660Ti or 7950 for Battlefield 3

the HD 7950 boost is 15% faster than GTX 660 Ti.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/31.html

GTX 660 Ti - 58.5
HD 7950 iceq boost - 67.5
GTX 670 - 67.5
HD 7970 Ghz - 78.9
HD 7950 boost OC (1200) - 82.9

An average HD 7950 boost OC of 1125 Mhz matches HD 7970 Ghz performance which would be around 20% faster than a GTX 660 Ti OC (1200 Mhz). Go with the HD 7950 boost.
 
BF3 runs better on AMD cards. This is not the same with other games, like skyrim: it runs much better on Nvidia cards.
 
Geforce gtx 660ti will be your best all around card un less bf3 is the only game you ever plan to run then by all means get the 7950:D
 
KazeoHin said:
BF3 runs better on AMD cards. This is not the same with other games, like skyrim: it runs much better on Nvidia cards.
Click to expand...

Not in my experience. I had horrid frame rate drops on the 7950 that I purchased. I returned it and got the GTX 670 OC WindForce. Never had an issue with frame rates since. I sincerely doubt that Frostbite was optimized for AMD graphics.
 
Hmmm looks like the drivers have definitely pushed the AMD ahead quite a bit.
 
And if he can afford $60-$70 more, he can forego the 660Ti and get a 670 OC model which costs less than a 7970 at the same performance level. If not, then I would probably cite with getting the 7950 vs the 660. As for the new drivers, I am wondering what AMD changed to get them to perform better...
 
Geforcepat said:
Geforce gtx 660ti will be your best all around card un less bf3 is the only game you ever plan to run then by all means get the 7950:D
Click to expand...

BF3 would be the main game. But I'd also like to play Far Cry 3, Day Z, etc.

Not looking to spend any more than $300, so I'm thinking the 7950 will be my best bet.
 
KazeoHin said:
BF3 runs better on AMD cards. This is not the same with other games, like skyrim: it runs much better on Nvidia cards.
Click to expand...

I, like a few others in this thread have read the exact opposite. Any links?
 
RamonGTP said:
I, like a few others in this thread have read the exact opposite. Any links?
Click to expand...

other than the hardocp review mentioned above here are a few others

BF3 singleplayer

310.61 beta vs 12.11 beta 8
http://www.techspot.com/review/603-best-graphics-cards/page4.html

1920 x 1200 4x AA

HD 7970 Ghz - 81
GTX 680 - 73
HD 7950 boost - 69
GTX 660 Ti - 60

BF3 Multiplayer

BF3 Strike at karkand 310.33 vs 12.11 beta

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/bericht-amd-catalyst-12.11-beta/9/
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/nvidia-geforce-310.33-beta/10/

1920 x 1080 FXAA
HD 7970 Ghz - 119.2
GTX 680 - 94.9

1920 x 1080 4x MSAA

HD 7970 Ghz - 78.3
GTX 680 - 65.2

BF3 Aftermath 310.70 whql vs 12.11 beta 11
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/battlefield-3-aftermath-test-gpu.html

1920 x 1080 HQ

HD 7970 Ghz - 107
GTX 680 - 91
HD 7970 (925) - 93
HD 7950 (800 Mhz) - 81
GTX 660 Ti - 75

a HD 7950 boost (925 mhz) is just 3 - 5% slower than HD 7970. should do close to 90 fps

1920 x 1080 VHQ 4x MSAA

HD 7970 GE- 72
GTX 680 - 65
HD 7970 - 63
HD 7950(800 Mhz) - 55
GTX 660 Ti - 53

HD 7950 boost (925 mhz) would be around 60 fps.

HD 7950 boost is generally 15% faster than GTX 660 Ti at stock. the gap widens with manual voltage overclocking. HD 7950 (1150 Mhz) matches HD 7970 Ghz performance.
 
Last edited:
this is all you need to know from techreport: http://techreport.com/review/23419/nvidia-geforce-gtx-660-ti-graphics-card-reviewed/4

bf3-7950.gif


bf3-beyond-16.gif


"The 16.7-ms threshold is the toughest test—equivalent to 60 FPS—and there, the GTX 660 Ti cards outperform all of the Radeons we tested, though the PNY card's margin of victory over the 7950 is slim."
Click to expand...

short answer is neither will play bf3 better. in detailed study, the nvidia card is faster. but not by much.
 
There seems to be a issue with AMD cards in some games were the framerate jumps wildly and results in microstutter although you are getting an acceptable framerate.
 
When I suggest an AMD 79xx card, it's usually for a customer who wants to play a game that I know utilizes the AMD card more efficiently, if I'm unfamiliar with the game, I follow the basic formula for the current generation: 7870 or below go AMD. 660ti or above go Nvidia. I know for a fact that BF3 utilizes the AMD arch a bit more effectively. For an unknown game, I would suggest Nvidia at that price range.
 
raghu78 said:
thats an older review with older drivers. with the latest drivers from both camps AMD wins BF3 easily.
Click to expand...

August 16, 2012 is not long ago, and the difference between amd and nvidia driver optimization over time is not very big. you've bought into driver marketing!
 
bAMtan2 said:
August 16, 2012 is not long ago, and the difference between amd and nvidia driver optimization over time is not very big. you've bought into driver marketing!
Click to expand...

http://hardocp.com/article/2012/11/12/fall_2012_gpu_driver_comparison_roundup/3
http://hardocp.com/article/2012/11/12/fall_2012_gpu_driver_comparison_roundup/4

so you won't consider latest drivers performance because AMD does better. thats ridiculous.

this was hardocp's conclusion

"Middle pricing band – This pricing band was far less competitive as the Radeon HD 7950 with Boost simply demolished the GTX 660 Ti across the board with regards to raw frame rates and overall game play experience across our suite of testing. "

so now you think even [h] has got it wrong. :p
 
As far as I know, AMD cards have ALWAYS been better in BF3. I know a couple of reviews like to max the settings and see witch cards have the least-abysmal framerate, but [H]ard's original PiQ evaluation of BF3 deemed AMD cards slightly ahead, didn't it? And the newest drivers only solidify that... I'm not a fanboy either, my favorite card this gen is the 660ti: I have put smiles on MANY customers' with those cards.
 
BF3 was always better on Nvidia, but now new ATI drivers have improved FPS drastically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top