GTX 560 vs HD 6950?

HD6950 uses a little less power, and it's quite a bit faster in most games, when you're getting the most out of the detail.
 
It seems to be review dependent. Both cards are so close in performance that its going to be a wash either way. The higher ram density of the 6950 would lend itself well to ultra widescreen gaming. That said, on a single 1080p display, it probably won't matter.
I'd go with whatever was cheaper...depending on how you plan to use it. The 2gb 6950 can still be flashed however...and at 6970 specs, its considerably faster then the 560. But there are downsides to flashing, so it really shouldn't be factored into the comparison.
 
I got confirmation from Kyle in a review that the 6950 1GB and 2GB are overall better then the 560. I was wondering the same thing earlier today. In his Review it showed that the 560 was on par with the 6870
 
In benches I'm dubious of, the GTX560 only equals the HD6950. In benches I trust, [H] included, the HD6950 is better. Thus, on merits, the HD6950 is the better card, as the 560 never wins, per se.
 
Look at it this way , even if the gtx 560 is as fast as the 6950 1 gig , at higher resolution and newer more demanding games the 6950 2gig may pull ahead because of the extra ram. To make the choice easier , the refrence 6950 cards unlock to 6970 speeds which brings it up to close to gtx 580 speeds.
 
For $280 you can get a 2GB 6950. Its only $30 more than the GTX560 you linked, offers more performance, and can offer even more after a simple bios reflash. If you prefer Nvidia than get the GTX560 and don't look back.
 
Bad ConNecTioN said:
It seems to be review dependent. Both cards are so close in performance that its going to be a wash either way. The higher ram density of the 6950 would lend itself well to ultra widescreen gaming. That said, on a single 1080p display, it probably won't matter.
I'd go with whatever was cheaper...depending on how you plan to use it. The 2gb 6950 can still be flashed however...and at 6970 specs, its considerably faster then the 560. But there are downsides to flashing, so it really shouldn't be factored into the comparison.
Click to expand...

What would be the downside to flashing the 6950???
 
The cards dual bios eliminates many of the risks associated with flashing. And the current crop of 6950's have pretty much a 100% flash success rate. Any failures are likely due to people not knowing what they are doing.
As for not lasting...if you can keep it cool, it'll last.
 
Disposed said:
1. Bullshit
2. Bullshit
Click to expand...

So you've hand-tested every flashed HD6950 that exists in the world?
A quick google is all you need to know.
I did not specify the percentage of these issues that occur (as far as I can tell it's about 1% for case 1, and about 5% for case 2) but the fact is, they do occur. You simply can't call bullshit on something like that, that'd be like claiming bullshit on a product ever having had a single RMA.
 
HD 6950 will perform better but will also come with a premium that comes out about equal to the performance gain.
 
samuelmorris said:
So you've hand-tested every flashed HD6950 that exists in the world?
A quick google is all you need to know.
I did not specify the percentage of these issues that occur (as far as I can tell it's about 1% for case 1, and about 5% for case 2) but the fact is, they do occur. You simply can't call bullshit on something like that, that'd be like claiming bullshit on a product ever having had a single RMA.
Click to expand...

What you are reading is 99.999999% user error. None of your reasons hold any water whatsoever.

Yes every 6950 2gb can be flashed to 6970 and as to whether or not it will last that has absolutely nothing to do with flashing it. Once flashed it is a 6970 with a different sticker on it plain and simple. They are the same card for crying out loud, the only difference is the 6950 is crippled via the bios.

Im calling bullshit on your flimsy reasoning. There is no downside to flashing it at all. Even if you screw it up royally it can easily be fixed.

Its not a hardware mod or tricky software mod its a simple foolproof straight forward bios flash.
 
Yes every 6950 2gb can be flashed to 6970 and as to whether or not it will last that has absolutely nothing to do with flashing it. Once flashed it is a 6970 with a different sticker on it plain and simple. They are the same card for crying out loud, the only difference is the 6950 is crippled via the bios.
Click to expand...

Not true. The 6970 has faster RAM chips with different voltage specifications. I have two 6950's and only one of them will run at a 6970's RAM speed. The other one throws errors and BSODs. Also, not all 6950 cards will flash to a 6970. There are reasons why chips are binned and have shaders disabled (they don't work). You cannot guarantee somebody that their 6950 will definitely run at 6970 specifications perfectly.
 
Bad ConNecTioN said:
The cards dual bios eliminates many of the risks associated with flashing. And the current crop of 6950's have pretty much a 100% flash success rate. Any failures are likely due to people not knowing what they are doing.
As for not lasting...if you can keep it cool, it'll last.
Click to expand...

I disagree. As mentioned in the post above me - failure occurs because the mem spec on the 6950 is lower than the 6970 - some 6950 mem chips are unable to handle the higher voltages and speed and can incur permanent damage because of it - hence the 6950 shader unlock (without the full 6970 bios).

Even if your card seems okay now - it's impossible to know how badly the extra voltage you're feeding to the lower spec mem chips will effect it in the long run.

Keeping it cool will not save your card if your mem is taking higher voltage than it can handle
 
Why do noobs ask these generic questions when the review for the card is linked at the top of the video card section. Plain as day.
If you do not trust the review. Why are you on this site?
 
