Feature differences (non performance) between 570 and 6970

[Chaoticlusts]

I'm curious.. say for arguments case we put aside price/performance just for this discussion pretend the the 6970 and 570 bench exactly the same for the same price..what's the feature tradeoff between the two

ie...on Nvidia's side you've got PhysX, Their version of 3d (and by the sounds of it the version amd supports will work on any card anyway), CUDA and other things i'm sure i'm missing (hense why I've started this discussion )
while on AMD's you've got eyefinity, their new GPGPU thing which we'll see how it works out hopefully it'll get nicely picked up but no way to tell for the moment..and that's it I can think of

so firstly what am I missing? and secondly whats everyone's opinions on these 'exclusive' features?

 

[Shmee]

6970 also has > 2 monitor support per card, as well as dual Display port.

 

[flopper]

3D is still a gimmick.
physX in games, please come on.
Cuda, useful for videoediting and folding.
All close standards so not so useful.

I use 3 screens, eyefinity.
crossfire scales well with 6800/6900 series and as far its all I need.
amd has more gpgpu plans.

I game, and I like more fps, the features is nice, enjoy eyefinity and one card supporting that is the reason I got screens for that gaming.
I also enjoy the crossfire scaling lately, its nice.

other than that, not much

 

[Chaoticlusts]

3D is still a gimmick.
physX in games, please come on.
Cuda, useful for videoediting and folding.
All close standards so not so useful.

I use 3 screens, eyefinity.
crossfire scales well with 6800/6900 series and as far its all I need.
amd has more gpgpu plans.

I game, and I like more fps, the features is nice, enjoy eyefinity and one card supporting that is the reason I got screens for that gaming.
I also enjoy the crossfire scaling lately, its nice.

other than that, not much

That's the impression I got from physX which is pretty expected from a game system that shuts out a large portion of the market..basically garentees developers aren't going to put much effort in
honestly from what I've heard of eyefinity it could be classified as almost as much a 'gimick' as 3d...it's a great thing to have for some games..and I'm guessing it comes in handy for desktop use sometimes (I love having 2 monitors though I'm not sure i'd always use a 3rd) but it's situational dependant like 3d...some things it doesn't work for at all others it works badly (Civ 5's implementation is supposed to be reasonably broken) while in some it adds a lot to the gaming experience. I would be curious to hear your experience with running on eyefinity cause i've been considering it...but i've also considered 3d...chances are I won't be able to do either for quite sometime due to budget issues

as for gpgpu plans...well they're plans..we'll have to wait and see how they turn out..I remember Nvidia's CUDA plans when it first announced it..they were very grandious....and never really eventuated

I thought crossfire and sli had reached a point were there was little difference between the two in terms of effectiveness/scaling?

but yeah if they really are all the features then there's nothing that's specifically pulling me either way..I'm unlikely to use the majority of those the ones i'd like too I may not be able to afford the extra parts to implement

out of curiousity as well..how does your system handle the rez's that eyefinity will run things at...you never see benchmarks for it (I understand why since you could only compare amd cards) but 5760x1200 must be quite taxing (I'm just guessing your using 1920x1200 monitors I know I could be way off )

 

[Dribble]

AMD has single card eye infinity (i.e. can drive 3 screens with one card). Nvidia basically has everything else.

 

[flopper]

out of curiousity as well..how does your system handle the rez's that eyefinity will run things at...you never see benchmarks for it (I understand why since you could only compare amd cards) but 5760x1200 must be quite taxing (I'm just guessing your using 1920x1200 monitors I know I could be way off )

scaling for me is now,
3.2ghz to 4.2ghz i7 950 I gained 60fps minimum, 30 fps average in BC2.
6850crossfire 940/1140mhz at 5760x1080 using one odd screen at 1920x1200 which rescale.

Eyefinity has taken off a lot more people use 3 screens nowadays, and I now see shops sell eyefinity setup package, like a 5770 and 3 screens for around 600euro http://www.komplett.se/k/ki.aspx?sku=618760 (swedish site)
Its insane, 3 screens and a good videocard for a setup at that price?

Playing rts games etc..3 screns is a fun enjoyable experience, dragon age , diablo 3, lotro etc...its a lot more fun.
I play FPS like BC2 and then you need a lot of horse power, granted, since I aim to max my fps to be competitive.
110fps average atm.

