GTX 670 or 7970? Micro-stuttering and such?

[MrMuppet]

I've actually got both (still boxed), but will keep one and return the other. Price difference is negligible (imo). Which one should I keep?

1. The GTX 670 2GB is a reference card and was 3141 SEK.
- Optional: An Accelero Twin Turbo II can be bought for an additional 345 SEK for a total of 3486 SEK.

2. The Sapphire HD 7970 3GB Dual-X was 3290 SEK
- It comes with Sapphire's Dual-X cooler (obviously).

Now, the ~200 SEK difference doesn't really matter (and it's deductible), choosing the right card is much more important.

I'm leaning towards the GTX 670 tbh, since it appears GTX 670 SLI doesn't suffer from nearly as much micro stuttering (MS) as 7970 CF. Also, while I'm not sure what games I'll play, I know I'll play BF3 and Skyrim (where Nvidia does better). I'll probably get SC2 too (a third Nvidia title). I'll also try Crysis, since I haven't, but such games you only play once right? Additionally, Adaptive VSync seems interesting (if it works).

7970 single seems stronger in general, but GTX 670 is stronger in some big titles. Most importantly, GTX 670 SLI seems a much more viable upgrade path in the future than 7970 CF due to MS. 7970 has 3GB, but I'm only gaming at either 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. I can't seem to shake the apprehension that if a GTX 670 isn't enough, a 7970 may not be either. I will be overclocking of course and on the other hand 7970 is said to be the better overclocker.

What are your thoughts, good people? Any advice? Thanks!

Other specs: cpu Intel Core i5 3570k | hsf Noctua NH-D14 | mobo ASRock Z77 Extreme4 | ram Crucial BallistiX Sport 16GB Kit (2x8GB) DDR3 1600MHz | ssd Samsung 830 Series 256GB | hdd Seagate Barracuda 3TB | psu Zalman ZM850-HP | 5x HDD | Creative X-Fi Elite Pro (PCI) | nic: Intel Pro/1000CT PCIe | Cooler Master Stacker | lcd Eizo Foris FS2331 | lcd Eizo FlexScan S2401W | tv Sony Bravia KDL-52HX900

(The above was intended to be my sig, but alas...)​

Regarding micro-stuttering from SweClockers (see the charts comparing GTX 680 SLI with 7970 CF):

Article: http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/15381-geforce-gtx-690-varldens-snabbaste-grafikkort/18#pagehead
Google Translate: http://translate.google.com/transla...690-varldens-snabbaste-grafikkort/18#pagehead

Charts:

 

[cmdrdredd]

I like Nvidia drivers better.

 

[MrMuppet]

I like Nvidia drivers better.

Good for you, however what's relevant for this thread is obviously why you think the way you do as well as whether you think that alone makes the GTX 670 the better choice?

 

[cmdrdredd]

they work better with new games. Issues are fixed faster.

There's also a few threads about this around with all the info that will be repeated here.

Pick your resolution, pick your games, check the scores and decide.

 

[MrMuppet]

Resolution? 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 as per the OP (depends on whether I have my VA or TN hooked up, IQ or response time). It says no preference.

Games? Well, I haven't been able to game for a while (my ATI HD 3650 = ATI 2600 XT is simply too slow) so I've been out of the loop, but the few games I know or I'm pretty certain I'll play (BF3, Skyrim, and SC2) say GTX 670. But, 7970 may still be good enough for those, seems better all-round, and may even be able to play Crysis (which I haven't tried, yet).

Already checked the AnandTech scores at least and they were trading blows at stock, and I have a few more days to decide (before the rest of my parts arrive and I start unboxing stuff).

Now, upgrade-path is an interestintg question. Do the threads you mentioned deal with Kepler SLI vs Tahiti XT CF micro-stuttering?

If SweClockers' numbers are typical, GTX 670 SLI is finally a viable upgrade path (as I said), whereas 7970 CF is NOT.

edit:

snip

Does Adaptive VSync work well btw?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Micro-stuttering is there either way. Some people don't notice it, some do.

What you should do really is decide what games you want to play. Then take the benchmarks at your resolution and decide which card plays the games you're interested in at a higher framerate.

For example, GTX 670 is faster in Battlefield 3 and Skyrim but the 7970 would be faster in Dirt Showdown, Metro 2033, and Crysis.

Crysis can run on either card, but if you are considering SLI or X-Fire then I would suggest The 670 because from my reading SLI is working in more games and gets updates out more quickly for new titles.

 

[MrMuppet]

snip

Well, like i said in the OP, SweClockers findings were that Kepler SLI had as much (or as little) micro-stuttering as a single 7970. While dual 7970 in CF was much, much worse.

