Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Help me choose GTX 670 or HD 7970 GE

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 26, 2012 7:21:32 AM

Hello, everyone, I'm planning on buying a new card this week but I really can't decide between 3 of them, so some feedback would be good.

I've come down to 3 cards:

MSI GTX 670 Power Edition Twin Frozr IV 2 GB - Core 1020Mhz / Memory 6010Mhz
Sapphire HD 7970 Ghz Edition Vapor-X 3GB - Core 1000Mhz / Memory 6000Mhz
Gigabyte HD 7970 Ghz Edition Windforce 3GB - Core 1100Mhz / Memory 6000Mhz

Now, the 670 is 55 bucks cheaper than the 7970's and I will mostly play @ 1080p (BF3, GW2, Dota 2, Diablo 3 and newer releases)
I've got a XFX Core Edition PRO650W PSU and a 120hz monitor.

I'm looking for a card that will not only give me a nice performance, but also good temperatures, noise levels and such.

Thanks!

More about : choose gtx 670 7970

August 26, 2012 7:28:00 AM

go for gtx 670 if u want to play on a single monitor otherwise for multi-monitors amd 7970 will be perfect.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2012 7:31:21 AM

I'd go with the Gigabyte 7970 if money isn't an issue :) 
m
0
l
Related resources
August 26, 2012 7:31:22 AM

If I were u I would get the gigabyte one its definitely faster than the 670 or the sapphire, the choice is simple believe me but if u care about physix get the 670
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2012 7:39:33 AM

it comes down to preference.. both perform similarly at 1080p i believe.. how about gtx660 at $300 with free borderlands 2 ? since you will be gaming at 1080p it wont make a difference.. also its a great overclocker.. can overclock it to near gtx670 levels..all this for much less than an hd7970.. i say sweet
m
0
l
August 26, 2012 7:59:35 AM

"Physx" don't really matter to me, so that won't be a problem, neither will be the extra money if I end up choosing one of the 7970's.

Well, here where I live the 660TI is pretty expensive atm, not really worth it right now.

What about thinking ahead? I mean the 7970 seems to have more raw power, so technically they may be able to perform better in future games, like Crysis 3 for instance. Am I right?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2012 8:00:54 AM

davech1 said:
"Physx" don't really matter to me, so that won't be a problem, neither will be the extra money if I end up choosing one of the 7970's.

Well, here where I live the 660TI is pretty expensive atm, not really worth it right now.

What about thinking ahead? I mean the 7970 seems to have more raw power, so technically they may be able to perform better in future games, like Crysis 3 for instance. Am I right?


All of them will be able to perform good on upcoming games. But meh, the 7970 is the best haha :) 
m
0
l
August 26, 2012 8:30:11 AM

Well, unless someone comes with a big splash in favor of the 670 I guess I'm going with the Gigabyte 7970.

Thanks, guys! :) 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2012 5:53:58 PM

DO NOT GET A 660 Ti. It's not really a 1080p card.

the 670 is almost perfect at that resolution, but as far as future proofing is concerned, i'd go with the 7970.

@supersonic: that's a different card.

Though yeah, i think the Gigabyte is the best of the lot...but read this:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7970-over...
m
0
l
August 26, 2012 6:00:56 PM

ya check the sapphire with 1100 Mhz its nearly as the same as the gigabyte at 1100 Mhz
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2012 6:05:54 PM

If you mostly play 1080p the 670 will do fine. If you want multiple monitors and are going to be editing video, or doing a lot of computing go with the Saphire 7970. Saphire Vapor X is one of the best cards out there. Can't go wrong with Gigabyte either.

I'm thinking about getting the Saphire Ghz edition but I need a new case if I do that. Plus I am waiting to see if this week will bring any promo codes or sales.

Otherwise my other choice is a Evga 670 FTW.
m
0
l
a c 598 U Graphics card
August 26, 2012 6:08:14 PM

Crysis 3 wll support TXAA, a feature you will only get to use with the 670.

