Matrix 7970 vs 680 directcu ii top

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us Source: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_680...
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/HD_7970_Matrix/

depends on price of each gpu.generally most people recommend gtx 670 over the gtx 680 since the cost differece is more than the performance difference.Since the gtx 670 and hd 7970 have the same cost (most of the time) and since hd 7970 beats gtx 670 when both overclock most of the time my vote goes to hd 7970. but you have to post the prices to be more accurate in our answers!!sorry for my bad english anw!

No problem about the english thanks for the speedy reply The Asus directcu ii top is going for $520 while the Asus Rog Matrix HD 7970 Platinum is going for $480. I would also take adaptive vsync into account. From what i've heard the Matrix 7970 is an AMAZING over clocker.

Yes AMD's HD 7970 and its more powerful brother HD 7970 GHz Edition have been on the market for a while now. MSI has also launched their HD 7970 Lightning in June. Now ASUS has released the HD 7970 Matrix - a card that will directly compete with MSI's HD 7970 Lightning.
ASUS has increased clock speeds to 1100 MHz. That is 50 MHz more than the GHz Edition and higher than any other HD 7970 card, including the MSI Lightning. Memory clock is, with 1650 MHz, also higher than any other AMD card.

The card comes with a powerful triple slot cooling solution and adds many features for hardcore overclockers like support for VGA Hotwire, voltage control, and three buttons for direct GPU voltage control. We also find voltage measuring points and a Turbo-fan button to set fan speed to 100% on the card.

Price-wise, the HD 7970 Matrix comes at $480, which is quite a price increase given AMD's recent price drops for the HD 7970. Source: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/HD_7970_Matrix/

Is it worth the extra 40 bucks to get the gtx 680 directcu ii top even though the Platinum matrix can over clock to that level? And how well does adaptive v-sync work.

What refresh rate is your monitor? I personally have not found adaptive v-sync very useful with a 120hz monitor, as with such a high refresh rate, v-sync doesn't impose nearly as much latency as it does on a 60hz machine. However, I've heard good things from people with 60hz monitors, but be aware of what adaptive v-sync does. It turns v-sync on when you can maintain 60 fps (or what ever your refresh rate is), and turns it off when you drop below that FPS.

Do you wish you could use FXAA in games that don't normally offer it? If so, Nvidia might for you, however, be aware that AMD does have MLAA 2.0. I personally found MLAA 1.0 to not be nearly as good as FXAA, but I have not tried MLAA 2.0.

Is PhysX important to you? Be aware, very few games benefit from GPU accelerated PhysX, so if you aren't sure, you probably don't need it.

Do you have need for OpenCL or DirectCompute? This is used mostly in desktop GPGPU applications. In this area, AMD's cards stomp Nvidia's. Although, Nvidia has CUDA for GPGPU, so if CUDA is offered as an alternative, then Nvidia does well.

I think the general consensus is that 7970 is the faster card now and a cheaper price, and often bundled with games. So this may be the best card for you, but depending on other features you may want, you may prefer the GTX 680. I personally choose the GTX 680 this go around because of 3D Vision. While AMD has HD3D, my monitor doesn't support it at 1080p, and generally, 3D Vision is better supported.

Best answer selected by Qmully.