560 Ti vs 6950 Aghrrh

Get either a 6850/6870 or a GTX 460/560 non ti. I came from a setup that ran 1680x1050 and anything over a GTX 285 is complete overkill as I was maxing everything at 1680x1059 except crysis and metro.

I'd suggest going single 30 inch monitor for now and pairing that with a great value card such as a 6950 2gb. There really is no reason to be gaming at below 1080p when a console which has inferior hardware to your system can run 1080p no problem.
 
They dont run at 1980 resolution though, its just a low res upscaled. and secondly no i have no interest in a 30 inch display.

1680 resolutiuon is completely fine for me, I play alot of CS S and even then i use 1280 x800.
 
They dont run at 1980 resolution though, its just a low res upscaled. and secondly no i have no interest in a 30 inch display.

1680 resolutiuon is completely fine for me, I play alot of CS S and even then i use 1280 x800.

This is not true, at least for an xbox 360 I can tell you that the system runs the games at 1920x1080 if your using a hd cable like component or hdmi and a tv or projector that supports it.

If you'll be gaming at such a low resolution keep what you have, your probably already getting over 100fps in cc s with that.
 
This is not true, at least for an xbox 360 I can tell you that the system runs the games at 1920x1080 if your using a hd cable like component or hdmi and a tv or projector that supports it.

AFAIK, the majority of 360/PS3 games run at 720p. The 360 upscales them to 1080p, and the PS3 does not. There are a few games that run in native 1080p, though.
 
This is not true, at least for an xbox 360 I can tell you that the system runs the games at 1920x1080 if your using a hd cable like component or hdmi and a tv or projector that supports it.

If you'll be gaming at such a low resolution keep what you have, your probably already getting over 100fps in cc s with that.

the 360 doesn't render any games at 1080p that i know of. most are 720, some even less. list of know game resolutions

edit: where have you been?
 
Last edited:
I honestly find that hard to believe, 52 degrees in crysis ;s ive heard people report temps much higher then that.

It can easily be done, the cooler is in my opinion not even close to piss poor. I am running at 950mhz core (1.2vcore), 1350mem, with a moderate fan profile. It never hits more than 59c, with the fan at about 55% max. And I live in a very hot and damp environment with no ac, ambient is usually 30c+. It all depends on how good\bad your setup can take in\out air. I can easily believe his numbers.
 
the 560ti is a over priced card, its performance is less than of the 6950 and is more expensives uses more power. The only advantage it has over the 6950 is physics support. Granted you would have to lower your overall details in games to run it, and not many games support it.

I've used both and the 560ti was faster than my unlocked 6950 in most games at 1680x1050. I had to return the 560 because I was experiencing the GTX4xx/GTX5xx compatibility issues with my setup. I would have kept the 560 if not for that.
 
Get either a 6850/6870 or a GTX 460/560 non ti. I came from a setup that ran 1680x1050 and anything over a GTX 285 is complete overkill as I was maxing everything at 1680x1059 except crysis and metro.

I'd suggest going single 30 inch monitor for now and pairing that with a great value card such as a 6950 2gb. There really is no reason to be gaming at below 1080p when a console which has inferior hardware to your system can run 1080p no problem.

I played through Crysis and Warhead with max settings and 8xAA and it ran near 60fps the entire way through both (Not counting the DX10 bug during the boss in Crysis) on my 6950 at 1680x1050. 60fps is where I like to be so I'd call it adequate.

The consoles don't run any graphically modern games at 1080P. The great majority of them are 720P or below upscaled to 1080P.
 
There are 5 Xbox 360 games in that 2008 outdated list you linked alone. Don't you read the stuff you link to? Also you may want to read the OP

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241

edit: where have YOU been?

Look only a small handful of games run at 1080p, some dont even run at full 720p, and ye its from 2008 that meens since then as Developers have pushed the consoles to there limits the res has been dropped, doesent meen the list has increased atall.

Infact If you read N4G there are plenty of articles that get posted on what Res games are running on consoles and plenty of new games that dont even manage to hit 720P

I own both 360 and ps3, i think the only game i have played at full 1080 Res is wipeout.


I've used both and the 560ti was faster than my unlocked 6950 in most games at 1680x1050. I had to return the 560 because I was experiencing the GTX4xx/GTX5xx compatibility issues with my setup. I would have kept the 560 if not for that.

Yeah also the reason i want the card, most benchmarks seem to show this.
 
You made it sound like every game ran natively at 1080P which couldn't be farther from the truth.

