Which card is better?

Austyn

Hey, was not sure where to place this topic so i have dumped it here. Basically my old man wants a new GFX card for under the £200 mark. Being a longtime customer of Overclockers, we will be using them again. However i have not been "intouch" with the recent GFX advancements and basicaly, in short i want to know which of these cards give the biggest BANG for their buck.

In the red corner we have:
Asus GeForce GTX 560Ti DirectCU II TOP 1024MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card **Supplied with Battlefield 3 PC Game** [ENGTX560 TI DC2 TOP/G/2DI/1GD5]

Quote:

Features:-
- Core Clock: 900MHz
- Memory: 1024MB GDDR5
- Memory Clock: 4200MHz (Effective)
- Memory Interface: 256-Bit
- Processing Cores: 384
- Shader Clock: 1800MHz
- Bus Type: PCI-Express 2.0
- Display Connectors: 2x Dual-Link DVI-I & 1x HDMI 1.4a (Includes HDMI & VGA Adapters)
- SLI Ready
- HDCP Capable
- DirectX 11 Support
- OpenGL 4.0 Support
- PhysX Enabled
- CUDA Enabled
- 3D Vision Enabled
- NVIDIA Surround Enabled
- Warranty: 3 years

- Supplied with BattleField 3 Full PC Game download voucher!

In the blue corner we have:

HIS HD 6950 IceQ X Turbo 2048MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card with FREE Deus Ex PC Game [H695QNT2G2M]

Quote:

Features:-
- Core Clock: 840MHz
- Memory: 2048MB GDDR5
- Memory Clock: 5120MHz (Effective)
- Memory Bandwidth: ??GB/sec
- Processing Cores: 1408
- Texture Units: 88
- ROPS: 32
- Bus Type: PCI-Express 2.1
- Display Connectors: 1 Dual Link DVI-I and 1 single link DVI-D, 1 HDMI & 2x Mini-DisplayPort
- HDCP Capable
- DirectX 11 Support
- Shader Model 5.0 Support
- OpenGL 4.0 Support
- ATI CrossFire Ready
- ATI Eyefinity Technology
- ATI Avivo HD
- ATI Stream Technology
- ATI HD3D Technology
- Maximum Power Consumption: 250W (Typical 190W)
- 2x 6pin PCI-E power connectors required (Power Adapters included in box for older PSU's)
- 450W minimum PSU recommended
- Warranty: 2 Years
- Supplied with FREE Deus-Ex PC Game (Subject to availability)

Between the two, i cant really see too much difference, although im completely clueless and out of the loop. I will probably be using this computer too at some point to play BF3 but im mainly a console user now.

Ive always stuck with nVidia cards in the past but dont mind jumping ship if its really worth it for driver support and so forth...

Let the battle commence!

Li4m79 · 03-09-2012, 17:55 | posts: 4,692 | Location: Scotland

hmmmm Team Green gets my vote!

Driver support is much better with Nvidia....

qwwwizx · 03-09-2012, 18:01 | posts: 121 | Location: Copenhagen

Nvidia win because of drivers, but looses again because of 1 GB memory only. Both cards will be comparable performance wise. See if you can get the nvidia with more memory and you will be home free.

mitzi76 · 03-09-2012, 18:01 | posts: 7,053 | Location: UK

yep 560's seem to be a bit cheaper as well.

n sure the mem issue is very important.

qwwwizx · 03-09-2012, 18:12 | posts: 121 | Location: Copenhagen

1 GB is a little sucky in games like Bf3.

Austyn · 03-09-2012, 18:23 | posts: 825 | Location: London, UK

seems tied at the moment...from experience, nvidia have always had far superior aftermarket support with drivers, however, is 1GB such a massive issue with BF3? i dont expect or look to play it on any ultra settings, however i would like it to run smooth on atleast medium - high on a 1920x1080 resolution..

mitzi76 · *Last edited by mitzi76; 03-09-2012 at 18:33.*

http://www.guru3d.com/article/battle...nchmark-test/6

well not much in it there...

ultra settings there so sure you manage around 60fps with a few tweaks...get a good ocer n custom cooler.

Pill Monster · 03-09-2012, 18:34 | posts: 20,473 | Location: NZ

The 6950 annihilates the 560Ti in most if not all games. The GTX570 is Nvidia's counterpart to the 6950 not the 560Ti....

Not only that but with a mild overclock the 6950 turns into a 6970.

qwwwizx · 03-09-2012, 18:35 | posts: 121 | Location: Copenhagen

if you push it above 1600x1200, you need more than 1GB to keep up the pace in BF3.

mitzi76 · 03-09-2012, 18:40 | posts: 7,053 | Location: UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pill Monster

The 6950 annihilates the 560Ti in most if not all games. The GTX570 is Nvidia's counterpart to the 6950 not the 560Ti....

Not only that but with a mild overclock the 6950 turns into a 6970.

actually it doesnt from what i can see.

also price is important as in uk 560's are a fair bit cheaper.

p.s if it's for your dad and he isnt a big gamer i shouldnt worry about the vram but that's my opinion.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/palit-...t-le-review/15

check out those score pill.

Pill Monster · 03-09-2012, 18:42 | posts: 20,473 | Location: NZ

Quote:

Originally Posted by mitzi76

actually it doesnt from what i can see.

How many benchmarks have you seen? One?

I've seen prob at least 20+ and trust me the 6950 wins hands down.

mitzi76 · *Last edited by mitzi76; 03-09-2012 at 19:03.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pill Monster

How many benchmarks have you seen? One?

I've seen prob at least 20+ and trust me the 6950 wins hands down.

nope just went through that guru review there...take a look if you dont believe...

unless am reading it wrong.

current price atm overclockers 6950 £200 560 ti £175.

it's def not annihilate that's for sure...

i'd get the 6950 if it were cheaper or same price perhaps...but then i'd look at temps/noise of the card in question. and yeah drivers would then perhaps nudge me to nvidia...

Agent-A01 · 03-09-2012, 19:03 | posts: 5,634 | Location: USA

Uhm yeah he has one so expect that kind of response.. lol .560Ti is about equal with6950 in places where vram is not full. 570 is 6970s equal.. And 560 scales much better when oced compared to 6950. Also better drivers. But i would try for a 2gb 560 to if not the 560Ti 448 1.28gb which is slightly faster than the 6950

mitzi76 · 03-09-2012, 19:05 | posts: 7,053 | Location: UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent-A01

Uhm yeah he has one so expect that kind of response.. lol .560Ti is about equal with6950 in places where vram is not full. 570 is 6970s equal.. And 560 scales much better when oced compared to 6950. Also better drivers. But i would try for a 2gb 560 to if not the 560Ti 448 1.28gb which is slightly faster than the 6950

i think those 560's are over £200...i must admit it is a toss up.

hence i think the op's dilemma and reason for a poll...

anyways arent dad's happy with something that's cheaper etc etc....

Pill Monster · 03-09-2012, 19:08 | posts: 20,473 | Location: NZ

Quote:

Originally Posted by mitzi76

nope just went through that guru review there...take a look if you dont believe...

unless am reading it wrong.

current price atm overclockers 6950 £200 560 ti £175.

it's def not annihilate that's for sure...

i'd get the 6950 if it were cheaper or same price perhaps...but then i'd look at temps/noise of the card in question. and yeah drivers would then perhaps nudge me to nvidia...

Lol, no way dude...try using results from a reference card instead and then come see me. It even shows in the same benchmarks you linked to that the reference 560Ti is behind the 6950 every time....

And no I'm not biased....

BlackZero · 03-09-2012, 19:15 | posts: 8,078 | Location: United Kingdom

Most nvidia owners will say the nvidia card is better (nvidia section as well) and the same can be said from AMD owners, having said that I would say the 6950 2GB is a better card, there's no doubt about that but then the 560 ti is cheaper and comes with the more popular game so that evens things out in the end but the 1Gb vram is probably a deal breaker at 1080p so unless you want to stick with nvidia and feel more comfortable with their drivers I would take the 6950, but as it's for your dad it might be better to stick with what you feel comfortable doing.

In anycase, this is what Hilbert thinks about new cards, games and vram.

Quote:

with modern games we recommend 2 GB these days anyways (if you like better image quality that is).

mitzi76 · 03-09-2012, 19:20 | posts: 7,053 | Location: UK

@pill it's not about ref cards atm becuase op is looking at oc'd cards.

hence why i used a review of an oc card.

anyways i think either is good. let's let the op decide.

p.s not having 2gb vram has effected me abosolutely zero. (like the pun there?)

Pill Monster · 03-09-2012, 19:21 | posts: 20,473 | Location: NZ

I have to reiterate I'm def not a fanboy, the only reason I know the 6950 is better is because I spend a long time trying to decide between the GTX570 & 6950 when I did my last upgrade. The 560Ti didn't even come into the picture...

