What graphics card will suffice?

Hello, I will be buying a graphics card sometime in the next few weeks. I will be playing on a 1080p 24" monitor. I really want to play current games such as BF3 and Skyrim maxed out, but I also want to have enough juice to futureproof my rig so I can play future games such as Crysis 3 with acceptable frame rates. Sure, we do not know how intensive Crysis 3 will be, but I am being general here. I would like to spend around $300...

My build is...
CPU: i5 2500k
Memory: 8 GB Ripjaws
Motherboard: Z77
SSD: 256 GB Samsung 830

Also, I have been thinking... Do you think two GTX 670s would be hard pressed to run games at 60 FPS on Ultra once the next generation of consoles are released? Or will the improvements that the next generation of consoles bring not be so significant?

Thanks!
63 answers Last reply
More about what graphics card suffice
  1. My advice is get a PSU and motherboard that will support 2 video cards over the next few years. I paid 300 for my MSI 7870 and couldn't be happier. OCed to 1250/1400 @ 1.299V and only hits 58C.

    tip: pci-e_x16 2.0 vs 3.0 gives less than 10% performance increase. So you should be more interested in sli/crossfire motherboards that give true x16, x16.

    With a good case I was able to get 4.3Ghz out of my 2500k with stock heatsink and stay under 70c.
  2. arcticle said:
    Hello, I will be buying a graphics card sometime in the next few weeks. I will be playing on a 1080p 24" monitor. I really want to play current games such as BF3 and Skyrim maxed out, but I also want to have enough juice to futureproof my rig so I can play future games such as Crysis 3 with acceptable frame rates. Sure, we do not know how intensive Crysis 3 will be, but I am being general here. I would like to spend around $300...

    My build is...
    CPU: i5 2500k
    Memory: 8 GB Ripjaws
    Motherboard: Z77
    SSD: 256 GB Samsung 830

    Also, I have been thinking... Do you think two GTX 670s would be hard pressed to run games at 60 FPS on Ultra once the next generation of consoles are released? Or will the improvements that the next generation of consoles bring not be so significant?


    Thanks!



    Id recomend the amd 7950. Very easily overclockable good cooling
  3. I don't advise going with dual gpus, too many issues with them. Go with the single fastest card you can afford. I would get the AMD Radeon 7970 GHZ edition as it is the fastest card (arguably) available. If you find that isn't enough in the future, you can always add a second one down the road.
  4. maestro0428 said:
    I don't advise going with dual gpus, too many issues with them. Go with the single fastest card you can afford. I would get the AMD Radeon 7970 GHZ edition as it is the fastest card (arguably) available. If you find that isn't enough in the future, you can always add a second one down the road.


    The 7950 is more bang for the buch than the 7970........
  5. hbeduryan818 said:
    The 7950 is more bang for the buch than the 7970........

    Definitely agree. It can easily be OCed to 7970 performance.
  6. rene13cross said:
    Definitely agree. It can easily be OCed to 7970 performance.


    I see you have. 800w there powering your crossfire
  7. Grab one GTX 670 - you'll be playing all games (including Crysis 3 - I just finished a week of participating in the Closed Alpha) on Ultra @ 1080p with at least a 45fps average. When you need a more powerful card in a few years, just sell it and upgrade. 2-card configs aren't worth the trouble.
  8. jessterman21 said:
    Grab one GTX 670 - you'll be playing all games (including Crysis 3 - I just finished a week of participating in the Closed Alpha) on Ultra @ 1080p with at least a 45fps average. When you need a more powerful card in a few years, just sell it and upgrade. 2-card configs aren't worth the trouble.



    7950 is better
  9. hbeduryan818 said:
    7950 is better

    Better? Just overall, including everything, better?

    Prove it.
  10. jessterman21 said:
    Better? Just overall, including everything, better?

    Prove it.