The percentages (relative deviations from local mean, lower is better) were:
GTX 680: 5%
HD 7970: 7%
GTX 690: 7%
GTX 680 SLI: 7%
HD 7970 CF: 85% [sic]

See the actual chart for the rest of the cards tested.

So, yeah, technically micro-stuttering is there even with single cards (albeit for other reasons than AFR), but it seems to be much worse on Tahiti XT than Kepler in dual card configs.

Do check the graphs, did they not show up properly in the OP? (I used IMG tags, but hotlinking may not be allowed, idk.)

Kepler and Tahiti XT micro-stuttering: http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/15381-geforce-gtx-690-varldens-snabbaste-grafikkort/18#pagehead

I don't plan on getting SLI atm, but having that option in the future won't hurt. Unless AMD shape up (better drivers perhaps?) CF is sadly not an option.

 

[DefRef]

I went from SLIed GTX 460 1GB cards to a single GTX 670 SC 2GB (rig in sig) and with the combo of the card and Adaptive Vsync, I don't have any of the stuttering that drove me nuts before and I was able to turn AA up full blast in BF3 with no loss in frame rate. I have all my settings maxed and other than a couple of instances on gigantic complicated maps like on the TV station of Sharqi Peninsula, I rarely dip under 50 fps and most of the time I'm pegged at 60 fps. I only noticed the bogging down because it was so out of the ordinary. It crushes every game I play and was able to make Metro 2033 playable at max settings and native 1920x1200 rez.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I don't consider under 30fps avg playable in Metro 2033, but my preference is for 60.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Personally speaking here, when I was playing between GeForce GTX 680 SLI and Radeon HD 7970 CrossFireX, I felt GTX 680 SLI delivered the better experience in every single game. I will make a bold and personal statement; I'd prefer to play games on GTX 680 SLI than I would with Radeon HD 7970 CrossFireX after using both. For me, GTX 680 SLI simply provides a smoother gameplay experience. If I were building a new machine with multi-card in mind, SLI would go in my machine instead of CrossFireX. In fact, I'd probably be looking for those special Galaxy 4GB 680 cards coming down the pike. After gaming on both platforms, GTX 680 SLI was giving me smoother performance at 5760x1200 compared to 7970 CFX. This doesn't apply to single-GPU video cards, only between SLI and CrossFireX.

http://hardocp.com/article/2012/03/28/nvidia_kepler_geforce_gtx_680_sli_video_card_review/9

 

[MrMuppet]

Metro 2033: I only recognize the name because I've seen it in benchmarks. Don't know if I'll play it, but @ 1920x1200 the 7970 seems to be the better card. Both cards did much better in AnandTech's tests (670 avg 54.5; 7970 avg 60.5), maybe AT tested an easier part.

http://hardocp.com/article/2012/03/28/nvidia_kepler_geforce_gtx_680_sli_video_card_review/9

Yes, well, the cheapest 670 4GB reference is 1000 SEK or 30% more expensive than my current 670 2GB reference was. If >2GB is needed (meaning 670 2GB SLI will never be enough), then I will probably cheap out with a single 7970 3GB. But a lot of people say 2GB will be enough for a long time at 1920x1200.

Anyway, it was probably that lack of micro stuttering they noticed. Much more even frame times leading to a higher perceived "smoothness".

 

[BallaTheFeared]

[H] was using 2gb cards, even at triple screen res and in tests where 7970 was getting higher fps the Nvidia setup was perceived to give smoother play back.

The author just stated he would seek 4gb cards, that's not what he was using.


For 1200p it's not even an issue, 470 SLI is more powerful than either of the cards you're looking at and vram is not an issue for me, 1.28GB is what I have. Perhaps BF3 might suffer from it requiring slightly lower AA settings, however that game was never very optimized and would not be a problem for a 2gb card at that res.

 

[Ferzerp]

As others have stated most of the reviews of the current gen cards really disliked the crossfire performance. Single card, it's a wash (buy whichever), multi-card, unless numerous reviewers (even ones who are typically more amd favorable in the graphics arena) are lying, I'd stay away from the 7xxx series if you need two cards.

 

[MrMuppet]

Ok, well, I probably won't need SLI right now, but eventually one must upgrade to play the latest. Then SLI is an option and may well be the best bang for the buck upgrade when prices have fallen, no?

Leaning towards the GTX 670 then, for that reason. Unfortunately, some other parts have been delayed (one shop's ETA was too optimistic), so if I want to try the single GTX 670 (before possibly returning it), I will only have a couple of days tops to do so. Decisions, hmm. The 7970 I'm not allowed to try before returning.

What would be best to play (and at what settings) to see if the GTX 670 is enough for now?