Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Gtx 660ti vs amd 7950

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 4:46:38 PM

i cant decide between getting a gtx 660ti a amd 7950 or waiting till i have enough money and getting a gtx 670.
i will mostly be playing bf3, borderlands 2, skyrim, minecraft,tf2,cs:go, maybe assaqsins creed 3.

More about : gtx 660ti amd 7950

October 3, 2012 4:56:31 PM

I guarantee you everyone is going to recommend the 7950. Why? IDK. The general consensus seems to be that 7950 > 660 ti & sometimes 670. Which I have yet to see proof. Everywhere I have looked the 660 ti destroys the 7950 in bf3. Only time it will lose is if you got past AAx8, which doesnt make much sense to go past x4. I say 660 ti or wait for 670. I am currently also trying to pick between 660 ti and 670. I have until the end of the month to choose. I hope the price will drop on either one by then but it probably wont.

Some people will argue that the 7950 OC's better. In truth they both OC very well. I don't trust many benchmarks anymore. There are never consistent results and some people might be getting paid to misrepresent results. I like to watch youtube videos of people playing to judge performance against the benchmarks. From what I have seen, the 7950 struggles to maintain ~50 fps and the 660 ti does a good job of staying around ~60 in bf3
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 4:59:19 PM

Get the 7950 you'll make many bitcoins. The benchmarks prove it yo. Plus it's actually better, just look at the toms GPU charts foo.
Score
0
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:00:05 PM

If you can wait than get the Gtx670. its best price/performance card for $400. If you cant wait then get the 7950.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:03:50 PM

I have seen the 7970 get beat by the 670 and sometimes the 660 ti in BF3.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:07:32 PM

There is a reason why AMD has price dropped their cards and Nvidia has yet to respond. There is also a reason why the 8850 and 8870 were compared to Nvidia's gtx 670 and not their own cards.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:31:13 PM

BigMack70 said:
Save your money and get a GTX 670. The 660ti is basically the GPU equivalent of a poo smear at $300. It's $50 overpriced for having such risky issues with minimum framerates due to the crippled memory bus.

The 670 will be a lot better than the 7950 in the games you mention - you will get better PhysX in borderlands 2, a better experience in BF3, and you can enable SSAO in Skyrim.


That's debatable. AMD has greater overclocking headroom on the good models (some of the good 7950s have more average headroom than the GTX 670 TOP, the best, albeit discontinued, GTX 670 that I'm aware of) that can let you use other settings, higher MSAA efficiency, and can use OpenCL/Direct Compute features such as some advanced lighting features that Nvidia can't do with playable performance on the GTX 600 cards. PhysX is really only an advantage in two modern games, Borderlands 2 and Batman:AC, and eve nthen, AMD ahs their own advantages that can counteract PhysX (such as the huge MSAA advantage that you mentioned).
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:32:44 PM

eric4277 said:
There is a reason why AMD has price dropped their cards and Nvidia has yet to respond. There is also a reason why the 8850 and 8870 were compared to Nvidia's gtx 670 and not their own cards.


Yes, the reason is that AMD needs to make more money. They're in debt last I checked, so they need to be more aggressive. Nvidia just doesn't give a crap about lowering prices until they absolutely need to, they just release new cards that make some of their more expensive cards largely irrelevant (GTX 670 to the GTX 680 and GTX 660 to the GTX 660 Ti).
Score
0
a c 85 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
October 3, 2012 5:34:28 PM

I love the fact that so many AMD fanboys are accusing everyone who isn't of being an Nvidia fanboy. Does it really matter? People have preferred brands, live with it. Yours is AMD.


BigMack70 said:
The 7970 is actually the better price/performance around $400, just not for the specific game combo he mentioned.


Mmm, Tom's disagrees with you. OP, save up your money - the 670 is an extremely beastly card that overclocks very well. My friend and I built new rigs at the same time; everything the same except for the video card. (And minor various things that don't affect performance.)

I've got a 670, and he has a 7950. When we're playing at 1920x1080, my rig wrecks his - I'm getting 10-15 more fps than him on ultra. We did an experiment once, though - combining monitors to run with three monitors at once. When we did that, his rig took the advantage, by far.

End result? Go with a 670, as it will happily max out any modern game at 1080p without blinking. If you're playing at stupid high resolutions, go Radeon.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:34:38 PM

And tomshardware is the one and only official source of all things tech right? go check other websites and live gameplays on youtube and see how the 660 ti annihilates the 7950. I have seen some results from Tom's that dont add up. Also, IIRC Tom's has multiple sites that handle benchmarks. That can cause some conflicting results as well.