To be honest, when I posted what I posted before I didn't know how many games actually ran at 1080p I just knew that some did and I just don't understand why someone would buy parts for a new gaming build to game on the pc at a lower resolution than even home consoles game at but I guess to each his own.
 
I've used both and the 560ti was faster than my unlocked 6950 in most games at 1680x1050. I had to return the 560 because I was experiencing the GTX4xx/GTX5xx compatibility issues with my setup. I would have kept the 560 if not for that.

I have to agree. I just now received a MSI 6970 from Newegg. It's competing against a 560 Ti and quite frankly, it's losing. First of all, this fucker is loud. It's audible at idle and this is the first card I've ever used that has been audible at idle over the rest of my system. Second of all, I'm playing two games of real interest right now: The Witcher 2 and Brink.

It suffers from the same problem that seemingly all ATI cards do in Brink. It runs like shit, roughly half the framerate of the 560 Ti with the same stutteriness and frame drops on certain maps in certain areas. It's also definitely slower in TW2. It's less pronounced there and it certainly isn't gamebreaking like it is in Brink, but it's slower all the same. Not to mention that the fan sounds like a damn jet engine in both of these games... it's bad.

I have never truly been disappointed with a video card purchase before. I usually waffle back and forth between my options because there is no clear winner, but this card is frankly disastrous. I only got it because I found a hella-good deal, but it's just not impressing me. It's been giving me trouble with 120Hz, it's been struggling to do the dual monitors thing properly, and it's just generally inferior to the 560 Ti in my experience so far. I know that the benchmarks place it roughly 25% ahead of the 560 Ti, but those benchmarks aren't everything.
 
the 6950 is not a loud card. I have used 6850/6870, 6950, 6970. None of the cards were loud. Even full tilt in games. In fact my CPU cooler is louder which is just the factory box heat sink that came with my 1055T. I have personally used the geforce offerings as well, 460, 560,570
The 560 Ti is slower in ALL games vs the 6950. If your having trouble with fan noise, and performance. I would uninstall your drivers and do driver sweeper. Reinstall with the latest drivers.

KIramerifffic, about witcher 2, there is a setting which is a bit buggy atm, if you have that one until the driver hotfix comes out your performance will be hurt. Turn ubersampling off and you'll be good to go.
 
To be honest, when I posted what I posted before I didn't know how many games actually ran at 1080p I just knew that some did and I just don't understand why someone would buy parts for a new gaming build to game on the pc at a lower resolution than even home consoles game at but I guess to each his own.

None of the AAA titles run at 1080p. It's pretty much reserved for the PSN/Xbox Arcade games. Most console games also run with non-existent or horrible AA, low framerates, and lowish settings. It's not even comparable.

In my case I'd rather run my current 16:10 IPS than to spend money to "upgrade" to a 16:9 TN.
 
the 6950 is not a loud card. I have used 6850/6870, 6950, 6970. None of the cards were loud. Even full tilt in games. In fact my CPU cooler is louder which is just the factory box heat sink that came with my 1055T. I have personally used the geforce offerings as well, 460, 560,570

The 6950 can get pretty loud. It's noticeably louder than the rest of my system once the fan speed is above 35% and gets somewhat annoying at 50%. The 560Ti I used did not have a reference cooler so it's not really a fair comparison but I never even heard the fans spin up on it.

The 560 Ti is slower in ALL games vs the 6950. If your having trouble with fan noise, and performance. I would uninstall your drivers and do driver sweeper. Reinstall with the latest drivers.

No, it's not. The 560Ti was faster than the 6950 in almost every single game I tested them both in. It wasn't a huge difference but it was there.
 
No, it's not. The 560Ti was faster than the 6950 in almost every single game I tested them both in. It wasn't a huge difference but it was there.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/05/23/gigabyte_hd_6870_super_overclock_video_card_review/3

because your results are not repeatable. The 6950 is faster than the 560 ti in every game Hardocp tested. It was faster in my personal system as well.

the performance of the 560 ti sits between the 6870 and the 6950. I don't know how you are actually benchmarking your system but every site i've been to these are the same results, including my personal results.
 
I went through a similar debate, trying to choose between 6850's in xfire, a 6950 2gb reference to do a shader unlock, and a 560. I was coming from two 8800 GTS 512 in SLI so I knew there would be a huge difference but I wanted to upgrade for the long term. I went with the 6850's and have had a ton of driver problems. Flashing and jagged textures in BC2 is an annoyance that I live with now, but at least the rig is booting up now. AMD really needs to up their game on their driver side.
 
