670 vs 7970

[Deleted]

Well with crysis 3 and bioshock with a 7950/7970 vs the in game items Nvidia offers, I would pick a 7970 over a 670.

[Yohassakura]

Whats that suppose to mean?

The link you posted earlier was before the 310.70, 310.90, 314.07 drivers.

So 1 new driver since then you still think the benchmark you showed are legit?

Urgh... Like I said, neither of us are going to be happy.

Basically, nvidia pushes out 2 drivers when AMD push out 1, not to mention there's AMD beta drivers out as well (which I haven't included).

This is what Nvidia did in the 3 latest patches

New in GeForce 314.07 Drivers
Increases performance by up to 5% in Crysis 3 (measured with GeForce GTX 680 at 1920x1080 high settings).

New in GeForce R313Drivers

Performance Boost – Increases performance for GeForce 400/500/600 series GPUs in several PC games vs. GeForce 310.90 WHQL-certified drivers. Results will vary depending on your GPU and system configuration:
GeForce GTX 690:
Up to 65% in Crysis 3 Up to 24% in Assassin’s Creed III Up to 15% in Civilization V Up to 14% in Call of Duty: Black Ops II Up to 12% in Dirt 3 Up to 11% in Just Cause 2 Up to 9% in Deus Ex: Human Revolution Up to 8% in Far Cry 2 Up to 7% in Far Cry 3 Up to 7% in Batman: Arkham City Up to 7% in Dragon Age II Up to 5% in Battlefield 3 Up to 4% in Shogun: Total War Up to 4% in Stalker: Call of Pripyat
GeForce GTX 670:
Up to 28% in Assassin’s Creed III Up to 11% in Civilization V Up to 8% in Far Cry 3 Up to 6% in Just Cause 2 Up to 5% in Deus Ex: Human Revolution Up to 5% in Dirt 3 Up to 5% in Batman: Arkham City Up to 5% in Far Cry 2 Up to 4% in Call of Duty: Black Ops II Up to 3% in Shogun: Total War Up to 3% in Stalker: Call of Pripyat
NVIDIA SLI Technology – Adds or updates the following SLI profiles:
Crysis 3 – updated SLI profile Warframe– updated SLI profile DmC: Devil May Cry– added SLI profile
NVIDIA 3D Vision – Adds the following profiles:
Crysis 3 – rated Excellent Dead Space 3 – rated Poor Resident Evil 6- rated Good
NVIDIA CUDA
Includes support for applications built using CUDA 5 or earlier version of the CUDA Toolkit. More information at http://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-toolkit

310.70

GeForce GTX 680:
Up to 38% in Far Cry 3
Up to 26% in Call of Duty: Black Ops 2
Up to 16% in Battlefield 3
Up to 18% in Assassin's Creed III
Up to 9% in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Up to 6% in Medal of Honor: Warfighter
Up to 6% in StarCraft II
Up to 6% in Dragon Age II
Up to 6% in Batman: Arkham City
Up to 5% in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat
GeForce GTX 660:
Up to 24% in Call of Duty: Black Ops 2
Up to 10% in Battlefield 3
Up to 7% in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Up to 6% in Far Cry 3
Up to 5% in Dragon Age II
Up to 5% in Assassin's Creed III
Up to 4% in Batman: Arkham City
Up to 4% in Medal of Honor: Warfighter

So, 7970 > 670, 7970 = 680

[Deleted]

Well with crysis 3 and bioshock with a 7950/7970 vs the in game items Nvidia offers, I would pick a 7970 over a 670.

imo falling for some games instead of actual performance isn't the best way to make a performance based choice.

@
So, 7970 > 670, 7970 = 680
how about no........
at this point im pretty sure that valley is among the heaviest of raw gpu benchmarks and image there seems to not confirm such listing. (3dmark firestrike only heavier thing out there atm and previous updated heaven is on par with valley as well)

[BicycleMafioso]

imo falling for some games instead of actual performance isn't the best way to make a performance based choice.

@
So, 7970 > 670, 7970 = 680
how about no........
at this point im pretty sure that valley is among the heaviest of raw gpu benchmarks and image there seems to not confirm such listing. (3dmark firestrike only heavier thing out there atm and previous updated heaven is on par with valley as well)

Every game functions differently. Why would anyone have Unigine Valley as their one go-to reference chart, if no games are actually using the Unigine engine?
Get the card that works best for the games you intend to playing.

Overall, that is the HD7970.
You have a GTX 670, you love it. You're allowed to. But it's not the correct answer for everyone.

[Toffie]

Yohassakura I'm no fanboy like you so I honestly don't care. They are equal and your asumptions are just thin air.

7970 = 680

You have no idea have you

Ok, we know the OP plays skyrim right?

1920x1200
670 = 76 fps
7970 = 79 fps

Drivers today added 9 % for nvidia, nothing have changed for AMD. As for the other games, 2 of those games aren't out so it's hard to compare.

[BicycleMafioso]

Guys, let's not get personal here.
Fanboy in this regard is often considered an insult. Let's not go that road.
This is meant to everyone, not anyone in particular

[Deleted]

imo falling for some games instead of actual performance isn't the best way to make a performance based choice.

@
So, 7970 > 670, 7970 = 680
how about no........
at this point im pretty sure that valley is among the heaviest of raw gpu benchmarks and image there seems to not confirm such listing. (3dmark firestrike only heavier thing out there atm and previous updated heaven is on par with valley as well)

The 7970 and 670 are pretty much even, so those extra games are pretty nice. (If you were planning on playing it, the card just becomes cheaper)

Anyway, firestrike is in favor of the 7970 (from what ive seen in the 3dmark post) and valley seems to favor the 670. But they are still synthetic benchmarks.

[Idrinkwhiterussians]

I would honestly see if you could get the Gigabyte 7970 from Amazon with the free game codes. It is $400 there.

[moremana]

It does not matter what date my benchmarks are from as they are showing the base comparison among reference cards. Those numbers are the same today as they were back then.

Wrong...drivers make a differencve so old drivers versus new drivers do make a difference.

Either card is good and probably more than you will ever need for a while. Like someone else said, look at which one does the better for you in the games YOU play!

[Yohassakura]

Ok, we know the OP plays skyrim right?

1920x1200
670 = 76 fps
7970 = 79 fps

Drivers today added 9 % for nvidia, nothing have changed for AMD. As for the other games, 2 of those games aren't out so it's hard to compare.

Nvidia 75.9 * 1.09 = 82.731 vs AMD 7970 79.4

So admittedly, the 670 beats the 7970 in Skyrim with those values.

I'm quite interested in how the 7970 GHz did worse than the normal one, as it should just have a higher clock.

I'm going to say that there will be another performance boost in skyrim soon(tm) for AMD cards as they have recently reduced the latency in skyrim (beta drivers) and if the higher clocked 7970 is losing to the lower clocked 7970 then something is obviously wrong.

I admit that the 670, 680 and 7970 all trade blows and that the 7970 GHz edition is more comparable to the 680 than the "normal" version, but when you have interesting results like these, it shows that there can still be better performance from the AMD cards with more driver updates (not to say that there can't be any more performance achieved from Nvidia cards of course).

Then, if the OP decides to get another / a new monitor down the line, the 7970 would be slightly better with the extra VRAM, which perhaps makes it a better choice, as 4k resolution and the like is supposed to be coming out and will soon(tm) become mainstream, wherein the OP may not decide to upgrade his GPU within that time, if it can handle the games he plays.

Sure, I might lean a little towards AMD, but look at how many more people lean towards Nvidia in comparison.

[BicycleMafioso]

Note that up to a 9% increase increase != +9% performance