7970 vs 670

[sitbar]

HI guys, so I need help choosing between the 7970 and the 670. I was gonna get the 670, but now seeing as how the latest drivers for the 7970 has really ramped up the speeds for the 7970 in games like bf3, its more even. I need help choosing in between the

Msi 670 power edition

Asus direct cuii 670 nontop (will oc myself)

And the XFX Radeon HD 7970 Double D Ghz edition.
Any help will be appriciated.

Edit: Will be ocing all cards.

 

[sam_p_lay]

GTX670 without a doubt. Some people will talk over-voltage drama on the MSI PE but I'd personally take that one anyway. The voltage thing was blown way out of proportion.

 

[Computered]

The question you first need to ask is what resolution you will use. That extra speed shown in benchmarks is nice but unless you are really pushing the card is also meaningless.

At a 1080 resolution for gaming you would never see a performance difference between these to cards. At a higher resolution the difference could finally come into play.

 

[sitbar]

The question you first need to ask is what resolution you will use. That extra speed shown in benchmarks is nice but unless you are really pushing the card is also meaningless.

At a 1080 resolution for gaming you would never see a performance difference between these to cards. At a higher resolution the difference could finally come into play.

Yes I will be at 1080p.

Im concerned because games like bf4 and crysis 3 will be coming out soon. And since they seem to do better on nvidia cards i'm sorta leaning towards the 670.

 

[sitbar]

GTX670 without a doubt. Some people will talk over-voltage drama on the MSI PE but I'd personally take that one anyway. The voltage thing was blown way out of proportion.

Well should I take the pe or the nontop and oc it my self?

 

[bigcyco1]

GTX670 without a doubt. Some people will talk over-voltage drama on the MSI PE but I'd personally take that one anyway. The voltage thing was blown way out of proportion.

+1

 

[bigshootr8]

Nvidia had a driver since the point of AMD having there drivers updated as well. I'm curious what games do you play.

 

[sitbar]

Nvidia had a driver since the point of AMD having there drivers updated as well. I'm curious what games do you play.

CoD
Bf3
Crysis
Minecraft (with mods)
Skyrim (with mods)

I will be playing bf4 and crysis 3 when they come out.

 

[bigshootr8]

If you are playing Skyrim with mods I would consider getting a 7970 over the 670 mainly because of the vram. Also, AMD cards have been doing better with Skyrim for some time. If you are insistent on Nvidia you could get a 4 gigabyte version of the 670 for around the price of a 680 and go at it that way otherwise I would go with a 7970 and specifically this one.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202001

 

[bigcyco1]

I agree with bigshootr8 excecpt i think the 7970 is over priced still i would go for this card
Sapphire's HD 7950 Vapor-X comes with a large dual-fan cooler that uses the company's famous vapor-chamber technology. On the Vapor-X you will also find a "Lethal Boost" button which switches to a second BIOS with higher clock speeds. With this BIOS, clocks are increased to 950 MHz GPU and 1250 MHz memory.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202003

 

[sitbar]

I agree with bigshootr8 excecpt i think the 7970 is over priced still i would go for this card
Sapphire's HD 7950 Vapor-X comes with a large dual-fan cooler that uses the company's famous vapor-chamber technology. On the Vapor-X you will also find a "Lethal Boost" button which switches to a second BIOS with higher clock speeds. With this BIOS, clocks are increased to 950 MHz GPU and 1250 MHz memory.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202003

Thanks for the info, but I shall be going with either the 670 or the 7970.
Right now im leaning towards the 7970. Have you have experiance with saphire cards?
Also does the vapor-x 7970 also have the leathal boost option?

 

[sitbar]

the sapphire one here in canada is 40 dollars more than the xfx version.

 

[sam_p_lay]

I've owned three Sapphire cards, and they all died within a few months of the warranty expiring. I may have just been unlucky, but I won't be risking it on a fourth.

 

[rwayne]

Yes I will be at 1080p.

Im concerned because games like bf4 and crysis 3 will be coming out soon. And since they seem to do better on nvidia cards i'm sorta leaning towards the 670.

Actually the new AMD Drivers have really changed things especially with games like Battlefield 3. Check out this recent review based upon the current Catalyst 12.11 and GeForce 310.61 drivers.

http://www.techspot.com/review/603-best-graphics-cards/page4.html

The new Catalyst 12.11 beta drivers delivered major performance gains in many popular games such as Battlefield 3, Borderlands 2, Civilization V, Skyrim, Sleeping Dogs and StarCraft II. While most titles ran around 10% faster depending on their settings, Battlefield 3 was 20 to 30% faster.

 

[chinoroy]

AMD has improved their drivers. so i vote for HD 7970.

 

[sam_p_lay]

AMD aren't the only ones who improve drivers

 

[redeemer]

The 680 should be compared to the 7970 and not the 670. The 670's strength is in 3D and Cuda. If you have no use for those features then the 7970 is the way to go.

3GB+384 bit bus width is a better bet to go with, Crysis 3 though a beta destroyed my 2X SLI 680's. Of course the game is in its early stages however I was bandwidth limited @ 2GB.