None of the AAA titles run at 1080p. It's pretty much reserved for the PSN/Xbox Arcade games. Most console games also run with non-existent or horrible AA, low framerates, and lowish settings. It's not even comparable.

It has never been used as a comparison by me, not sure why you say that. I said they can run 1080p res and they can end of story. It was a reference to my not understanding why game at 12x7 when home consoles can run games at higher resolutions with lower end hardware. I guess the op like cs s and other competitive games and fps > image quality/fidelity

In my case I'd rather run my current 16:10 IPS than to spend money to "upgrade" to a 16:9 TN.

I'd be careful at using this as a generalized statement. Although usually the truth for 99% of TN panels out there. Keep in mind it may not always be the case. I for example, have 3 TN panels and no they are not your ordinary TN panels. These can kick the shit out of 90% of IPS panels out there, probably yours even. Research them.

No, it's not. The 560Ti was faster than the 6950 in almost every single game I tested them both in. It wasn't a huge difference but it was there.

Not sure what games you were playing but the 6950 is faster than the GTX 560 Ti by about 10% give or take a few % in almost every single game. That is why they were considered overpriced when they came out. Too close to the superior 2GB 6950 price to be worth the launch price for many. Research and read some reviews.
 
It has never been used as a comparison by me, not sure why you say that. I said they can run 1080p res and they can end of story. It was a reference to my not understanding why game at 12x7 when home consoles can run games at higher resolutions with lower end hardware. I guess the op like cs s and other competitive games and fps > image quality/fidelity.

Should probably just say they upscale 99% of their games to 1080P and no one would argue with you. 1280x768 is basically 720P and still, console games hardly ever run at that. It basically like playing L4D2 at 1366x720 stretched out on a 24" 1920x1080 monitor and it looks like shit.
 
I'd be careful at using this as a generalized statement. Although usually the truth for 99% of TN panels out there. Keep in mind it may not always be the case. I for example, have 3 TN panels and no they are not your ordinary TN panels. These can kick the shit out of 90% of IPS panels out there, probably yours even. Research them.

I have. There are only a handful of TNs that are even close to IPS panels in regard to graphical quality and I have yet to see one without bad viewing angles. Also, none of them are 16:10 which is what I referenced in my earlier post.

Not sure what games you were playing but the 6950 is faster than the GTX 560 Ti by about 10% give or take a few % in almost every single game. That is why they were considered overpriced when they came out. Too close to the superior 2GB 6950 price to be worth the launch price for many. Research and read some reviews.

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1588960

http://www.++++++++++++++++++++/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/40552-nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti-roundup-asus-evga-gigabyte-msi-10.html


http://www.anandtech.com/show/4135/nvidias-geforce-gtx-560-ti-upsetting-the-250-market/1
 
those to cards aren't even in the same class performance wise the 6950 will blow the 560 away.

people here are so weird somone posts a pair of reference gtx 480's in the for sale forum for 540 and gets bumps for having a great deal but post a pair of reference 6950's for ten dollars less and even though both cards are going for the same price in retail and the 6950's perform better the dude who posts the 6950's gets badgered all day about being over priced.

anyways/endrant.

long story short get the 6950.
 
I use a ref cooler 6950 unlocked, fan on auto, and it is no louder than my gtx 570 sc card when idle or gaming.
 

True they are at a different aspect ratio. I don't mind the aspect ratio difference but it's yet another drawback to the inferior TN panel tech. It seems 16:10 panels are being phased out though. Eventually even the newer IPS panels coming will be 16:9. At least it looks like it'll be that way in no time.

Not sure your results in that thread will be re produced as mostly every real world performance review shows the 6950 is a faster card. Anand's canned benchmark review is pointless. According to them, it seems the GTX 560 Ti seems to be the card to get if you run canned benchmarks all day!! LOL. :D They also use a bunch of heavy nvidia favored games not because they are biases in any way but it skews their results nonetheless. Mass effect 2, Civ 5, Hawx 2, all in the same review.

Of all the links you just provided the most interesting to me would be the hardware canucks but unfortunately I can't access the link as the forum seems to destroy links to their website. Could you please post which article it is from and I'll go to their site and find it manually and read it. They do real world performance most of the time or a mix of both so I think that'll be more valuable info than anandtech. Nevermind I found it. Looking now...

