670 v. 7970, assume for a moment

[lopri]

1. That they're equally priced or the price difference doesn't matter to you
2. That they consume equal power or power consumption delta doesn't matter to you

The criteria become:

- Build quality
- 3D performance including overclocking experience (Duh)
- 2D performance (handling multiple windows, monitors, alt-tabbing, videos, internet videos, multiple VMs, and general OS smoothness, etc.)
- Longevity of the card (both in terms of its value and its lasting power)
- Other subjective pros/cons you perceive other than aforementioned two. (price and power)

Under these circumstances, which one of the two (GTX 670 or HD 7970) would you pick/keep? (If anyone has experienced both, your input is even more greatly appreciated)

Here is the thing. For me, I can get over the price difference of $50. But since I am not going to get both, choosing one over the other becomes a net investment of $400~$500, which is a lot. While $50 isn't much to agonize over, $450 is a different story. So let's assume there is no price difference whatsoever.

Moreover, 50W difference under load isn't a big deal to me since I don't game much. What matters more to me is heat and noise, and since all the cards I'm considering are custom designs, let's ignore them altogether for a moment, unless there is a glaring issue reported by users for a specific design. Besides, in my past experience, NV cards tend to ramp clocks higher for 2D works, which reviews rarely catches but I learned by myself. (it can be annoying). So let's ignore the power consumption figures altogether for now, as we did with the prices.

Here are the candidates:

GTX 670 (915 MHz reference)

ASUS DirectCU II TOP (1058 MHz)
Gigabyte Windforce (980 MHz)

HD 7970 (925 MHz reference)

Gigabyte Windforce (1000 MHz)
Powercolor PCS+ (1100 MHz) -> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814131471 (This one is the most confusing one because of its high stock OC and funky heatsinks. If its build quality is as good as DirectCU and WindForce, then I'd rate it over WindForce 7970 due to its higher factory OC)

Note that I am not playing games 24/7. But when I play games I would like as much as eye candies. I tend to pick certain games and stick with them and move on. Currently playing The Witcher 2. Used to play StarCraft 2, and will likely get its expansion when it comes out. Skyrim I will eventually get to it when I find out how to circumvent the Steam service. I probably game 5 ~10 hours average a week and have a 30" screen.

So taken the initial assumption into account (no price difference, no power consumption difference, only the performance and stability/versatility matters), which of the 4 cards are most attractive to you?

P.S. No SLI/CF plz.

Edit: After checking out lavaheadache's thread, Powercolor PCS+ is out of consideration. Only 7970 I'm considering at this point is Gigabyte WindForce. Both 670s are still in strong contention (ASUS DirectCU and Gigabyte Windforce) with a slight nod toward ASUS DirectCU because my pleasant experiences with them in the past.

 

[lopri]

ASUS 7970's 3-slot design is too much for me, btw.

 

[SickBeast]

I think that the 7970 would be marginally better overall. By that I mean 5%, plus it has 3gb of vram which is nice. That said, the GTX 670 will run cooler and quieter with less power. You need to decide which of those variables is most important for you. Most people seem to be going with the GTX 670. That's probably what I would do in the situation.

 

[Don Karnage]

Problem with the 7970 is that its horribly priced. If it was priced at 399.99 it would be the better choice but the 670 will do everything you want and more for less.

 

[JAG87]

It's funny how this post reads:

If you don't take anything into account, which one would you buy? Well, if I don't take anything into account, I would buy nothing.

If I take into account that a GTX 670 gives me lower price, lower power, lower heat, lower noise, and additional features (phsyx, AO, TXAA), it's pretty obvious which one I should choose.

And I love the "build quality" bullet point. Define build quality please. Is it that feeling you get from trying to flex your card from it's ends and thinking "Hmm, seems pretty sturdy"

Is it that feeling?

 

[Ferzerp]

I like how "multiple vms" is bolded.

 

[Jaydip]

Gigabyte Windforce 7970 without a hitch

 

[lopri]

If you don't take anything into account, which one would you buy? Well, if I don't take anything into account, I would buy nothing.

I'm taking only two out of the equation: price and power consumption.