When you are already behind you will need a huge OC.

Also, MSI power editions and ASUS tops have OC'd to ~1400mhz
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:37:29 PM

eric4277 said:
And tomshardware is the official source of all things tech right? go check other websites and live gameplays on youtube and see how the 660 ti annihilates the 7950.

When you are already behind you will need a huge OC.

Also, MSI power editions and ASUS tops have OC'd to ~1400mhz


http://hardocp.com/article/2012/08/23/galaxy_gtx_660_ti...

Most 660 Ti reviews have AMD cards using old drivers (some of them even had AMD on the December 2011 driver) and also compared cherrypicked and/or overclocked 660 Tis to stock 7950s. This one did a good overclock on all tested cards such as the GTX 660 Ti 3GB from Galaxy (possibly the best 660 Ti), the GTX 670 TOP from asus, and a Radeon 7950 XFX Black Edition with proper drivers for all cards. Notice how the 7950 won against even the 670. My only issue with this review is that I think that the 670's memory wasn't clocked as high as it could have been, but oh well.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:39:36 PM

DarkSable said:
I love the fact that so many AMD fanboys are accusing everyone who isn't of being an Nvidia fanboy. Does it really matter? People have preferred brands, live with it. Yours is AMD.




Mmm, Tom's disagrees with you. OP, save up your money - the 670 is an extremely beastly card that overclocks very well. My friend and I built new rigs at the same time; everything the same except for the video card. (And minor various things that don't affect performance.)

I've got a 670, and he has a 7950. When we're playing at 1920x1080, my rig wrecks his - I'm getting 10-15 more fps than him on ultra. We did an experiment once, though - combining monitors to run with three monitors at once. When we did that, his rig took the advantage, by far.

End result? Go with a 670, as it will happily max out any modern game at 1080p without blinking. If you're playing at stupid high resolutions, go Radeon.


Tom's doesn't disagree, so I don't know where you're getting your information. Also, unless you give full hardware specs for the two comparison machines as wel las configuration, saying something like that is irrelevant. It must be solidly backed up to be worth believing.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:43:37 PM

Now, I challenge you to find a youtube video of someone with a 7950 holding 60 FPS on Ultra at 1080p at least x4
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:44:25 PM

eric4277 said:
Now, I challenge you to find a youtube video of someone with a 7950 holding 60 FPS on Ultra at 1080p at least x4


Since when is Youtube an unbiased source of such information?
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:44:33 PM

L2 Scroll wheel. shows no msaa, then x4 @ 1080p and 1600p. and shows OC on a different page
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:45:24 PM

I find a youtube video of someone trying to show what their card can do and not being influenced by any type of sponsorship more unbiased than any website.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:48:04 PM

eric4277 said:
Now, I challenge you to find a youtube video of someone with a 7950 holding 60 FPS on Ultra at 1080p at least x4


I think the argument against the 660 Ti is the minimum frame rate, wich guarantees less lag spikes in the 7950 i guess, and yes youtube vids are not that trustworthy i think.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:48:41 PM

eric4277 said:
I find a youtube video of someone trying to show what their card can do and not being influenced by any type of sponsorship more unbiased than any website.


Sorry, but I'm seen a lot of Youtube videos about such things and not many were unbiased and none that were from less than a few years ago. I'm not saying that there aren't any, but I haven't seen any.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:50:12 PM

If the 7950 was better than the 670, AMD would not have it priced at the same range as the 660 ti. And if it was better, Nvidia wouldnt be stupid enough to have their most equivalent performer priced $100 more than the competition. That wouldnt make sense from any point of view. If you say greed, it doesnt make sense because you will sell more at a $350 price point than $400 and make more money for your greed.

Honestly, selling a $400 card at $550 because you dont have any current competition sounds more greedy to me.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:50:33 PM

Hiii said:
I think the argument against the 660 Ti is the minimum frame rate, wich guarantees less lag spikes in the 7950 i guess, and yes youtube vids are not that trustworthy i think.


The minimum frame rate isn't necessarily always extremely low on the 660 Ti, but it's generally lower, not that it's an absolutely empirical metric. Besides, there's more than the minimum frame deficiency to argue against. The 660 Ti is one of the worst cards for overclocking out of the this graphics generation along with other deficiencies, such as MSAA efficiency.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:52:09 PM

When I say youtube videos, I also mean regular user more so than sponsored channels.