Edit: The canucks review you linked is very favorable for the 6950 over the GTX 560Ti. When I looked at the charts I looked at the 6950 2gb vs the GTX 560 Ti as you can get both for the same price and they are both stock clocked. In that review you see the 6950 beating the GTX 560 Ti factory clocked card in most every scenario where there is AA and/or the game is not nvidia biased. The best showing for the GTX 560 Ti factory clocked model was in dirt 2 and that was a synthetic benchmark.

That is the 6950 1gb or 2gb stock clocked. keep in mind you can unlock many 6950s even 1gb models and aftermarket models now too as long as they have a writable bios using rbe and the shader unlock checkbox. That puts the 6950 at 6970 stock levels and an even better value even compared to the heavily factory overclocked gtx 560ti models listed in that review.

Canned benchmarks show 560ti in a better light than the card really gives someone who buys the card to play games at home.

I game at high levels of aa 8x or 4x aa at the minimum. Many of the results that showed them close or with the GTX 560Ti slightly beating a 6950 you'll notice the 6950 had a higher minimum framerate or the game simply was at a low res with no aa and I don't know who would cherry pick that as a victory as if your gaming without IQ you can get a GTX 260 from last gen, and play the same games at playable fps.
 
Last edited:
Canned benchmarks show 560ti in a better light than the card really gives someone who buys the card to play games at home.

Again, I have used both in gaming, in the same system. In no instance did the 6950 run faster than the 560ti at 1680x1050.
 
Again, I have used both in gaming, in the same system. In no instance did the 6950 run faster than the 560ti at 1680x1050

Well that is your problem right there. You don't buy a 250$ video card to run 1680x1050.. Heck my old 4870 can max out that res in 99% of games.

You buy a 250$ video card to run 1080P and higher resolutions..... It is known that the 5XX series does really well at low resolutions, but soon as you step into the high resolutions the AMD cards perform better.

I have used the following cards. AMD 6790/6850/6870/6950/6970 Nvidia 450gts/460/560ti/570/ 580. The 6870 is a better competitor to the 560 TI than the 6950 is. I don't think there was one game i tested where the 560TI beat out the 6950 on my system running at 1920x1200 resolution.
 
Again, I have used both in gaming, in the same system. In no instance did the 6950 run faster than the 560ti at 1680x1050.

What AA settings were you using? Even in the canucks review it fared well at 1680x1050 as long as there was either one of 2 factors 0AA OR A nvidia bias game (unnecessarily high tessellation) 1 e.g.. Did you test on any non nvidia heavily bias games? Comment 2 on your thread by sam morris says it all. http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1588960

Well that is your problem right there. You don't buy a 250$ video card to run 1680x1050.. Heck my old 4870 can max out that res in 99% of games.

You buy a 250$ video card to run 1080P and higher resolutions..... It is known that the 5XX series does really well at low resolutions, but soon as you step into the high resolutions the AMD cards perform better.

I have used the following cards. AMD 6790/6850/6870/6950/6970 Nvidia 450gts/460/560ti/570/ 580. The 6870 is a better competitor to the 560 TI than the 6950 is. I don't think there was one game i tested where the 560TI beat out the 6950 on my system running at 1920x1200 resolution.

This is very true. However even at 16x10 I've seen the 6950 beat out a GTX 560 Ti if you are using at least moderate IQ settings. I mean for one I agree you shouldn't buy such hardware for such a paltry resolution in the first place but why waste all that gpu overhead by not adding at least 8x AA. In that scenario the GTX 560 Ti would struggle and the 6950 would shine. BTW I'm not talking about vram I'm simply talking about 1gb vs 1gb. Look at the canucks revew and go to the 8x msaa test section after the games. At 25x16 there is a huge difference in 4 of 5 games despite the vram.
 
Well that is your problem right there. You don't buy a 250$ video card to run 1680x1050.. Heck my old 4870 can max out that res in 99% of games.

You buy a 250$ video card to run 1080P and higher resolutions..... It is known that the 5XX series does really well at low resolutions, but soon as you step into the high resolutions the AMD cards perform better.

I have used the following cards. AMD 6790/6850/6870/6950/6970 Nvidia 450gts/460/560ti/570/ 580. The 6870 is a better competitor to the 560 TI than the 6950 is. I don't think there was one game i tested where the 560TI beat out the 6950 on my system running at 1920x1200 resolution.

1080p is only 300,000 more pixels than 1680x1050. It's not like it looks or performs amazingly better because it's 240 pixels wider. And a 4870 maxing out 99% of games may count if you're including old games too. I came from a 260 which performed nearly identically to the 4870 and it could not max out many games (Metro, Crysis, GTA4, Mafia 2, Rift, BF:BC2, etc.).
 
What AA settings were you using? Even in the canucks review it fared well at 1680x1050 as long as there was either one of 2 factors 0AA OR A nvidia bias game (unnecessarily high tessellation) 1 e.g.. Did you test on any non nvidia heavily bias games? Comment 2 on your thread by sam morris says it all. http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1588960

You can see in my comparison that I was using 4x or 8x AA where possible. The canucks review shows the 560 being faster than the 6950 even when AA is used in 5 out of 7 games. But the other 2 games shouldn't count since they're AvP and F1 - two notoriously AMD biased games :p.
 
the 6950 is not a loud card. I have used 6850/6870, 6950, 6970. None of the cards were loud. Even full tilt in games. In fact my CPU cooler is louder which is just the factory box heat sink that came with my 1055T. I have personally used the geforce offerings as well, 460, 560,570
The 560 Ti is slower in ALL games vs the 6950. If your having trouble with fan noise, and performance. I would uninstall your drivers and do driver sweeper. Reinstall with the latest drivers.

KIramerifffic, about witcher 2, there is a setting which is a bit buggy atm, if you have that one until the driver hotfix comes out your performance will be hurt. Turn ubersampling off and you'll be good to go.

We all have differing notions of tolerable system noise, and yours clearly favors the loud end. I'm not using a factory box heatsink, I'm using a Thermalright Silver Arrow with a pair of 14cm 900 RPM fans to keep an i7 930 @ 4.2GHz cool and quiet. I'm running an Antec 1200 with 5 12cm Scythe S-Flex fans all at 1200 RPM for superb airflow while remaining quiet. The 6970 is not the most obnoxious card I've ever owned, that award goes to the X1950XT, but it's still considerably louder than the 560 Ti.

I am also not running ubersampling in TW2. Bugged or otherwise, I find it to be a massive FPS drain for a minor improvement in static visual fidelity. I know how to uninstall and reinstall drivers with Driver Sweeper, so these are not driver issues. I consistently get drops into the 30s and 40s on the 6970 while the 560 Ti very rarely sees the 50s.

I also see you failed to address the Brink issue (so has ATI in 3 separate release candidates of their 11.5a hotfix drivers). Brink is, to put it frankly, a fucking disaster on ATI hardware. Maybe they'll fix it in a driver update, maybe they won't, but it's remained disaster status through three separate driver revisions from ATI and two major "performance improvement" patches from Splash Damage. It just doesn't inspire much faith in ATI when this sort of thing happens in the game that you personally want to play.

These two games have renewed my lack of faith in ATI's driver department. They catch a lot of flak for a reason: they have driver issues. Like it or not, admit it or not, they have some real issues, and they don't always fix them in a timely fashion. I'm interested to see if their next driver revision actually fixes any of these problems with TW2 and Brink, because god knows their last 3 tries haven't done jack shit.

And I'm not an NV fanboy. I've already stated that I owned an X1950XT, I had a 9800 Pro before that, and more recently a 4850 and finally a 4890. Historically I've tended more toward the red side than the green, but this is one time that my personal experiences with them cannot abide. This 6970 was a damn steal at $250 and it's a travesty that I'm going to have to send it back even with all the benchmarks, people and logic on its side. It should be the better card, but for my purposes and needs right now, it just plain isn't.
 
Well that is your problem right there. You don't buy a 250$ video card to run 1680x1050.. Heck my old 4870 can max out that res in 99% of games.

You buy a 250$ video card to run 1080P and higher resolutions..... It is known that the 5XX series does really well at low resolutions, but soon as you step into the high resolutions the AMD cards perform better.

I have used the following cards. AMD 6790/6850/6870/6950/6970 Nvidia 450gts/460/560ti/570/ 580. The 6870 is a better competitor to the 560 TI than the 6950 is. I don't think there was one game i tested where the 560TI beat out the 6950 on my system running at 1920x1200 resolution.

I highly doubt you can max out 99% of games using 4870 @ 1680 x 1050 LOL. I had 4890 before and sure it allowed me max out some games but by far not 99% and that was at 1600 x 900. I love it how lower resolution such as 1680 x 1050 often get underestimated.
Back on the topic, I've taken my lesson, 4890 was a beast when all works well, im just tired of the extra efforts to make it works well for me so i switched to nVidia. Like I said before, there is something about AMD cards that makes them shine on popular titles, those used on reviews, but moving onto less popular and older titles, they lose their beastness, they either need extra efforts (mostly not easy) or nothing you can do at all. Few titles still fresh on my mind, Monday Night Combat (crash/unplayable), Mount and Blade Warband (broken graphics and stuttering), Last Remnants (no working AA).
 
Calling out Bankie as a NV fanboy. His results contrast all of the data collected by H and all the other sites.
 
We all have differing notions of tolerable system noise, and yours clearly favors the loud end. I'm not using a factory box heatsink, I'm using a Thermalright Silver Arrow with a pair of 14cm 900 RPM fans to keep an i7 930 @ 4.2GHz cool and quiet. I'm running an Antec 1200 with 5 12cm Scythe S-Flex fans all at 1200 RPM for superb airflow while remaining quiet. The 6970 is not the most obnoxious card I've ever owned, that award goes to the X1950XT, but it's still considerably louder than the 560 Ti.

I am also not running ubersampling in TW2. Bugged or otherwise, I find it to be a massive FPS drain for a minor improvement in static visual fidelity. I know how to uninstall and reinstall drivers with Driver Sweeper, so these are not driver issues. I consistently get drops into the 30s and 40s on the 6970 while the 560 Ti very rarely sees the 50s.

I also see you failed to address the Brink issue (so has ATI in 3 separate release candidates of their 11.5a hotfix drivers). Brink is, to put it frankly, a fucking disaster on ATI hardware. Maybe they'll fix it in a driver update, maybe they won't, but it's remained disaster status through three separate driver revisions from ATI and two major "performance improvement" patches from Splash Damage. It just doesn't inspire much faith in ATI when this sort of thing happens in the game that you personally want to play.

These two games have renewed my lack of faith in ATI's driver department. They catch a lot of flak for a reason: they have driver issues. Like it or not, admit it or not, they have some real issues, and they don't always fix them in a timely fashion. I'm interested to see if their next driver revision actually fixes any of these problems with TW2 and Brink, because god knows their last 3 tries haven't done jack shit.

And I'm not an NV fanboy. I've already stated that I owned an X1950XT, I had a 9800 Pro before that, and more recently a 4850 and finally a 4890. Historically I've tended more toward the red side than the green, but this is one time that my personal experiences with them cannot abide. This 6970 was a damn steal at $250 and it's a travesty that I'm going to have to send it back even with all the benchmarks, people and logic on its side. It should be the better card, but for my purposes and needs right now, it just plain isn't.

look at my sig. I have a thermal take V9 gaming case. i have 2 230mm fans running at 900rpms, which are silent, 140mm intake fan, and a 120mm exhaust fan and of coarse the PSU fan. All of these fans are silent running and are not audible. I keep my room cool at 68 degrees, my system temp isn't much higher. My CPU fan is by far the loudest thing in my system. When i had the 6970 installed it wasn't much louder than my 6870. The CPU fan was still louder.

I highly doubt you can max out 99% of games using 4870 @ 1680 x 1050 LOL. I had 4890 before and sure it allowed me max out some games but by far not 99% and that was at 1600 x 900. I love it how lower resolution such as 1680 x 1050 often get underestimated.
Back on the topic, I've taken my lesson, 4890 was a beast when all works well, im just tired of the extra efforts to make it works well for me so i switched to nVidia. Like I said before, there is something about AMD cards that makes them shine on popular titles, those used on reviews, but moving onto less popular and older titles, they lose their beastness, they either need extra efforts (mostly not easy) or nothing you can do at all. Few titles still fresh on my mind, Monday Night Combat (crash/unplayable), Mount and Blade Warband (broken graphics and stuttering), Last Remnants (no working AA).

My 4870 was overclocked a good bit, but yes i HAD ZERO trouble running most games at MAX settings. Sure some of the new breed of games prolly would have to turn off AA and maybe lower a setting here or there.

Anyone yells driver problems, and state that AMD has crap drivers, your are automatically a Nvidia Fan boy. No side is perfect, and i can name some games which NVIDIA has driver problems, cough dragon age 2 cough. OH MY what is this? the green team has a driver issue quick dash into your doomsday cave.

now if you want to buy a video card due to its 1680x1050 performance, when 1080P+ performance is where you want to look for longevity.

I'm done arguing with you folks, I don't care to mow though anymore BS. Buy what ever card you want. I'm telling you right now a 6950 is a better card than that 560ti. Believe what you want. Post up all your links to external sites, but the forums your posting on are the ones of [H] OCP. In there reviews it CLEARLY shows the 6950 to beat the 560ti.
 
Back
Top