7950 CF would decimate a single 7970 or 680
need help choosing upgrade from HD 5850
- Thread starter megagabobe1
- Start date
Master&Puppet
New member
Yea of course. I meant a single overclocked 7950 is roughly as good as any other single overclocked card
Back to the OP:
Well a 7950 is better than a 7870 so if you've got the money then definitely go for that. The GTX670 is also another excellent choice (not sure whether it's worth an extra $50 though if you are open to overclocking)
+1^ & even the 7870 would be an excellent option as well.
Master&Puppet
New member
Interested to see where you got that from. The 7xxx cards all scale the same as far as I've seen with the 3gb 7950 performing better at higher resolutions.
Above ^ is a BOLLOCKS statement
Sounds like another one of them mantras I have been hearing like 670 perform better than 680 LOL Bullocks I say complete and utter Bollocks LOL.
jamesriley94
New member
hahaa, I've seen the 670 beating a 680 in loads of posts. It always seems to be, yeh the 670 will overclock to perform way better than a 680.....ignoring the fact that it is also possible to overclock a 680 too....
seumasbeathan
Banned
The 670 is very little more money thant he 7950 so I would suggest that
TheOneHalf
New member
honestly I'd go with a 7950 if your mothjerboard only supports crossfire to be better off in the future and not needing a new mobo and CPU
You can get a 660 to beat a 670 ect ect ect your argument is not valid the 680 is the top card for a reason mate because it is the top card no matter how you slice it LOL.
jamesriley94
New member
Errr is that aimed at me?
Think you completely misunderstood what I was saying there...I'm arguing that the 680 is better?
I'm saying that people that say that you can overclock a 670 to perform better than a 680 dont consider the fact that you can overclock the 680 as well....
I fail to see where I said that the 7870 performed better than the 7950. I simply said it scaled better at higher res. Meaning that the performance decrease going from 1650x1050 to 1920x1080 will be less than the decrease on the 7950. something to do with pipeline length and distance to the memory controller.
Relevance being that if he currently plays at 1650x1050 and then moves to 1920x1080 it will be less of a disappointment for fps loss.
seumasbeathan
Banned
Look mate, nearly everybody here will tell you that when overclocked the 670 is either as good or better than the 680 and when you take into consideration the cost it is a better choice than the 680 in most cases
680 is faster anyway you slice it mate.
Master&Puppet
New member
This is why I, and many others on this site, recommend the cards we do.
I've taken down the average FPS scores across TTL's reviews and put them into graph format. One of the stand out features of his reviews are that he reports the FPS results when overclocked across all the cards and games too. Very few reviews do this.
Results at stock:
The best performing card is the 670 and it also comes in at £295. Why would you buy the HD7970 (£360) or GTX680(£380)? The HD7950 also performs respectably for £265 and the 7870 (£220) is obviously the most economical card producing very acceptable framerates across the games except for Batman, where all the cards struggle, because it is such a pathetic attempt at coding a game for PC.
Results on Overclock:
Things change a little when all the cards are overclocked. The 680 is squaring off against the 7950 rather amusingly and also the 7970 and 7950 perform almost identically. The AMD cards make better gains than the nVidia cards because the GTX6xx series cards effectively come mildly overclocked by the nature of having a
I've taken down the average FPS scores across TTL's reviews and put them into graph format. One of the stand out features of his reviews are that he reports the FPS results when overclocked across all the cards and games too. Very few reviews do this.
Results at stock:
The best performing card is the 670 and it also comes in at £295. Why would you buy the HD7970 (£360) or GTX680(£380)? The HD7950 also performs respectably for £265 and the 7870 (£220) is obviously the most economical card producing very acceptable framerates across the games except for Batman, where all the cards struggle, because it is such a pathetic attempt at coding a game for PC.
Results on Overclock:
Things change a little when all the cards are overclocked. The 680 is squaring off against the 7950 rather amusingly and also the 7970 and 7950 perform almost identically. The AMD cards make better gains than the nVidia cards because the GTX6xx series cards effectively come mildly overclocked by the nature of having a
Last edited:
You are quite delusional to think that a lower binned and lower performing CHEAPER card is faster LOL. Buy the way what the heck kind of graph did you post you might as well have said 670 is x amount faster than y card cause you have substaciated nothing here but you ignornace towards nvidias hierarchy of GPUs.This is why I, and many others on this site, recommend the cards we do.
I've taken down the average FPS scores across TTL's reviews and put them into graph format. One of the stand out features of his reviews are that he reports the FPS results when overclocked across all the cards and games too. Very few reviews do this.
Results at stock:
The best performing card is the 670 and it also comes in at £295. Why would you buy the HD7970 (£360) or GTX680(£380)? The HD7950 also performs respectably for £265 and the 7870 (£220) is obviously the most economical card producing very acceptable framerates across the games except for Batman, where all the cards struggle, because it is such a pathetic attempt at coding a game for PC.
Results on Overclock:
Things change a little when all the cards are overclocked. The 680 is squaring off against the 7950 rather amusingly and also the 7970 and 7950 perform almost identically. The AMD cards make better gains than the nVidia cards because the GTX6xx series cards effectively come mildly overclocked by the nature of having a
Last edited:
Master&Puppet
New member
It's really not that complicated - I put tom's results into a graph.
Here's another review:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5818/nvidia-geforce-gtx-670-review-feat-evga/19
The 680 is often beaten by the 7970 at stock. The 680 is beaten by the 670 in every overclocked bench.
How about offering something to back up your views?
Here's another review:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5818/nvidia-geforce-gtx-670-review-feat-evga/19
The 680 is often beaten by the 7970 at stock. The 680 is beaten by the 670 in every overclocked bench.
How about offering something to back up your views?
Max OC to MAX OC the 7970 is faster than 680 but reference for reference the 680 is faster than 7970 because of the higher reference clock speed of the 680. Clock for Clock the 7970 is faster than the 680. 670 is slower than both 680 and 7970 end of story LOL. PS it's not correct to say a 670 is faster than 680 when the 670 you are referring to is OCed and the 680 is @ reference clock speeds LOL. OC to OC and stock to stock is fair and correct.
Last edited:
