AMD's GPU Q3 2012 marketshare - 14% declines across the board to NVIDIA

[Zodiark1593]

I've read the 8870 is ~gtx 680. So, maybe 10% slower than HD 7970. Assuming the claims are true.

Hmm, I was under the impression the GTX 680 and the Radeon 7970 traded blows depending on workload.

 

[Val_]

Hmm, I was under the impression the GTX 680 and the Radeon 7970 traded blows depending on workload.

I think it really depends on which review you read (methodology ; which games + which applications are tested ; and newer driver versions make a difference too), but according to the latest tests on hardware.fr, the 7970 GHz edition is faster :

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/869-18/recapitulatif-performances.html
http://www.behardware.com/articles/869-18/review-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition.html (English version translated a bit later)

Newer still review : http://www.hardware.fr/articles/873-21/recapitulatif-performances.html

 

[3DVagabond]

Hmm, I was under the impression the GTX 680 and the Radeon 7970 traded blows depending on workload.

No, the 7970 is faster overall. The reviews that Val posted were pre 12.11's which increased performance further. It of course is game dependent, but with a fair mix of games the 7970 comes out ahead. Especially if you us games released this year where AMD's architecture performs better in most of them.

 

[MrK6]

No, the 7970 is faster overall. The reviews that Val posted were pre 12.11's which increased performance further. It of course is game dependent, but with a fair mix of games the 7970 comes out ahead. Especially if you us games released this year where AMD's architecture performs better in most of them.

FWIW, he said 7970 and 680, which do trade blows. However, the 7970 GHz Edition is absolutely faster.

 

[OCGuy]

FWIW, he said 7970 and 680, which do trade blows. However, the 7970 GHz Edition is absolutely faster.

If I could blind-test a random group of people to tell me the difference between a 680, a 7970, and a 7970 oc'd to 1ghz....my guess would be you have a 33% chance of guessing what card you are currently using correctly.

Coming from someone who has experience with all three....

 

[MrK6]

If I could blind-test a random group of people to tell me the difference between a 680, a 7970, and a 7970 oc'd to 1ghz....my guess would be you have a 33% chance of guessing what card you are currently using correctly.

Coming from someone who has experience with all three....

Probably, but that's not what we're talking about. Besides, "we're barely noticeably slower" is not a good marketing slogan, otherwise nvidia would have used it by now.

 

[3DVagabond]

Probably, but that's not what we're talking about. Besides, "we're barely noticeably slower" is not a good marketing slogan, otherwise nvidia would have used it by now.

Also ignore the fact that the 680 is more expensive and barely noticeably slower.

This also only seems to not matter when AMD is faster. When nVidia is faster you buy it because you want the best performance available.

 

[nOOky]

I did my part by buying a 7970 when they came out for $549. I can't help it if they haven't come out with anything better for a whole year, nvidia either!
And I feel like upgrading too!

 

[Keysplayr]

If I could blind-test a random group of people to tell me the difference between a 680, a 7970, and a 7970 oc'd to 1ghz....my guess would be you have a 33% chance of guessing what card you are currently using correctly.

Coming from someone who has experience with all three....

True. Unless you're playing a PhysX title. Then I bet someone could tell the difference rather quickly. ^_^

 

[MrK6]

Also ignore the fact that the 680 is more expensive and barely noticeably slower.

This also only seems to not matter when AMD is faster. When nVidia is faster you buy it because you want the best performance available.

Exactly. Nvidia fanboys remind me of the pundits on Fox news: they'll take whichever side of the argument makes their "team" look less bad this cycle.

 

[Rikard]

True. Unless you're playing a PhysX title. Then I bet someone could tell the difference rather quickly. ^_^

...if you find a PhysX title worth playing...

 

[Keysplayr]

...if you find a PhysX title worth playing...

I dont know man. A lot of people feel PysX is even worth a hybrid physx hack.

 

[SirPauly]

Indeed!

 

[GaiaHunter]

If you grab two twins and strip one of them the differences are noticeable.

 

[Rikard]

I dont know man. A lot of people feel PysX is even worth a hybrid physx hack.

Well, we are enthuisasts. People do it for the same reason as they make Hackintoshes. Because they can, not because they need it, or actually ever use it.

If you grab two twins and strip one of them the differences are noticeable.

Are we still talking of graphics cards? If you strip one it would be hard not to do both wouldn't it?

 

[jacktesterson]

Ive messed around plenty with physx and have no issues going without it. Its very overrated

 

[Jaydip]

Well, we are enthuisasts. People do it for the same reason as they make Hackintoshes. Because they can, not because they need it, or actually ever use it.


Are we still talking of graphics cards? If you strip one it would be hard not to do both wouldn't it?

Wrong,after BL2 debuted I saw many people asking how to setup a hybrid physx for the eye candy.It doesn't matter what you think of it, it matters to a lot of people.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Are we still talking of graphics cards? If you strip one it would be hard not to do both wouldn't it?

No.
We talking about physic and graphic effects.

 

[NIGELG]

This thread is still going I see.... even though the Pro Nvidia people are derailing it with talks of PhysX and other useless, unrealistic looking Nvidia features.

Face it ,people if AMD is going down they are going down fighting and I am still thinking their GPU's are better for my needs.My current card is almost 3 years old and I think a 7970 can give me 3 years service as well.

I'm still turned off by Nvidia and it's raging fanboys plus my experiences with my 8800gts left a sour taste for Nvidia.

SO if a 7970 is the first and last AMD card I ever own so be it....my current card is an ATi card with the ATi logo....lol.I haven't owned an AMD card yet.Yes I know it's semantics....LOL.

 

[SirPauly]

This thread is still going I see.... even though the Pro Nvidia people are derailing it with talks of PhysX and other useless, unrealistic looking Nvidia features.

Interesting! Useless! Market decides.

 

[SirPauly]

Wrong,after BL2 debuted I saw many people asking how to setup a hybrid physx for the eye candy.It doesn't matter what you think of it, it matters to a lot of people.

Indeed!

 

[Silverforce11]

As i've said previously and still agree to, Physx is still the ONLY defining feature that really gives the masses a reason to go with NV over AMD, its something many are willing to pay extra for. Nv's only problem is lately there's a lack of good titles with Physx, it used to be much more.

 

[Ibra]

PhysX and other useless, unrealistic looking Nvidia features.

You know Physx=physics. And you know AMD's realistic feature? Bankruptcy.

 

[chimaxi83]

You know Physx=physics. And you know AMD's realistic feature? Bankruptcy.

Nice troll attempt, but you fail. PhysX, as implemented in any current game, is only eye candy. Game physics, on the other hand, are NOT just eye candy.

Realistic reactions between colliding vehicles, bodies flying during an explosion, walls crumbling in unique ways, those are game physics.

Unrealistic goo crap, some swaying fabric, and fog machine-like mist, those are PhysX. Learn the difference so you can flame bait better, or just don't post :thumbsup:

 

[NIGELG]

Interesting! Useless! Market decides.

Lol....the market decides that ONLY one game needs GPU physX for the whole year so far.