The new 2x6950 that is incoming hopefully will add the sugar to the cake for me

3 screens is nice for surfing, mail, music and actually increase productivity.
You can have more stuff in your visual field, and skip to close and open applications

 

[blastingcap]

You missed:

FOR THE 6970:

2GB RAM vs. whatever the 570 has, 1280MB? (But by the time this becomes important we'll be a gen or two ahead of present... unless of course you game at 25x16 or Eyefinity resolutions)

heat/noise advantage

power draw and powertune for more efficient power usage (power draw will eventually translate to dollars saved of electricity)

switchable BIOS

better video playback (see HQV 2.0 scores)

FOR THE 570:

CUDA (if you use apps that can take advantage of it)

better at Folding@Home

more powerful tessellation and geometry, but by the time this extra oomph matters, we'll be a gen or two ahead

I'm curious.. say for arguments case we put aside price/performance just for this discussion pretend the the 6970 and 570 bench exactly the same for the same price..what's the feature tradeoff between the two

ie...on Nvidia's side you've got PhysX, Their version of 3d (and by the sounds of it the version amd supports will work on any card anyway), CUDA and other things i'm sure i'm missing (hense why I've started this discussion )
while on AMD's you've got eyefinity, their new GPGPU thing which we'll see how it works out hopefully it'll get nicely picked up but no way to tell for the moment..and that's it I can think of

so firstly what am I missing? and secondly whats everyone's opinions on these 'exclusive' features?

 

[Triggaaar]

honestly from what I've heard of eyefinity it could be classified as almost as much a 'gimick' as 3d...it's a great thing to have for some games..and I'm guessing it comes in handy for desktop use sometimes (I love having 2 monitors though I'm not sure i'd always use a 3rd) but it's situational dependant like 3d

3d and eyefinity are both situation dependant, and many won't use them, but if you can use them they're definitely not gimmicks. Does the 570 have something in 3d that the 6970 doesn't have an equivellant of?

 

[Triggaaar]

You missed:

FOR THE 6970:

2GB RAM vs. whatever the 570 has, 1280MB?

I don't think that was missed, that's performance related and the OP is looking for non performance feature differences.

 

[Mistwalker]

Probably missing some, but:

AMD

Eyefinity
Better multi-monitor support
Better multi-GPU scaling (as of 6000 series)
Better video playback scores
Limited 3D support
Powertune (of dubious use but it's there)

Nvidia

Physx
Stereoscopic 3D
CUDA
Folding@Home
Game-specific profile support
SLI benefits are not driver dependent

 

[biostud]

the other problem with physX is that you either need two videocards or one very powerful to use it. So not only do you need a nvidia card (or two) but you also need a high-medium range card, efficiently cutting out at least 90% of gamers.

 

[Mistwalker]

the other problem with physX is that you either need two videocards or one very powerful to use it. So not only do you need a nvidia card (or two) but you also need a high-medium range card, efficiently cutting out at least 90% of gamers.

To be fair, any GPU-based physics solution would likely require similar. Can't really fault PhysX for that.

Its restrictive implementation is more where I would knock it (and you could relate that to lower adoption and thus lower developer support).

 

[Dribble]

the other problem with physX is that you either need two videocards or one very powerful to use it. So not only do you need a nvidia card (or two) but you also need a high-medium range card, efficiently cutting out at least 90% of gamers.

That's a major point of buying a high end card.

For this thread the op is talking about getting at least a 570. I have a 1080p monitor and a GTX 570. I can play batman maxed out with high phsyx and 4*AA and I get > 60fps (the bench was average 78fps, min 38fps I think). I do have an old 8800GT but haven't bothered plugging it in - no point.

As soon as a 3D vision driver comes out (latest 3D vision driver is an older driver rev then the first 570 supported driver) I'll try it in 3D. I saw a review where they were getting 45 fps with medium phsyx, 3D and everything else maxed at my res so it is possible. Perhaps I'll try plugging the 8800GT in then to see if it helps

That's partly why I went nvidia. There are more opportunities to put the excessive amount of gpu power to good use.

 

[digitaldurandal]

the other problem with physX is that you either need two videocards or one very powerful to use it. So not only do you need a nvidia card (or two) but you also need a high-medium range card, efficiently cutting out at least 90% of gamers.

Considering the discussion is about 5x0 vs 6xx0 I think your post is a bit silly, as it is assumed by the very topic at hand.

A few statements:

I think at this point there is still a case to be made for the 570. Between drivers, physx, gpgpu, 3d. I also think the price of the 570 might drop 25 bucks within two weeks at which point I think it will be the better card to buy.

The 6950 is nice, but I don't think it has the power to tap out the 2gb of vram. Looking at eyefinity resolution testing (see hardwareheaven) it seems that the 570sli is the same as the 6950xf and slower than the 6970xf.