The MSI GTX 670 PE/OC is, all things considered, probably one of the one or two best video cards you can buy right now. The 670 is a more efficient chip than the Tahiti 7970 Ghz chips, with less heat, less power consumption, and less noise. It also comes with additional pluses of, yes, Physx, Adaptive VSync, TXAA, FXAA, better driver support, and overall better game compatibility. This will be particularly true for the games that you originally listed (BF3, GW2, Dota 2, Diablo 3, etc.). Those games will play better on the 670.

Not many Diablo 3 benchmarks out there, but you can see it favors Nvidia cards:
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1527/pg6/amd-rade...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 26, 2012 6:24:59 PM

One thing always to consider are the games you play as stated above. If most of the games you have played are better made for Nvidia, then without a doubt get that. Although its not like one brand will play them the rest won't its just that you can get extra features/better performance at a set resolution with those specific brand titles than you would with the other.
m
0
l
August 26, 2012 9:56:44 PM

17seconds said:
Crysis 3 wll support TXAA, a feature you will only get to use with the 670.

The MSI GTX 670 PE/OC is, all things considered, probably one of the one or two best video cards you can buy right now. The 670 is a more efficient chip than the Tahiti 7970 Ghz chips, with less heat, less power consumption, and less noise. It also comes with additional pluses of, yes, Physx, Adaptive VSync, TXAA, FXAA, better driver support, and overall better game compatibility. This will be particularly true for the games that you originally listed (BF3, GW2, Dota 2, Diablo 3, etc.). Those games will play better on the 670.

Not many Diablo 3 benchmarks out there, but you can see it favors Nvidia cards:
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1527/pg6/amd-rade...

That's a good point, but what worries me most are the future games and how the 670 will handle em.
For example, BF3 is a game that is consuming almost 2GB of VRAM (@1080) nowadays, so let's imagine BF4 is released and consumes 2+GB, in that case I think the 7970GE would be a safer choice, but idk.

Maybe I'm being too picky here, but I really wanna make the right choice, I mean these cards are not cheap. :pt1cable: 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 12:17:20 AM

With the game engines they use these days, there should be a way to configure games that they use less ram. But BF3 is very very graphicly intense. Not just single player but because you can have up to 64 people on a map with continuous action. 3GB ram is nice to have I don't imagine that all the gaming requirements will require a card with 2+ gb of ram. Not all the games would sell because not everyone can afford such cards everytime a new game comes out. Even in general, casual gamers won't spend 300+ a video card for a game, on the other hand they will buy a console lol.

I understand you want something future proof but in 6 months from now something else will come out. Crysis 3 will be the next game that will cripple most cards out right now, well not cripple but it will be demanding too. I would like a 7970 too but I like how most games run on Nvidia and I like physix too.

To be honest, I don't pay attention to AA and all that stuff because it usually looks and plays good enough that I don't notice.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 11:46:41 AM

Games like Crysis 3 and Watch Dogs may need 2+ GB RAM. But meh, both the 670 and 7970 are going to be able to handle them. I'm sure :) 
m
0
l
August 27, 2012 11:51:08 AM

17seconds said:
A review listing VRam usage for several games:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/evga-...

If you're talking about future-proof, I wouldn't want to be in a situation where a really good PhysX or TXAA game came out, then not be able to use those features.


If you're talking about future-proof, I wouldn't want to be in a situation where a really good game came out with awesome graphics that needed more than 2GB vram, and then not be able to use those features...

"Future-proofing" is a stupid guessing game - either for vram or nvidia-feature fear-mongering. Buy the best card you desire/can afford when it's time for a purchase. Right now the 7970GE is the better card overall, unless you primarily play a PhysX based game (of which there are very few) or care a lot about power draw. Don't let this forum's resident Nvidia marketing department fool you about that.

The 670 is also a good purchase, but the reason to get it over the 7970GE is to save money or because you have a lousy power supply, not because it's a better card (it's not).
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 11:59:30 AM

I don't really think games will be exceeding 2GB VRAM usage too soon.

Though i'm very divided on a game like crysis. If they'll throw in a lot of compute performance requirements like Crysis 1, then the 670 will suffer.

On the other hand, if it'll come with TXAA built in, it's likely to be a TWIMTBP title like Crysis 2.

So no way to tell. I think i could safely say this:

Look at the performance delta over 60 fps at 1080p for Crysis 2 (for that matter all games you like) maxed out in DX11 for both the cards.

Pick the one with the greater delta.
m
0
l
August 27, 2012 12:08:00 PM

My point wasn't to argue that games are headed over the 2GB limit soon, my point was that what is or is not "future-proof" is a stupid guessing game that should be 99% irrelevant to a graphics card purchase.

There's no way to know what games will or won't use TXAA, and no way to know if the 670 will be powerful enough to run them with TXAA. There's no way to know when 2GB vram will stop being enough.

The moral of the story is always the same: buy the best card you can afford/desire for your needs now and let the future worry about itself.

Wanna save some money? Get the 670 - it's a great card. Want the better card? Get the 7970GE - it's a great card that's a bit faster for a bit more money.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 12:45:09 PM

Pick randomly. If you choose one and you have doubts that means you wanted to get the other card. Both good cards, no way of deciding. If money is no issue then I don't see why you would not get the 7970GE.
m
0
l
a c 598 U Graphics card
August 27, 2012 6:48:07 PM

Well, if you buy a 7970, then you guarantee that you will NEVER play games with PhysX or TXAA, or Adaptive VSync, or forced FXAA, etc. It's a gamble. With a 670, there is no gamble, you get it all.

If the Ghz edition was so much "better" I wouldn't be here trying to talk some sense, but it's not. One card has additional features, the other card doesn't, performance is the same. Easy.
m
0
l
August 27, 2012 11:23:02 PM

Performance isn't the same... the 7970GE is about 10% faster, FXAA is irrelevant since AMD has MLAA, and you can still enable PhysX and run it off the CPU if you want (though the performance hit is substantial for some games).

Nvidia does have a features advantage, but it's not anywhere near as great as you are suggesting. The only time the Nvidia feature set is a big deal is if you know you are going to be primarily playing a game that makes good use of them (of which there are very few and they are not listed in the OP's post).

The 670 is the cheaper card, and it's certainly enough for 1080p gaming, but it's not the better card overall...

It's only the better card in a few specific situations (oh and by the way the 7970 has just as many situations where it becomes by far the better choice e.g. extra high res gaming)
m
0
l
a c 598 U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 6:13:00 AM

BigMack70 said:
Performance isn't the same... the 7970GE is about 10% faster

Gotta remember he's talking about the MSI GTX 670 PE/OC card, which is equal to a GTX 680. The difference with the 7970 Ghz is more like 1-2%, i.e. EXACTLY the same performance. There's no way I could recommend someone use a 1% performance advantage as a rationale for giving up on lower power consumption, less noise, better drivers, PhysX, Adaptive VSync, FXAA, TXAA, forced Ambient Occlusion, Transparency Supersampling, and better overall game compatibility. It would be different if AMD had anything worthwhile to offer, but that's all they have... 1%, which doesn't make it "better".
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_670_Power_Ed...
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/HD_7970_SOC...

Like Anandtech said in a statement which also holds true for the MSI GTX 670 PE/OC:
"The end result is that while AMD has tied NVIDIA for the single-GPU performance crown with the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition, the GeForce GTX 680 is still the more desirable gaming card. There are a million exceptions to this statement of course (and it goes both ways), but as we said before, these cards may be tied but they're anything but equal."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6025/radeon-hd-7970-ghz-e...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 12:54:10 PM

I say he gets the best for what his money can afford. If cost is not an issue why not get the overclocked 670, a good brand or the 7970. Assuming he does not want extra features and is just looking at raw stats.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 1:47:33 PM

Simple as this -

If you can get the 7970 and if you don't have any money issues, go for it!
m
0
l
August 28, 2012 2:31:02 PM

if you dont have any money issue, and wanna go with single gpu then go for gtx 680 i would say!
m
0
l
August 28, 2012 2:44:19 PM

*sigh* debate with green-blooded folks is pointless...

And the GTX 680 is pretty much a waste of money right now until the price comes down to the 7970GE
m
0
l
August 28, 2012 2:53:03 PM

I'm in the same debate with the two cards. Talking fps, What kind of a loss will I have getting a 670? Playing at 1920 x 1080 on a single monitor. Are we talking 5 fps or we talking a higher amount like 10-15. I want the option of physx and txaa and 3d vision so I want nvidia. But I don't want to pay the same if I'm going to have a substantial fps drop .
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 3:47:41 PM

The 670 is a little slower than the 7970. I think about 10-13 fps slower. You can overclock it though as well. In most games the 670 does a little better.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 4:00:47 PM

Both the 670 & the 7970 OC well. Overall - 7970 is faster.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 4:25:39 PM






I suppose the best indication of future proofing at 1080p is the 2560x1600 performance today. Sadly, there's no comparison chart for the 670 roundup at this resolution.



Also note, i'm not sure the settings are exactly the same (because the fps isn't exactly the same for identical stock cards).
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 4:36:42 PM

To be honest its a few fps off for each card depending on the game. So the best thing would be to go for what is the best deal in terms of price.
m
0
l
a c 598 U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 4:38:01 PM

selayan said:
The 670 is a little slower than the 7970. I think about 10-13 fps slower. You can overclock it though as well. In most games the 670 does a little better.

What games are you speculating about there?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 4:52:07 PM

If you plan on overclocking the card and are fine with spending a little extra than the 7970 is a good choice.

With the 670 you get almost as good of performance at stock levels, plus better driver support and more features, all while being cheaper and using less power.

Personally I would go with 670, but both options are good, as both cards are great. Neither choice is bad. Like others said, it also depends on the games you are playing. Research and find out if they favor Nvidia or AMD.

It should also be noted that the 670 would include a free copy of Borderlands 2, so if you are interested in that game at all that's something to consider.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 4:58:45 PM

Haha this thread keeps on growing. Why don't we let the OP reply first :) 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 6:28:04 PM

17seconds said:
What games are you speculating about there?


If you look and Anandtech benches for the 670 vs the 7970, the 7970 takes off in the beginning with games like Metro, Dirt at 1920x1080 at least that is what I play at. Then go down the list, you see BF3, Batman, Portal, Shogun, the 670 starts to do better. So it does also depend on what you will be playing.

Currently, the 7970 HIS IceQ model on newegg can be had for $393. That is the cheapest of all the cards we are considering here. Not sure on quality or how well it does because it does not have any reviews.
m
0
l
a c 598 U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 6:43:09 PM

selayan said:
Currently, the 7970 HIS IceQ model on newegg can be had for $393. That is the cheapest of all the cards we are considering here. Not sure on quality or how well it does because it does not have any reviews.

You're flip flopping between models, 7970/7970 Ghz. The cheapest regular 7970 that I see on Newegg is $410 and the cheapest Ghz model is $430.

The MSI GTX 670 PE/OC is $384 after rebate and comes with a free copy of Borderlands 2.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.guru3d.com/news/borderlands-2-physx-features...

Really this is becoming the ultimate "no-brainer". It's probably best to let davech1 revisit his thread and sift through the evidence.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 7:58:31 PM

I'm sorry I was confusing the ghz version with the regular 7970. How would you rate the 670 PE vs the Evga FTW?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 9:12:30 PM

selayan said:
I'm sorry I was confusing the ghz version with the regular 7970. How would you rate the 670 PE vs the Evga FTW?