Say, you're buying a refrigerator. One is $2,000 and the other is $2,050. The difference being $2,050 one has a "color accent" on the knobs/handles. Some might care or some might not, and the $50 difference becomes pretty meaningless when the whole thing costs $2K+. Someone might be willing to pay for that extra touch, but another might think it's cheesy. (i.e. that $50 means little)

And say, you're buying a chandelier. There are two models with nearly identical design, but there is a difference of two extra bulbs on one of them. (one has 300 bulbs and the other has 302 bulbs) Power difference being 50W. It's not unreasonable to think she may ignore the power difference and go for whichever she likes more.

 

[JAG87]

I'm taking only two out of the equation: price and power consumption.

Say, you're buying a refrigerator. One is $2,000 and the other is $2,050. The difference being $2,050 one has a "color accent" on the nobs/handles. Some might care or some might not, and the $50 difference becomes pretty meaningless when the whole thing costs $2K+. Someone might be willing to pay for that extra touch, but another might think it's cheesy. (i.e. that $50 means little)

And say, you're buying a chandelier. There are two models with nearly identical design, but there is a difference of two extra bulbs on one of them. (one has 300 bulbs and the other has 302 bulbs) Power difference being 50W. It's not unreasonable to think she may ignore the power difference and go for whichever she likes more.

I understand what you're saying, but when performance is almost identical what else is there to look at?

I look at
#1 price (any amount is money left in my wallet)
#2 power (might be negligible in cost, but heat and noise are directly correlated)
#3 any features that are available in software.

By that criteria, nvidia wins.

 

[Elfear]

If you plan on playing Skyrim with mods, the 7970 would be the easy choice at 1600p. I saw vram usage of 2.4GB+ with AA cranked. The 7970 also scales better with overclocking and has more headroom in general so I'd think it would end up a good bit faster overall, especially at 1600p.

Build quality I can't comment on much but AMD cards in general tend to be overengineered compared to Nvidia although coil whine has been a problem on some models.

 

[ViRGE]

I understand what you're saying, but when performance is almost identical what else is there to look at?

I have to agree with JAG. If you assume performance, price, and power consumption are equal, then you have identical cards. And since noise and heat are just a function of GPU power consumption for any given cooler, in the process you've equalized that too.

 

[lopri]

I understand what you're saying, but when performance is almost identical what else is there to look at?

I look at
#1 price (any amount is money left in my wallet)
#2 power (might be negligible in cost, but heat and noise are directly correlated)
#3 any features that are available in software.

By that criteria, nvidia wins.

I agree that's the way to go for majority of gamers. I'm probably not a majority. And I did give some criteria off my head. I will think of more later. As for build quality - I am sure you can tell build quality differences among different hardware. (i.e. I don't feel the need to spell it out for you because I think you are knowledgeable)

Build quality I can't comment on much but AMD cards in general tend to be overengineered compared to Nvidia although coil whine has been a problem on some models.

That has been a chronic issue for AMD cards. You just don't know which vendor to trust. I've heard about coil whines of many 7970s, thus I limited the choices to the WindForce and PCS+ when it comes to 7970s. PCS+ is a big unknown as of now. Wish someone has a first-hand knowledge.

 

[JohnnyChuttz]

GTX 670 - I have had too many driver issues with the last Ati cards I've owned(4670 and 6750) compared to 0 issues with the 448 core GTX 560ti I am currently running. I'll be buying the 670 once I find something that my 560 has trouble running at 1080.

 

[blastingcap]

I understand what you're saying, but when performance is almost identical what else is there to look at?

I look at
#1 price (any amount is money left in my wallet)
#2 power (might be negligible in cost, but heat and noise are directly correlated)
#3 any features that are available in software.

By that criteria, nvidia wins.

Please stop being argumentative. OP asked a specific question; if you don't like his criteria then so be it. Make your own thread then. And if you don't know what "build quality" means then it's you who is silly, not him. Serious overclockers know what build quality means. Poor VRM, cooling, etc. can limit overclocks just as much as having a lower-binned GPU, if not more so.

