Help choosing between HD 7970 GHZ & GTX 680

hi,

at this moment , i am seeing mixed reviews about 7970 GHZ version. some sites say its slower some say its faster.
i want similar class GPU for my other PC. i know in this place i can find people who own this device. some personal reviews \ benchmark details would help a lot.

thanks.

 

I had a Gigabyte Windforce 7970 (too loud so sent back) then a Sapphire 7970 with an Accelero Xtreme Cooler (very quiet )
I clocked both at 1250mhz/1675mhz with around 1250mV, so very were running very fast, significantly faster than stock and indeed the new GHZ versions.

Now I have a GTX680 which is clocked at 1150 (boost 1215)/1502mhz.

At these speeds both cards perform very similarly, with the 680 having the edge, but nothing you'd really notice in gameplay.
It has a few extra min FPS in BF3, and about a 100 points extra or 3.5fps in Unigine Heaven 2.5 (didn't test with 3.0 whilst I had my 7970).

But heres the thing.......
Whilst playing BF3 with the 7970 my system used 423 watts, whereas the 680 uses 355 watts. (both idled at 90watts)

So 680 equals better performance for less power usage.
But don't forget my 7970 was heavily overclocked to compete with the 680, so would use more power.
Bottom line 680 is more power efficent.

However....
The 7970 can be had for much cheaper than a 680, so its your call !!!!
Once clocked to 1200mhz or above it becomes very close to 680 (but uses more power to do so)

PS.
I got rid of my 7970 because the software side of things is just so much better with nVidia, namely drivers are better and 3rd party tools to tweak drivers (nVidia Inspector) - wheres as tools like RadeonPro and ATT are now dead on ATI side.

 

thanks for the detailed write up. 7970 Ghz edition, i can find on newegg for $430, where 680 is $500. i see both of these are high end parts, how hard was it to overclock your older 7970 model ? I have option to buy 680gtx used. a dude is selling me stock clocked evga 680 for 400$, which seems a fair deal.

 

It was very easy, just upped the voltage to 1.25v and saw how high I could get before artifacts appeared in heaven bench.

For both cards it was near enough 1250mhz.

The Gigabyte Windforce was VERY loud at these clocks though so i returned it and got a reference Sapphire card then strapped a Accelero Xtreme cooler on it - to keep temps down.

I'm not sure how loud a reference cooled card would get when clocked to 1250mhz, but i'm sure it would be loud and hot !!!!!

 

I have a 7970 overclocked to 1200Mhz and could'nt be happier

It plays everything extremely well, I know some people complain about drivers but I use them all even beta's (using 12.7 beta right now) and I don't have any problems with it.

Mostly play BF3, Skyrim, Risen: Dark Waters, Tribes, Crysis 2 etc.

The newest 12.7 gave a few FPS improvement in most games and benchmarks.

I don't have any specifics, but for example I play BF3 at 3840X1024 and rarely see it drop below 60fps. (very good for that resolution).

Good luck, either choice will kill.

PS, I went with the 7970 because of the 3GB frame buffer, a good benefit for running higher resolutions. (Most 680's only have 2GB.)

 

thanks for the input, 3gb is another reason why i am thinking about 7970 over 680. i play at 1920x1080 but later i may get dual \ tri monitor setup.
by the way, how much you score in 3dmark 11 at these clocks?

 

hi,i have an asus directcu 7970 1ghz edition(orignal) ,ive had it running at 1100/5768 with very little heat increase but to be honest i havent got a game it cant maxout @1080p and at stock speeds but its nice to know the extra is there if i need it as for the cooling...it quiet...im mean very quiet,the only thing i`d switch to nvidia would be for phyx but i dont think thats such a big thing now,on the driver side...the latest whql drivers work fine for me,the only game i have issues with is lag in tdu2 but thats more the game than the drivers

 

I think my highest score was P8972, my PII holds me back a bit compared to the I7's

 

Performance should be about the same. However, the 680 offers more flexible custom resolutions, driver level ssao, and better driver level AA support. If you just want to plug the cards in and play, go the cheaper route. If you think you will make use of the difference in features, get the 680.

 

I've flashed my xfx to a ghz edition and running nicely at the new clocks too I recommend the ghz edition as the new beta 12.7 drivers are really stable and I've yet to c2d in almost a week of solid gameplay and no hints of stuttering. For true value for money buy a second hand sapphire basic 7970 for £270 and flash it to ghz edition.

 

I guess it depends if you're an ultra-high resolution gamer or not. If you game at 1080p, get a 670/680 no questions. Much higher, then the scale tips in AMDs favour.

 

guessing you didnt hear about the 4gb 670/680

 

Or the upcoming 6 Gig 7970 LOL.

And the beat goes on.!

Never need 4G let alone 6G.
Exceed 3G? In time.

Later

 

Get 7970.
Nvidia always has problems with new games on day 0(release date). Ghost Recon, Max Payne 3, Diablo 3....
Also look in Nvidia section - vsync is broken, witcher 2 doesn't work, max payne runs like ****, and another load of Nvidia BS.:wanker:

Forgot about PhysX :funny:

 

Right...don't be too quick to forget the fiasco AMD had with Skyrim, BFBC2, BF3, Saints Row 3, and Rage. Launch issues goes both ways.

670/680 are pretty boss at high resolutions as well. Then there's the fact you can set custom resolutions with them to get more for your money, which you can't do with AMD's cards.

 

Played in Skyrim from release date on my 5970. No problems with gfx. There was some with quests.
BF3? What's wrong? Are you serious?
BFBC2 - I remember CF issues and nothing more.
SR3 is an AMD Evolved Title and it's OK with AMD cards form day 0.
RAGE is coded for Nvidia devices. So who cares? :nerd:

 

These are all the experiences I had withh my 5970 on the following titles when they launched.
Skyrim - terrible performance and poor crossfire scaling
BF3 - low performance
BFBC2 - long load times on DX10/11, and horrendous performance with most of the later catalyst 10.x drivers
SR3 - low fps
Rage - terrible performance. Also, why should we not care if its a popular game? A lot of peoplle were pissed at AMD for the quality of their drivers with Rage.

 

5970 has 1 GB VRAM. I think the main problem is here.
When I had 5970, I was playing without MSAA, but with injected FXAA. Because of VRAM.
And I wrote - RAGE is coded by Carmack for Nvidia. But it is a crap, not a game. New engine, new mexatextures:wanker: Who cares, it looks worse than every UE3 title:bang:

 

1 GIG Ram???

Under the impression it had 2 GIGS!

Later

 

There are some versions with 2GB VRAM.
But reference 5970 has 2x1024MB VRAM(per chip). In fact it's 1 GB:nerd: