHz costs an extra $100 and has a ridiculous noise level and heat.
a b U Graphics card
July 31, 2012 12:01:45 AM

cepheid said:
I don't think that word means what you think it means. There's nothing unreasonable about it. A gtx 670 with unlocked votlage can easily reach 1350MHz core with a +700 memory bump for $50 less than the cost of the 7970. Unless you're running multiple monitors over 1920x1080 the 670 easily destroys the 7970 on single monitor systems. In fact due to lower TDP it can reach a higher clock speed and equal or beat overclocked 680s WHICH have thoroughly trumped the 7970. If you don't believe me look at the 7970 GHz edition trying to beat an overclocked 680 and watch the fail. The only reason to invest in a 7970 is for the higher resolutions.

No, you will never get %110 solid proof because it doesn't matter what the premise it can be denied. Sorry but it's the truth in regards to speeds at 1920x1080. No, I'm not going to come over to your house and overclock your components for you.

Proof is the chart above, 75-79'C for 1200-1400 clock speeds, ROFL. 1350 with a 670 and it doesn't go above 65'C on full load. And the 7970 GHz costs an extra $100 and has a ridiculous noise level and heat.



It takes a 670 @ 1300 core to compete with a 7950 1200 @core 7000 series simply scales better
July 31, 2012 12:03:45 AM

redeemer said:
It takes a 670 @ 1300 core to compete with a 7950 1200 @core 7000 series simply scales better


Yup that's why it beats all the markers in the Tom's hardware settings for Unigine for every card running at 81fps. I'm sorry but you don't seem to have the appropriate frame of reference in regards to what these cards can actually pull off. I'd like to see you get a 7050 to pull that number.
July 31, 2012 12:03:55 AM

But it like this,at stock settings on card at 1080p on game.Generally speaking which am i better of with!?
July 31, 2012 12:06:04 AM

WantedChaos said:
But it like this,at stock settings on card at 1080p on game.Generally speaking which am i better of with!?


If you're not going to overclock it yourself and want to pay $100 for someone else to do it then the 7970. It's highest factory overclocked but it's very loud, power hungry and hot. For me, the heat and noise aren't worth it when you can get better performance just tweaking a 680 or 670 but that's my preference. I've owned both AMD and Nvidia cards over many years and personally Nvidia cards are on average a better product and much less of a hassle than AMD. This is coming from someone who loves AMD and has done their best to support the company for many years now.
July 31, 2012 12:09:02 AM

cepheid said:
If you're not going to overclock it yourself and want to pay $100 for someone else to do it then the 7970. It's highest factory overclocked but it's very loud, power hungry and hot. For me, the heat and noise aren't worth it when you can get better performance just tweaking a 680 or 670 but that's my preference.


I do plan on overclocking but really i just want to know the better card,and then buy + overclock it! At the moment im more looking at the GTX 670 tbh!
a b U Graphics card
July 31, 2012 12:11:04 AM

Quote:
That chart above shows no clocks for the 6xx cards, plus mine will be under water... :kaola: 

384-Bit bus
No turbo boost
= For The Win!

My opinion.



I always laugh when Matto comes up with these benchmarks and graphs from months ago that show an autoboost kepler card against a stock 7950 and 7970. He dissappears when you bring up 7000 series overclocking.
July 31, 2012 12:11:28 AM

i remember hearing that Physx was greatly hobbled on the cpu to ensure that gamers with a high end processor wouldn't run it as well as a Nvidia gpu. Heard this from a member on Tom's. I think he was a mod with the Jackie Chan's Uncle avatar...

http://www.realworldtech.com/physx87/5/

"For Nvidia, decreasing the baseline CPU performance by using x87 instructions and a single thread makes GPUs look better. This tactic calls into question the CPU vs. GPU comparisons made using PhysX; but the name of the game at Nvidia is making the GPU look good, and PhysX certainly fits the bill in the current incarnation. "

Thats a small quote but read the entire article. its pretty informative on the history and technical aspect of Physx.
July 31, 2012 12:12:28 AM

WantedChaos said:
I do plan on overclocking but really i just want to know the better card,and then buy + overclock it! At the moment im more looking at the GTX 670 tbh!


MSI GTX 670 or 680 are the highest Tier card you can get because they have the unlocked voltage. Below that are the Upper Tier 7970 including GHz editions. Below that are factory overclocked 680s. The 7970s have been touted as having the better overclocking but that disappeared when MSI unlocked voltage for their cards about a week ago. With voltage unlocked the 680 rips up the 7970. The hard part though is finding a decently priced 680 with voltage unlocked as some companies charge an arm and a leg for that these days (really one of the reasons why AMD is still a decent company as they don't artificially lock the voltage on their cards). Also Nvidia is lobbying hard to have voltage limited even on aftermarket designs due to the incredible performance of the 670 chip. Here's to hoping they don't make MSI change the BIOS on upcoming cards.

MSI Lightning 680 or GTX 670 Power Edition > 7970 GHz Ed. > Factory Overclocked 680 or 7970 > GTX 670

This is the current breakdown regarding performance at 1920x1080, note the MSI cards are listed higher because they have unlocked voltage and don't cost an extra $200-300 LIKE evga charges. EVGA Classified would be with the MSI cards in regards to performance but EVGA charges an additional $100 on top of a $659 card just to have the voltage unlocked which is ridiculous. At the higher resolution the 7970 comes out on top.

My recommendation for cost/performance would be the MSI GTX 670 Power Edition. It's easily the best buy out there currently for gaming at 1920x1080 resolution. If you think you might move to a higher resolution or 2-3 monitors in the next year or two get the 7970.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... <---This is the best deal out there in my opinion.

http://forums.guru3d.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55 <----- Afterburner unlocked voltage (**thanks Unwinder**) makes this card so sexy.


P.S. Physx doesn't matter anymore as any decent game engine has it already built in. The days when Physx was a selling point are disappearing.
July 31, 2012 12:29:08 AM

cepheid said:
MSI GTX 670 or 680 are the highest Tier card you can get because they have the unlocked voltage. Below that are the Upper Tier 7970 including GHz editions. Below that are factory overclocked 680s. The 7970s have been touted as having the better overclocking but that disappeared when MSI unlocked voltage for their cards about a week ago. With voltage unlocked the 680 rips up the 7970. The hard part though is finding a decently priced 680 with voltage unlocked as some companies charge an arm and a leg for that these days (really one of the reasons why AMD is still a decent company as they don't artificially lock the voltage on their cards).

MSI Lightning 680 or GTX 670 Power Edition > 7970 GHz > Factory Overclocked 680 > GTX 670

This is the current breakdown regarding performance at 1920x1080, note the MSI cards are listed higher because they have unlocked voltage and don't cost an extra $200-300 LIKE evga charges. At the higher resolution the 7970 comes out on top.

My recommendation for cost/performance would be the MSI GTX 670 Power Edition. It's easily the best buy out there currently for gaming at 1920x1080 resolution. If you think you might move to a higher resolution or 2-3 monitors in the next year or two get the 7970.



P.S. Physx doesn't matter anymore as any decent game engine has it already built in. The days when Physx was a selling point are disappearing.


"And then the really bad news ...

While I was writing this article I learned that NVIDIA just issued new BIOS files to the AIC partners and is frowning upon voltage tweaking outside their limitations. As such all new batches Lightning cards will have BIOSes where their limit of 1.175V is enforced, even in the LN2 BIOS. MSI has to follow that directive or probably face the fact that they will not be able to purchase the GPUs anymore.

This as well includes setting restrictions in the new AfterBurner 2.2.3

So while everything as described above is possible it in the end means that only the first batch of 5000 cards will have an OLD Bios that is freed up from the limitation and thus allows voltage tweaking to a certain extent. We can only assume that the old BIOS will spread like a virus to current Lightning owners to give them a little more flexibility on voltage tweaking matters. However you'd also need a special MSI AfterBurner build to support it. And that we do not see happening, due to the limitations requested by NVIDIA.

We understand NVIDIA's point of view on this, really .. extreme voltage tweaking can damage GPUs, and in the end these are returned to NVIDIA. Next to that the complexity of this new methodology is extensive and to a certain extent even unreliable. For NVIDIA it thus is matter of RMA and cost.

The flipside of the coin however is that when imposing such limitation on the high-end GPUs it pretty much kills off the fun for many of you. Extreme performance and tweaks drive the overclocking community and in the end drive the sales of the complete product line.

We do hope this point of view will change in the future allowing the AIC partners more flexibility. But for now you guys will have to face the fact that NVIDIA's 1.175V limitation is a solid fact. But sure, this news is a little bitter."

Shazbot...

http://www.guru3d.com/article/msi-gtx-680-lightning-vol...
July 31, 2012 12:31:24 AM

aznplayer213 said:
"And then the really bad news ...

While I was writing this article I learned that NVIDIA just issued new BIOS files to the AIC partners and is frowning upon voltage tweaking outside their limitations. As such all new batches Lightning cards will have BIOSes where their limit of 1.175V is enforced, even in the LN2 BIOS. MSI has to follow that directive or probably face the fact that they will not be able to purchase the GPUs anymore.

