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

[Elfear]

Talk about missing the mark. Dude, the drivers were so bad for so long the 680 was faster at release all the way up until a month or so ago. Yes AMD had it's thumb up its ass. They should have had drivers like this ready way sooner and then they might not have had to drop prices so hard. Not that price drops were bad, but when the competition releases a card that sells for less and is faster, that's not very good.

I agree the 680 was the better card when it launched but I think you're misremembering when it lost the performance crown. These are from June 21st.

These results are using the Catalyst 12.7 Beta drivers which were released into the wild on June 28.

AMD's been doing well for quite a few months now performance wise. Sales on the other hand...

 

[badb0y]

Talk about missing the mark. Dude, the drivers were so bad for so long the 680 was faster at release all the way up until a month or so ago. Yes AMD had it's thumb up its ass. They should have had drivers like this ready way sooner and then they might not have had to drop prices so hard. Not that price drops were bad, but when the competition releases a card that sells for less and is faster, that's not very good.

Really? The drivers were so bad for months? No one told me you know since I own the damn card since release.

The second part of your statement has nothing to do with first part. nVidia sells more cards because they have better marketing just like Apple. Apple sells a ton of phones and tablets and makes bank not because they have the best products but because they have the best marketing.

 

[MrK6]

AMD's been doing well for quite a few months now performance wise. Sales on the other hand...

:thumbsup:

I was going to post the same charts. Furthermore you'll notice that even most recently nothing much has changed: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/28.html . The lot of you are bitching about a few percentage point differences comparing the 7970 non-GHz to the GTX 680 over a nine month period. The reason is BOTH nvidia and AMD have substantially improved their drivers over the course of this series lifetime, otherwise we'd see greater differences. However, only nvidia fans seem to complain rolleyes: ) that AMD has improved their drivers since release, where as nvidia has done the exact same thing. And some of you possess the idiocy to say this forum is AMD-biased; it just shows how good nvidia marketing is at producing fanboys.

 

[Jaydip]

Really? The drivers were so bad for months? No one told me you know since I own the damn card since release.

The second part of your statement has nothing to do with first part. nVidia sells more cards because they have better marketing just like Apple. Apple sells a ton of phones and tablets and makes bank not because they have the best products but because they have the best marketing.

You have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[3DVagabond]

The 7970 is not faster in "most games". The GHz edition on the other hand is.

That's a difference.

It doesn't have to be a GHz edition, it just has to be clocked higher than 925MHz, which most are. You could get THIS Sapphire for $380 ($360AR) with the Never Settle gaming bundle free and it would be faster overall than a reference 680.

 

[BoFox]

Voted for HD 7970 just for the heck of it.

AMD needs our help now. HD 7970 is a decent DX11.1 card, and I'd go for the vanilla 7970 (non-GHz edition) since it's cheaper, and can be overvolted/overclocked pretty much the same.

Let's boycott PhysX, guys!! It looks like DirectCompute and OpenCL can do GPU physics as well, so I think we should push it. I just do not mind if Physx goes away in favor of DC/OpenCL GPU physics, so that there's a universal standard for game developers to build their engines upon rather than tacking an add-on that's not really inside the core of the gameplay. It's for the better for all of us, both AMD and Nvidia gamers.

DX11.1 will also bring standard Stereo3D. HD 7970 has that. I want AMD to survive.. competition is vital for us, and it's good that so many of you are supporting AMD now when AMD needs your support the most.

.. And of course I'd still use a GTX 690 in the other rig for excellent S3D support with lots of games so far - with none of them using DX11.1! (Despite having spent nearly $200 on new proprietary and required 3D Vision glasses that pissed me off for a long while when I had several pairs of wired glasses for $10-15 each from Ebay).

 

[3DVagabond]

People are just coming up with their own nonsense a lot of the time and forgetting the fact that many people that purchased a 680 didn't buy it yesterday. So they probably paid less than the 7970 was at the time and up until about a month or so ago, were getting superior performance. Now suddenly those people were stupid and got ripped off? How did all the sudden the GTX 680 become junk? It's not and as I said before, it was months between the 680 release and the new drivers that actually did what should have been done long ago IMO.

I think just about everyone who is recommending/voting for the 7970 is qualifying it with "now". Most people would have bought the 680 when it was released. The only people that wouldn't, would have been the ones who wanted more vram and/or take advantage of it's compute capabilities (small niche, particularly on these boards, obviously) or people who just hate nVidia.

