What is it with companies designing a great looking cooler, and putting it on a crap looking PCB. I want a nice, clean matte black PCB with a black backplate and a decent cooler.
This is the thing- I can see the PCB of my graphics card when I use my PC- So my Asus reference 6970 looks, ballin'.
Agree with TDK - I put a backplate on my 680 to improve the looks :D
This is a kick-ass card though... I did however look at it initially and, remembering the size of the reference card's PCB, thought to myself "looks like they've taken two 670s and stuck them end-to-end..." Would make sense if they've taken the stuff off the back and put it on the front though!
Originally Posted by Hustler Nice card, but overpriced (as all Gfx cards are these days)...£250 should be what the 670's cost.
A card that's 5-10% slower than a GTX 680 should be £150 cheaper? On my price/performance calcs, the 670 is easily the strongest card out right now (bar 7970s on super special offers).
The past cheap graphics card era is long over at least in the high end market, 670 680 will maintain a £300 - £350 price barrier with the 7970 in a similar thing they may see a reduction once the next gen is out but id expect similar high prices once its out.
Originally Posted by Hustler Nice card, but overpriced (as all Gfx cards are these days)...£250 should be what the 670's cost.
In all fairness, they cost a fair deal less in the US just because of conversion rates.
That said, I doubt there will ever be the anomalous HD48xx era ever again..
Yep, rip off Britain strikes again. Although my dad has been getting some great treatment from the NHS recently so I shouldn't complain...
Love this card though, similar speeds to the HD 7970 yet with physx which I have kinda missed on my current card. I'm looking to upgrade early next year sometime and it should be a huge step up.
p.s. I wish you still included Arma2 in the tables, and also a noise/volume chart somewhere, or something.
p.s. I wish you still included Arma2 in the tables, and also a noise/volume chart somewhere, or something.
Surely the noise/volume chart you request is pointless as it is down to too many variables... Such as chosen case, how many case fans, sound proofing used if any, location of case in room, ambient temp of room etc... I wouldn't want Bit-Tech to waste hours taking readings that in the end would not reveal any scientific provable results anyway.
I still do not understand why you are not using the latest drivers. There is a huge bump in performance in BF3 and nice 5-10% increases in other games for the 12.11 driver. That is the same as the difference between a 670 and a 680. It also makes your conclusion skewed because this card does not offer the same performance as the 7970 ghz edition for less money.
I'll not buy this generation of either AMD or Nvidia cards - over-priced for what they are and no real reason to move from my GTX570 right now (I play at 1920*1080 and only have room for one display).
That as an aside - this is just the sort of non-oem model I would like, good price with cooler and quieter operation, the ram on this model looks a bit special too.
the review is a fail. the performance conclusions are wrong. the GTX 680 loses to HD 7970 Ghz and GTX 670 loses to HD 7970 (925 Mhz) . Use the latest drivers. the 12.11 has been available for 3 weeks.
Originally Posted by SchizoFrog Surely the noise/volume chart you request is pointless as it is down to too many variables... Such as chosen case, how many case fans, sound proofing used if any, location of case in room, ambient temp of room etc... I wouldn't want Bit-Tech to waste hours taking readings that in the end would not reveal any scientific provable results anyway.
What? Most sites already do this, you use the same components and then record the volume with different graphics cards. Knowing how noisy a card is, is just as important to some people as the speed, and arguably, even more important than the temps.
Very disappointed that such obsolete drivers have been used, especially for AMD's cards. Looking at other reviews on the net, GTX670 has no chance at all to come anywhere near HD7970 Ghz with the latest drivers.
Originally Posted by BlueFalcon Nice cooler on that 670 card.
Very disappointed that such obsolete drivers have been used, especially for AMD's cards. Looking at other reviews on the net, GTX670 has no chance at all to come anywhere near HD7970 Ghz with the latest drivers.
This review is more or less irrelevant for measuring performance standing between NV and AMD cards at this point in time.
