6970 VS GTX570

[neoguyver1]

Hold on here lads I see that the GTX570 is being given preference over the 6970. Yet when i go look up benchmarks and reviews the 6970 is better. Now is it a case of certain sites being biased or what is going on. If the 6970 falls in between GTX570 & 580 this means it is in fact better than it.

Need arguments for both sides form ye on which one is better and is it based in fact or youe own personal leaning.

GRRR!

 

[S_I_N]

First off Read my Sig

secondly with nVIDIA you have physics

thirdly it does it without sounding like a leaf blower and stays a helluva lot cooler to boot.

 

[GODuk]

As SIN said

 

[neoguyver1]

I am two whiskers from selling my 6970 dual fan and buying a KAF2 GTX570 I use one 1920 x 1080 monitor.

• Does extra AA make it look better?
• Is the physx noticeable?
• What is overclocking like?
• Does it depend on the game?
• Is it better on DX11?

 

[Arioch13]

I have machines using 580s and one using 2 6970s. I am about to replace the 6970s for 2 6990s (just waiting for the delivery) but I have no isse with noise on the 6970s at all. In fact they are quieter than my 580s. I am expecting this to change dramatically with the 6990s of course, as widely reported but i havent seen anyone having issues with the 6970s which after all are just 6950s. (though I actually bought mine as 6970s for the dual bios)

 

[Rastalovich]

4thly, if you already have a 6970 and are happy with it being around a similar ball-park as the 570 (aka 480 minus some memory) I don't see the logic in buying one.

Cept ofcourse for the physx factor. The games you play will often dictate whether you'll appreciate physx being used. I also stand by the argument that you have to set the amd drivers to deliver the quality of textures that the nvidia will do as standard, but that's a personal thing.

5thly. In all honesty, if I've got cash to whip out on 2x 6970 & 6990 & 580, I would question why I'm shelling out fantastic cash on all this gpu hardware, with the "lesser" of my systems being able to play games at the best possible quality. I'd get a 590 (well personally I wouldn't, but if I wanted the epeen of 2x gpus) and the 580 in the other rig, cos I see no sense in spending lots of cash on cards that don't do the full job. If one does 100fps and the other 110 - what the hell difference does it make ? Quality matters alot tho. Fps hasn't been that important for a few generations.

If you're on a budget of course, you buy what you can afford.

 

[S_I_N]

physics is noticeable in most games that support it and yes DX11. physics is the stuff in the background that add ambiance like smoke billowing after blowing something up fog effects and the likes its so much more but those are 2 examples.

 

[neoguyver1]

Hi guys my replacement 6970 fell through and I have opted for a Gigabyte GTX570 OC windforce it has a 780mhz clock i think and it matches my Gigabyte Mobo so happy out.

Every performance card I had up to now was ATI..3850>4850>4870X2>5870>6970.

So I have my first proper NVIDIA first one was the size of a sound card lol and my first graphics card so I have done full circle and will give a review on it when I get it.

 

[Ya93sin]

physics is noticeable in most games that support it and yes DX11. physics is the stuff in the background that add ambiance like smoke billowing after blowing something up fog effects and the likes its so much more but those are 2 examples.

Would PhysX engine be responsible for the cardboard box I had to frag in Mafia II before it moved out of the way?

Anyway:

I think even though it has slightly better performance, I wouldn't have gone for the 6970. I'm not a fanboy or anything, but these things come to mind:

1. nVidia drivers. I had SO many issues with the AMD drivers, and through hearing on the forums, and now my own experience, about how little fuss there is with nVidia drivers...They say time=money, and drivers are a small issue (touch wood so far) with nVidia cards.
2. Game support. In nearly every game I've played except Dirt2/3, I've been seeing the nVidia splash at the beginning. I don't have to worry about games like The Saboteur playing crap on AMD GPUs (I had to give up on that game until I got my new PC).
3. 3D vision. This is not going to apply to most users, but I'm interested in it, and the AMD 3rd party way is not what I want to be doing. nVidia have 3D Vision, its supported by quite a few games judging by my list in the nVidia Control Panel.
4. Overclocking and temperature. The 400 series ran hot, but the 500 series run at very nice temperatures, I've not seen over 70degC on my card and thats with a 12.5% overclock above my card's default core clocks, and a 16.5% overclock above the reference cards' core clocks.

Now of course, later this year, AMD might release the 7970 and blow nVidia out of the water (ideally the fans won't be doing this, or I'll have to watercool

), but for right here, right now, that's how I feel. I might update how I feel if I can think of anything.

 

[S_I_N]

no the box was there even without physics Physics allowed you to blow it away in stellar fashion versus it just jumping out of the way.

 

[o0bananaman0o]

the 6970 and 570 cost the same in oz ($330AU)

570:

- physx

- better drivers

6970:

- better performance

- eyefinity

- 2GB vram for eyefinity/+1080p resolutions

id have to say the 6970

 

[Ya93sin]

the 6970 and 570 cost the same in oz ($330AU)

570:

- physx

- better drivers

- runs cooler

- less hassle

- overclocks better

- 3D Vision

6970:

- better performance

- eyefinity

- 2GB vram for eyefinity/+1080p resolutions

- runs warmer than a 570

- drivers can be a pain in the ass

id have to say the 570

Fix'd.

 

[neoguyver1]

What about the higher AA? I was looking at batman on a 560ti hawk and looked smooth.