137 replies to this topic

[Barbaric Soul]

Catamount, on 26 March 2012 - 02:20 AM, said:

Your two 5870s should already outperform a GK104 handily (as it's not even faster than the 5970, which is clocked lower), so the GK110 wouldn't gain you much. You'd be paying like $600-$700 for maybe a 25-30% performance increase, at absolute best, based on the suggested specifications.

On the other hand, there's basically nothing that exceeds the capabilities of your cards, at least at single-monitor resolutions.

That's not exactly correct. The GTX680 is about equal to my 5870 crossfireX set up. And it's not all about a gain in performance. I don't keep computer hardware to the point that it has no monetary value. I could get about $350 for my 5870 cards if I was to sell them now, come summer time, that will be down to somewhere between $250-300.

BTW, a 30% performance boost is plenty for an upgrade IMHO. Especailly considering I'd be getting that boost from a single card I'll SLI as a later upgrade. Also, keep in mind this is the monitor I'm using- http://www.newegg.co...N82E16824001098

[nano]

A 30incher Barbs? Nice. I'm planning on doing 3x24" myself. I gotta say, its a tough decision between NVIDIA and AMD, at this point anyway.

[Fresh Meat]

The GTX 680 has adaptive vsync, providing smoother game play below 60 fps and cutting back on micro stuttering. That plus comparable performance and $50 less price make it seem a better deal IMO.

[nano]

Good points.

[HeroicTofu]

Yeah. For the comparison of 7970 and GTX 680, the 680 has the edge, both with performance and price. I'm hoping that when I go to get my 7870 (not the 9, the 8), that the effect of the 680 being super awesome will cause all AMD cards to go down in price. I'd love to get the 7870 for $300 instead of $350. Since I'm running a monitor with a max res of 1280x1024, I've got no real reason to upgrade past that point.

[Barbaric Soul]

nano, on 26 March 2012 - 09:13 AM, said:

A 30incher Barbs? Nice. I'm planning on doing 3x24" myself. I gotta say, its a tough decision between NVIDIA and AMD, at this point anyway.

Yeah, I found the 30" last fall on CL for $150. I also have a 1920*1200 resolution 24".

HeroicTofu, on 26 March 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

. Since I'm running a monitor with a max res of 1280x1024, I've got no real reason to upgrade past that point.

Dude, a 9800gtx+/gts250/4850 will max that rsolution.

[Vincent Vascaul]

a 30 inch for $150, I. hate. you.

[Barbaric Soul]

Vincent Vascaul, on 26 March 2012 - 03:42 PM, said:

a 30 inch for $150, I. hate. you.

Get that right, a $800 30 inch for $150.

http://www.google.co...ved=0CFMQ8wIwAA#

I've also gotten a 3 week old GTS450 for $20.

[Charles Martel]

Beater desktop has a GeForce 8800GTS, new laptop has a GTX560M, and the new build desktop I'll be putting together in June will have two GTX680s.

[DarkBazerker]

I used both geforce and radeon never had any break on me before. In performace there about neck in neck but geforce does give you alittle more power and heat. Radeon uselly is cheaper and cooler.

If you want somthing to play your games on high and low Ultra setting go for ether a 560ti or a 6870 radeon.
You can get a 6870 now for $160.

[SirDenOfYork]

I have always have good luck with my Nvidia GTX grouping...

[Sym]

I've been running my Nvidia GTX 560 Ti 2gb for almost a year and love it.

I just did a quick google and found this that might help people who are looking for a good card for the money.
http://www.videocard...orce+GTX+560+Ti

Edited by Sym, 27 March 2012 - 01:26 PM.

[GDL Germ]

Nvidia the way its meant to be played. gtx 560 2gb

[bikerbass77]

AMD cards generally give better bang for the buck at most price points. Nvidia tends have more consistant performance and works better in SLI than AMD works in Crossfire. I have used both for extended periods and both have their good and bad points. Nvidia is also better in terms of compatibility with older games as they generally have better quality drivers although I have noticed AMD generally give better visual quality.

[RecklessFable]

My GTX 560 (Twin FROZR) has that problem where I have to shut the machine off every couple of days to clear out the artifacts that start to accumulate. Rebooting doesn't help, only cold reboot.

Drivers have never helped.

When I buy my next card (or pair) for my system, it will be AMD. I've never gone AMD before but I'm kinda tired of nVidias blowing up after a year. They never make it to the end of my planned 2-year refresh cycles...

Edited by RecklessFable, 27 March 2012 - 01:42 PM.

[Chiyeko Kuramochi]

I been through 3-4 ATI cards and 1 Nvidia, the fact that I run ATI right now is simply because it is a laptop and it had this card.

For me the real issue is with drivers ATI has given me hassle always and needed work around fixes blah blah (seriously random people can make things work and you can't as a company) so I am leaning towards Nvidia, however in the end it is just logic and I get whatever gives me the best bang for my buck.

[LordDeathStrike]

MuffinTop, on 09 January 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

I have a Nvidia 8800 GTX, and I wonder what some of you moneybags have or will be buying to upgrade your rigs. Whats most important to you, and is brand loyalty based on the name or do you have extensive use of both cards? Did one brand break your heart once, twice and will never go back? Did you base your decision on your friend's sister's boyfriend's neighbor's experience, i.e another person's opinion and never tried the other brand? I'm curious, because I'm looking at switching to a mid range AMD Radeon for my next purchase. Thanks in advance for your time.

screw brand loyalty, both make fail crap cards, and both make good cards.

lately amd makes good cards for less. especially for laptops like the one i use, so i have an amd crossfire setup.

get the best card your budget can, whoever makes it. (if you have 200$ and amd has a good card for 199, but nvidias equivelent is 250, you get what i mean, and vice versa)

both companies have sucked at driver support lately, and amd has come the furthest in remedieing the issues. but neither updates in a timely enough fashion for paying customers to feel satsified. god help you if you buy bleeding edge cards, they have the worst driver support of them all.

Edited by LordDeathStrike, 08 April 2012 - 02:44 AM.

[Radmo1]

all Good valid posts here .....

[Catamount]

Well, yes and no.

A lot of the information given here is woefully out of date. Ati/AMD Radeon cards no longer offer superior image quality, and haven't in a long time, while Nvidia drivers are no longer better, and haven't been for a long time. Likewise, Nvidia hasn't gotten better performance out of SLI than Crossfire has delivered, again, in quite a number of years.


With the battle between Fermi and Evergreen/Northern Islands the only differences were that AMD cards consumed less power, and that AMD cards were a better deal at most pricepoints vs the Geforce 500 series. That's it. That's the total difference between the two.


Now the market's changed up again. Thus far, AMD is dominating the higher mid range with the 7870, while Nvidia is dominating the high end with the 680. Nvidia seems to have closed the power consumption gap and then some, so it's possible the 600 series will prove itself superior to Southern Islands, leaving AMD to regroup and come back with Canary Islands, but let me emphasize that that's pure speculation.

[StandingCow]

I go back and forth... whichever has the best price/performance is what I go with, don't care if it is nvidia or amd.

Usually I use this: http://www.tomshardw...eview,3107.html