Aren't all 3 of those benchmarks comparing a 7970 GHZ against stock 670's though, not really comparable seeing as bits review is using a high clocked 670?
7970 ghz's seem to be about £50 dearer too.
I think older drivers may have been used so that you can compare new cards to cards in other bit-tech reviews, that's my take on it anyways.
The main point I was making is that with latest drivers, AMD cards gained 7-10% boost, and 20-25% in Frostbite 2.0 games (Battlefield 3, Medal of Honor Warfighter)
The relative improvements for each card with Catalyst 12.11 are:
HD 7750: +4%
HD 7770: +5%
HD 7850: +4%
HD 7870: +10%
HD 7950: +7%
HD 7970: +7%
HD 7970 GHz: +7%
If you look at the reviews I linked they all show that HD7970Ghz is now easily faster than GTX680, HD7970 beats GTX670 and HD7950 Boost / V2 beats GTX660Ti.
Also, TechPowerUp, has a performance summary that shows that HD7970 is faster than GTX670. If you look at Legion Hardware's write-up, HD7970 Ghz beat GTX680 in 10 of 14 games, tied in 2, lost in 2. HD7950 Boost beats GTX660Ti in 12 of 14 games, lost in 2. That's at stock speeds.
Legion Hardware also has an overclocking section where HD7950 OCed beats HD7970 Ghz and GTX680. That makes it a way better value than GTX670 in this review. Cards like MSI TwinFrozr III 7950 or Gigabyte Windforce 3x HD7950 or Sapphire Dual-X HD7950 overclock to 1100-1150mhz without much trouble and at 1100mhz, HD7950 is already as fast as a GTX680.
This is why it's questionable why GTX670 got such an amazing rating in this review:
1) Enthusiast consider overclocking, and that's what makes i5-2500k/i5-3570K stellar;
2) Even without overclocking, HD7970 is now nearly as fast as a GTX670, yet in this review it's slower -- because they used outdated drivers.
I think this is still a good choice of card for those looking to upgrade, price is reasonable, cooling and quiteness are in line with worth paying a little extra for and they suck up a lot less energy than comparitive Radeon cards.
All I say is that not many people play at 2560x1440 let alone 2560x1600 (less than 1% at guess), anything over 70fps is a waste (the human eye can't process above 60hz, unless you're opting for 3D?
1920x1080 or lower is where most people are at right now.
Whilst I take on board what BlueFalcon has said and backed up with some numbers, those stellar settings are for the people who believe in multi monitor set-ups or have £1200 30" monitors.
Comments 1 to 25 of 29
ReplyWhat is it with companies designing a great looking cooler, and putting it on a crap looking PCB. I want a nice, clean matte black PCB with a black backplate and a decent cooler.
This is the thing- I can see the PCB of my graphics card when I use my PC- So my Asus reference 6970 looks, ballin'.
Agree with TDK - I put a backplate on my 680 to improve the looks :D
This is a kick-ass card though... I did however look at it initially and, remembering the size of the reference card's PCB, thought to myself "looks like they've taken two 670s and stuck them end-to-end..." Would make sense if they've taken the stuff off the back and put it on the front though!
In all fairness, they cost a fair deal less in the US just because of conversion rates.
That said, I doubt there will ever be the anomalous HD48xx era ever again..
A card that's 5-10% slower than a GTX 680 should be £150 cheaper? On my price/performance calcs, the 670 is easily the strongest card out right now (bar 7970s on super special offers).
Well, obviously I meant such price reductions should be across the whole range, so as to keep the relative costs at the same level between cards.
My point was that ALL gfx cards are way overpriced these days..
Yep, rip off Britain strikes again. Although my dad has been getting some great treatment from the NHS recently so I shouldn't complain...
Love this card though, similar speeds to the HD 7970 yet with physx which I have kinda missed on my current card. I'm looking to upgrade early next year sometime and it should be a huge step up.
p.s. I wish you still included Arma2 in the tables, and also a noise/volume chart somewhere, or something.
