• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

My 7770 Experience

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sleeping Dogs Benchmark

2500k @ 4.5GHz, MSI 7770 @ 1200/1250(Stock 1000/1125) at 1366x768 with High Res Texture Pack Installed

High Preset
highu.png



Extreme Preset
xtremei.png
 
Last edited:
Also to note above...

I am running the game currently on the Extreme Preset with High Res Texture Pack, but with the 3 shadow settings on Normal rather than High. Textures and Filtering remain at Extreme. World Density set to Extreme.

60822289.png
 
Last edited:
Rezist said:
I was mostly reffering to getting dimmer over time at the same settings.
Click to expand...

I am sure it's decreased statistically but I can't notice it. If there was serious degradation, the picture quality would look awful but it looks like any 2012 TV in the store to me. I never took a picture of the image 5 years ago.

Maybe you can snap a picture of theirs and I'll see how it compares to mine.

adam_the_giant said:
Also to note above...

I am running the game currently on the Extreme Preset with High Res Texture Pack, but with the 3 shadow settings on Normal rather than High. Textures and Filtering remain at Extreme. World Density set to Extreme.

Getting a consistent 36-37 FPS. Very playable at 768p at Near max settings.
Click to expand...

That's crazy too because Extreme setting enables SSAA similar to Witcher 2!
 
i3-2100 + MSI HD7770 (R7770-PMD1GD5)
Skyrim - 1920X1080 on ultra settings played very smooth but there was an occasional micropause.
 
jaydee said:
I'm not suprised, because overall, you are using more expensive hardware now. Your greater expense just shifted from high cost GPU/low cost monitor to a low cost GPU/high cost monitor.
Click to expand...

A television can be enjoyed in different manners and in a broader scope than a 20"-24" Computer monitor. Try sitting on a couch and watching a movie on a small monitor... it sucks.
 
1366 x 768 is a cakewalk for a 7770 compared to 1080p, but you must consider the more consolized nature of PC gaming these days, with exceptions like Metro 2033, BF3, Crysis 2 and whatnot, but diminishing returns come into play. DX11 features are helping via tessellation, but the exponential amounts of horsepower needed to run these features at 1080p, and even 720p in some cases is kind of damning to users in the first place.

I will say that I do value higher FPS,resolution and AA modes before I value "expanded graphics" (textures, geometry) in comparison to console games. Especially in multiplayer, resolution can give you an edge in picking out those targets from very far away. Higher FPS gives you smoother and quicker reaction and movement. AA helps to kill the jaggies and crawling.

When you consider what an Xbox 360's Xenos does with only 240 GFLOPS, 8 GTexels and 4 GPixels of processing capability, it's a bit jarring. However, a Radeon 7770 at only $100 and at this very late stage in this very long console cycle really makes the PC shine in comparison, considering it's a good 5x more capable in overall processing power. Coupled even to a modest CPU like an i3, fast 8 GB of RAM, and a 1080p monitor, BF3 will look and play much better than either the 360 or PS3 version and you'll still be able to get quite a bit of the expanded eye candy.

i3-2100 + 7770 + 8 GB DDR3-1866 would make one hell of a cheap, fast and portable LAN rig.
 
Last edited:
NUSNA_Moebius said:
i3-2100 + 7770 + 8 GB DDR3-1866 would make one hell of a cheap, fast and portable LAN rig.
Click to expand...

Running i3-2120, 7770 w/ 8GB DDR3 @ 1080p. I do need to trim down settings from Ultra or Very High to High. That said, it has been pleasant. I do miss PhysX though. As a result, I'm interested in seeing what Nvidia can bring to the table between $100-$200. I'll have to wait until September, at the earliest. My 7770 was purchased for $111. It's hard to beat that.
 
Last edited:
BlockheadBrown said:
Running i3-2120, 7770 w/ 8GB DDR3 @ 1080p. I do need to trim down settings from Ultra or Very High to High. That said, it has been pleasant. I do miss PhysX though. As a result, I'm interested in seeing what Nvidia can bring to the table between $100-$200. I'll have to wait until September, at the earliest. My 7770 was purchased for $111. It's hard to beat that.
Click to expand...

Changing GPU's for physx only is kind of a waste. Not sure what you miss, but to each there own!
 
Got a 7770 with factory OC to 1100 and I'm extremely pleased with it for a backup box. Diablo 3 looks and plays fantastic at 16x10 and CIV 5 plays as well as my OC 7950 when I turn a few of the extras off. I can't really tell the difference between the two they run so smooth on Civ 5. My brother was so impressed he ran off with that computer to college.

The 7770 won't take an overclock over 1125. Did you guys give yours extra voltage to hit 1200?
 
blastingcap said:
You reach the point of diminishing returns with most things in life, whether it's $10 vs $40 for a hamburger, or $20k vs $200k for a car, or $110 vs $550 for a video card.

Same for graphics settings... those last few check boxes for DoF or whatever add very little to image quality but sink your framerates. If you are willing to give up those last few checkboxes, you can often make do with much weaker hardware.

I have recently gamed on a 7770 with barely any oc and it's about the same as my old 6850. Quite capable and sips power. Got mine as an open box for under $100.
Click to expand...

So true.

A lot of these new graphics features have very little return on IQ for a lot of GPU grunt.

