GTX680 vs Sapphire 7970 OC -- Performance and Noise Level matter

LightningHawk

Junior Member
May 5, 2010
5
0
0
The question: To go with a GTX680 (most likely EVGA), or a Sapphire 7970 OC and overclock it higher? I am not really looking to go with a watercooled solution, so will be air only (I have learned my lesson though and my next major build out will be all water cooled vs the CPU only sealed system I have now).

Currently I have a Sapphire 7950 OC that I have successfully boosted the overclock to a core clock of 1100Mhz with a Memory clock of 1450Mhz (5800Mhz effective). At those settings the best part about the card is how quiet it still is at load, Sapphire's cooler is outstanding on these cards. While I have been generally very happy with this card, I need to get a new card for updating my brothers gaming PC and due to our resolution differences while playing (he games at 1920x1200, while I am at 2560x1440) I figured this card would work great for him and I could step-up to one of the two in question to help the higher resolution I play at.

I had a EVGA Superclocked GTX580 before the 7950 and while the performance was good the noise at load really started to bother me while gaming, hence after Anand's review of the Sapphire 7950 OC I was impressed by the review numbers for noise and made the switch.

I have crossed the numbers between the 680 and 7970, and I know the 680 does beat it, and my a decent margin on a chunk of games, but I am worried that getting a new 680 is going to turn into another noise issue for me seeing as the current noise levels seem to match very close to the 580. With the luck in OC'ing the 7950, I am tempted to get the 7970 OC and try to clock it even higher. I suppose the other options also include waiting a little bit to see if the 7970 Toxic (or VaporX) comes out for even higher performance, or to see if a nice aftermarket cooler version of the 680 is released, but I have about 2 weeks before I have to make the purchase.

Generally I am playing mainly Blizzard games (D3 Beta, SC2, not so much WoW, along with LoL, with some shorter stints in Skyrim and/or the FPS of the month). I am generally a person that wants to max all visual settings possible with the extras (AA, AF, etc) and do not want to frames to drop or get stuttering in games. Believe it or not D3 can sometimes stutter before I OC'ed my current card with all settings maxed (and having a darker filter applied to the game).

Am I a bit nuts to go for the 7970 OC, and if not would waiting a couple of weeks to see if the Toxic/VaporX version is released be best? (I am just so spoiled now with Sapphire's DualX coolers, they really are great.) There have to be others that are still annoyed with how noisy some of these video cards can get. Again, thanks for any input or advise, I apologize for the long post.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
If you're going to O/C them there's not an appreciable difference performance wise, depending on games played, of course. and assuming both cards O/C well. If you were, for example, to end up with dud O/C'ers then the 680 would be the better performing card. I personally would want to go with one of the custom cooled cards, like a Sapphire, rather than a reference design from either company. The reference nVidia cooler is quieter, but I'm not so convinced about the VRM quality of reference nVidia cards. (Not trying to offend any of the nVidia faithful, just my own opinion.)

Just talking of your brother's build, he might be just fine with a 7870. You wouldn't get a new card that way though. ;)
 

Dark Shroud

Golden Member
Mar 26, 2010
1,576
1
0
Sapphire has Toxic & Atomic versions coming down the line. Those are what you'll want for OC'ing.

And don't be so quick to say the 680 beats it by a margin. It's 15% at best and OCing AMD cards takes away the advantage. On top of that Auto-tune will start down clocking the card once it reaches 70 degrees.

The cards are pretty much on par.
 

aaksheytalwar

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2012
3,389
0
76
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2234512

Performance wise 7970 would be a bit faster in many games but not enough to feel the difference. That is only if it is overclocked to 1200 though compared to a 680 OC also at 1200.

Practically it is a tie. However, the 680 is cheaper and that is in its favor.

As far as noise is concerned, 680 beats the 7970 reference fair and square. And I don't think that most 7970 custom are that quiet either, compared to the reference 680 that is.
If noise is an issue the best would be to go Arctic Xtreme with 7970 and overclock high. Otherwise just get a 680 which is recommended if it is significantly cheaper.
 

chloros

Member
Feb 1, 2011
95
0
0
If anyone had the choice between the 2.....680 would be chosen. If you cant wait for stock on the 680 then get a 7970.
 

aaksheytalwar

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2012
3,389
0
76
Yes, I second that. You cant go wrong with either card. However, if there are no specific games you play that are better on the 7970, and especially if you plan to run at stock, just go with 680. But if it isn't in stock, just buy a 7970 and overclock :)
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
If anyone had the choice between the 2.....680 would be chosen. If you cant wait for stock on the 680 then get a 7970.

It's not quite that cut and dry, but I'll grant you that the 680 is a better choice for a majority of buyers. The more robust power stages, extra gig of RAM, better compute architecture, and dual bios are in favor of the 7970 offering more flexibility and long term usefulness.
 

chloros

Member
Feb 1, 2011
95
0
0
It's not quite that cut and dry, but I'll grant you that the 680 is a better choice for a majority of buyers. The more robust power stages, extra gig of RAM, better compute architecture, and dual bios are in favor of the 7970 offering more flexibility and long term usefulness.

lol....unless you are those who invested and bought into bitcoining.....680 would be the choice. Drop the prices on the 7970 then its a different story.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
lol....unless you are those who invested and bought into bitcoining.....680 would be the choice. Drop the prices on the 7970 then its a different story.

I didn't even think about bitcoin mining. Add that to my list too. ;)
 

Borealis7

Platinum Member
Oct 19, 2006
2,901
205
106
but an overclocked 7970 consumes a lot of juice. more than the stock 680 which already consumes less than a stock 7970.
 

lavaheadache

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2005
6,893
14
81
in what scenarios are people seeing super high power consumption? I can't replicate it.

My rig

7970 @ 1125
gtx285 for physx
2 ssd
1 hdd
soundblaster titanium
2600k @ 4.4
6gb ram
5 case fans

Most I have seen at load is 465w this is peak number with mostly 430ish watts.

I don't run furmark so that could be the culprit for really high power consumtion. Real world usuage, I really don't see what the fuss is about. At idle my rig barely breaks 135w.

-----


ok, so before I even posted this message I went ahead and installed furmark and ran that along with fluidmark at the same time and got a peak load of 512 watts. That is completely unrealistic situation but I suppose it could happen very very rarely.

still, I stand behind my original statement. Power consumtion between these 2 cards isn't really a big concern. 7970 is packed full of compute stuff and certainly "wastes" watts because of it. Not making excuses but just thought I would point it out.
 

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,209
50
91
I dont know where 3DVagabond got the idea that 680s may have low quality VRMs.
Just whimsy? Just throwing it out there as a possibility?
Please elaborate on your fears about this, 3D.
 

Don Karnage

Platinum Member
Oct 11, 2011
2,865
0
0
I dont know where 3DVagabond got the idea that 680s may have low quality VRMs.
Just whimsy? Just throwing it out there as a possibility?
Please elaborate on your fears about this, 3D.

Was thinking the same thing. Please elaborate 3D
 

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,209
50
91
in what scenarios are people seeing super high power consumption? I can't replicate it.

My rig

7970 @ 1125
gtx285 for physx
2 ssd
1 hdd
soundblaster titanium
2600k @ 4.4
6gb ram
5 case fans

Most I have seen at load is 465w this is peak number with mostly 430ish watts.

I don't run furmark so that could be the culprit for really high power consumtion. Real world usuage, I really don't see what the fuss is about. At idle my rig barely breaks 135w.

-----


ok, so before I even posted this message I went ahead and installed furmark and ran that along with fluidmark at the same time and got a peak load of 512 watts. That is completely unrealistic situation but I suppose it could happen very very rarely.
I
still, I stand behind my original statement. Power consumtion between these 2 cards isn't really a big concern. 7970 is packed full of compute stuff and certainly "wastes" watts because of it. Not making excuses but just thought I would point it out.
It's possible that he meant that compared to gtx680 when overclocking , the
7970s power consumption goes up more per mhz than it does on the 680.
It could be the extra ~50mm^2, the extra 128 bits of memory bandwidth and an extra gigabyte of memory to feed. Perhaps when we see 4GB 680s the power consumption gap may close especially when o/c'd.
 

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
If one has been pleased in the past about their vendor or AIB choice, well, it may be wise to see what they can do. If build quality, improved thermals and acoustics are important, some AIB's offer this as welcomed choice.

Sometimes patience may be wise to buy what one really desires instead of being rushed into something they may not and suffer some buyers' remorse.