Don't get me wrong. I do think the 7950 is a great card. I just dont like how everyone is chumping off the 660 ti like it is a pos and the 7950 is better than everything, because it isnt.
Score
0
a c 85 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
October 3, 2012 5:52:36 PM

Anyways, OP, if you go with the 670 or the 7950, you'll be happy either way.
It's highly recommended to avoid the 660ti, however, due to memory bandwidth issues - it'll cause stuttering at higher settings.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:52:44 PM

Get whichever is cheaper. There really isn't that much of a difference, as you can tell through all this bickering. If BF3 is really THAT important to you get the 660ti. I personally don't like it. If Crysis is important get AMD. For comparison I have a 7870 and Skyrim keeps 60fps with the hd textures. I haven't seen it lower yet. CSGO has minimums of around 160 fps. I use 1920x1080 by the way. Also, BF3 goes from 45-80 fps with AA off and everything Ultra in MP.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 5:55:00 PM

The 660 ti can OC to ~1400mhz core and ~7000 on the memory. How is that the worst?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:55:13 PM

eric4277 said:
If the 7950 was better than the 670, AMD would not have it priced at the same range as the 660 ti. And if it was better, Nvidia wouldnt be stupid enough to have their most equivalent performer priced $100 more than the competition. That wouldnt make sense from any point of view. If you say greed, it doesnt make sense because you will sell more at a $350 price point than $400 and make more money for your greed.

Honestly, selling a $400 card at $550 because you dont have any current competition sounds more greedy to me.


The first sentence couldn't really be more wrong. Not only is the 7950 generally only much better when overclocking is considered (something that is not accounted for in MSRP) for common resolutions, but pricing does not necessarily make sense on anything. Supply and demand is a lie.

Nvidia also doesn't care because they used a huge amount of FUD in the 660 Ti launch. More than half of the reviews of that card use old drivers on the AMD cards as well as unrealistic settings to make the 660 Ti look better than it is (cherry picked cards were also common, but not as common as the above two factors).

AMD is also far mroe monetarily challenged than Nvidia at this time. AMD is in debt. Nvidia is not. Nvidia also has lower BOM on their cards for a variety or reasons such as fewer memory chips and such, so they can afford to sell fewer cards if they have to.

The Radeon 7970 was so expensive at launch because it had to be. Yields were much worse back then, supply was lower as a result of that. They also had it priced to beat the price/performance margins of the time with the GTX 580 3GB, it's closest competitor.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:56:12 PM

eric4277 said:
The 660 ti can OC to ~1400mhz core and ~7000 on the memory. How is that the worst?


It rarely hits 1.4GHz core clock and it's core clock is irrelevant because it's memory hold it back too much. High memory frequencies are far counteracted by the slimmer memory bus. The 660 Ti can hit high frequencies on both the GPU and memory, especially on the memory with the 3GB models, but it scales performance very badly with increased GPU frequency as a result of its weak memory bus.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:58:35 PM

DarkSable said:
Anyways, OP, if you go with the 670 or the 7950, you'll be happy either way.
It's highly recommended to avoid the 660ti, however, due to memory bandwidth issues - it'll cause stuttering at higher settings.


Agreed. Both a good 670 and a good 7950 are great options. Some 670s can get as cheap as $340 making them have fairly close overall value to a good 7950.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:08:38 PM

eric4277 said:
When I say youtube videos, I also mean regular user more so than sponsored channels.

Don't get me wrong. I do think the 7950 is a great card. I just dont like how everyone is chumping off the 660 ti like it is a pos and the 7950 is better than everything, because it isnt.


The problem with the 660 Ti is that it really is an inferior card. It has worse stuttering, worse MSAA scaling, worse overclocking headroom, and other deficiencies. At least the 670 has good overclocking headroom and acceptable MSAA scaling up to 4xMSAA as well as far less stuttering issues than the 660 Ti (not everyone notices it, so this can be argued against as a con, but still).

