GPU ??

A

AP514

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
482
Im looking at buying the 27" Crossover..........2560 x 1440

Im looking for a Card to run this badboy..

Going to be Gaming........... MEKWARRRIOR ONLINE, BF2 mod--Project Reality

Single Card only for the time being...


Thanks in Advance for the input
 
Depends on how much you want to spend. Thats a hefty resolution so youll want as much horsepower as you can get. If you can afford $500 for a GTX680, that would be the best one to get. The $460 7970 or $400 GTX670 would also be good options. Id want a GTX670 at least for that resolution if youre looking for highest performance. You say you play BF2, if you ever venture over to BF3 play, youll need that extra GPU muscle cause that game is one of the more demanding out there.
 
I do not think I will play BF3 Too kiddy.........as in ..rush, shoot, die (who cares),respawn...rinse and repeat. My boy plays it...fly'n a chopper he crashes into the ground 10 times or shoulsd I say Bounces off of it and chopper keeps fly'n

Thats why I play Project Reality--- BF2 mod , more real you take your time no so arcade'y

As far as the GTX 680 and the 7970 what brands/cards do you suggest ??
 
I have that monitor. Its a beast

I recommend the EVGA 670 gtx FTW. It is the exact same thing as a 680 (same pcb, chip, cooler, etc) just with some shadders knocked off. $80 less and only ~5% slower.

I can not recommend the 7970 as my 670 gtx ftw blew my old ASUS Direct CU II (1125oc) out the water.

If you have the extra cash the 680 gtx would be a great option also.

Brands: Everyone has their personal fav. Mine is EVGA. If you buy the 670 and decided you want more power you can step up to the 680 by just paying the difference in price ($80) plus shipping. *(also have to buy $25 warranty which gives you 5yrs of warranty.)
 
I would lean towards a 7970 or even a 7950 at that resolution. With an overclock they tend to be faster than a GTX 670 or 680 especially in the games where the 680 really struggles and there are quite a few at such a high resolution.
 
Get the Sapphire HD 7970 OC or Gigabyte HD 7970 OC. good card for 2560 x 1440. excellent overclocker. good cooler.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/10/sapphire_hd_7970_oc_edition_video_card_review/

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/02/08/gigabyte_radeon_hd_7970_oc_video_card_review/

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102982
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125413

But if you want best price perf there is a sapphire HD 7950 950 Mhz edition card. at USD 370 its a steal. clock for clock HD 7950 is close to HD 7970 perf. comes with a HD 7970 PCB and 8 pin + 6 pin power. quite similar to sapphire HD 7970 OC. here is a HD 7950 (900 Mhz) overclocked to 1.2 Ghz and compared with HD 7970 (925 MHz)

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/03/01/xfx_radeon_hd_7950_black_edition_video_card_review/8

Sapphire HD 7950 950 Mhz edition - USD 370
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102991

you can see the card and know more about it here

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1695577
 
A GTX680 isnt going to struggle at 2560x1440. That card is a monster and will rip thru pretty much any game at max settings at that resolution.

Here's Anand's review of the 680 and it handles every game at max settings at 2560x1600 so itll handle your monitor just fine. If you can swing the $500 price tag, that is the baddest single card on the market right now so its definitely the way to go if youre looking for the most GPU horsepower.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5699/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-review
 
The reason why the 7970 is suppose to have better performance is because the bandwidth is larger plus more total ram.

The ftw (670) has a higher power target. 145 compared to 111 on the base 670.

Here is the differences between the EVGA 680 linup.

Reference one ($500) has 4 PWM phases and NVIDIA's design.

Superclocked ($520) still has 4 PWM phases and NVIDIA's design, but is slightly factory overclocked.

Signature ($530) has 5 PWM phases (the more phases, the further you can overclock theoretically, but in real life there are a lot of factors so more PWM phases doesn't mean you will be able to do higher OC, but you will most likely will)
Signature also has EVGA design with high flow bracket (like 3ºC less)

FTW and FTW 4GB ($570 and $630) have 8 PWM phases and vapor chamber cooling (cools the GPU a bit better).

Classified ($660) has 14 PWM phases.

"+" means it comes with EVGA backplate.
 
MacLeod said:
A GTX680 isnt going to struggle at 2560x1440. That card is a monster and will rip thru pretty much any game at max settings at that resolution.

Here's Anand's review of the 680 and it handles every game at max settings at 2560x1600 so itll handle your monitor just fine. If you can swing the $500 price tag, that is the baddest single card on the market right now so its definitely the way to go if youre looking for the most GPU horsepower.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5699/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-review
Click to expand...

+1.
 
MacLeod said:
A GTX680 isnt going to struggle at 2560x1440. That card is a monster and will rip thru pretty much any game at max settings at that resolution.
Click to expand...

Have you used a GTX 680 at that resolution? It struggles in quite a few games. Serious Sam 3, Crysis, Crysis 2, Metro 2033, Alan Wake, and I'm sure that there are more. Quite frankly I'm not impressed with Kepler at the moment.

If you can swing the $500 price tag, that is the baddest single card on the market right now so its definitely the way to go if youre looking for the most GPU horsepower.
Click to expand...

An overclocked 7970 beats it up pretty good in the games where it really matters. You might want to look at that review that you linked again or even better check out a 7970 ghz edition review.

Here is a quote from the review that you linked.

