Nvidia = AMD

[SolMiester]

Most 7850s are 900mhz+ out of the box anyway.

And?

 

[The Alias]

And?

meaning they're already 10% faster

 

[3DVagabond]

You cant rate cards to the competitor card with OC, as it isnt a guarantee, so you have to go with out of the box clocks....

Most 7850s are 900mhz+ out of the box anyway.

Both of these statements are correct.

There are basic guidelines comparing reference to reference, but with nVidia's boost you even have to look at what the review cards boosted to. My advice is once you've narrowed it down to a price range you need to look at the offer (rebates, game bundles, shipping, etc.), overall performance, performance in games you play, features and how they'll effect the games you play and apps you use, power requirements and compatibility with your equipment (is your PSU adequate? Monitor connectivity and if you'll need any adapters?).

If you are going to O/C, then that changes the dynamic. Pretty dramatically in some cases. The 7850 and 6950 at stock clocks will not only O/C by a lot, but they have very good scaling with that O/C. They will easily reach and surpass the next model up in the lineups. 670's easily pass stock 680's. Etc...

OP, if you have a model(s) you are interested in, tell us. You will get plenty of advise on what else might be a better value for the same/similar dollars. Give us the rest of your system specs, as well.

 

[NIGELG]

+/- a few percent

690 = No equal
Titan = No equal
680 = 7970 Ghz
670 = 7970
660Ti = 7950 boost
660 = 7870
650 Boost = 7850

No.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

No.

Yes!

The only thing I'd probably change is 7950 = 660 Ti and nothing from Nvidia really competes directly with the 7950 boost.

It's a tough one because the 670 is closer to the 7970 than it is the 7950 boost.

Seems my list matches up quite well with the price stack as well :hmm:

 

[blastingcap]

Why bother trying to do this yourself, just borrow Tom's guide.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

 

[Eureka]

Why bother trying to do this yourself, just borrow Tom's guide.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

I'm surprised it took to the second page to see this link.

It's a bit rough but it's good enough for a first glance. There's a lot of arguing over a few percentages (and yes 10% is more or less unnoticeable once you start playing)...

 

[Cloudfire777]

Although those listings looks OK,

Tomshardware is the most biased unprofessional reviewer site out there. I usually just skim through their reviews since they are filled with the reviewers own opinions and they rarely just post the data and let it speak for itself.

I don`t trust them for a second

 

[SolMiester]

Actually, I think Toms is a fair assessment of the state of play

 

[Cloudfire777]

Actually, I think Toms is a fair assessment of the state of play

I specifically remember their GTX Titan review and their conclusion. Their reviews is filled with these opinions. They do not reflect on other scenarios, like you have no room for smaller build, that you don`t like SLI or CF etc. :\

The Titan isn’t worth $600 more than a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition

Way to be subjective Tomshardware. Really nice

Here is a thread at overclock that discuss both their articles and the way they treat the forum members.
http://www.overclock.net/t/988183/why-not-to-trust-tomshardware-for-psus-at-least

 

[bystander36]

I specifically remember their GTX Titan review and their conclusion. Their reviews is filled with these opinions. They do not reflect on other scenarios, like you have no room for smaller build, that you don`t like SLI or CF etc. :\


Way to be subjective Tomshardware. Really nice

Here is a thread at overclock that discuss both their articles and the way they treat the forum members.
http://www.overclock.net/t/988183/why-not-to-trust-tomshardware-for-psus-at-least

Since on screen data, especially these FPS only comparisons, do not reflect the actual game play experience, some personal experience is needed to be added. While they don't always think of every scenario, they did give their opinion.

Those in special case scenarios should know they are a special case and to look for something more for them. Most sites add some subjective thoughts. Some thought the Titan was good in some situations, others did not.

Then there are metrics that are hard to quantify. Is it better to have lower latency with lower FPS, which also means more time between input, or higher FPS, higher latency, but more points of input? It is hard to judge that one on numbers alone. Some experience may be needed to come out with an answer.