    You get môre bang for your buck. 386 bit 3gb v ram
  11. And what about the features you get with nvidia? do they not count either? Really have to consider everything each company gives past the hardware itself.
  12. Derza10 said:
    And what about the features you get with nvidia? do they not count either? Really have to consider everything each company gives past the hardware itself.


    Whose been here longer? Who has more experience? Who gives more bang for the buck? Which one is more realaible for the future? Qhich one has better cooling? Which one overclocks easier? I rest my case. OP go for the 7950.
  13. hbeduryan818 said:
    You get môre bang for your buck. 386 bit 3gb v ram


    Nice empty words that mean nothing :lol:

    @OP: I'd get a GTX 670 as well. I know it's a bit over your budget, you it will last you long time and will be able to max out all current games at 1920x1080.
  14. hbeduryan818 said:
    Whose been here longer? Who has more experience? Who gives more bang for the buck? Which one is more realaible for the future? Qhich one has better cooling? Which one overclocks easier? I rest my case. OP go for the 7950.


    Haha, you must be joking. So you state all these questions, contribute no real info, and then claim that proves something?
  15. Sunius said:
    Nice empty words that mean nothing :lol:

    @OP: I'd get a GTX 670 as well. I know it's a bit over your budget, you it will last you long time and will be able to max out all current games at 1920x1080.


    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/645?vs=598
  16. Derza10 said:
    Haha, you must be joking. So you sate all these questions, contribute no real info, and then claim that proves something?


    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/645?vs=598 i want you to answer those questions smart ass. You cant can you
  17. hbeduryan818 said:


    Nice find. Out of 9 games, GTX 670 wins in 8. It has also lower power consumption.
  18. hbeduryan818 said:
    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/645?vs=598 i want you to answer those questions smart ass. You cant can you


    What a joke. To prove his point he sends us a link that clearly shows the gtx 670 performing better than the 7950 in games. As was stated above out of the 9 games in the list it only performs better than then 670 in one of them (at 1920x1200 res)... Crysis and only by 1.4 FPS. Where as most of the other games the 670 is 5-40 fps faster.
  19. hbeduryan818 said:


    Kind of shot yourself in the foot there, IMO @1080 before overclocking the 670 is better
  20. paddys09 said:
    Kind of shot yourself in the foot there, IMO @1080 before overclocking the 670 is better

    It proves the 670 is margianlly better nit worth the $79 more
  21. hbeduryan818 said:
    It proves the 670 is margianlly better nit worth the $79 more


    Marginally better? it shows it performing around 20 fps better in half those games... and one as much as 40 fps... I'd pay $79 for 20 more fps.
  22. hbeduryan818 said:
    It proves the 670 is margianlly better nit worth the $79 more


    I only stepped in because you were throwing out some fairly biased statements... I mentioned nothing about price, the 7950 obviously proves to be better value in some cases, especially if you include their games deal, if you were intending on purchasing those games in the first place...

    ...If you had of just said "I think the 7950 is better because I believe it is better value"....I would have said nothing
  23. paddys09 said:
    I only stepped in because you were throwing out some fairly biased statements... I mentioned nothing about price, the 7950 obviously proves to be better value in some cases, especially if you include their games deal, if you were intending on purchasing those games in the first place...

    ...If you had of just said "I think the 7950 is better because I believe it is better value"....I would have said nothing


    One of my main points was the 7950 is a way better bang for the buck........
  24. hbeduryan818 said:
    One of my main points was the 7950 is a way better bang for the buck........


    Yes one of them
  25. paddys09 said:
    I only stepped in because you were throwing out some fairly biased statements... I mentioned nothing about price, the 7950 obviously proves to be better value in some cases, especially if you include their games deal, if you were intending on purchasing those games in the first place...

    ...If you had of just said "I think the 7950 is better because I believe it is better value"....I would have said nothing

    The HD 7950 is a better value, absolutely, but I'd go for the GTX 670 every time, even if I had to wait another pay period. Like buying a Ferrari 458 over a Corvette ZR1.

    Nvidia driver support + PhysX + smoother frametimes (@Techreport.com) + Adaptive Vsync + injectable FXAA and SSAO + TXAA support. Just flat-out does it for me.
  26. jessterman21 said:
    The HD 7950 is a better value, absolutely, but I'd go for the GTX 670 every time, even if I had to wait another pay period. Like buying a Ferrari 458 over a Corvette ZR1.

    Nvidia driver support + PhysX + smoother frametimes (@Techreport.com) + Adaptive Vsync + injectable FXAA and SSAO + TXAA support. Just flat-out does it for me.


    The 7950 overclocks better and way better the nweest catalyst driver improves the smoothness of the 7950 by alot....
  27. hbeduryan818 said:
    The 7950 overclocks better and way better the nweest catalyst driver improves the smoothness of the 7950 by alot....

    You're probably right, and the newest benchmarks that include the HD 7950 Boost show it's comparable to the GTX 670, but if I had $300 for a GPU right now, I'd wait until I had $360.
  28. hbeduryan818 said:
    The 7950 overclocks better and way better the nweest catalyst driver improves the smoothness of the 7950 by alot....


    Do you ever wonder why some very similar threads turn into a flame war and others don't?.....Its these kind of comments...

    In my experience the 7950's do overclock very well and appear to be quite consistent in the speeds they can achieve, it doesn't mean 670's cannot achieve better relative clock speeds, but appears to be more of a roll of the dice game with Nvidia...

    The new catalyst drivers mostly only improve performance in games that, in fairness, they were falling behind in, notably BF3

    Just don't rush in making bold statements, that have little to no evidence...Jessterman21 was only trying to explain some of the extra features that the card has and why he thought it was worth the extra money...

    If you really must win this argument, then why don't you just say that the 670 is way out of the OP's budget
  29. paddys09 said:
    Kind of shot yourself in the foot there, IMO @1080 before overclocking the 670 is better

    Catalyst 12.11 rectifies this, for the most part, but a GTX 670 does come out on top. This is mostly due to the Conservative stock clock speeds found on the Radeon HD 7950 which have been deliberately lowered in order to not compete with the 7970. Heck in some titles a 1,000MHz 7870 bests a 7950. A simple 200MHz Overclock to 1GHz on the core and a 7950 bests a GTX 670. Heck at the same clock speeds a 7950 bests a GTX 670 (especially true with Catalyst 12.11 drivers).


    Derza10 said:
    Marginally better? it shows it performing around 20 fps better in half those games... and one as much as 40 fps... I'd pay $79 for 20 more fps.

    Yeah see above answer.


    jessterman21 said:
    The HD 7950 is a better value, absolutely, but I'd go for the GTX 670 every time, even if I had to wait another pay period. Like buying a Ferrari 458 over a Corvette ZR1.

    Nvidia driver support + PhysX + smoother frametimes (@Techreport.com) + Adaptive Vsync + injectable FXAA and SSAO + TXAA support. Just flat-out does it for me.

    nVIDIA is like Justin Bieber. A product for the Mainstream. AMD are like Muse. Somewhat mainstream but haven't sold out. Don't like that analogy? Well I don't enjoy yours either considering AMD cards are faster than nVIDIA cards right now so your analogy is facetious.

    nVIDIA drivers? Do you mean these drivers?







    PhysX? Yeah I just bought a cheap nVIDIA card for that and then realized little to no important games use PhysX. Wasted money.

    Smoother framerates? From your review... you mean this?


    Adaptive V-Sync? Ahh well.. AMD has RadeonPro: http://www.radeonpro.info/en-US/ It actually does a better job than nVIDIAs implementation: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7990-devil13-7970-x2,3329-11.html

    For AMD all AA levels can be used to compliment or replace in game setting except Adaptive AA which is DX9 only.

    So what reasoning beyond "I prefer nVIDIA"?