What those people are disagreeing with is the retort of release prices, which are irrelevant now, release drivers, which are irrelevant now, micro stutter, when the thread clearly states a single card, so again, irrelevant, etc... It's pretty blatant when people are grasping at straws to support their favorite brand.

Again, nobody needs to justify why they bought a 680 8 months ago. We are in the here and now with this poll.

 

[3DVagabond]

Im quite sure the 680 on release was faster and took back the single GPU crown, and its wasn't until this happened that AMD pulled their finger out of their arse and decided to do something about fixing their drivers. CF was broken for 6mths+ with multi monitors....
And least impressive?, it was cooling and quieter than any flagship prior card...

This is what I was talking about. Living in the past.

Still I wouldn't expect any other comment from a AMD appreciation forum....LOL

If I thought this forum was a biased forum, I wouldn't post here. That's why I don't go to ABT. Maybe you should ask yourself why you post here if you feel that way?

 

[BoFox]

with 5 or so active posters and half trying to become part of the nvidia focus group with the other half actually being part of the neutral focus group, I'm sure we can guess how that will turn out. lol.

Apop, If you are reading this, I mean no harm.... There was laughter as I wrote that. I love ABT, keep up the good work. ABT is in my favorites list =)

I added the blue part for you, because I'm actually being part of the independently neutral focus group. It's like an Alcohol Anonymous meeting group for the extreme fans on each side, focusing on bringing them all together in unity! () :biggrin:

 

[BoFox]

If I thought this forum was a biased forum

towards Nvidia, that is. ^_^
Anyways, keep it up with supporting AMD! AMD needs all the support you can give them now!!
I just want AMD to survive the difficult times and keep on coming strong, especially in the GPU department.

 

[badb0y]

You have no clue what you are talking about.

Please enlighten me oh great one.

 

[3DVagabond]

towards Nvidia, that is. ^_^
Anyways, keep it up with supporting AMD! AMD needs all the support you can give them now!!
I just want AMD to survive the difficult times and keep on coming strong, especially in the GPU department.

No qualification. There is no point posting in a biased forum. Now, make no mistake, there are biased people here. Everyone has biases. It's human nature. If someone doesn't think they are biased they are fooling themselves. It doesn't mean people have to force their biases on others though. As in, disagree with the position of the site owner or admin and get belittled and/or banned. There's no way to have an open discussion in an environment like that. AMD fanbois, nVidia fanbois, and people in the middle can post here without one of the site admins attacking them for their opinion. They draw the line with personal attacks or excessive (and they are REALLY lenient here) derailing and thread crapping.

I'll say the same thing to you, If you think this forum is biased, why would you post here?

 

[RussianSensation]

Well if people are going to bring GTX680's resale value, then I'll bring forth the ultimate money saving feature this generation = bitcoin mining. Let's calculate the price/performance of HD7970 vs. GTX680 and HD7970 CF vs. GTX680 SLI after xx months of bitcoin mining. Let's see who wins. There is only 1 group of gamers who potentially walked out with free $500-1,500 HD7970 setups. :biggrin: Bitcoin mining was the ultimate trump card of HD7970 series for those who jumped on the bandwagon early enough. I admit, it was kinda hard to say no to GPUs that slowly but surely paid for themselves over time even when HD7970 was slower in the beginning.

Not related to the actual poll, but for those who are paying attention an after-market HD7950 is now just 1% slower than a GTX670 at 1080P and just 10% slower than a GTX680 but it costs just $280.

GTX680 manages to be only 5% faster than an after-market HD7950 card with latest Cats 12.11s.

With current prices on HD7950, it's very hard to make a case for GTX660Ti/GTX670/680 or HD7970/7970 Ghz cards. If you think about it, after-market HD7950 CF for $560 ~ 90% of the performance of $820 GTX680 SLI at 1600P. But even at $410 GTX680 is still too expensive since it's not faster than a 1Ghz HD7970 that costs $360.

Asus GTX680 still goes for $510-540. The cheaper GTX680 cards are all reference models, which is not exactly everyone's cup of tea for single GPUs. To step up to an after-market open air design, GTX680 costs $450. Seems to me GTX680 is way too expensive.

 

[3DVagabond]

Well if people are going to bring GTX680's resale value, then I'll bring forth the ultimate money saving feature this generation = bitcoin mining. Let's calculate the price/performance of HD7970 vs. GTX680 and HD7970 CF vs. GTX680 SLI after xx months of bitcoin mining. Let's see who wins. There is only 1 group of gamers who potentially walked out with free $500-1,500 HD7970 setups. :biggrin: Bitcoin mining was the ultimate trump card of HD7970 series for those who jumped on the bandwagon early enough. I admit, it was kinda hard to say no to GPUs that paid for themselves over time even when HD7970 was slower in the beginning.

It wasn't slower in the beginning. It was the fastest single GPU card available for months until you could buy a 680. Remember it was released first and then availability for the 680 was pitiful. If people really want to talk about what happened in the past.

 

[Jaydip]

Please enlighten me oh great one.

You have not looked at the Iphone 5 and Ipad benches?you don't need to be great to look at benches lol

 

[Gikaseixas]

:thumbsup:

I was going to post the same charts. Furthermore you'll notice that even most recently nothing much has changed: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/28.html . The lot of you are bitching about a few percentage point differences comparing the 7970 non-GHz to the GTX 680 over a nine month period. The reason is BOTH nvidia and AMD have substantially improved their drivers over the course of this series lifetime, otherwise we'd see greater differences. However, only nvidia fans seem to complain rolleyes: ) that AMD has improved their drivers since release, where as nvidia has done the exact same thing. And some of you possess the idiocy to say this forum is AMD-biased; it just shows how good nvidia marketing is at producing fanboys.

Great post. People talk as if the 7970 was the only card benefiting from driver improvements. Both got better each month after release dates. 7970 drivers at launch were not bad, they weren't optimized just like GTX 680 weren't at launch.

My vote goes for 7970 Ghz

 

[DominionSeraph]

Poll needs choice for 7950.

 

[Greenlepricon]

You have not looked at the Iphone 5 and Ipad benches?you don't need to be great to look at benches lol

Because people invest an extra $200 in a phone or tablet to say it's the fastest on the market :whiste:

Don't get me wrong, their products are pretty nice. For that price though I would rather just upgrade my pc so I could do actual work on it.

Back on topic though. The 7970 is the better card because it is currently the best performer you can buy for the price. The 680 is a really nice card too, but for about the same amount of performance you're paying a premium. You're also paying for a smaller bus and less memory, which doesn't matter too much but it's nice to have nonetheless. AMD really pulled some magic out of their hat with the driver updates. If this question were polled 6 months ago, I'd be on the other team even though I hold a soft spot for AMD. It doesn't matter which company you like or which one you buy from, just which one has the better product at the moment.

 

[raghu78]

It wasn't slower in the beginning. It was the fastest single GPU card available for months until you could buy a 680. Remember it was released first and then availability for the 680 was pitiful. If people really want to talk about what happened in the past.

HD 7970 was unquestionably the fastest GPU from Jan 9th to Mar 22nd. From Mar 22nd to Jun 22nd Nvidia had the lead but only in stock comparisons. But when both cards were overclocked to the max they would end up on par. From Jun 22nd with the 12.7 beta drivers, HD 7970 Ghz (1050 Mhz) was the fastest card. BF3 remained a thorn in few reviews

http://techreport.com/review/23150/amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/11

http://ht4u.net/reviews/2012/amd_radeon_hd_7970_ghz_edition_tahiti_2/index26.php

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/3/

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/869-18/recapitulatif-performances.html

After Oct 22nd the GTX 680 is now on par or slower than HD 7970 (925 Mhz). HD 7970 Ghz is in the clear lead with games like BF3 showing upto 15% higher performance.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/11/12/fall_2012_gpu_driver_comparison_roundup/3

http://www.techspot.com/review/603-best-graphics-cards/page12.html

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...12-11-never-settle-driver-performance-17.html

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html

The problem is the market's perception was strongly formed when the inital launch reviews were released. Nvidia cashed in with their stronger brand and marketing. definitely it made a significant impact to AMD's sales at the high end as Nvidia took desktop market share in Q3. its only in Q4 that things are looking to improve.

The fact is majority of users will pick Nvidia if AMD provided similar performance. You need a significant performance difference and lower prices to make users consider AMD over Nvidia. Now with the HD 7950 boost matching GTX 670 and selling at GTX 660 Ti's price and HD 7970 OC( 1Ghz) and HD 7970 Ghz beating GTX 680 clearly for a lesser price AMD can make a bigger impact in the high end part of the GPU market.

 

[Jaydip]

Because people invest an extra $200 in a phone or tablet to say it's the fastest on the market :whiste:

Don't get me wrong, their products are pretty nice. For that price though I would rather just upgrade my pc so I could do actual work on it.

Back on topic though. The 7970 is the better card because it is currently the best performer you can buy for the price. The 680 is a really nice card too, but for about the same amount of performance you're paying a premium. You're also paying for a smaller bus and less memory, which doesn't matter too much but it's nice to have nonetheless. AMD really pulled some magic out of their hat with the driver updates. If this question were polled 6 months ago, I'd be on the other team even though I hold a soft spot for AMD. It doesn't matter which company you like or which one you buy from, just which one has the better product at the moment.

Sorry man you are in the minority now.The tablet/smartphone market is going way strong compared to pcs. You can't deny that Apple has the absolute performance lead in smartphone/tablets.

 

[Silverforce11]

The fact is majority of users will pick Nvidia if AMD provided similar performance.

The majority of users will pick NV regardless.

This was true in the past where NV released crap or when ATI released dominating GPUs, NV still sold heaps.

 

[Whitestar127]

No qualification. There is no point posting in a biased forum. Now, make no mistake, there are biased people here. Everyone has biases. It's human nature. If someone doesn't think they are biased they are fooling themselves. It doesn't mean people have to force their biases on others though. As in, disagree with the position of the site owner or admin and get belittled and/or banned. There's no way to have an open discussion in an environment like that. AMD fanbois, nVidia fanbois, and people in the middle can post here without one of the site admins attacking them for their opinion. They draw the line with personal attacks or excessive (and they are REALLY lenient here) derailing and thread crapping.

I'll say the same thing to you, If you think this forum is biased, why would you post here?

I actually came to these forums in the hope of finding unbiased people here. I suppose I enjoy hoping for the impossible. But still, it doesn't look too bad so far.
I agree with you that everyone has some sort of bias. But when it comes to video cards I hardly think you will find someone less biased then yours truly.
I honestly don't give a flying eff you see kay which brand I end up with, as long as I'm confident it'll fulfill my needs. I always hope the newest released card from whichever company will smoke the one I have in my computer now, and why wouldn't I? It just means my next purchase in the future will be that much better. It does NOT mean that the card in my computer is suddenly rubbish, as long as it still runs games well. Being a die hard fan of either company is just so irrational in my opinion.

My previous card was a GTX 8800, and I was very happy with that.
My current card is a 5970, and I'm very happy with that.
Nothing more to say really.

 

[3DVagabond]

Poll needs choice for 7950.

You would take a free 7950 over a free 7970?

 

[Silverforce11]

You would take a free 7950 over a free 7970?

I would. Significantly less power usage for negligable performance loss. Unless you bitcoin, those extra shaders do squat once the clocks are comparable.

 

[Gryz]

People seem to forget that everyone has different criteria on which they make their choices.

- Some people care only about raw performance. If one card is 3% faster than the other, they want that one. And they would call the other card "fail".

- Some people care about overclocking. They only compare performance of 2 cards when fully overclocked to the max. Others don't want the hassle, and will probably never overclock their videocards (like me).

- People play different games. Your favorite game might behave completely different from average performance. So while card X might be 5% slower on average, it might be 10% faster in your favorite game. Same thing with features, you might like high AA, and one card performs better than the other with high AA. Same with resolutions.

- Some people care about features. Multi-monitor, types of connectors, etc. Others have only a single 1920x1080 monitor, and don't care about all that.

- Some people care about software. Stability of the drivers, easy of configuration, timely optimization for new games, adding new features to old games, etc.

- Compute power. Not just in videogames, but GPGPU. OpenCL and Cuda. Most people don't care. But some do.

- And then there is power-consumption. Some people care about power because of the energy bill (e.g. if you want 24/7 computations). Others care about the heat.

- And I care about the noise. And thus the heat. And thus powerconsumption. But also fans. Are waterblocks available ?


It seems most AT readers find only the first criterium important. Raw performance. One card is 3% faster, so anyone who wants the other card is an idiot. A few more find overclocking important. But everybody seems to forget about the other criteria. They might not be important to you, but they might be important to others.

I bought a gtx680 at release. Would I pick the gtx680 again ? Maybe. From what I've read at benchmarks, it runs quieter than the 7970. And I imagine the GHz-edition runs even slightly hotter/noisier. When performance is so close, this factor might make the difference for me. Am I an idiot ?