 

[Cloudfire777]

That is exactly my point. Heat, absolutely straight line (smooth) when measuring latency (compared to CF with horrible latency), small build, great GPGPU performance, etc etc. There is a lot to consider.

There are even people that ditched their GTX 690 because of micro stuttering. People who much rather wanted single GPU instead of SLI/CF who bought Titan. And there are people who rather want the extra FPS from 7970 CF and doesn`t care about the drivers. People are different and have different opinions.

And when they burst out:

"Titan isn`t worth it"

A reviewer should try to stay as objective as he can. Post the data you gathered from your testing and let it speak for itself. Look at Anandtech and their summary. Its much more thoroughly and they cover all bases, and they do not tell people that a GPU isn`t worth it.

I lost whatever respect I had left for them. I`ve seen Tomshardware do sloppy reviews many times before. Absolutely horrible reviewer site

 

[BallaTheFeared]

lol respect for toms, the good folks who brought us average frame latency?

 

[bystander36]

That is exactly my point. Heat, absolutely straight line (smooth) when measuring latency (compared to CF with horrible latency), small build, great GPGPU performance, etc etc. There is a lot to consider and when they just burst out

There are even people that ditched their GTX 690 because of micro stuttering. People who much rather wanted single GPU instead of SLI/CF who bought Titan. And there are people who rather want the extra FPS from 7970 CF and doesn`t care about the drivers. People are different and have different opinions.

And when they burst out:

"Titan isn`t worth it"

A reviewer should try to stay as objective as he can. Post the data you gathered from your testing and let them speak. Look at Anandtech and their summary. Its much more thoroughly and they cover all bases, and they do not tell people that a GPU isn`t worth it.

I lost whatever respect I had left for them. I`ve seen Tomshardware do sloppy reviews many times before. Absolutely horrible reviewer site

The thing is, there is a group of people, that you see come to the forums, that want that. They want a direct answer, and do not want to come up with an opinion themselves. They give a direct opinion for those people.

 

[Cloudfire777]

The thing is, there is a group of people, that you see come to the forums, that want that. They want a direct answer, and do not want to come up with an opinion themselves. They give a direct opinion for those people.

There is no direct answer.

That was my whole point

lol respect for toms, the good folks who brought us average frame latency?

Nooo, seriously? That doesn`t help at all

 

[bystander36]

There is no direct answer.

That was my whole point

There is no direct fact, but an opinion doesn't have to be a fact. And seriously, there are a lot of people around that require someone to tell them, "This is not for you!"

And let's be honest, unless you know you are in a special case situation, the Titan is not likely for you.

 

[Cloudfire777]

There is no direct fact, but an opinion doesn't have to be a fact. And seriously, there are a lot of people around that require someone to tell them, "This is not for you!"

And let's be honest, unless you know you are in a special case situation, the Titan is not likely for you.

There are many people who totally disagree with both you and Tomshardware here. Have a look at overclock forum and read what setup they had before they bought a Titan...

And reviewers are allowed to have opinions, but not something that totally discard a GPU. In which case Tomshardware made themselves look absolutely ridiculous since the market totally disagree with them. Either Toms is biased or they don`t know what they are talking about. In my opinions its both.

 

[Plimogz]

You cant rate cards to the competitor card with OC, as it isnt a guarantee, so you have to go with out of the box clocks....

I realize that, sort of... but

First off, I wasn't being snarky -- though I can see where the tone of my response was ambiguous -- from your reply I take it that you thought I was being so and meant that overclocked values should be taken as reference. Not so.

I was as taken aback by Balla's comparison as aaksheytalwar, but upon looking at the proffered benchmarks came to see the validity in it. Hence the "apparently" -- which can come across as snarky, no doubt.

On the other hand, however, I do have to take some issue with your:

You cant rate cards to the competitor card with OC, as it isnt a guarantee, so you have to go with out of the box clocks....

Insofar that I purchased my current cards based on good word-of-mouth and they certainly haven't disappointed: Case in point, many regular 7950 reviews at the time when I bought mine benchmarked 800MHz cards, so I often had to extrapolate for the 880MHz stock on the TF3s, but of course that was peanuts compared to the 1200MHz I can hit on both my cards when gaming. And you have to remember that I bought these cards sight unseen with the assumption that they would hit some nice clocks indeed. So the legends where, if not actually guarantied, at least justified.

Thus I just don't think it wise to go around ignoring the possibility of 50% core overclocks when making a recommendation. At least, not if the prospective owner is the kind of person who will take the time to extract the untapped potential of their card.

And the 7850 has been known to be a rather above average overclocker as well. So I don't quite see why this shouldn't factor into a person's choice; or into recommendations, for that matter.

 

[bystander36]

There are many people who totally disagree with both you and Tomshardware here. Have a look at overclock forum and read what setup they had before they bought a Titan...

And reviewers are allowed to have opinions, but not something that totally discard a GPU. In which case Tomshardware made themselves look absolutely ridiculous since the market totally disagree with them. Either Toms is biased or they don`t know what they are talking about. In my opinions its both.

No review will agree with everyone.

Tomshardware tends to do their reviews with the average gamer in mind.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I'm willing to bet most people look at the FPS graphs and charts, then go to the conclusion to see if it is worth the price. They really do want someone to tell them "It is worth the extra money over card X" or "It's simply not worth X amount of dollars more than brand Y".

 

[Lonbjerg]

I'm surprised it took to the second page to see this link.

It's a bit rough but it's good enough for a first glance. There's a lot of arguing over a few percentages (and yes 10% is more or less unnoticeable once you start playing)...

Does that ranking include runt frames...sure dosn't look like it.

 

[bystander36]

Does that ranking include runt frames...sure dosn't look like it.

Not a chance, but in all but the dual-GPU cards, it doesn't apply to most.

Really, there are a lot of things to consider, but for raw power, most people have it close. You'll have to revisit the order for crossfire/sli purchases.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Not a chance, but in all but the dual-GPU cards, it doesn't apply to most.

Really, there are a lot of things to consider, but for raw power, most people have it close. You'll have to revisit the order for crossfire/sli purchases.

You mean AMD's dual GPU solutions needs to be ranked lower right?

 

[Eureka]

Insofar that I purchased my current cards based on good word-of-mouth and they certainly haven't disappointed: Case in point, many regular 7950 reviews at the time when I bought mine benchmarked 800MHz cards, so I often had to extrapolate for the 880MHz stock on the TF3s, but of course that was peanuts compared to the 1200MHz I can hit on both my cards when gaming. And you have to remember that I bought these cards sight unseen with the assumption that they would hit some nice clocks indeed. So the legends where, if not actually guarantied, at least justified.

Thus I just don't think it wise to go around ignoring the possibility of 50% core overclocks when making a recommendation. At least, not if the prospective owner is the kind of person who will take the time to extract the untapped potential of their card.

And the 7850 has been known to be a rather above average overclocker as well. So I don't quite see why this shouldn't factor into a person's choice; or into recommendations, for that matter.

I've had both a 7950 and a 7970 that was just an average overclock. Both cards seemed to have topped out around 1100-1150 MHz. No 1200 MHz cake here.

Are we also ignoring how 670s can hit 150+ MHz boosts?

Overclock is far too individualized. Some OC higher than others. You can make note of it, but it shouldn't come in a ranking.


Also, what the hell is everyone arguing over? Toms Hardware's list is a guide, it doesn't even provide solid numbers. I don't think anyone can argue that a 690, 7990, or Titan is slower than a 7970 or a 680. Stop arguing over 1 or 2 cards, it's completely derailed the thread.

 

[willomz]

Tom's thinking that the 660 Ti = 7870 is a joke.

They've proved they aren't equal with their article comparing the two cards in cf/sli.

Even in games where AMD has an advantage like Hitman/Tomb Raider the 660 Ti's blow the 7870s away.

In other titles the 660 Ti can equal even a 7970GE.
http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page4.html

It's pretty clear that the 7950 is the closest AMD card to the 660 Ti. Whether it is closer to the old 7950 or the Boost version is the only question.