As for power consumption, OP says he doesn't even game much (5-10 hours/week). If he's idling or in 2D most of the time, guess which card has lower power consumption? Yes, that's right, the HD7970: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_670_Direct_Cu_II/26.html 2 watts may not sound like much, but consider this: if your PC is idling or in 2D mode (websurfing or whatever) for 22.5 hours each day and gaming 1.5 hours each day (roughly corresponding to OP's usage pattern if he does not shut down the PC when not in use, which some people do not do), then 22.5 x 2 = 45 watts. 45/1.5 = 30 watts. In other words, the GTX 670 needs to use 30 watts less than the 7970 does when both are at load, just to make up for the GTX 670's lower idle/2D efficiency. (In practice it will be less if OP uses GPU acceleration for Flash, etc., however.)

Note at the same link, the factory-overclocked GTX 670 draws MORE load during gaming than the stock 7970. Of course once both are oc'd to the hilt the 7970 probably draws more power again, but it's also faster (an oc'd 7970 equals a oc'd 680 and both are slightly faster than an oc'd 670): http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/05/14/geforce_680_670_vs_radeon_7970_7950_gaming_perf/3

All of that said, I would go for a well-built GTX 670 like the DirectCUII model, not one with a crappy PCB and VRMs and VRM cooling. The reason being NV's slightly better software support and feature set, including PhysX/CUDA, adaptive V-Sync, GPU Boost, more extensive gamedev relations, etc. which offsets the HD7970's minor speed advantage.

Plus you can probably save a little money in the process, which will offset the extra power you may use in idle. Although: note that some 7970s come with extra goodies like miniDP->DVI adapters (single link) that you may be able to sell for $15-20, and even high-speed HDMI cables, so the cost difference between them isn't as big as some people might think.

Coil whine isn't as big of an issues as some people are making it out to be and is not destructive to the card, unlike a NV GTX 590 self-destructing or something like that. My first Sapphire OC 7970 had a little coil whine but its replacement has trivial levels of it. Your case fans will be louder. And yes AMD cards tend to be over-engineered relative to NV cards especially this round when NV went the "el cheapo mini PCB" route. But a custom NV card should still be good, like the ASUS DCuII.

 

[boxleitnerb]

GTX670. For the reasons JAG87 mentioned+ Ambient Occlusion, and it performs better in Skyrim. VRAM usage says little to nothing -> caching, different memory management. 2GB should be okay for the vast majority of cases.

 

[jacktesterson]

7970 if same price.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Why not a GTX 680 if the last 50$ doesnt matter and you are already at 450$?

 

[Elfear]

GTX670. For the reasons JAG87 mentioned+ Ambient Occlusion, and it performs better in Skyrim. VRAM usage says little to nothing -> caching, different memory management. 2GB should be okay for the vast majority of cases.

You 100% sure about that? I'm not saying it's not possible (or even probable) but I haven't seen anything to prove it either. Review sites very rarely benchmark modded games so it's hard to determine what will and will not work without the user community doing some testing.

 

[JAG87]

I agree that's the way to go for majority of gamers. I'm probably not a majority. And I did give some criteria off my head. I will think of more later. As for build quality - I am sure you can tell build quality differences among different hardware. (i.e. I don't feel the need to spell it out for you because I think you are knowledgeable)

I understand, but build quality differences only apply to reference models. Even then, both vendors build their reference models well enough that they will outlast their useful lifetime. Having 4 phases on the reference 670 vs. 6 phases on the reference 7970 doesn't really mean anything to you as a consumer. After their 3 year warranty is done, you will look for a new card anyways. Whether it is to play new games, or to give up gaming, you wouldn't be using this card in 3 year's time.


But let's do apples to apples, i.e. two models that you listed:

Windforce 7970 vs Windforce 670.

Performance wise, they are similar.
The cooler is the same.
Build quality is the same.
Heat is the same.
Noise is the same.
Power, the 670 wins.
Features, nvidia wins.

On that alone, I would buy the 670.

snip

I am a multi monitor user, and look at the ~30W difference between the 670 and 7970 while idling. To me, the 7970 is not more efficient at all.

Also did you know that with nvidia cards you have external tools such as Inspector to force a lower power state? Up until the 690/670, nvidia raised the clocks when two monitors with different timings are plugged into the same card (AMD does the same thing), which was necessary in the past to avoid flickering, but it is no longer necessary because there's enough performance even at the lowest power state (in fact it is fixed in the GTX 690 and 670, but not in the 680 believe it or not) and the power usage and heat increases significantly. With an nvidia card, I have the flexibility to control power states, with AMD I don't.