I was actually gaming fine on my OC 5850, it was chewing through BF3 1080p on high/ultra, all i had to do was turn off MSAA (which makes little difference anyway).

But upgrade itch needs scratchin'.
 
Silverforce11 said:
So true. A lot of these new graphics features have very little return on IQ for a lot of GPU grunt.
Click to expand...

Ya, that's the interesting part. Take a game like Crysis Warhead that looks great and gets almost 60 fps on a 7970 GE:

48450.png


Now compare the graphics of Crysis Warhead to many game releases on the PC in the last 2-3 years, and you'd think they'd be running at 150-200 fps based on their average graphics. 😀

A game like Sleeping Dogs doesn't even look amazing and yet doesn't run well on GTX680/7970:
HKShip_2012_08_21_16_37_13_096.jpg

max1.jpg


I guess with these style games like Saints Row the Third, GTA and Sleeping Dogs, it takes a lot of GPU power to render big cities/city blocks, etc.

sd%201920%20fxaa.png


41 fps on a $600 GTX680 ..... what are these developers adding that's worth such a massive performance hit? I am just not seeing it. Instead of worrying about SSAA, they should be adding more complex physics, higher resolution textures and more realistic character and facial animations.
09_dogs.png
 
Last edited:
BlockheadBrown said:
Running i3-2120, 7770 w/ 8GB DDR3 @ 1080p. I do need to trim down settings from Ultra or Very High to High. That said, it has been pleasant. I do miss PhysX though. As a result, I'm interested in seeing what Nvidia can bring to the table between $100-$200. I'll have to wait until September, at the earliest. My 7770 was purchased for $111. It's hard to beat that.
Click to expand...

Even more so, I'd like to build a mini-ITX or slim-ITX/mATX system, as HIS and Sapphire have low profile 7750s on the way, but I really wish for a low profile 7770 (though tough luck since it needs external power). Also there are hardly any laptops out their with medium end Cape Verde, and they are pricey.
 
Lots of negative reviews on the ASUS 7770. Blue screen is prevalent. Something about drivers and flash.
 
HydroSqueegee said:
hmmmmm... since this is what i ordered, i'll see how it goes. especially since its an open box. im good with a refund if it comes to that though.
Click to expand...

BlockheadBrown said:
I haven't had any issues with the one I have, other than it can't go much past the stock OC of 1100.
Click to expand...

It could have just been bad luck with early drivers among those who got the card when released.
Hopefully its all sorted out now
 
adam_the_giant said:
I gotta stop making these threads, and checking local adds, I have a GPU problem clearly.

Just picked up a 5870 with a Twin Turbo II installed on it for $145.00 locally.

Thought it was too good of a deal to pass up, and although I was MORE than happy with the 7770, I have played a couple games at 1366x768 that couldn't be fully maxed, which annoyed me just a smudge 🙂. Overall, great card though!

Now, I'm sticking with this one for a while. I promise 🙂 should be more than capable at satisfying my 768p needs on a budget.

captureefp.png
Click to expand...

Wow that Twinturbo 2 looks funny on that card.
 
Rezist said:
Edit about plasma's those with panasonic vierra plasmas do you notice them getting dimmer? My Parents is now 5 years old and it's going dim pretty badly.
Click to expand...

All TVs (well, maybe not CRTs) get dimmer over time. If you look at a TV's half life, that's how many hours it has to run before getting to half its original brightness (usually 25+ years of usage). If it loses 50% of brightness in 25 years, then it would lose roughly 10% brightness every 5 years.

Basically, a TV should be calibrated every few years to compensate for brightness loss. That goes for plasmas and LCDs. I'm not sure about projectors and projection TVs, but I think they're supposed to be calibrated with every bulb replacement since no two bulbs are identical.

I have a ~5yo Pioneer 5080 plasma. It's 768p like the OP's, and it just blows away every other TV I've seen. I don't play PC games on it, but I play PS3 games and have my HTPC connected to it. Both look great. I might have to pick up a 7750 as my next HTPC card so that I can play games on it. I have a 150W Pico PSU, so I think the 7750 is the most it could handle (if that).

I have noticed lately that my TV is darker than when I first got it, so I need to run the calibration again.
 
I don't remotely have the money for a new tv these days, but I saw a 720p 50" plasma at sams club for about $450, which is certainly far more accessible than the $3000 you paid years ago. Maybe someday 🙂 The only thing I may be put off of from Plasma is they always look so dim compared to everything else in the store. Maybe it's substandard retail lighting/settings.
 
Sophitia said:
I don't remotely have the money for a new tv these days, but I saw a 720p 50" plasma at sams club for about $450, which is certainly far more accessible than the $3000 you paid years ago. Maybe someday 🙂 The only thing I may be put off of from Plasma is they always look so dim compared to everything else in the store. Maybe it's substandard retail lighting/settings.
Click to expand...

Plasma's are meant for darker rooms.

Turn the lights out, and then see how the Plasma looks.


Not turning this into a Plasma vs LCD/LED thread, but I also own 2 other 1080p TVs, a 32" LCD 1080p LG and a LG 42" 1080p 120Hz LED.

My Plasma, which is still my main TV, looks better than my other 2 TVs. Color reproduction is much better, gaming feels smoother, motion looks smoother, etc. I'm a Plasma fan, my next TV will be Plasma again since OLED is looking to be years away before its affordable. Having a dark room/little glare is key with Plasmas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top