The 2GB models of the 660 Ti also have an odd 1.5GiB+.5GiB memory configuration where performance starts to drop off around the 1.5GiB mark. This is caused by the last .5GiB being only accessible to one memory controller and thus running at a mere one third of the bandwidth of the first 1.5GiB of memory.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:15:11 PM

Oh no not this thread again..BOTH cards will do just fine canned benchmarks dont do any good and everyone had different hardware which means everyone will have different experiences..Yes the memory bandwidth is low on the 660 Ti but the memory speed being at 6Gbps and the cores make up for it..Cant we all just get along and still about the memory controller thing my opinion i dont think it apply ive ran 1.6GB on the 660 Ti and i didnt lag but nvidia only knows the true answer of how they setup the cards
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:21:07 PM

determinologyz said:
Oh no not this thread again..BOTH cards will do just fine canned benchmarks dont do any good and everyone had different hardware which means everyone will have different experiences..Yes the memory bandwidth is low on the 660 Ti but the memory speed being at 6Gbps and the cores make up for it..Cant we all just get along and still about the memory controller thing my opinion i dont think it apply ive ran 1.6GB on the 660 Ti and i didnt lag but nvidia only knows the true answer of how they setup the cards


There is a drop in performance. Nvidia can only do their best to minimize it, but they can't eliminate it. They did a good job of hiding it, but some people still notice it as increased stutter. Even the full memory performance is proven to cause some issues because that and the ROP difference are all that separate the 660 Ti from the 670 in performance. Games tested with the 3GB Model of the 660 Ti that involve high memory capacity without crippling memory bandwidth needs prove that the 660 Ti 2GB's unorthodox memory configuration is inferior.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 6:24:10 PM

luciferano said:
The problem with the 660 Ti is that it really is an inferior card. It has worse stuttering, worse MSAA scaling, worse overclocking headroom, and other deficiencies. At least the 670 has good overclocking headroom and acceptable MSAA scaling up to 4xMSAA as well as far less stuttering issues than the 660 Ti (not everyone notices it, so this can be argued against as a con, but still).

The 2GB models of the 660 Ti also have an odd 1.5GiB+.5GiB memory configuration where performance starts to drop off around the 1.5GiB mark. This is caused by the last .5GiB being only accessible to one memory controller and thus running at a mere one third of the bandwidth of the first 1.5GiB of memory.


Do you know what stuttering is" I have yet to hear of this "Stuttering" issue.
There are different forms of stuttering.

*Micro-stuttering- having more frames than your monitor can display and causing them to overlap. curable by vsync.
*Low FPS- stuttering due to low frames per second, or lag in some cases.
*Bad Drivers- bad driver support.

I dont think I have heard of any card having stuttering issues beyond the aforementioned cases.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:26:01 PM

The 660ti really? Come on guys I mean I like Nvidia I have two 680's but at this time with the current performance/Pricing nothing can touch AMD at this time. A 7950 is the best bang for the buck by far, a 660 and a 7950 shouldnt even be used in the same sentence. Now the 670 is a great card unfortunately its pricing puts it square infront of the 7970 which is better at everything.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:26:19 PM

eric4277 said:
Do you know what stuttering is" I have yet to hear of this "Stuttering" issue.
There are different forms of stuttering.

*Micro-stuttering- having more frames than your monitor can display and causing them to overlap. curable by vsync.
*Low FPS- stuttering due to low frames per second, or lag in some cases.
*Bad Drivers- bad driver support.

I dont think I have heard of any card having stuttering issues beyond the aforementioned cases.


The second type of stutter that you mentioned is the type of stutter caused by this.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 6:26:35 PM

Are you talking about texture stuttering? Cause I have seen that before from both camps.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:27:20 PM

redeemer said:
The 660ti really? Come on guys I mean I like Nvidia I have two 680's but at this time with the current performance/Pricing nothing can touch AMD at this time. A 7950 is the best bang for the buck by far, a 660 and a 7950 shouldnt even be used in the same sentence. Now the 670 is a great card unfortunately its pricing puts it square infront of the 7970 which is better at everything.


The 680 is not inferior to the 7970 in everything, just on average and even then, only slightly so at stock.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:27:25 PM

eric4277 said:
Do you know what stuttering is" I have yet to hear of this "Stuttering" issue.
There are different forms of stuttering.

*Micro-stuttering- having more frames than your monitor can display and causing them to overlap. curable by vsync.
*Low FPS- stuttering due to low frames per second, or lag in some cases.
*Bad Drivers- bad driver support.

I dont think I have heard of any card having stuttering issues beyond the aforementioned cases.




Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:28:21 PM

eric4277 said:
Are you talking about texture stuttering? Cause I have seen that before from both camps.


