Faster in crysis2 and 1-2 other games where both get 60+ fps so it doesn't matter. Overall stock vs stock it is a tie, 7970 is just 5% or so faster and. Only at 1440p or above. But once both are overclocked 7970 is faster, hence it is a better card.
After seeing how the GTX 670 performs, the GTX 660 is going to be an awesome card. I hope at a $250-$300 price point.
What about better performance with triple displays?
Do you have a triple display? No? Please don't speak for those of us who do have them, then.
The H test admitted that 4x MSAA crippled their tri-SLI 680 setup in BF3. If you want that level of MSAA (which not everyone wants), you need the 4GB VRAM edition to not run into VRAM walls with the 680, which changes price/perf. As much as 3GB VRAM is overkill for single displays, it allows breathing room you can't get at 2GB VRAM, and room to grow in case games of tomorrow require even more VRAM. FXAA is not MSAA. Say no to blur.
TR also did 5760x1200 testing and you can see their results here: http://techreport.com/articles.x/22922/3
As for "modern games" I don't even know what you are talking about. BF3? You can't use only a few games as examples. Even NV themselves said, in their press release today, that the gtx 670 ties with the 7970 at 1920x1080 resolution across 25 popular games. Not beats--ties. At higher resolutions the 7970 will start to win, which is why AMD PR is desperately trying to get people to bench games at 2560x1600 instead of 1920x1080, when comparing the 670 to the 7970. (Good luck AMD, I have a feeling you already lost that battle.)
I think with equal pricing the 670 is a slightly better buy for those gaming w/ 1 monitor. For 3 though the 7970's extra VRAM and slightly better fps at high rez wins out. But price is not equal. They are changing though.
Power consumption is irrelevant to me. And it isn't better with more modern games, it is the reverse. And once overclocked it is at least 10-15% slower, triple monitor is a niche market, it may be better for them. Dunno. Cheaper is not relevant to better. An overclocked 7970 is at least 10% faster than 670 oc and slightly faster or as fast as 680 oc. So 7970 could have stayed put had amd had a better reputation. I don't see any reason for 680 to be more than $30 compared to7970. If 7970 is $420 then 680 should be $450 lol
Vary nice performance. AMD needs to bring the 7970 down to $399 as the stock 670 beats up on the stock 7970. Now AMD give the little boys back their lunchmoney being 1st out of gate does not a winner make.
I think with equal pricing the 670 is a slightly better buy for those gaming w/ 1 monitor. For 3 though the 7970's extra VRAM and slightly better fps at high rez wins out. But price is not equal. They are changing though.
Well said. MI think the AVG gamer is are gaming @ 1080P. Right now, the GTX 670 is a better buy at that resolution. I still thinks it's more than most need though. I have a now lowly HD 6870 and I max all of the games I play @ 1080 -- Sorry, only 2X AA on BF3....
2560x1600 is an irrelevant comparo because how many people game at that resolution? 1%? ..05%?
Please re-read my OP. I don't know how much clearer I could have made it, saying that if at equal price, the670 is better for 1 monitor, 7970 better for 3. Pricing is in flux though, and GHz Edition + Three for Free 7970s can't be far away. We'll see where pricing settles for both. I think the highest factory oc 670s and GHz + 3forFree 7970s will both be about $450.
Nope.
1. Stock vs stock, at 1080p they are equal.
2. Once both are oced, 7970 wins 1080p by 5-10% margin, again, not very far from equal.
3. 670 isn't really needed for 1080p for most games unless you want 8X AA in most games or at least 4x MSAA plus.
4. 1 year down, 3GB VRAM will come in useful. PERIOD.
5. Given the price is same, go 7970. PERIOD.
6. If 670 is $400 and 7970 is $480 and you game at 1080p, then go for 670 and upgrade after 1-1.5 years.
Well said. I think the AVG gamer is gaming @ 1080P. Right now, the GTX 670 is a better buy at that resolution. I still thinks it's more than most need though. I have a now lowly HD 6870 and I max all of the games I play @ 1080 -- Sorry, only 2X AA on BF3....
+-5% performance difference isn't a win. To win you need at least a 10% lead,
Nope.
1. Stock vs stock, at 1080p they are equal.
2. Once both are oced, 7970 wins 1080p by 5-10% margin, again, not very far from equal.
3. 670 isn't really needed for 1080p for most games unless you want 8X AA in most games or at least 4x MSAA plus.
4. 1 year down, 3GB VRAM will come in useful. PERIOD.
5. Given the price is same, go 7970. PERIOD.
6. If 670 is $400 and 7970 is $480 and you game at 1080p, then go for 670 and upgrade after 1-1.5 years.
Explain this then?
Battlefield 3 - Edge to 670 (4Q 2011)
Crysis 2 - Edge to 7970 (1Q 2011)
Skyrim - Edge 670 (4Q 2011)
Metro 2033 - Edge to 7970 (1Q 2010)
Dirt 3 - Edge to 670 (1Q 2011)
All 7970 titles are 1+ years old. All but 1 670 title is <6 months with one being slightly over a year. You are plain wrong here and know it.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-670-review,3200.html
How the hell did you attribute my quote to the other guy I have no idea... lol
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Stop being emotional and irrational just because you own a 7970. The 670 at 399.99 just made the 7970 at 479.99 a horrible buy.
I don't agree with the modern vs no-modern game scores, I think it just comes down to the engine. Some work better for one card, and some for another. Thats why we typically end up with games that ultimately favor AMD or nVidia.
As for you calling Skyrim "modern" I have to disagree. An engine as old as Gamebryo, is not modern.
So if stock for stock they are equal, why isn't the GTX 670 a better buy? it's $50 cheaper..
You are talking like AMD has already lowered their pricing.
2560x1600 is an irrelevant comparo because how many people game at that resolution? 1%? ..05%?
Because not everybody plays at stock. If you overclock, it is worth that $50 extra. If you don't oc, then it isn't. It comes down to a personal preference. But 7970 OC is still faster. So at the same price the 670 is a worse card. At $50 difference, they are about equal value, due to more performance plus VRAM/future proofing. At $480, 7970 is a little bit expensive but then so is 680 at $500.
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Stop being emotional and irrational just because you own a 7970. The 670 at 399.99 just made the 7970 at 479.99 a horrible buy.