The reality is that you have two cards that are almost in the same pricing category 670=2GB+256bit bus, now the 7970=3GB+384 bus, physx is irrelevant only 40 titles since 2007, TXAA makes the images blurry from what I can see in the game 'The Secret World' The 7970 also scales better when overclocked, keep in mind that in comparisons the 670 is using autoboost for its clocks while the 7970 remains at stock speeds. Even an overclocked 670 is no match for a overclocked 7970.







m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 10:39:04 PM

While the auto boost sounds interesting, I guess with an app like MSI afterburner it should not be too hard to overclock the 7970 following a guide or so.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 10:59:08 PM

selayan said:
While the auto boost sounds interesting, I guess with an app like MSI afterburner it should not be too hard to overclock the 7970 following a guide or so.



I got both and though I like my 680's very much the autoboost bit is just plain garbage. The 7970 is the hardcore ethusiasts choice as far as I am concerned, it overclocks better and has more vram bigger bus compute etc. We will see the real fruits of 28nm soon with the 8000 series and 700 series
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
August 28, 2012 11:15:57 PM

Quote:
physx is irrelevant only 40 titles since 2007


Games that use gpu physX is 21... 9 in the last two years... Out of those games only a few were blockbuster titles. And the rest were throwaways.

http://www.geforce.com/games-applications/physx

I love seeing the nVidia crowd throwing physX around like it's something that should even be considered in a purchasing decision (it shouldn't).

Havok is where it's at and open to all platforms and developers know this. PhysX is a dead end and one of the things that's contributing to the demise of PC gaming.

AMD features:

Eyefinity
Full screen SSAA
DirectCompute Accelerated AA (MLAA)
DirectCompute Accelerated Post Processing
Great drivers (I've personally never had any major issues and remember it was nVidia that had drivers that B-B-Q'd cards)
Last but not least, some OpenCL/OpenGL balls.


I'd go with the 7970Ghz Edition.


m
0
l
August 29, 2012 12:32:30 AM

RussK1 said:
Quote:
physx is irrelevant only 40 titles since 2007


Games that use gpu physX is 21... 9 in the last two years... Out of those games only a few were blockbuster titles. And the rest were throwaways.

http://www.geforce.com/games-applications/physx

I love seeing the nVidia crowd throwing physX around like it's something that should even be considered in a purchasing decision (it shouldn't).

Havok is where it's at and open to all platforms and developers know this. PhysX is a dead end and one of the things that's contributing to the demise of PC gaming.

AMD features:

Eyefinity
Full screen SSAA
DirectCompute Accelerated AA (MLAA)
DirectCompute Accelerated Post Processing
Great drivers (I've personally never had any major issues and remember it was nVidia that had drivers that B-B-Q'd cards)
Last but not least, some OpenCL/OpenGL balls.


I'd go with the 7970Ghz Edition.


Finally, some sanity. The Nvidia marketing department on this forum is a bit too vocal for my taste. Although I haven't had the best experience with AMD multi-GPU drivers (but flawless for a single card experience).

+1 to you good sir
m
0
l
August 30, 2012 2:33:15 PM

davech1 said:
Hello, everyone, I'm planning on buying a new card this week but I really can't decide between 3 of them, so some feedback would be good.

I've come down to 3 cards:

MSI GTX 670 Power Edition Twin Frozr IV 2 GB - Core 1020Mhz / Memory 6010Mhz
Sapphire HD 7970 Ghz Edition Vapor-X 3GB - Core 1000Mhz / Memory 6000Mhz
Gigabyte HD 7970 Ghz Edition Windforce 3GB - Core 1100Mhz / Memory 6000Mhz

Now, the 670 is 55 bucks cheaper than the 7970's and I will mostly play @ 1080p (BF3, GW2, Dota 2, Diablo 3 and newer releases)
I've got a XFX Core Edition PRO650W PSU and a 120hz monitor.

I'm looking for a card that will not only give me a nice performance, but also good temperatures, noise levels and such.

Thanks!



O.K. What kind of graphics card to you currently have?
m
0
l
!