For me, one more reason not to go AMD.

 

[Grooveriding]

Too lazy to look at prices, but the Powercolor PCS 1100Mhz 7970 is the fastest card of that bunch.

Unless power consumption on a card is so obscene that it makes running the card obnoxious, who cares if you're looking at high end GPUs ? The only cards I can think of that are too over the top on power to make them a pain are the GTX480 and 6990.

 

[lopri]

I have to agree with JAG. If you assume performance, price, and power consumption are equal, then you have identical cards. And since noise and heat are just a function of GPU power consumption for any given cooler, in the process you've equalized that too.

That's quite a logical leap, IMO. What you're saying amounts to that GK104 and Tahiti are the same thing, except the power requirements, which I disagree. Having NV cards and AMD cards side-by-side for more than 10 years, I can almost pass a blind test if right tools/data are given. (no, not GPU-Z )

There's gotta be architectural difference and PCB-level refinement that will distinguish these cards. Since they are kind of "new" architecture, I am currently blank on both of them. I figured someone might shed some light on what has changed positively, negatively, or comparatively.

 

[blastingcap]

I am a multi-monitor user as well though most of the time I power off all but the center monitor to save power. (Your monitors likely use 25+ watts even if LED, and more like 50+ if 27" LED; if not LED then a large-panel CCFL LCD panel can use 75+ watts... so in truth, neither setup is energy-efficient regardless of any GPU power savings). You can manually tweak clocks and voltage on a 7970 to lower power consumption btw so even that 30W NV advantage is ephemeral. For instance, I am a habitual under-volter and under-clocker and even when in multi-monitor mode I am clocked so low and undervolted that I bet I am not using any more power than you are. Anyway, none of this is relevant to OP, who stated that he is on a 30" single panel.

Good to know that NV is taking power more seriously. How "green" of them.

AMD has ZeroCore power so I would not be so hard on them for effort.

If I didn't need AMD's abilities (GTX670/80 are stripped of HPC), and if price/perf/power/noise/heat were equal, I would be on an NV card for their better software support and feature set. AMD's drivers are actually quite decent for single-GPU, but I'd like to have adaptive Vsync, GPUBoost, etc.

I am a multi monitor user, and look at the ~30W difference between the 670 and 7970 while idling. To me, the 7970 is not more efficient at all.

Also did you know that with nvidia cards you have external tools such as Inspector to force a lower power state? Up until the 690/670, nvidia raised the clocks when two monitors with different timings are plugged into the same card (AMD is doing the same thing), and the power usage (and heat) increases significantly. With an nvidia card, I have the flexibility to control power states, with AMD I don't.

For me, one more reason not to go AMD.

 

[Termie]

OP - you briefly mentioned an interest in overclocked performance in your first post. If that's something you value, you might want to take a look at HardOCP's comparison of 7900-series vs 600-series overclocking: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/05/14/geforce_680_670_vs_radeon_7970_7950_gaming_perf/3

My feeling is that if you're big into seeing payback from OC'ing, get the 7970. Otherwise, the 670 is the better option.

 

[boxleitnerb]

You 100% sure about that? I'm not saying it's not possible (or even probable) but I haven't seen anything to prove it either. Review sites very rarely benchmark modded games so it's hard to determine what will and will not work without the user community doing some testing.

Not 100% sure, but it's not like the number shown by Afterburner&Co. are meaningful either. One would have to check for stuttering and fps drops to be absolutely sure about a possible VRAM limitation.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I would buy the 7970 even if the premium didn't exceed 10% of the 670's price. Max to max 15% extra. And that is where the 7970 is so I think it is pretty fair for a genuinely unbiased buyer.

Assuming both are the same price, 7970 eyes closed. With your criteria, there is no reason to go for a 670 unless you play only a game or two which particularly favors 670 which too is unlikely to be noticeably better once both are overclocked.

If you want to do SLI then of course 670 may make a lot of sense.

However, for single card, 7970 eyes closed.