This as well includes setting restrictions in the new AfterBurner 2.2.3

So while everything as described above is possible it in the end means that only the first batch of 5000 cards will have an OLD Bios that is freed up from the limitation and thus allows voltage tweaking to a certain extent. We can only assume that the old BIOS will spread like a virus to current Lightning owners to give them a little more flexibility on voltage tweaking matters. However you'd also need a special MSI AfterBurner build to support it. And that we do not see happening, due to the limitations requested by NVIDIA.

We understand NVIDIA's point of view on this, really .. extreme voltage tweaking can damage GPUs, and in the end these are returned to NVIDIA. Next to that the complexity of this new methodology is extensive and to a certain extent even unreliable. For NVIDIA it thus is matter of RMA and cost.

The flipside of the coin however is that when imposing such limitation on the high-end GPUs it pretty much kills off the fun for many of you. Extreme performance and tweaks drive the overclocking community and in the end drive the sales of the complete product line.

We do hope this point of view will change in the future allowing the AIC partners more flexibility. But for now you guys will have to face the fact that NVIDIA's 1.175V limitation is a solid fact. But sure, this news is a little bitter."

Shazbot...

http://www.guru3d.com/article/msi-gtx-680-lightning-vol...



http://sadtrombone.com/

Well that was bound to happen. But none the less the Afterburner files have already been released to the public and the Bios is flashable. Also conversely the current Afterburner that has been released does allow for voltage tweaking on the Power Edition 670 and the Lightning. I now this because I can measure it right now on mine own card. Essentially that means that so long as the old Bios is available. I guess I lucked out and got a card before Nvidia screwed up MSI.

Power Edition has the voltage ID pins removed so no matter what happens they can't put the cat back in the bag and software is already in the publics hands.
July 31, 2012 12:46:24 AM

cepheid said:
http://sadtrombone.com/

Well that was bound to happen. But none the less the Afterburner files have already been released to the public and the Bios is flashable. Also conversely the current Afterburner that has been released does allow for voltage tweaking on the Power Edition 670 and the Lightning. I now this because I can measure it right now on mine own card. Essentially that means that so long as the old Bios is available. I guess I lucked out and got a card before Nvidia screwed up MSI.

Power Edition has the voltage ID pins removed so no matter what happens they can't put the cat back in the bag and software is already in the publics hands.





More bad news....


http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/28132-overclocking-al...

KHAN!!!
a b U Graphics card
July 31, 2012 12:47:50 AM

cepheid said:
MSI GTX 670 or 680 are the highest Tier card you can get because they have the unlocked voltage. Below that are the Upper Tier 7970 including GHz editions. Below that are factory overclocked 680s. The 7970s have been touted as having the better overclocking but that disappeared when MSI unlocked voltage for their cards about a week ago. With voltage unlocked the 680 rips up the 7970. The hard part though is finding a decently priced 680 with voltage unlocked as some companies charge an arm and a leg for that these days (really one of the reasons why AMD is still a decent company as they don't artificially lock the voltage on their cards). Also Nvidia is lobbying hard to have voltage limited even on aftermarket designs due to the incredible performance of the 670 chip. Here's to hoping they don't make MSI change the BIOS on upcoming cards.

MSI Lightning 680 or GTX 670 Power Edition > 7970 GHz Ed. > Factory Overclocked 680 or 7970 > GTX 670

This is the current breakdown regarding performance at 1920x1080, note the MSI cards are listed higher because they have unlocked voltage and don't cost an extra $200-300 LIKE evga charges. EVGA Classified would be with the MSI cards in regards to performance but EVGA charges an additional $100 on top of a $659 card just to have the voltage unlocked which is ridiculous. At the higher resolution the 7970 comes out on top.

My recommendation for cost/performance would be the MSI GTX 670 Power Edition. It's easily the best buy out there currently for gaming at 1920x1080 resolution. If you think you might move to a higher resolution or 2-3 monitors in the next year or two get the 7970.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... <---This is the best deal out there in my opinion.

http://forums.guru3d.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55 <----- Afterburner unlocked voltage (**thanks Unwinder**) makes this card so sexy.


P.S. Physx doesn't matter anymore as any decent game engine has it already built in. The days when Physx was a selling point are disappearing.



Unlocked voltage is for the big boys with LN2 cooling, since the MSI lightning is $140 more than the 7970 it is defeated. The 7970 can clock up to 1280 core beating most the 680's out there for only $429. Like I said earlier it takes a 670 @1300 core to match a 7950 @ 1200 core the 7000 series just scales better in dual onfig and overclocking
!