If one has been impressed by Sapphire and their Toxic/VaporX differentiation, may indeed wise to wait a short time to see what they can do with the HD 7970.
 
Last edited:

ensign_lee

Senior member
Feb 9, 2011
401
0
0
I assume you're talking about the Sapphire Dual-X cards. My god, those things are *so* quiet. I had two off them crossfired and even if I cranked the fan u on them to 100%, they were less audible together than my 5870 was by itself. And not a little quieter, like 2-3x quieter.

If quiet-ness is your primary concern, you won't go wrong with those sapphire Dual-X 7970s
 

aaksheytalwar

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2012
3,389
0
76
IMO power consumption should not be an issue, just get a quality 1000+ watts and forget about power worries regardless of your system unless you have a tri gpu beast. Power supplies re very cheap in the states anyway. A quality 1000w costs sub $200 and will last 2-3 years and sell for $50-75 after that.
 

LightningHawk

Junior Member
May 5, 2010
5
0
0
Thanks all for the comments and input, glad to see that for the most part both cards would end up being strong performers, so I least I know that I am not completely nuts :D...

IMO power consumption should not be an issue, just get a quality 1000+ watts and forget about power worries regardless of your system unless you have a tri gpu beast. Power supplies re very cheap in the states anyway. A quality 1000w costs sub $200 and will last 2-3 years and sell for $50-75 after that.

I agree with the power issue, I know that a smaller power draw would also equal lower electric bills, but at this point I am not too worried about that, plus I am running a 1000W Enermax power supply with a ton of headroom so no worries there.


Bella, thanks for the link, I did not see that video yet.

I personally would want to go with one of the custom cooled cards, like a Sapphire, rather than a reference design from either company.

I think that this is the option that I am strongly headed down, since I have a few more weeks, I think I might try and hold off a little and keep my fingers crossed that Sapphire will get either the Toxic or Atomic versions out soon.

I assume you're talking about the Sapphire Dual-X cards. My god, those things are *so* quiet. I had two off them crossfired and even if I cranked the fan u on them to 100%, they were less audible together than my 5870 was by itself. And not a little quieter, like 2-3x quieter.

If quiet-ness is your primary concern, you won't go wrong with those sapphire Dual-X 7970s

I know right :biggrin:

If there is any more feedback, please continue to post as it is always nice to have more information.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
but an overclocked 7970 consumes a lot of juice. more than the stock 680 which already consumes less than a stock 7970.


The 7970 is pretty tame until I push voltage. It's also very acceptable and fairly quiet at 1125MHz. But, as soon as I approach 1.3v and 1200Mhz, well... :( It is quite loud. That is actually what is stopping me from overclocking further.

And at the resolution the OP is gaming at, I would take the 3GB at x performance over the 2GB at x + 10-15% performance (when comparing these two cards) at stock clocks. The OP is obviously comfortable with overclocking his parts.

If anyone is really worried about the small (to me) difference in power, run bitcoin to offset it... just a thought.
 
Last edited:

BallaTheFeared

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2010
8,115
0
71
Nvidia has superior IQ in D3 and SC2, 2GB hasn't held back SLI at 5760x1200 which is a higher resolution than you're running so imo, 2GB vs 3GB is a non factor.
 

aaksheytalwar

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2012
3,389
0
76
If you plan to use for at most a year then yes 2gb isn't an issue, but if you plan to use it for 2-3 years then 2gb may not cut it just like anything less than 1.25 gb is a little less today and anything less than 1.5gb isn't comfortable. And 768mb is pure obsolete
 

Elfear

Diamond Member
May 30, 2004
7,147
770
126
Nvidia has superior IQ in D3 and SC2, 2GB hasn't held back SLI at 5760x1200 which is a higher resolution than you're running so imo, 2GB vs 3GB is a non factor.

Hmmm. OP said "I am generally a person that wants to max all visual settings possible with the extras (AA, AF, etc) and do not want to frames to drop or get stuttering in games."

Have you seen any user reviews of the 680 running AA maxed out and a bunch of HD texture mods at 2560x1440 (or 1600p)? OP did say he plays Skyrim and that game can use a lot of vram. I see 2.4GB used in Afterburner so I'm not sure I'd be recommending a 2GB card without knowing if the 680 can handle lots of AA and lots of HD textures.

The Blizzard games will be fine with 2GB but I have my doubts about Skyrim or other moddable games.