[Hardcorp] GALAXY GTX 660 Ti GC OC vs. OC GTX 670 & HD 7950

[raghu78]

No, it's not playable: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Sleep...sts/Sleeping-Dogs-im-DirectX-11-Test-1020709/

That's ingame and not the benchmark. 38 FPS on a 7970@1200MHz it's not playable in this game.

As I have already said I am playing the game at 1080p on my HD 6950 2GB (860 Mhz) with High AA instead of Extreme AA. FPS is very comfortable at 35 - 50 fps.
Normal AA - FXAA medium and SSAA off
High AA - FXAA high and SSAA medium
Extreme AA - FXAA high and SSAA high.

Also pcgameshardware did not test at High AA which is a good balance of performance and image quality. SSAA is supposed to be the best in terms of image quality, even better than MSAA. Play the game at high AA and tell us what fps you are getting

 

[SirPauly]

vgchartz shows both the X360 and PS3 in the top 5 global sellers

http://www.vgchartz.com/

Imho,

Thanks for the link! Personally have no problems with AMD working with developers to improve the PC experience over what a console may offer. Welcome it! With both nVidia and AMD working hard to improve PC experiences -- improves more PC awareness for consumers, which may allow developers to take even more care and focus more on the PC platform.

 

[HisDivineOrder]

How many are playing Sleeping Dogs and Sniper?

I suspect most people who are currently buying a 7870 or 7950 are playing Sleeping Dogs not long after they install their card. And of those that aren't, most are selling it to someone who intends to play it.

The game looks great. I think it was a great win for AMD to bundle it in with its $200-$300 cards, but I wish they'd extended it to the 7970 and 7970 GHZ, too (similar to how nVidia let the Borderlands 2 bundle extend across all its GK104 Kepler cards).

 

[RussianSensation]

You guys trying to claim Sleeping Dogs isn't popular? It was hitting top 4 steam sales last i checked and its relatively new. One of the highest rated games in recent times to boot, with a huge cast team of voice actors/actresses.

If we only look at popular games on Steam, then no point in buying anything faster than an HD7850. For some of those even a GTX560 would be fast.

The Secret World was brought up but its average score is just 71.16% vs. 86.44% for Sleeping Dogs. The User Score for sleeping dogs is 8.4 vs. 8.3 for the Secret World. Not sure how Sleeping Dogs became a title not worth talking about but the Secret World somehow is?

Like I said, no point in cherry-picking games when NV is faster and ignoring Crysis, Metro 2033, Anno 2070, Bulletstorm, ArmaII, Alan Wake, Risen 2, Crysis Warhead, Batman AC, Skyrim+Mods, Trine 2 with SSAA, Mass Effect 3 with SSAA. By looking at 15-20 games we allow for a fairer comparison. If someone plays BF3 the most, great, then they can ignore average performance charts.

What I find interesting is that people are happily defending price drops on GTX600 series line. Since when? I didn't know it was great for me as a consumer that NV kept prices high.

HD7950 MSI TF3 for $275 CDN vs. $410 for after-market 670.

And here is BF3 everyone loves talking about, I'll link that since apparently it's the most popular game:

Sorry, but NV owned HD7970 series when it launched GTX670 @ $399 and 7970 was going for $500-550. Now a $200-240 HD7870 owns the 660Ti and a $275-318 HD7950 owns the 670. Things change in the marketplace as prices adjust. All I am saying is NV's price/performance at the moment is very poor for enthusiasts who are willing to take 5 min to overclock in MSI Afterburner. Even at stock speeds, NV is delivering worse price/performance.

 

[Crap Daddy]

What's with this Sleeping Dogs performing worse on NV? I see something different here:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Sleep...sts/Sleeping-Dogs-im-DirectX-11-Test-1020709/

And before somebody says the settings are not right, on everything extreme even if the Radeons fair better it's still almost unplayable for every card.

 

[SirPauly]

Interesting!

 

[SirPauly]

I suspect most people who are currently buying a 7870 or 7950 are playing Sleeping Dogs not long after they install their card. And of those that aren't, most are selling it to someone who intends to play it.

The game looks great. I think it was a great win for AMD to bundle it in with its $200-$300 cards, but I wish they'd extended it to the 7970 and 7970 GHZ, too (similar to how nVidia let the Borderlands 2 bundle extend across all its GK104 Kepler cards).

Thanks, going to check out Sleeping Dogs, looks like a neat title!

 

[Imouto]

<a href=&quot;http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Sleep...eeping-Dogs-im-DirectX-11-Test-1020709/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Sleep...sts/Sleeping-Dogs-im-DirectX-11-Test-1020709/ And before somebody says the settings are not right, on everything extreme even if the Radeons fair better it's still almost unplayable for every card.

The extreme benchmark is right aside the shown one. http://www.pcgameshardware.de/scree...eeping-Dogs-GPUs-1920-SSAA-FXAA-PCGH-v1.1.png

4 GB 680 GTX in the OC section? Also... Forced driver settings? Tricky results anyway. The 7970 doing worse at stock and about the same as the 680 while OCed in the regular bench. If you go to the Extreme bench the 680 does worse at stock and about the same as the 7970 while OCed.

 

[RussianSensation]

What's with this Sleeping Dogs performing worse on NV? I see something different here:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Sleep...sts/Sleeping-Dogs-im-DirectX-11-Test-1020709/

And before somebody says the settings are not right, on everything extreme even if the Radeons fair better it's still almost unplayable for every card.

That's because there are 3 settings for AA in Sleeping Dogs, Normal, High and Extreme. Also, they mentioned you get a 1/3 FPS performance hit if you enable High Screen Space Ambient Occlusion. If you look at their benchmarks in Normal mode, the videocards cards are reaching high-70s/80s fps. That means they tested Normal with High SSAO Off. You can play the game like that if you want but then you don't need anything faster than a GTX560Ti. Why spend $500 on a new generation card then?

So then you have an in-between Normal and Extreme setting that still is playable => FXAA (no SSAA) but keep everything on High including AO:

That's a 925mhz 7970 and you can already buy a 1Ghz 7970 for $420. GTX670 loses to an 800mhz 7950 at these settings. Also, HD7970 has higher % overclocking headroom than a 680 does. That means you can get > 30 fps minimums and probably 50s fps average once you push a 7970 to 1150mhz+ at these settings, all for way less $ than a 680 costs.

This game is just one of the few games that continues to show that NV needs to drop prices. GTX680 now costs a good $70-80+ more than most 7970s. If you get something like the $450 Vapor-X, there are only 2 680 cards that can compete by virtue of surpassing 1300mhz: $550 MSI 680 Lightning and $660 EVGA Classified + EVBot. GTX670 is being undercut by a HD7950 by $70-80 as well and HD7870 undercuts 660Ti by $60-100. The 670 does have good sales for $330-350 so it's still decent for now, but 660Ti and 680 are just overpriced.

NV is simply delivering less FPS / $1 spent (7870 vs. 660Ti, 7950 vs. 670, 7970/7970GE vs. 680). That's not even considering overclocking which only exacerbates NV's price/performance equation for NV because GTX670 OC / 680 OC cannot beat HD7950 OC / 7970 OC, respectively. And then there is bitcoin mining which allows for AMD cards to earn $ every month at cheap North American electricity rates. If we consider that, well then NV is price/performance goes right out the window. Having said that if someone wants to go dual-GPUs, needs PhysX, wants 3D Vision, then GTX670 SLI is still a great option.

================

PowerColor HD7950 for $270 CDN + Dirt Showdown + Sleeping Dogs. You can now get almost 2 7950s for the price of a 680.....