    PS. I don't deny criticisms of AMD n'or do I believe that they're superior to nVIDIA overall as a company. Just playing Devil's Advocate here.
  30. paddys09 said:
    Do you ever wonder why some very similar threads turn into a flame war and others don't?.....Its these kind of comments...

    In my experience the 7950's do overclock very well and appear to be quite consistent in the speeds they can achieve, it doesn't mean 670's cannot achieve better relative clock speeds, but appears to be more of a roll of the dice game with Nvidia...

    The new catalyst drivers mostly only improve performance in games that, in fairness, they were falling behind in, notably BF3

    Just don't rush in making bold statements, that have little to no evidence...Jessterman21 was only trying to explain some of the extra features that the card has and why he thought it was worth the extra money...

    If you really must win this argument, then why don't you just say that the 670 is way out of the OP's budget


    Im sure he can afford $60 more but why is it worth it if hes gonna get a card barely faster for that price? When he can invest in other parts
  31. ElMoIsEviL said:
    Catalyst 12.11 rectifies this, for the most part, but a GTX 670 does come out on top. This is mostly due to the Conservative stock clock speeds found on the Radeon HD 7950 which have been deliberately lowered in order to not compete with the 7970. Heck in some titles a 1,000MHz 7870 bests a 7950. A simple 200MHz Overclock to 1GHz on the core and a 7950 bests a GTX 670. Heck at the same clock speeds a 7950 bests a GTX 670 (especially true with Catalyst 12.11 drivers).


    Yeah see above answer.


    nVIDIA is like Justin Bieber. A product for the Mainstream. AMD are like Muse. Somewhat mainstream but haven't sold out. Don't like that analogy? Well I don't enjoy yours either considering AMD cards are faster than nVIDIA cards right now so your analogy is facetious.


    nVIDIA drivers? Do you mean these drivers?
    http://tinkertry.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/display-driver-nvlddmkm-stopped-responding.jpg
    http://lucatarrini.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ScreenHunter_12-Sep.-18-04.37_thumb.jpg
    http://www.personalcomputerfixes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/display1.png
    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/4516197538_e96de71da7_o.png
    http://support.lenovo.com/ContentResources/images/Consumer%20Figures/HT075224-Display%20driver%20stopped%20responding%20and%20has%20recovered.jpg
    http://i.imgur.com/VrnJn.png

    PhysX? Yeah I just bought a cheap nVIDIA card for that and then realized little to no important games use PhysX. Wasted money.

    Smoother framerates? From your review... you mean this?
    http://techreport.com/r.x/geforce-gtx-670/bf3-beyond-50.gif

    Adaptive V-Sync? Ahh well.. AMD has RadeonPro: http://www.radeonpro.info/en-US/ It actually does a better job than nVIDIAs implementation: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7990-devil13-7970-x2,3329-11.html

    For AMD all AA levels can be used to compliment or replace in game setting except Adaptive AA which is DX9 only.

    So what reasoning beyond "I prefer nVIDIA"?



    +1 :sol:
  32. I'm using a 7950. With Eyefinity. It's the pants.
  33. SinisterSalad said:
    I'm using a 7950. With Eyefinity. It's the pants.


    Is that good or bad lol?
  34. hbeduryan818 said:
    Is that good or bad lol?

    Good. ;) Plays BF3 Medium/High settings smoothly. And I haven't even updated the drivers, yet.
  35. hbeduryan818 said:
    Im sure he can afford $60 more but why is it worth it if hes gonna get a card barely faster for that price? When he can invest in other parts


    Your missing the point completely, take a look through my comments....I haven't recommended either card, infact the 7950 seems like the better deal to me and what I would have recommended as his budget is $300 and hasn't made out that he would get much benefit from physX etc...Im just trying to put people off posting "fanboi" comments as it ruins threads...
  36. Get HD 7970 since it costs the same as GTX 670. Acquire catalyst 12.11

    Skyrim: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/19.html

    HD 7950 is the same as GTX 670 at 1920X1200. It is BETTER than GTX 680 at 2560X 1600. HD 7970 wipe the field with GTX 670 in the skyrim in general.

    BF3

    http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/5.html

    HD 7950 is a bit slower than 670. But, OC it to HD 7970 and you can have a GTX 680 Killer.

    Comparison with other cards: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html

    No one cares about 720p when you are gaming with a 300+ dollar graphics card.


    If you turn aa above the 4X used in techpowerup reviews. GTX 670 will fall off the cliff compared to HD 7950.
  37. burntpizza said:
    Get HD 7970 since it costs the same as GTX 670. Acquire catalyst 12.11

    Skyrim: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/19.html

    HD 7950 is the same as GTX 670 at 1920X1200. It is BETTER than GTX 680 at 2560X 1600. HD 7970 wipe the field with GTX 670 in the skyrim in general.

    BF3

    http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/5.html

    HD 7950 is a bit slower than 670. But, OC it to HD 7970 and you can have a GTX 680 Killer.

    Comparison with other cards: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html

    No one cares about 720p when you are gaming with a 300+ dollar graphics card.


    If you turn aa above the 4X used in techpowerup reviews. GTX 670 will fall off the cliff compared to HD 7950.


    7970 is completely not worh it.....
  38. paddys09 said:
    Your missing the point completely, take a look through my comments....I haven't recommended either card, infact the 7950 seems like the better deal to me and what I would have recommended as his budget is $300 and hasn't made out that he would get much benefit from physX etc...Im just trying to put people off posting "fanboi" comments as it ruins threads...


    Im not a fanboy but im not a liar either
  39. hbeduryan818 said:
    7970 is completely not worh it.....


    and how is it no worth it? HD 7970 is the one that got the graphic card recommendation instead of 7950. If hd 7950 can OC, then HD 7970 can do it even better
  40. burntpizza said:
    and how is it no worth it? HD 7970 is the one that got the graphic card recommendation instead of 7950. If hd 7950 can OC, then HD 7970 can do it even better


    7970 is an overclocked 7950 for sure.
  41. Overclock wise you're looking at 1150 to 1300 on average for either a Radeon HD 7970 or a 7950. Heck that's the avg range for all Tahiti GPUs I've tested thus far (7770, 7850, 7870, 7950 and 7970 are the GPU models I own).
  42. hbeduryan818 said:
    Im not a fanboy but im not a liar either


    If you are referring to my first post saying that the 670 was better @1080 before overclocking, and it is, then that was in relation to your comment and not the OP's question...

    You are the one that has lied...notice how I'm only having a go at you, although some of ElMoIsEviL's pics were a bit out of line :lol:
  43. hbeduryan818 said:
    7970 is an overclocked 7950 for sure.


    No, it is not.

    HD 7950 have 28 compute units with a total of 1792 stream processors

    HD 7970 have 32 compute units with a total of 2048 stream processors

    HD 7970 have 1 TFLOPS MORE compute power than HD 7950.


    If 7970 and 7950 overclock to the same max ghz, which probably won't happend as hd 7970 is binned better, hd 7970 would still win due to more stream processor

    http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/7000/7950/Pages/radeon-7950.aspx#3

    http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/7000/7970/Pages/radeon-7970.aspx#3
  44. 7950? Pffft, my so called great 7950 refused to go past 1025MHz core even at stock 7970 voltage - 1.175v. Get a 680 with a nice factory OC and forget about anything else. Overclocking GPU's is not some magical guarantee and all it is is a waste of time and effort. The 680 has all the grunt you need at 1080p until the 880 is released within 2 yrs. If anything, AMD's drivers are rubbish - they continually crashed on my rubbish 7950.
  45. NV88 said:
    7950? Pffft, my so called great 7950 refused to go past 1025MHz core even at stock 7970 voltage - 1.175v. Get a 680 with a nice factory OC and forget about anything else. Overclocking GPU's is not some magical guarantee and all it is is a waste of time and effort. The 680 has all the grunt you need at 1080p until the 880 is released within 2 yrs. If anything, AMD's drivers are rubbish - they continually crashed on my rubbish 7950.



