Gtx 670 4Gb vs Gtx 680 vs 7970

[Archie42dj]

Hi all, this is a bit of a continuation (if thats even a word :S) from my last post. I was wondering which of the three cards stated in the title would give me the most bang for buck. Thanks!

 

[MadMarc]

I'd just go with a normal gtx 670, the 4gb is only needed for a triple screen setup, and to play the latest games maxed out, you'll maybe need SLI

 

[yassarikhan786]

As above go for the standard 670 if you're gaming on a single screen. The 7950 is also a very nice card

 

[NRG!]

pointless getting 4gb one unless you get 3 or play skyrim with a crapton of texture mods.

 

[jamesriley94]

Normal 670 - Unless you can find a very nice deal on a NON-reference 7950

 

[CPMFW]

standard 670 will do the job!!!

 

[Liarma]

670. I got the Gigabyte OC model and am extremely happy.

 

[PEXON]

7970 1GHz Edition with the latest drivers poops all over the 680/670 at a cheaper price and more VRAM. The only game it doesn't compete with the Nvidya cards is in Crysis 2. It beats them in BF3 and Skyrim by a few frames and trounces it in games like 2033 where Nvidya don't have biased drivers. Also the 7950 is a stellar card for under 240

 

[seumasbeathan]

Personally I would go with this - http://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Comp...R5+PCI-Express+Graphics+Card+?productId=51851

I mean for that price it is just a steal

If not the as others have said a standard 670 will be fine

 

[KING_OF_SAND]

pointless getting 4gb one unless you get 3 or play skyrim with a crapton of texture mods.

Or you just want to play BF3 maxed. Seriously play BF3 maxed, I hit 2gb EASY with BF3 on my 680.

 

[nepas]

Or you just want to play BF3 maxed. Seriously play BF3 maxed, I hit 2gb EASY with BF3 on my 680.

Will you stop that rubbish,and learn how BF3 uses Vram(you have been told more than once)

 

[KING_OF_SAND]

Will you stop that rubbish,and learn how BF3 uses Vram(you have been told more than once)

LOL. You cannot be this stupid!? I hate calling people stupid in a forum but REALLY!!! How do you now know how VRAM works!? It works the same in EVERY GAME!!!! with a few variations here and there. A game uses more vram if it is needed. if a 2gb card is using 2gb and a 1gb card running on the same settings is using 780mb of RAM you are 100% clearly starving the game. This is not even computer related it's just logic. And the people telling me either had no idea how Vram worked or they grew a brain. Again this is not even computer science it's freaken logic.

 

[NRG!]

2gb will run bf3 maxed (except msaa at 2x) on a 3 by 1080p setup, as long as you disable aero.

But the framerate will be rubbish. So you look to sli.

Then the frame rate is ~ok, so look to tri-sli.

Only then would you have the horsepower to drive the settings that need 4gb cards on BF3.

Once you're talking tri-sli 4gb cards, you realistically want x79 to drive them. Before you know it the cost of the system has skyrocketed..

I would much rather get 2 gb sli now for 3x 1080p (which i am getting soon), play games with the best settings I can with good frames, then sell them for an upgrade to next gen.

Skyrim is different story though, people that play a lot of skyrim with mods should read up on the mem usage of the ones they like because they just fill the vram with custom textures.

edit: also, I assume you have a 4 gb 680? I run full maxed and don't exceed 1.8gb vram, with aero on.

 

[KING_OF_SAND]

Here is my test a few weeks back of running BF3 on a 560ti vs a 680 on max settings 1080p at the same time using the same mouse so I could get the same exact shot in. This proves that there is a quality hit when playing with less VRAM.

GTX680

560ti

 

[KING_OF_SAND]

I will do a more scientific method later but moving computers is a pain in the ass. Also both Nvidia settings are set EXACTLY the same.

 

[PEXON]

Those pictures are too small to see anything. Also, Nepas is right, as we've told you 1000 times, BF3 is a hog and uses as much RAM as it likes. In games like TF2, Gotham City Impostors, CS:GO etc my 7970 uses about 600MB of its 3GB...

 

[KING_OF_SAND]

Those pictures are too small to see anything. Also, Nepas is right, as we've told you 1000 times, BF3 is a hog and uses as much RAM as it likes. In games like TF2, Gotham City Impostors, CS:GO etc my 7970 uses about 600MB of its 3GB...

LOL no it doesnt. And the pictures are big enough to see the visual difference between the 560ti and the 680.

Here is more logic for you. You keep making the absolutely ridiculous claim that it "uses as much ram as it likes" so what is the minimum RAM usage? That quote you keep spewing suggests you can play this game with 128mb of RAM. The fact of the matter is the MINIMUM for BF3 is quite high and if you can’t meet that your visual quality will suffer. You and Nepas need to do some more research. And please do not make stupid comparisons to BF3 visuals and CS, it makes you look stupid, do you suggest the min RAM usage for BF3 should be 600mb?

Also I showed you proof with those pictures that less VRAM when needed dropes visual quality, are you trying to refute the proof LOL

 

[PEXON]

Where does it say in my post anywhere, that even remotely suggests that BF3 can be played with 128mb of RAM? Also, the fact that modern, good looking games that are properly coded can use as little as 500-600mb of RAM and still perform well. 4GB for one 1080 screen is laughable, for a couple of 1080p screens make more sense, but 4gb comes into its own field when you use 1400P (multiple monitors). The 4GB version of the Nvidya cards often perform 1-2% slower than the 2GB from the reviews I've seen. Your pictures are too small to see ANY difference to be fair.

 

[Josh Weston]

I take it to be like the OS cache for RAM. If you have 2GB of total sysyem RAM, then the OS shall not cache much data. However, if you have 8GB, it shall cache more as it has more to play with.
Would this not be a similar story with BF3 and VRAM, or am I barking up the wrong tree here?

 

[KING_OF_SAND]

Where does it say in my post anywhere, that even remotely suggests that BF3 can be played with 128mb of RAM? Also, the fact that modern, good looking games that are properly coded can use as little as 500-600mb of RAM and still perform well. 4GB for one 1080 screen is laughable, for a couple of 1080p screens make more sense, but 4gb comes into its own field when you use 1400P (multiple monitors). The 4GB version of the Nvidya cards often perform 1-2% slower than the 2GB from the reviews I've seen. Your pictures are too small to see ANY difference to be fair.

You really have a lack of understanding when it comes to the English language. You said "uses as much RAM as it likes" which suggests (in the english language) that there is no minimum. when you say "as it likes" it implies that you should be able to run this game at 128mb of RAM because as you suggest it is as much as it likes. This also implies there is no maximum which means it could use up to 1,000,000gb of vRAM. Now that we have that English lesson out of the way. Also games are in animate objects so they cannot do something as it likes.

What is your view on "good looking games?" This is clearly subjective. How many games have you seen that like BF3 and use less vRAM? Also you cannot change how textures are used in a game. Higher res textures will use more vRAM, how can you say it wont? CS textures are TINY, i would wager they are only 512x512 MAX while BF3 is i would guess 1024x1024 at the minimum. Also BF3 uses POM which is also a vRAM user as well as tessellation and other DX11 features which take up vRAM. Also have you ever rendered anything IN YOUR LIFE!! The more vRAM you have the more you can fit on the display. I can EASILY use 4gb of vRAM in the cryengine with only 512x512 textures at 480p. It all depends on how many different textures you have at once, and how far they are going, and what they are doing.

You really need to learn how this works before you spew.