Historically SLI has better scaling, ati seems to have definitely improved. I do hope to see more scaling improvements through drivers for nvidia cards.

If you are not interested in physx, gpgpu, 3d, then I think the choice is obvious to go AMD right now.

If you go for the 580 I think that is a bit silly now that the competition has come out so cheap, although I do think they are going to drop their prices on that card as well. I originally stated I thought they wouldn't - but I did not expect AMD to price the 6970 at $370 (380 to get a card with a reasonable warranty though - lifetime or get out IMO)

 

[Wreckage]

Building off Mistwalkers list for NVIDIA.
Physx
Stereoscopic 3D
CUDA
Folding@Home
Game-specific profile support
SLI benefits are not driver dependent
Better texture filtering
Transparency AA
Ambient Occlusion
Better linux support
TWIMTBP
Better support for games at launch (i.e. supporting AA)
Better OpenCL support (built into the driver, instead of a separate SDK)
Optimus for Laptops
Hybrid SLI
Better drivers overall (i.e not having to hotfix the same driver 5 times).

 

[Barfo]

Nvidia has better support for GPU accelerated Adobe programs. Also, if you have programs that can use CUDA, it is a great asset.

 

[digitaldurandal]

Building off Mistwalkers list for NVIDIA.
Physx
Stereoscopic 3D
CUDA
Folding@Home
Game-specific profile support
SLI benefits are not driver dependent
Better texture filtering
Transparency AA
Ambient Occlusion
Better linux support
TWIMTBP
Better support for games at launch (i.e. supporting AA)
Better OpenCL support (built into the driver, instead of a separate SDK)
Optimus for Laptops
Hybrid SLI
Better drivers overall (i.e not having to hotfix the same driver 5 times).

Some of these statements are relevant and some remind me of Rollo.

What does Optimus have to do with this thread at all?

TWIMTBP would seem to encompass all the games that they support AA with at launch, so I feel as if you are listing the same benefit twice.

Linux support using a 5x0 series seems kind of wasteful as well, unless you are talking about for GPGPU CUDA and Folding - in which case those benefits have already been named as well.

This is coming from someone that owns 2x570 gtxs.

OpenGL is a joke - Carmack stopped writing half the code for it and support for it has died. Honestly I don't see it being around in 3 years. What recent games use it? Does Rage?

 

[Wreckage]

OpenGL is a joke - Carmack stopped writing half the code for it and support for it has died. Honestly I don't see it being around in 3 years. What recent games use it? Does Rage?

Did I mention OpenGL?

 

[Rifter]

Linux support using a 5x0 series seems kind of wasteful as well, unless you are talking about for GPGPU CUDA and Folding - in which case those benefits have already been named as well.

How is it wasteful? they have better Linux drivers its that simple. When i was running my 4890 sometimes the ATI linux drivers performance were so bad the desktop effects lagged.

Granted to play most newer games you have to use windows but since i spend 70% of my time in linux, good linux driver support is essential for me.

Im going SLI 460's i have a second on order. But if i didnt i would probably go for a single card solution like a 570 or 580 and would not find good linux driver support wasteful at all.


As to the OP

I think physx is over rated.

Eyefinity as well, I would rather have one screen with higher FPS/quality/AA but i guess thats a personal preference.

Cuda is useful if you use apps that make use of it.

 

[Wreckage]

How is it wasteful? they have better Linux drivers its that simple. When i was running my 4890 sometimes the ATI linux drivers performance were so bad the desktop effects lagged.

Granted to play most newer games you have to use windows but since i spend 70% of my time in linux, good linux driver support is essential for me.

Im going SLI 460's i have a second on order. But if i didnt i would probably go for a single card solution like a 570 or 580 and would not find good linux driver support wasteful at all.


As to the OP

I think physx is over rated.

Eyefinity as well, I would rather have one screen with higher FPS/quality/AA but i guess thats a personal preference.

Cuda is useful if you use apps hat make use of it.

I think he was trying to imply that you don't need a powerful card like the 570 for linux. He may not know that many people dual boot their desktops win7/linux. So having a good driver for linux regardless of how powerful the card is, will be a bonus to many people.

 

[Rifter]

I think he was trying to imply that you don't need a powerful card like the 570 for linux. He may not know that many people dual boot their desktops win7/linux. So having a good driver for linux regardless of how powerful the card is, will be a bonus to many people.

I didnt think of that. I think though its pretty safe to assume if you buy a 570 you are gaming, in which case you have to dual boot if you use linux as your primary OS.