Question about GTX680 Vs Radeon 7970

[xeledon20005]

I was noticing the benchmarks on this site for nvidia gtx 680 vs 7970 though to me they seem very close I do have question:

The benchmark compares a GTX680 2GB to 7970 3GB, the results I think are pretty close to each other, maybe I don't know much, I have a GTX 680 4GB module would it change the results of the benchmark at all? or would the 7970 overall just be alittle better then the 680?

If you have any questions about my current configurations feel free to post about it.

I have a GTX 680 4GB stock module.
(debating on overclocking it)

 

[Fx1]

I was noticing the benchmarks on this site for nvidia gtx 680 vs 7970 though to me they seem very close I do have question:

The benchmark compares a GTX680 2GB to 7970 3GB, the results I think are pretty close to each other, maybe I don't know much, I have a GTX 680 4GB module would it change the results of the benchmark at all? or would the 7970 overall just be alittle better then the 680?

If you have any questions about my current configurations feel free to post about it.

I have a GTX 680 4GB stock module.
(debating on overclocking it)

No.

The 7970 beats it hands down because it has a faster GPU and generally more of everything.

4GB of Vram doesnt help unless the bandwidth is also increased which i dont think it is.

 

[Greenlepricon]

Welcome to the forums. To answer your question, in most cases no. The benchmarks would be exactly the same. Very few games will use over 2GB of RAM under most testing conditions (without texture packs, single monitor, etc.). In the few games where more than 2GB are used, 3GB would be rare, much less 4. So if you are using a setup that somehow needs that much memory (some people amazingly do), then it might make a bit of a difference. Chances are it won't change the benchmarks much if at all though.

 

[Granseth]

A modded skyrim can use more than 2GB. And I would think that in some cases in the future if you plan to keep the card for a while the 4GB would find some uses, but for the most part it's only something you would need when using high(multiscreen) resolution and preferable in SLI, but that will always be an option.

When comparing 7970 and 680 they equal to about the same. In some games the 680 gives you a better experience and in some cases the 7970 will. But for the most you would have to look hard to notice the difference.

And you should definitely do an OC, even if it's a light one.

 

[ICDP]

I was noticing the benchmarks on this site for nvidia gtx 680 vs 7970 though to me they seem very close I do have question:

The benchmark compares a GTX680 2GB to 7970 3GB, the results I think are pretty close to each other, maybe I don't know much, I have a GTX 680 4GB module would it change the results of the benchmark at all? or would the 7970 overall just be alittle better then the 680?

If you have any questions about my current configurations feel free to post about it.

I have a GTX 680 4GB stock module.
(debating on overclocking it)

There would be no difference between the 2GB and 4GB in regards to performance unless you use a game like Skyrim with hi-res texture mods. The difference between the GTX 680 and HD 7970 is marginal in most games. The price/perf does favour the 7970 but you already have a GTX 680, it's a great card, enjoy it.

 

[Fx1]

There would be no difference between the 2GB and 4GB in regards to performance unless you use a game like Skyrim with hi-res texture mods. The difference between the GTX 680 and HD 7970 is marginal in most games. The price/perf does favour the 7970 but you already have a GTX 680, it's a great card, enjoy it.

Skyrim cant address 4gb of video memory. Why does everyone think those textures are so demanding?

its a 32bit program and couldnt even address more than 2gb of system memory until it was updated.

 

[Rvenger]

nvm

 

[akaliel]

Skyrim cant address 4gb of video memory. Why does everyone think those textures are so demanding?

its a 32bit program and couldnt even address more than 2gb of system memory until it was updated.

The default textures won't but there are high res texture packs which can use a lot more. But I believe you're right, I don't think it can address more the 2gb of memory, or is it 3gb?

That said you're not just buying a card for the games you're playing today, or a 1 yr old game like Skyrim. If you plan to keep that set up for 4 or 5 years. It doesn't hurt to do a little forward thinking.




Been ages since I posted here, just looked at my sig below. WOW! That is so NOT the rig I run today!

 

[Fx1]

The default textures won't but there are high res texture packs which can use a lot more. But I believe you're right, I don't think it can address more the 2gb of memory, or is it 3gb?

That said you're not just buying a card for the games you're playing today, or a 1 yr old game like Skyrim. If you plan to keep that set up for 4 or 5 years. It doesn't hurt to do a little forward thinking.




Been ages since I posted here, just looked at my sig below. WOW! That is so NOT the rig I run today!

Those high texture packs are also nothing. They barely change the game tbh i have them all installed. 4GB on a 680 is a waste of time since it only has a 256bit bus which makes it nearly useless

 

[ICDP]

Skyrim cant address 4gb of video memory. Why does everyone think those textures are so demanding?

its a 32bit program and couldnt even address more than 2gb of system memory until it was updated.

Skyrim only accessing 2GB of system RAM while running the exe is a seperate issue from what VRAM it uses.

 

[Black Octagon]

4GB of VRAM is overkill unless you are gaming on triple monitors and/or turning AA waaaayy up (and even then, for such setups you're looking at 2-4 670/680s anyway...)

 

[ICDP]

4GB of VRAM is overkill unless you are gaming on triple monitors and/or turning AA waaaayy up (and even then, for such setups you're looking at 2-4 670/680s anyway...)

Agreed, performance will run out long before VRAM limits are met. Skyrim with hi-res texture mods causes massive FPS drops on my GTX 680 (2560x1600). The cure was to drop MSAA from 8x to 2X and to be honest at that res with FXAA it wasn't noticable.

 

[Black Octagon]

^+1. I play Skyrim at 25601440 and TBH leave SSAA at 2x
4x DOES look slightly better, but 8x is a waste at this resolution

 

[xeledon20005]

Basicallyl if i just did a slight overclock on my card it would beat the 7970, as it is right now the 680 still outperforms in alot of games and the 7970 beats only in a few.

 

[Fx1]

Basicallyl if i just did a slight overclock on my card it would beat the 7970, as it is right now the 680 still outperforms in alot of games and the 7970 beats only in a few.

Err no.

the 7970 beats it in nearly every game since the 7970 will clock like a monster.

Every 7970 will hit the GHZ clocks without even a change in voltage.

In fact most 7970 come with an OC of 1ghz out the box anyway now even reference cards.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Im off the Nvidia bandwagon. Love the cards but AMD is just as good and right now they are cheaper and include free games. Not even a question anymore.

 

[notty22]

Basicallyl if i just did a slight overclock on my card it would beat the 7970, as it is right now the 680 still outperforms in alot of games and the 7970 beats only in a few.

Maybe do a review of your new card. With some pics of it. Benchmarks etc. Instead of looking for a epeen debate. Your conclusion, will surely challenge owners of the 7970, to defend their decision making etc.

 

[Fx1]

Maybe do a review of your new card. With some pics of it. Benchmarks etc. Instead of looking for a epeen debate. Your conclusion, will surely challenge owners of the 7970, to defend their decision making etc.

Im pretty sure there is no challenge in this debate

the 680 GTX is the slower card VS the 7970/7970 GHZ

 

[xeledon20005]

I will perhaps do a review of my card. Let me add a signature with my computers specs.

I can't seem to add a signature yet must be because I am a new memeber.

Anyway my computer specs are thus-

i7 3770k no OC | Gigabyte GA-Z77X-D3H-LGA 1155 | 32 GB Corsair Vengeance 9-9-9-24 1600mhz| EVGA GTX 680 4GB 1019/1084 | 750W Corsair Powersupply | 2 840 pro Samsung 128GB in RAID0 | I play on resolution of 1680x1050 Acer Ferrari monitor;

If you need anymore information about my computer specs please feel free to post.