7970 or 670 GTX

[Rvenger]

PhysX is great too for the huge library of games that use it. Around 2 of the 30 PC games released last year support PhysX, so clearly it's a must-have feature if you're a real gamerz.

+1 Can't have borderlands 2 without green caustic slime plastered everywhere.

 

[blackened23]

Over a stock 3570K, no. Ivy Bridge has 15% higher IPC than Nehalem and Westmere, and your CPU is clocked 18% higher than a stock 3570K.

I've used nehalemn, SB and IB. The difference from Nehalem to even SB was pretty substantial IMO especially in multiplayer games where CPU speed matters a lot.

 

[Fx1]

I've used nehalemn, SB and IB. The difference from Nehalem to even SB was pretty substantial IMO especially in multiplayer games where CPU speed matters a lot.

i have just worked out how much my 2nd hand stuff is worth on ebay and for the sake of £150 i may as well get the new mobo and CPU.

Does anyone know how Tri channel Ram will work on the Dual channel Z77?

 

[lavaheadache]

don't do it. Likely you have 1.65v ram and that stuff isn't good for Sandy and Ivy

 

[BrightCandle]

RAM is actually rather cheap, 8GB (more than enough) will not cost a lot at all. But check your RAM voltage (CPU-Z will do it) and the SPD settings will tell you what voltage it requires. If its not 1.5V or below then you'll need new RAM as well.

 

[Fx1]

RAM is actually rather cheap, 8GB (more than enough) will not cost a lot at all. But check your RAM voltage (CPU-Z will do it) and the SPD settings will tell you what voltage it requires. If its not 1.5V or below then you'll need new RAM as well.

Lol glad i mentioned it then. 1600mhz still ok? i read somewhere that it doesnt matter for games

 

[lavaheadache]

yep, Don't waste your money on "fast" ram

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I've used nehalemn, SB and IB. The difference from Nehalem to even SB was pretty substantial IMO especially in multiplayer games where CPU speed matters a lot.

If you compare OC vs. OC then the difference is substantial. An average overclock for Sandy/Ivy Bridge is 4.5GHz and for Nehalem 3.8GHz. Along with the 15% higher IPC, you'd see a boost of 30-35% in performance.

 

[Fx1]

If you compare OC vs. OC then the difference is substantial. An average overclock for Sandy/Ivy Bridge is 4.5GHz and for Nehalem 3.8GHz. Along with the 15% higher IPC, you'd see a boost of 30-35% in performance.

I have Bloomfield not nehalem.

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=29402&all=1

This shows a story that i didnt expect. 4.2 v 4.2 there is no advantage.

 

[poohbear]

There's not much that plays better on a 670 than a 7970. Certainly not BF3.

Huh? In BF3 a gtx 670 is a lil faster than a 7970(@ stock), unless driver updates have changed the situation? Same is true in shogun2. U have benchmarks showing otherwise? But w/ the game bundle i'd go with the 7970, assuming the price is the same.

 

[willomz]

The 12.11 drivers gave AMD staggering gains in BF3 and modest gains in most other titles.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6393/amds-holiday-plans-cat1211-new-bundle

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I have Bloomfield not nehalem.

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=29402&all=1

This shows a story that i didnt expect. 4.2 v 4.2 there is no advantage.

Err... Bloomfield, Clarkdale and Lynnfield are all based on the Nehalem architecture. They're just processor codenames.

 

[Fx1]

Err... Bloomfield, Clarkdale and Lynnfield are all based on the Nehalem architecture. They're just processor codenames.

yes thats like calling ivy bridge a sandy bridge. They clock different and are on different process nodes.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Huh? In BF3 a gtx 670 is a lil faster than a 7970(@ stock), unless driver updates have changed the situation? Same is true in shogun2. U have benchmarks showing otherwise? But w/ the game bundle i'd go with the 7970, assuming the price is the same.

No, it's not.

In Shogun 2 the GTX 670 is 4% faster.

The HD 7950 is the most solid bang-for-buck of the high-end cards.

 

[3DVagabond]

Huh? In BF3 a gtx 670 is a lil faster than a 7970(@ stock), unless driver updates have changed the situation? Same is true in shogun2. U have benchmarks showing otherwise? But w/ the game bundle i'd go with the 7970, assuming the price is the same.

Well, different sites will have different results. I've always used TechPowerUp because they are very stable in their procedures, equipment, and benchmarking suite.

This is from their latest 7970 review. There are results for the reference 7970 (925MHz), the 7970GE (1050MHz), and the HIS 7970 X-Turbo (1180MHz). The 7970 reference design is ~6% faster. Not enough to matter, really. The 7970GE is ~17% faster.

Shogun 2 still prefers nVidia. The 670 is ~4% faster than the reference 7970. The 7970GE is ~5% faster than the 670. I'd call all of those pretty much just trading blows.

You can read the whole review here

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

yes thats like calling ivy bridge a sandy bridge. They clock different and are on different process nodes.

Yeah... no. I know you probably don't understand much about this, but Nehalem to Westmere was simply a die-shrink (plus AVX). There were no architectural improvements like going from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge. Just going to a smaller process node alone doesn't do anything for performance.

And processor codenames are not the same as architecture codenames. Nehalem, Westmere, Sandy/Ivy Bridge are architectures and Bloomfield, Lynnfield, Clarksfield, etc., are processors. Those processors (Lynnfield, Clarksfield, Bloomfield) are all based on the same architecture (Nehalem). A processor is not an architecture.