Surely the noise/volume chart you request is pointless as it is down to too many variables... Such as chosen case, how many case fans, sound proofing used if any, location of case in room, ambient temp of room etc... I wouldn't want Bit-Tech to waste hours taking readings that in the end would not reveal any scientific provable results anyway.
That as an aside - this is just the sort of non-oem model I would like, good price with cooler and quieter operation, the ram on this model looks a bit special too.
Roll on GTX 770 or 780
massive jump from my 460.
I mainly chose the gigabyte card due to my 460 overclocking like a dream and still keeping very cool.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/11/12/fall_2012_gpu_driver_comparison_roundup/3
What? Most sites already do this, you use the same components and then record the volume with different graphics cards. Knowing how noisy a card is, is just as important to some people as the speed, and arguably, even more important than the temps.
Very disappointed that such obsolete drivers have been used, especially for AMD's cards. Looking at other reviews on the net, GTX670 has no chance at all to come anywhere near HD7970 Ghz with the latest drivers.
HardOCP (Cats 12.11)
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/11/12/fall_2012_gpu_driver_comparison_roundup
Legion Hardware (Cats 12.11)
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/his_7970_iceq_xsup2_ghz_edition_7950_iceq_xsup2_boost_clock,4.html
TechPowerUp (Cats 12.11)
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html
This review is more or less irrelevant for measuring performance standing between NV and AMD cards at this point in time.
Aren't all 3 of those benchmarks comparing a 7970 GHZ against stock 670's though, not really comparable seeing as bits review is using a high clocked 670?
7970 ghz's seem to be about £50 dearer too.
I think older drivers may have been used so that you can compare new cards to cards in other bit-tech reviews, that's my take on it anyways.
The main point I was making is that with latest drivers, AMD cards gained 7-10% boost, and 20-25% in Frostbite 2.0 games (Battlefield 3, Medal of Honor Warfighter)
The relative improvements for each card with Catalyst 12.11 are:
HD 7750: +4%
HD 7770: +5%
HD 7850: +4%
HD 7870: +10%
HD 7950: +7%
HD 7970: +7%
HD 7970 GHz: +7%
If you look at the reviews I linked they all show that HD7970Ghz is now easily faster than GTX680, HD7970 beats GTX670 and HD7950 Boost / V2 beats GTX660Ti.
Also, TechPowerUp, has a performance summary that shows that HD7970 is faster than GTX670. If you look at Legion Hardware's write-up, HD7970 Ghz beat GTX680 in 10 of 14 games, tied in 2, lost in 2. HD7950 Boost beats GTX660Ti in 12 of 14 games, lost in 2. That's at stock speeds.
Legion Hardware also has an overclocking section where HD7950 OCed beats HD7970 Ghz and GTX680. That makes it a way better value than GTX670 in this review. Cards like MSI TwinFrozr III 7950 or Gigabyte Windforce 3x HD7950 or Sapphire Dual-X HD7950 overclock to 1100-1150mhz without much trouble and at 1100mhz, HD7950 is already as fast as a GTX680.
This is why it's questionable why GTX670 got such an amazing rating in this review:
1) Enthusiast consider overclocking, and that's what makes i5-2500k/i5-3570K stellar;
2) Even without overclocking, HD7970 is now nearly as fast as a GTX670, yet in this review it's slower -- because they used outdated drivers.
I am not cherry-picking either. Other reviews now show even HD7970 beating GTX680 and HD7970 Ghz 10-15% faster than GTX680 at 2560x1600:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57413-amd-12-11-never-settle-driver-performance-17.html
I don't think this review tells the real story of current performance.
All I say is that not many people play at 2560x1440 let alone 2560x1600 (less than 1% at guess), anything over 70fps is a waste (the human eye can't process above 60hz, unless you're opting for 3D?
1920x1080 or lower is where most people are at right now.
Whilst I take on board what BlueFalcon has said and backed up with some numbers, those stellar settings are for the people who believe in multi monitor set-ups or have £1200 30" monitors.
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums