AT members choice: GTX 680 or 7970 (ghz) ?

[Ferzerp]

But the correct answer depends. What monitor do I have in your hypothetical?

Or are we going with what we already have?

I already have two 680's. So technically, the correct answer for me is to keep the 680, but if I had neither, and I didn't want to add a second, the answer is obviously the 7970.

If I had neither, and had the monitor I have now, then I have to say the 680 since neither the 680 or the 7970 alone are enough for 2560x1600 at settings I want, and SLI > Crossfire.

If I only have a 1080p screen, then the 7970 obviously.

You really have to give us more details so that we can answer!

 

[spinejam]

7970 Ghz -- In fact, at my resolution, I'll take a nice clocking 7950 over a gtx680.

 

[Ferzerp]

Note: Voted 7970, because I inserted a chosen reality in to the question and pretended I was the "average" person with neither of these cards and a 1080p monitor

 

[SolMiester]

NV for me...a couple of FPS extra either way makes no difference to me, Id rather have the extra features that arent on the AMD card.

 

[MTDEW]

I'm amazed that more people would rather be GIVEN a 2gb 680 vs 4gb version.

 

[Ferzerp]

I'm amazed that more people would rather be GIVEN a 2gb 680 vs 4gb version.

If you already have a 2GB one, then.....

 

[chimaxi83]

7970 all the way.

inb4 "but zomg! Nvidia has PhysX!!"

 

[tviceman]

If this was March-August I'd have said gtx680. Right now I'd take the hd7970GE.

 

[lavaheadache]

If this was March-August I'd have said gtx680. Right now I'd take the hd7970GE.

I imagine this is the general consensus around here

 

[GotNoRice]

I choose 680 because my main game is World of Warcraft where a 7970 might be able to keep up with a 660ti on a good day. I run 2x 680 in SLI to help feed my 120hz monitor. The amount of time I spend playing this game, it ends up being the #1 factor in just about all my hardware purchasing decisions.

 

[96Firebird]

I'm waiting on Keys,Lonbjerg and tviceman's choice....

inb4 "but zomg! Nvidia has PhysX!!"

lava, I'm sorry to see your thread head down a slippery slope with this useless drivel. :\

Anyways, after the 12.11 drivers, I'd pick the 7970 GHz.

 

[lavaheadache]

lava, I'm sorry to see your thread head down a slippery slope with this useless drivel. :\

Anyways, after the 12.11 drivers, I'd pick the 7970 GHz.

I was just hoping to make it 24 hours before it started. We already have member callouts, lol.

 

[chimaxi83]

nm

 

[OVerLoRDI]

7970 ghz for the 3gb of ram and the better performance at 1440p

 

[Ajay]

Nothing wrong with ATI cards, I just choose the GTX 680 because I have been using Nvidia cards since the GeForce2 GTS because, at the time, ATI drivers were horrible. Not a fanboi, just a fan.

 

[Grooveriding]

I choose 680 because my main game is World of Warcraft where a 7970 might be able to keep up with a 660ti on a good day. I run 2x 680 in SLI to help feed my 120hz monitor. The amount of time I spend playing this game, it ends up being the #1 factor in just about all my hardware purchasing decisions.

Not sure why W1zzard recycled old results for that review when on the same day he benched with the current AMD drivers, where the 7970ghz performs the same as a GTX 680 in WoW, with both much faster than a 660.

Almost all those cards are overkill for WoW though, getting way over 60FPS. A very fast CPU with a moderate video card is better than an average CPU with a very fast video card in World of Warcraft.

 

[Siberian]

Some of you really do fail at reading. I clearly stated that this was based on being *given* the card and no purchase was being made.

In that case the 690. Such an awesome card.

 

[tviceman]

In that case the 690. Such an awesome card.

Seriously, this card over those two in millisecond. Why isn't this an option?

 

[lavaheadache]

Seriously, this card over those two in millisecond. Why isn't this an option?

because to some of us, multi gpu provides "less" performance than single gpu... aka microstutter. Also, dual gpu support is often less than desireable a year or 2 down the road.

 

[GotNoRice]

Not sure why W1zzard recycled old results for that review when on the same day he benched with the current AMD drivers, where the 7970ghz performs the same as a GTX 680 in WoW, with both much faster than a 660.

I'd like to see the numbers for the 680 with the latest betas also. I know they improve performance for starcraft 2 and historically drivers that improved performance in starcraft 2 also did the same for world of warcraft. Either way, the 680 still comes out ahead of the 7970Ghz at every resolution in those benchmarks.

Almost all those cards are overkill for WoW though, getting way over 60FPS. A very fast CPU with a moderate video card is better than an average CPU with a very fast video card in World of Warcraft.

With my 120hz monitor, I want to be as close to 120fps at all times as possible, so at least in my case i don't feel that over 60hz represents overkill. A fast CPU is absolutely the best thing for the game, no argument there. If you look at the numbers for the 690 however, which should represent 680 SLI quite well, adding that 2nd GPU gives another 70fps. The game does appear to be able to benefit from extra GPU power.

 

[AtenRa]

Nothing wrong with ATI cards, I just choose the GTX 680 because I have been using Nvidia cards since the GeForce2 GTS because, at the time, ATI drivers were horrible. Not a fanboi, just a fan.

I have switched from NV to ATI since the 4850 days due to better price/performance. I have used 4850 CF, 5850, 6950 CF and now 7950. Yes there were driver problems along the way but NV also had probs. I was going to buy a GTX670 because i wanted to change to NV after all those AMD cards, but with the Never Settle bundle i would be stupid not to go for the HD7950.
Also, being able to change the Voltage was the second deciding factor to go with the 7950.

Perhaps next year ......

 

[biostud]

I fail at reading. If I was given a card I would choose he 680 GTX 4Gb, for the same reason I choose to buy a GTX 670 4Gb instead of 7950, when I could get it for the same price. I wanted to try physX for BL2 and other games.

 

[omeds]

I prefer the 680 because of features, support, 3D etc, but think the 7970 GE is the better piece of hardware. So as a user, better hardware doesn't mean much if it cant do what I want, so, 680 gets my vote.

 

[Shmee]

7970 normal and OC it. And then get another later for crossfire. at 2560x1600

And btw, I don't know why everyone is complaining about crossfire, my 6950 unlocked crossfire works fine. Even plays BF3 pretty well, not sure what setting, I think it is high, looks good enough.

 

[Silverforce11]

7970 normal and OC it. And then get another later for crossfire. at 2560x1600

And btw, I don't know why everyone is complaining about crossfire, my 6950 unlocked crossfire works fine. Even plays BF3 pretty well, not sure what setting, I think it is high, looks good enough.

They complain about MS in CF, which admittedly some users do notice. I didn't, and its probably because i ran with vsync and tripple buffering in my games.

But really, its easily fixed with radeon pro (AMD needs to hire this guy, he's doing a better job than their entire driver team for CF), delivering better results than SLI. Faster, smoother, cheaper.