Another area is overclocking, this is where the 7970 really shines and able to beat out all other GPU's.

 

[bigcyco1]

Thanks for the info, but I shall be going with either the 670 or the 7970.
Right now im leaning towards the 7970. Have you have experiance with saphire cards?
Also does the vapor-x 7970 also have the leathal boost option?

Just the one i recommend i bought it for my son but i use it sometimes i am not sure about the vapor-x 7970 ask redeemer i am more a NV fan but i like amd as well.

 

[sam_p_lay]

The 670's strength is in 3D and Cuda.

Also PhysX and adaptive v-sync. Also consistent, stable delivery of framerates:

http://techreport.com/review/23981/radeon-hd-7950-vs-geforce-gtx-660-ti-revisited

That's a GTX660 Ti being tested, but that same GPU was delivering inconsistent, fluctuating framerates like every other GPU until the most recent couple of articles, which suggests the improvements are driver-based, and therefore likely take effect on all Kepler GPUs and not just the GTX660 Ti specifically.

As for GTX670 vs GTX680, there's not really any difference worth mentioning. GTX680 averages ~6% faster - you wouldn't even be able to tell the difference.

 

[bigshootr8]

He had mentioned skyrim and mods so that's why it looks more of a clear shot with AMD. I buy both brands right now the NV solution is better for me because I use physx but none of the games he plays use it. Adaptive Vsync is nice though so I'll give you that.

 

[sam_p_lay]

He had mentioned skyrim and mods so that's why it looks more of a clear shot with AMD. I buy both brands right now the NV solution is better for me because I use physx but none of the games he plays use it. Adaptive Vsync is nice though so I'll give you that.

It certainly is That's true about PhysX, but I think I look at this stuff with an eye to the future maybe more than most people do. I've never understood basing decision on what existing games you're playing. I'd want something that's the best bet for future games, so try and draw trends from existing games, nothing more.

PhysX seems to be gaining momentum, used to just be smaller titles but it's in some big games now. So we're likely to be seeing more of it (no guarantees of course). It makes sense too - nVidia acquired a whole company to get their hands on PhysX. Makes sense they'd want to get some return on that investment. I'll certainly agree though that it's a smaller selling point than adaptive v-sync. It is cool though! First 40 secs are intro:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAfzjTAhpBk&feature=player_embedded

 

[killerchickens]

Check out this review

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/05/14/geforce_680_670_vs_radeon_7970_7950_gaming_perf/3

 

[redeemer]

Also PhysX and adaptive v-sync. Also consistent, stable delivery of framerates:

http://techreport.com/review/23981/radeon-hd-7950-vs-geforce-gtx-660-ti-revisited

That's a GTX660 Ti being tested, but that same GPU was delivering inconsistent, fluctuating framerates like every other GPU until the most recent couple of articles, which suggests the improvements are driver-based, and therefore likely take effect on all Kepler GPUs and not just the GTX660 Ti specifically.

As for GTX670 vs GTX680, there's not really any difference worth mentioning. GTX680 averages ~6% faster - you wouldn't even be able to tell the difference.

Yes but all these cards are within 6-8% of eachother, secondly Physx and Adpative Vsync are gimmicky feature that make no difference at all. I cannot imagine anyone buying a Kepler for its Physx or Adaptive Vsync, 3D and Cuda remain the strongest selling points without a doubt. 40 Physx titles since 2007? Hottest games like BF3, Hitman, Crysis 3, and even upcoming Bioshock Infinte will not utilize the tech.

The real question to ask is how much more performance will an overclocked 7970 give you? A 7970 a simple clock of 1200Mhz will beat out every card considerably, the architecture just scales better than the 600 series.

 

[rwayne]

Thanks for the info, but I shall be going with either the 670 or the 7970.
Right now im leaning towards the 7970. Have you have experiance with saphire cards?
Also does the vapor-x 7970 also have the leathal boost option?

Sapphire is supposedly the #1 seller of AMD cards. I have owned two of them. A X1950GT and a HD4870. I must say I haven't been thrilled with either. I mean neither have failed on me but their packaging and overall feel is just rather cheap. They do come with a lot of extra cables and stuff but I have used none of it. Their phone support while good is rather hard to access. Plus I have never been a fan of the blue PCBs. I think Sapphire sells the most cards because they tend to be the least expensive.

Either way you go (AMD or Nvidia) you may want to consider getting an ASUS Direct CUII card. Their cooling solutions and components are first rate. Plus their cards are about as quiet as you can get. ASUS' Super Alloy Power Manufacturing process is impressive.

http://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/Features/Super_Alloy_Power/

How is this for acoustics?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Pmv8sigAd-w

 

[bigshootr8]

Not many games use it. However, I hope they do in the future. The implementations in games that do use are great. However, that also being said I kind of wish this sort of thing was handled on the software side of things within a game. I think its unfair to judge his statement I agree that physx has improved and hopefully it will grow however I doubt it.

Vsync in general is kind of a gimmicky thing as well. I like that Adaptive is a way of approaching tearing at a less violent point then vsync normally would.