Memory bandwidth is cut from 144GB/s to 48GB/s on the last .5GiB of memory. Take a guess at the ramifications of that.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 6:40:41 PM



That has nothign to do with stuttering. And average game performance means just that. Average taken across multiple titles. Some Nivida do better, some AMD do better. We are specifically talking about BF3 since its most demanding game the OP is playing.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 6:42:35 PM

BigMack70 said:
Yeah and most 7970s will overclock to at least 1300 MHz on the core:
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/gigabyt...

Are you noticing any problems with this methodology yet? :sarcastic: 

There's two reliable ways to figure out an average OC of a card
1) Look at hwbot
2) Look at all the reviews of the card and average the overclocking results

Notice that the "cherry picking" method isn't one of them?

-edit- I guess technically you could buy a whole bunch of a card and overclock them all and average the results yourself... that would be a third way. :lol: 


LOL since when did 7970s get into the argument? And I'm not cherry picking. The MSI power edition has been getting ~7ghz on the memory pretty consistently
Score
0
October 3, 2012 6:45:38 PM

I am just trying to point out that the 660 ti doesn't deserve the bad wrap it gets and they 7950 doesn't deserve the pedestal it is on. As you can see from your own website. It does very well. The 192-bit bus width doesn't really hurt it until over x8 aa which is pointless. IDGAF about tom's article saying it suffers, its not true, the proof is in the pudding.
Score
0
October 3, 2012 6:48:40 PM

BigMack70 said:
The 660ti doesn't beat the 7950 in BF3 in the most important metric: minimum framerate. At the very least, it doesn't beat it consistently. It's just not a good card for $300.
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/GPU/GTX-660-ROUNDUP/GTX-660-ROUNDUP-38.jpg


That chart has them tying in minimum fps, that must mean they both suck. Though I will say minimum FPS is important, but if you average is almost double your minimum FPS(like the 660 ti is showing) you obviously wont be seeing that minimum often.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:51:28 PM

luciferano said:
The 680 is not inferior to the 7970 in everything, just on average and even then, only slightly so at stock.



The truth is hard to accept I know, the 7970 provides better scaling in everything. With current drivers its is faster than the 680 in most games and comes at a cheaper price. Furthermore its has better compute performance by far, and excels in 2560x1440p widening the performance gap. We know what happens when we overclock no point discussing. Currently my 680 setup hits the fps limit in Crysis 2 @ 2560x1440p because of vram!!

Dont forget that most reviews compare a stock 7970 against an "Autoboost Kepler 680" !





Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 6:54:06 PM

eric4277 said:
They also seem to be getting 7000mhz on the memory. That's odd
http://hardocp.com/article/2012/09/03/msi_gtx_660_ti_po...



Ima say this everyones pc specs is different..Some peoples specs favor 1 card over the other so many factors come into play you kinda got to do your own benchmarks we recommend cards but it get to the point to where some people here push the card on someone as if they going to play the game for them. My opinion do your own research and pick the card thats best for your needs both cards are nice the developers know what their doing..a 660 Ti plays well on 1080p/4xaa not to shabby and holds nice frames from what ive seen in my rig..the 7950 has a more memory/bigger mem banwidth but yall making it sound like you going to get 1000x more frames when thats not the case..Even with it being higher res and more aa some games you may see a small increase but nothing to right home about..If anything next gen cards will be something
Score
0
October 3, 2012 6:59:31 PM

BigMack70 said:
:heink:  This makes no sense at all...

For one thing, if the 660ti can't reliably beat the 7950 in a game known to favor Nvidia's architecture, why is this a pro in any sense for the 660ti? Especially since in other areas we know that the 660ti's minimum framerate can go in the crapper?

For another thing, remember that my point is that OP should get a 670. I don't think the 7950 is a good option for the games he's listed in comparison to the 670, even if overclocking were to be factored in.

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd for another thing, I guarantee you'll find drops from 60fps to 30fps WAYYYYYYYYYYYYY more annoying than dips from 40fps to 30fps. Dropping from 60 to 30 will make 30fps feel like obnoxious stuttering, even though it really isn't.


Everywhere I look, except for Tom's, I see it beating the 7950 in BF3. Explosions lower frames, so what. Nothing else will spike your frames as hard. Spike meaning dropping 15-30 frames in less than 2 seconds. Other times frame rate drops are gradual.
Score
0
!