If you want an example, look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynnfield_%28microprocessor%29

 

[willomz]

Sandy to Ivy was just a die shrink too (apart from some changes to the IGP, but meh).
They were both ticks, Intel decided to call Ivy a tick+ but really little changed.

 

[Fx1]

Yeah... no. I know you probably don't understand much about this, but Nehalem to Westmere was simply a die-shrink (plus AVX). There were no architectural improvements like going from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge. Just going to a smaller process node alone doesn't do anything for performance.

And processor codenames are not the same as architecture codenames. Nehalem, Westmere, Sandy/Ivy Bridge are architectures and Bloomfield, Lynnfield, Clarksfield, etc., are processors. Those processors (Lynnfield, Clarksfield, Bloomfield) are all based on the same architecture (Nehalem). A processor is not an architecture.

If you want an example, look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynnfield_%28microprocessor%29

You dont need to lecture me on intels Tick Tock. i know all about it.

My CPU was still not called Nehalem. which was my point.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Sandy to Ivy was just a die shrink too (apart from some changes to the IGP, but meh).
They were both ticks, Intel decided to call Ivy a tick+ but really little changed.

Ivy Bridge had architectural improvements, hence why IPC is slightly (~3%) higher. There were no IPC improvements going from Nehalem to Westmere, hence my point.

But moving on...

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

You dont need to lecture me on intels Tick Tock. i know all about it.

My CPU was still not called Nehalem. which was my point.

You have no point. Processor name does not equal architecture name. No one said your CPU was called Nehalem, because no CPU is called Nehalem. I said the architecture of the CPU is Nehalem, which is correct. Nehalem is the name of the architecture your processor has and the name of the processor itself is Bloomfield.

If you still don't get it: You're confusing architecture name with processor name.

But let's not keep derailing the thread.

 

[poohbear]

Sandy to Ivy was just a die shrink too (apart from some changes to the IGP, but meh).
They were both ticks, Intel decided to call Ivy a tick+ but really little changed.

ivy at the same speeds is 10-15% faster than sandy, so that's alot more than just a die shrink.

 

[poohbear]

No, it's not.

In Shogun 2 the GTX 670 is 4% faster.

The HD 7950 is the most solid bang-for-buck of the high-end cards.

upon release, a 670 GTX trounced a 7970 in BF3 (92 fps for 670GTX vs 71 fps for 7970 @ 1200p), and then with driver updates the 670 GTX became just a little bit faster. I guess with even more driver updates AMD finally closed the gap. Good for them then. Anyways u can see the GTX 670 review upon release below, it wasn't even close (@ 1200p):

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5818/nvidia-geforce-gtx-670-review-feat-evga/11

it still makes u wonder how AMD closed such a large gap.... are they dropping some quality features (without telling us) to bring it in line with the 670 GTX?

The 12.11 drivers gave AMD staggering gains in BF3 and modest gains in most other titles.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6393/amds-holiday-plans-cat1211-new-bundle

interesting read, thanks for the link! wow they really came a long way and apparently without sacrificing any image quality to boot. With the games bundled in (3 AAA games!) its a complete nobrainer to get a 7970 over a GTX 670. i bought the 670 upon release, so i had to go with the reality at the time. Anyways good to know AMD is still very competitive. still, i really don't care for waiting for driver updates to play a game upon release, especially when those 12.11 drivers came a year after BF3 was released!

 

[Final8ty]

upon release, a 670 GTX trounced a 7970 in BF3 (92 fps for 670GTX vs 71 fps for 7970 @ 1200p), and then with driver updates the 670 GTX became just a little bit faster. I guess with even more driver updates AMD finally closed the gap. Good for them then. Anyways u can see the GTX 670 review upon release below, it wasn't even close (@ 1200p):

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5818/nvidia-geforce-gtx-670-review-feat-evga/11

it still makes u wonder how AMD closed such a large gap.... are they dropping some quality features (without telling us) to bring it in line with the 670 GTX?



interesting read, thanks for the link! wow they really came a long way and apparently without sacrificing any image quality to boot. With the games bundled in (3 AAA games!) its a complete nobrainer to get a 7970 over a GTX 670. i bought the 670 upon release, so i had to go with the reality at the time. Anyways good to know AMD is still very competitive. still, i really don't care for waiting for driver updates to play a game upon release, especially when those 12.11 drivers came a year after BF3 was released!

No it did not take a year before you could play BF3 on the 7 series, you could play BF3 on 7 series release drivers, its not like 70 fps is unplayable.

 

[UNhooked]

I believe XFX have silent revisions for the same model number, so I'd be weary getting one. That being said one of my Xfire cards is a release day XFX that I bought off from a forum member. It also has more coil whine than my other 7970 that is made by Diamond.

So if you ever plan to say Watercool in the future etc, I would say away from XFX due the silent revisions

 

[poohbear]

No it did not take a year before you could play BF3 on the 7 series, you could play BF3 on 7 series release drivers, its not like 70 fps is unplayable.

Learn to read posts in the contexts they're written.

I was writing about vid cards in the $400 range (the gtx 670 & 7970). In that regards, NO, it was not playable and i sure as hell wasnt gonna pay $400 for a 7970 to play BF3 under 60FPS when a cheaper GTX670 plays it @ 90fps for same price.