Fwiw I went with ATI in the end because a) It was cheaper, and b) it had more vram. It was the extra vram the really sealed the deal for me, like BZ mentioned....

Btw @mitzi - did you like my use of the word "annihilate"? Didn't it sound impressive? Gotta love those superlatives lol

X card ANNIHILATED Y card by AT LEAST 2fps....haha

mitzi76 · 03-09-2012, 19:25 | posts: 7,053 | Location: UK

well in this case A) isnt true B)it's for the guys dad so perhaps having the 2gb vram isnt very important.

just my take on it. the op can clarify how much of a gamer his padre is.

p.s lets keep fanboys out of this.

and dont use words like annihilate i have to check on my spelling (most likely spelt it wrong)

Pill Monster · 03-09-2012, 19:30 | posts: 20,473 | Location: NZ

I'm actually curious as to how that Palit did so well compared to the other 560Ti's in those tests. The specs all look about the same from what I could see.

Austyn · 03-09-2012, 19:32 | posts: 825 | Location: London, UK

So, how much difference does this extra 1GB make? can anybody give me comparisons, lets say on BF3 using "ultra" settings, what difference will it make in FPS?

Does the nVidia offer anything else over the ATI apart from driver support? On a "hardware" side, does the ATI boast higher stats then the nVidia across the board?

Im still in the mix, also having a "free copy" of bf3 is a bit of a selling point as it would save me having to buy that aswell, im not convinced eitherway, my dad would primarily be playing Flight Sims like Cliffs of Dover and some of the other more recent titles, the only piece of kit holding him back is the GFX card which is an BFG nVidia 8800 GTX which i bought pretty much the week it came out,and for what it cost the card is not only a complete monster but has truley stood the test of time, however, his flight sims do not really put it thru its paces like Crysis with HI-RES would...

Anyway, any more feedback would be much appreciated

mitzi76 · *Last edited by mitzi76; 03-09-2012 at 19:36.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pill Monster

I'm actually curious as to how that Palit did so well compared to the other 560Ti's in those tests. The specs all look about the same from what I could see.

yeah def surprised me as well.

funnily enough am downloading il2 as we speak...

well that guru link i showed you was of bf3 fps at 1920x1200 ultra. so hence if you went med/high you might creep up to around 50-60fps...with an oc ofc.

if it were me i'd perhaps want a beefier card at the res you listed but for under £200 either of those cards is def bang for your buck.

i'd like to see some hard evidence myself of the 1gb extra in terms of a fps diff.

the diff in fps between the cards for bf3 was around 5 fps i think .

XBEAST · 03-09-2012, 19:39 | posts: 1,443 | Location: Unknown

GTX 560 Ti 448 Cores.

Pill Monster · 03-09-2012, 19:40 | posts: 20,473 | Location: NZ

Quote:

Originally Posted by Austyn

So, how much difference does this extra 1GB make? can anybody give me comparisons, lets say on BF3 using "ultra" settings, what difference will it make in FPS?

Does the nVidia offer anything else over the ATI apart from driver support? On a "hardware" side, does the ATI boast higher stats then the nVidia across the board?

Im still in the mix, also having a "free copy" of bf3 is a bit of a selling point as it would save me having to buy that aswell, im not convinced eitherway, my dad would primarily be playing Flight Sims like Cliffs of Dover and some of the other more recent titles, the only piece of kit holding him back is the GFX card which is an BFG nVidia 8800 GTX which i bought pretty much the week it came out,and for what it cost the card is not only a complete monster but has truley stood the test of time, however, his flight sims do not really put it thru its paces like Crysis with HI-RES would...

Anyway, any more feedback would be much appreciated

Yeah the 8800GTX is pretty much a legend.
Actually my last card was an 8800GTX, used it for about 4 years - longer than I've had any other card.

BlackZero · *Last edited by BlackZero; 03-09-2012 at 20:17.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by mitzi76

p.s not having 2gb vram has effected me abosolutely zero. (like the pun there?)

well it would depend on on game/settings but a lot of newer games are starting make use of the extra vram, again this is from my personal experience which you may think is biased as it's not always using generic settings used in many reviews but fortunately skyrim had it's standard hd texture pack dlc launched and as some of the latest reviews made use of I should be able to back this up as far as 1GB vram is concerned. 1GB (the card in topic) and 1.5GB are not the same and Hilbert stated his opinion which is based on his experience but you knew that as you are able to come up with such intricate puns

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5625/a...ern-islands/13

ps.

@OP

A lot of flight sims seem to prefer nvidia cards, so perhaps read up on the games your dad is likely to play.