    I think youre pretty rubbish :)
  46. ElMoIsEviL said:
    Catalyst 12.11 rectifies this, for the most part, but a GTX 670 does come out on top. This is mostly due to the Conservative stock clock speeds found on the Radeon HD 7950 which have been deliberately lowered in order to not compete with the 7970. Heck in some titles a 1,000MHz 7870 bests a 7950. A simple 200MHz Overclock to 1GHz on the core and a 7950 bests a GTX 670. Heck at the same clock speeds a 7950 bests a GTX 670 (especially true with Catalyst 12.11 drivers).


    Yeah see above answer.


    nVIDIA is like Justin Bieber. A product for the Mainstream. AMD are like Muse. Somewhat mainstream but haven't sold out. Don't like that analogy? Well I don't enjoy yours either considering AMD cards are faster than nVIDIA cards right now so your analogy is facetious.

    nVIDIA drivers? Do you mean these drivers?
    http://tinkertry.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/display-driver-nvlddmkm-stopped-responding.jpg
    http://lucatarrini.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ScreenHunter_12-Sep.-18-04.37_thumb.jpg
    http://www.personalcomputerfixes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/display1.png
    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/4516197538_e96de71da7_o.png
    http://support.lenovo.com/ContentResources/images/Consumer%20Figures/HT075224-Display%20driver%20stopped%20responding%20and%20has%20recovered.jpg
    http://i.imgur.com/VrnJn.png

    PhysX? Yeah I just bought a cheap nVIDIA card for that and then realized little to no important games use PhysX. Wasted money.

    Smoother framerates? From your review... you mean this?
    http://techreport.com/r.x/geforce-gtx-670/bf3-beyond-50.gif

    Adaptive V-Sync? Ahh well.. AMD has RadeonPro: http://www.radeonpro.info/en-US/ It actually does a better job than nVIDIAs implementation: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7990-devil13-7970-x2,3329-11.html

    For AMD all AA levels can be used to compliment or replace in game setting except Adaptive AA which is DX9 only.

    So what reasoning beyond "I prefer nVIDIA"?


    PS. I don't deny criticisms of AMD n'or do I believe that they're superior to nVIDIA overall as a company. Just playing Devil's Advocate here.

    Very nice rebuttal - though with the last pic, it's the only game tested in that review where the HD 7950 beats the GTX 670 in frametimes.

    Anyway - as you can see, I have an AMD card myself, so I see both sides. GCN is truly amazing, but I believe Kepler is a bit better. I like the look of FXAA over MLAA, I would like the option for PhysX, because I own both Batman games, BL2, and Mirror's Edge, and would at least like the option of enabling that feature. Also, have you used Dynamic Vsync? Is it any different than capping the framerate in Afterburner's OSD? I would definitely like to know more on that one... if there's one thing I hate more than aliasing, it's screen-tearing. (Why oh why don't all games just support motion-blur?)
  47. NV88 said:
    7950? Pffft, my so called great 7950 refused to go past 1025MHz core even at stock 7970 voltage - 1.175v. Get a 680 with a nice factory OC and forget about anything else. Overclocking GPU's is not some magical guarantee and all it is is a waste of time and effort. The 680 has all the grunt you need at 1080p until the 880 is released within 2 yrs. If anything, AMD's drivers are rubbish - they continually crashed on my rubbish 7950.



    Obvious troll is obvious. Look at your little over priced GTX 680. Can barely beat a several hundred dollar cheaper vanilla hd 7970 now. Even, 670 is wayy better value

    http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html
  48. arcticle said:
    Hello, I will be buying a graphics card sometime in the next few weeks. I will be playing on a 1080p 24" monitor. I really want to play current games such as BF3 and Skyrim maxed out, but I also want to have enough juice to futureproof my rig so I can play future games such as Crysis 3 with acceptable frame rates. Sure, we do not know how intensive Crysis 3 will be, but I am being general here. I would like to spend around $300...

    My build is...
    CPU: i5 2500k
    Memory: 8 GB Ripjaws
    Motherboard: Z77
    SSD: 256 GB Samsung 830

    Also, I have been thinking... Do you think two GTX 670s would be hard pressed to run games at 60 FPS on Ultra once the next generation of consoles are released? Or will the improvements that the next generation of consoles bring not be so significant?

    Thanks!


    If you're on a budget and want something decently highend and affordable, Go AMD . If you want Physx, You may as well go Nvidia unless if you have a spare Nvidia GPU laying around. I'd say the ASUS HD 7970 Matrix is a great future proof card, so is the GTX 680 Lightning. But they'll probably last until DX 12 which will probably drop in like 2-3 years. The GTX 670 and the HD 7950 are also great performance for Value, but They're not as good as the cards I mentioned.

    Don't let these guys bother you with their Tech Mumbo Jumbo, pick what you want, and enjoy it.
  49. ElMoIsEviL said:
    Catalyst 12.11 rectifies this, for the most part, but a GTX 670 does come out on top. This is mostly due to the Conservative stock clock speeds found on the Radeon HD 7950 which have been deliberately lowered in order to not compete with the 7970. Heck in some titles a 1,000MHz 7870 bests a 7950. A simple 200MHz Overclock to 1GHz on the core and a 7950 bests a GTX 670. Heck at the same clock speeds a 7950 bests a GTX 670 (especially true with Catalyst 12.11 drivers).


    Yeah see above answer.


    nVIDIA is like Justin Bieber. A product for the Mainstream. AMD are like Muse. Somewhat mainstream but haven't sold out. Don't like that analogy? Well I don't enjoy yours either considering AMD cards are faster than nVIDIA cards right now so your analogy is facetious.

    nVIDIA drivers? Do you mean these drivers?
    http://tinkertry.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/display-driver-nvlddmkm-stopped-responding.jpg
    http://lucatarrini.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ScreenHunter_12-Sep.-18-04.37_thumb.jpg
    http://www.personalcomputerfixes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/display1.png
    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/4516197538_e96de71da7_o.png
    http://support.lenovo.com/ContentResources/images/Consumer%20Figures/HT075224-Display%20driver%20stopped%20responding%20and%20has%20recovered.jpg
    http://i.imgur.com/VrnJn.png

    PhysX? Yeah I just bought a cheap nVIDIA card for that and then realized little to no important games use PhysX. Wasted money.

    Smoother framerates? From your review... you mean this?
    http://techreport.com/r.x/geforce-gtx-670/bf3-beyond-50.gif

    Adaptive V-Sync? Ahh well.. AMD has RadeonPro: http://www.radeonpro.info/en-US/ It actually does a better job than nVIDIAs implementation: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7990-devil13-7970-x2,3329-11.html

    For AMD all AA levels can be used to compliment or replace in game setting except Adaptive AA which is DX9 only.

    So what reasoning beyond "I prefer nVIDIA"?


    PS. I don't deny criticisms of AMD n'or do I believe that they're superior to nVIDIA overall as a company. Just playing Devil's Advocate here.


    :lol: did you just google "nvidia display driver stopped working" for those?








    lets throw a BSOD in there too, this is FUN!


    wow with all the cherry picking going on, someone is going to bake a great pie. :)

    while you were googling you did by chance find out about nvidia's sparse grid super sampling did you?

    no?

    a shame.


    (not picking a "side" either, just showing there is more than one advocate for the devil)

    cheers!
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards Games Graphics