The minimum framerate situation is even worse for NVIDIA here, with the GTX 680 clearly falling behind the 7950, and improving on the GTX 580 by only 10%. At its worst Crysis is absolutely devouring memory bandwidth here, and that leaves the GTX 680 underprepared.
Click to expand...

If I were going to do it all over I would have picked up a couple of 7950s. Clock for clock they aren't much slower than a 7970.
 
Last edited:
doug...

Thanks for the real examples..a great help...

So im really thinking the extra 2 GB is not worth the money....
 
BababooeyHTJ said:
Have you used a GTX 680 at that resolution? It struggles in quite a few games. Serious Sam 3, Crysis, Crysis 2, Metro 2033, Alan Wake, and I'm sure that there are more. Quite frankly I'm not impressed with Kepler at the moment.
Click to expand...

Dont have to use one thanks to all these handy review sites and me being able to read.

An overclocked 7970 beats it up pretty good in the games where it really matters. You might want to look at that review that you linked again or even better check out a 7970 ghz edition review.
Click to expand...

What games? The 7970 wins in Crysis Warhead, ties in Metro then loses the next EIGHT benchmarks. Dont get me wrong, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a 7970 especially considering theyre $50 cheaper. A 7970 will rip thru that resolution as well and its the card Im currently saving up to buy for myself (gotta get a H100 first so I can get my 8150 up to some respectable clocks). But that being said, at the end of the day, the GTX680 is the faster card.
 
Why don't you look at some more up to date reviews and keep in mind that 7970 has far more overclocking headroom.

In the games where GTX 680 does perform better the 7970 isn't exactly struggling. I can't say that about the 680.

The only thing that GTX680 has going for it at that resolution is noise and power consumption. If you don't mind overclocking the 7970 there is no doubt that it is the faster card at that resolution. Check a more recent benchmark like the 7970 ghz edition reviews and keep in mind that you average 7970 has more head room than that too.
 
Youre probably right about the overclocking but I dont count that when comparing GPU's because each card is different and while you might have a card thatll overclock to the moon, I might get one that barely runs above stock because I have shitty luck in general.

Just going off [H]'s review of an overclocked GTX680 and overclocked 7970, the 680 still edges out the win. The 7970 wins 1, ties 1 then loses 2.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/04/nvidia_kepler_geforce_gtx_680_overclocking_review/5

We're splitting hairs here because theyre both outstanding cards and nobody is going to notice a difference in my 680 getting 81 fps in Skyrim while your 7970 gets 76.
 
7970 has voltage control and GTX680 doesn't. It has more overclocking headroom. A lot more. Actually the 7970 ghz edition and GTX 680 have about the same amount of overclocking headroom.

Also [H] only tested 4 games. If you check a site that tested more games you'll see a bigger difference. 7970 ghz edition is about 10% faster at 2560x1600 according to TPU on average. Hardware canucks had similar results, including a few surprises like the ghz edition being faster in skyrim with more AA and a texture pack, quite a bit faster actually. Thats no doubt due to that lacking memory bandwith again.
 
BababooeyHTJ said:
Have you used a GTX 680 at that resolution? It struggles in quite a few games. Serious Sam 3, Crysis, Crysis 2, Metro 2033, Alan Wake, and I'm sure that there are more. Quite frankly I'm not impressed with Kepler at the moment.
Click to expand...

I dont think my 670gtx struggle with crysis 2

what you think?

http://youtu.be/OPoNfSDc6aw

do note that I am using 1.4gb of vram at those settings.
 
BababooeyHTJ said:
Crysis 2 is unplayable in DX11 with the high res texture pack at 1440p imo. I don't find a 40 fps average smooth. You know that you see dips well into the 30s, frequent dips.
Click to expand...

Well I know this comes down to personal preference and all but I have no problem with a 40 fps average. I play Crysis 1 and Metro on max settings and average and even 40 and 36 on Metro. Now dont get me wrong, Im not saying this is ideal and I want more which is why Im saving for a 7970 but 40 fps average is good enough for good solid game play. 60 is better though. ;)
 
OP for the resolution you are gaming the HD 7970 is your best option. You don't want to throw USD 450 - 500 at a high end card and find out that in the most demanding games it falls clearly short because of bandwidth. check a lot of reviews.
games which are clearly faster on HD 7970 at 1440p/1600p are Dirt 3, Dirt Showdown, Alan Wake, Deus Ex, Anno 2070, Skyrim, Witcher 2, Anno 2070, Crysis warhead, Crysis 2, Metro 2033, Sniper elite v2, AvP. Nvidia wins Shogun 2 and Lost Planet 2 clearly. Batman AC (8X MSAA) is faster on HD 7970 at 1600p, though with FXAA is faster on GTX 680. BF3 at 1440p is close enough to call a draw on HD 7970 and GTX 680. The margins by which the HD 7970 beats the GTX 680 in some of the games is huge (20 - 25%) and the most important fact is these are also the games which do less than 60 fps. so that difference makes a huge difference in playability.
 
AP514, Not to kill the subject, but isn't your CPU going to bottleneck the hell out of any highend card you get right now?
 
LOL...I have already gotten a
i5 3570K
GA-Z77X-D3H
8GB G Skill
NXZT source 210 elite case
waiting for 256M4 SSD price to drop(again)
Looking at Card--- to go w/ the 27" Crossover monitor 2560 X 1440 res
Also waiting on PSU deepending on the V-CARD I buy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top