Benchmark Results: Real-World Games
Based on your feedback, we're benchmarking these high-end cards using extreme quality settings and resolutions, including the multi-monitor setups they're designed to drive. This does limit the number of games we're able to test, since not all titles support Nvidia Surround and AMD Eyefinity.
What we notice is that the beta Catalyst 12.11 driver does, in fact, deliver a massive performance boost in a majority of the games we're testing. Nvidia only manages to maintain an advantage in long-time strongholds like Battlefield 3 and Batman: Arkham City, even though AMD jumps from 25 to 30 percent in Battlefield 3, practically making it a draw.
The gains in CrossFire configurations are a bit more moderate. We still don’t know how AMD is improving performance this much. Hopefully it isn't doing anything to graphics quality, as we've seen in the past (Do AMD's Radeon HD 7000s Trade Image Quality For Performance?). We aren't able to discern any difference at first glance, but we plan to take a closer look in an upcoming story. Unfortunately, overzealous German customs officials already did their part to make this story late by Googling for the price of a graphics card not yet on the market.
Crysis 2: DirectX 11
Batman: Arkham City
Alien vs. Predator
The massive performance difference between the Nvidia and AMD cards is gone in Battlefield 3, so long as you're talking about boards based on AMD's Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture.
Whatever advantage Nvidia maintains has more to do with the game sequence we tested than generally-better performance. AMD manages to draw even or pull ahead in less-taxing workloads.
Nvidia’s SLI technology remains more effective in this game than AMD’s CrossFire. So, we're calling it a draw. To the delight of gamers, the days when you had to pick one vendor over the other for a good experience in Battlefield 3 are over.
Current page: Benchmark Results: Real-World GamesPrev Page Benchmark Results: Synthetics Next Page Micro-Stuttering: The Current Situation
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
IMHO, the GTX690 looks best. There is something really alluring about shiny white metallic shine and the fine metal mesh. Along with the fluorescent green branding.Reply
Maybe i am too much of a retro SF buff :)
What's the most impressive is that the GTX 690 was made by nVidia themselves and not an OEM. Very nice and balanced card.Reply
your test system is sexy!!!!!!!Reply
You can't really go wrong either way with these generally insane(so to speak) cards.Reply
Is it just me or do the 7970X2 and 7990 coolers look so fast and fugly? :heink:Reply
thanks for the in depth analysis with adaptive V-sync and radeon pro helping with micro stutter.Reply
not to take away anything for the hard work performed; i would have liked have seen nvidia's latest beta driver, 310.33, included also to see if nvidia is doing anything to improve the performance of their card instead of just adding 3d vision, AO, and sli profiles.
can we get some quadfire benchmarks too? :DReply
AMD's Dual GPU at 500+ Watts of electricity is out for me.. Too Much Power and Noise..Reply
2 670's in sli is better than spending on a 690 and 2 7950's in Xfire is better than spending on a 7990. this way you save nearly $300 both waysReply