If you use MLAA, sure. But if you use MSAA, AMD cards don't do well. Cayman suffers in all games that use deferred MSAA.
Yes, it's losing terribly
No, they don't. A direct competitor to the HD6950 is GTX560 Ti. At 1200P or below, a heavily overclocked GTX560 Ti 448 would beat an an overclocked HD6950 in most games just like a GTX580 beats an HD6970 by 15-20%. Most 6950s are horrible overclockers on air and even when they overclock, they have poor scaling. Using your example of an HD6950 that went > 1000mhz on water cooling is frankly irrelevant for most people.
Using your example of not having a single clue, having never owned the card, frankly irrelevant. I find it amazing how I consistently show you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about, and are ignorant on the functioning of hardware, and instead of having the humility to admit this is the case, you either change the subject, deflect, or just don't post. You are tedious.
So there is no chance of a corrupt bios at all? 0%? My card is flashed, I know perfectly well how to perform the procedure. Although you must be special since you suggest that bios flashing is 100% risk free. But it seems your only way to win any argument on the forums is to personally attack posters. Meh. We get it -- you have special overclocking abilities no one else has. You have secret knowledge how to overclock better than anyone else. You also get the most overclockable parts out of anyone. Congratulations.
No, the difference is you do not have ANY competent knowledge or ability when it comes to these, so it must seem like some sort of magic or mystery to you.
Why even bother unlocking? Clock for clock, Fermi architecture scales well and Cayman doesn't. Most 6950s will drop off at 950mhz. That's barely faster than 6970. A GTX560 Ti 448 will overclock to GTX580 speeds. GTX580 is at least 10% faster than a slightly overclocked 6970 since GTX580 is 15-20% faster stock vs. stock. The measly 950mhz overclock on the 6950 won't be sufficient to surpass an overclocked GTX560 Ti 448.
But again, you haven't owned or overclocked any of these, so why should I entertain you talking out of your rear?
It's just common sense based on benchmarks. GTX580 has a massive advantage in BF3 with MSAA, in Crysis 2, etc. In those games, there is no chance for a 6950 @ 6970 + overclock to catch up at all at 1200P or below.
Or you could not use MSAA and it would be just as fast. See what happens when I also demand to use conditions that don't favor NVIDIA? But I don't, because I'm honest.
I wasn't trying to show off. I just realized there is no point in discussing anything with a person who twists and turns facts and then when he loses, attacks the poster's abilities. Meh. Apparently you have the highest technical knowledge on our forum. So why would I even try to "be at your level"? :whiste: I got better things to do in life than argue over definitions of TDP with a person who 2 months ago thinks 30-35 fps is perfect acceptable in FPS games and then posts pictures of BF3 never dropping < 60 to prove the worth of his $600 videocard.
Kind of like how you changed or deflected all the points above after I proved your wrong, amirite? Pot meet kettle? You're like every other fanboy in this thread that got upset and decided to personally attack me, since my argument was bullet proof, and now is having a pity party that it hasn't worked out. One of the "better things you should do in life" is become more educated on the subject you decide to argue about and educate others on, but fail miserably. I don't need more than 30-35 FPS to play well, but if I can get 60 that makes me happy. Furthermore, I think that information is useful for people looking to purchase. However, it doesn't seem to make you happy, most likely because it's an AMD card. Quite sad that you can't happy for technological achievement if it's from "the enemy."
Obviously they are sufficient for stock operation, but not for heavy overclocking beyond 950mhz without being too loud for people who game without headphones.
On air cooling, most 6950s max out at 940-950mhz without bumping insane voltage. Also, the reference blowers on the 6950 are loud once you start overclocking. But you are know it all, so what's the point of trying to voice an alternative opinion?
I wouldn't be against voicing an alternative, but the alternative isn't a $290 GTX 560 Ti 448 with a reference cooler.
Irony at its finest. The person who added prob. 200W+ through heavy overclocking to his 7970 is discussing the benefits of power consumption and using 1 website as superior to another when the #s don't agree. Interesting.
Irony at its finest, the person who just tired to scold me for deflecting and changing the subject when proven wrong does the same:
I wasn't trying to show off. I just realized there is no point in discussing anything with a person who twists and turns facts and then when he loses, attacks the poster's abilities.
The benefit, which you seem to not understand since you don't understand hardware, is that I don't have to always run my card to use that much power, but only when I need to. The GTX 560 Ti 448 wouldn't have that option if it consumes that much at stock. But nice failure all over the place.
Did I not say 6950 2GB is better for 2560x1600 but worse for 1200P or below? You are like a little child that didn't get love when he was younger. Always with the personal attacks when he doesn't get his ways.
Who's done nothing but personally attack me the entire post since he can't disprove any of my points with his lack of knowledge? You specifically said:
For 2560x1600, a single 6950 overclocked is way too slow.
Which is not true, nor would I expect you to know since you don't own that sized display nor the card, and once again are talking out of your rear.
I provided information and let someone interested in the GTX560 Ti 448 decide if the card fits their needs. In your case, you shove down your only ideal videocard and if anyone disagrees, they are idiots.
BTW, I haven't been "quiet" for 2 months. I just don't find it productive to waste too much time "arguing". Change of priorities. I came to this forum to learn not brag, not to show off my "special" overclocking abilities, not to put people down when they disagree, with the aim to provide unbiased advice and not engage in defence for voicing a different opinion. Although I see that you haven't changed at all - still putting other members if they offer a different viewpoint, twisting and turning facts to fit your conclusion.
In my world, both the GTX560 Ti 448 and HD6950 2GB have pros and cons and it's definitely not as clear cut, especially at similar prices.
No, you came to this thread to turn it into an NVIDIA vs. AMD fight since someone wasn't impressed with an NVIDIA-based card. You consistently waste my time with your nonsense and lack of knowledge on the subject, and lack the humility to admit when you're wrong or do not understand. The fact that you've been editing the above for almost an hour makes me believe that I'm finally getting through to you and that you're watching what you say. Good, that's the point. Now if you can offer an opinion as to why someone should buy this unimpressive and irrelevant card at $290 when their are cheaper options available, or when a GTX 570 is $295, I'll hear it. Otherwise, stop derailing the thread.
Facebook
Twitter