Maybe not, but do a simple shader unlock mod and you still increase performance on the 6950 which already beats a GTX 560. And no issues about the increased memory clocks causing issues either. :D
 
4LC4PON3 said:
I got confirmation from Kyle in a review that the 6950 1GB and 2GB are overall better then the 560. I was wondering the same thing earlier today. In his Review it showed that the 560 was on par with the 6870
Click to expand...

Kyle's review says it all /thread

alienate said:
Why do noobs ask these generic questions when the review for the card is linked at the top of the video card section. Plain as day.
If you do not trust the review. Why are you on this site?
Click to expand...

I ask myself that at times, but I never come to a concrete answer.
 
Last edited:
Disposed said:
What you are reading is 99.999999% user error. None of your reasons hold any water whatsoever.

Yes every 6950 2gb can be flashed to 6970 and as to whether or not it will last that has absolutely nothing to do with flashing it. Once flashed it is a 6970 with a different sticker on it plain and simple. They are the same card for crying out loud, the only difference is the 6950 is crippled via the bios.

Im calling bullshit on your flimsy reasoning. There is no downside to flashing it at all. Even if you screw it up royally it can easily be fixed.

Its not a hardware mod or tricky software mod its a simple foolproof straight forward bios flash.
Click to expand...

This from here http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138247

Just in case you are too lazy too click it.

Power Connectors
(Source: can be seen with the eye)

The two cards have a different power-connector configuration.

6950: 2x 6 pin
6970: 1x 6 pin and 1x 8 pin

Different PCBs
(Source: http://www.overclock.net/ati/893712-...ess-story.html)

- taken from above: different power connectors
- The 6950 PCB has some extra soldered resistors.
- The silver/blue caps are "E063..." for 6950 and "E059..." for 6970
- The large silverwhite block at the bottom left is "25CH10 X7" for the 6950 and "36CH10 A" for the 6970 (production date is in front, so these might either be different fabrication lines or actually different chips)
- other changes not visible in the small pictures

6950: http://www.xbitlabs.com/picture/?src..._pcbpw_big.jpg
6970: http://www.xbitlabs.com/picture/?src..._pcbpw_big.jpg

Different Memory Chips
(Source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...-hd6950_4.html)

6950: H5GQ2H24MFR T2C chips which work at 1.5 volts voltage and 5000 MHz rated frequency
6970: H5GQ2H24MFR R0C chips (1.5 volts, 6000 MHz)

Internal Device ID
(Source: RBE v1.27 released!)

Upon a BIOS flash the Device-ID remains intact, giving a flashed 6950@6970 card still the ID of a 6950.

6950: 0x1002 0x6719
6970: 0x1002 0x6718

PowerTune Cap-Settings
(Sources:
for the caps: http://www.++++++++++++++++++++/forum...-review-5.html
for not updating after BIOS flash: http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/...ng/vidcard/159)

The PowerTune caps remain unchanged after a BIOS flash.

6950: cap at 200W usage
6970: cap at 250W usage

So do you still stand by your opinion that the only difference is the crippled bios?
 
rahavsmt said:
This from here http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138247

Just in case you are too lazy too click it.

Power Connectors
(Source: can be seen with the eye)

The two cards have a different power-connector configuration.

6950: 2x 6 pin
6970: 1x 6 pin and 1x 8 pin

Different PCBs
(Source: http://www.overclock.net/ati/893712-...ess-story.html)

- taken from above: different power connectors
- The 6950 PCB has some extra soldered resistors.
- The silver/blue caps are "E063..." for 6950 and "E059..." for 6970
- The large silverwhite block at the bottom left is "25CH10 X7" for the 6950 and "36CH10 A" for the 6970 (production date is in front, so these might either be different fabrication lines or actually different chips)
- other changes not visible in the small pictures

6950: http://www.xbitlabs.com/picture/?src..._pcbpw_big.jpg
6970: http://www.xbitlabs.com/picture/?src..._pcbpw_big.jpg

Different Memory Chips
(Source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...-hd6950_4.html)

6950: H5GQ2H24MFR T2C chips which work at 1.5 volts voltage and 5000 MHz rated frequency
6970: H5GQ2H24MFR R0C chips (1.5 volts, 6000 MHz)

Internal Device ID
(Source: RBE v1.27 released!)

Upon a BIOS flash the Device-ID remains intact, giving a flashed 6950@6970 card still the ID of a 6950.

6950: 0x1002 0x6719
6970: 0x1002 0x6718

PowerTune Cap-Settings
(Sources:
for the caps: http://www.++++++++++++++++++++/forum...-review-5.html
for not updating after BIOS flash: http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/...ng/vidcard/159)

The PowerTune caps remain unchanged after a BIOS flash.

6950: cap at 200W usage
6970: cap at 250W usage

So do you still stand by your opinion that the only difference is the crippled bios?
Click to expand...


You posted all that to prove what exactly? That they aren't the same card? Whatever differences exist must not add up to much considering the number of flashed 6950's running around.
Regardless of the overclocks, unlocking the shaders nets a healthy performance gain. So even if the card can't reach 6970 speeds, it will still benefit from a flash. And with the dual bios setup on all the 6900 cards, the risk of a bad flash is exactly 0.
 
Yes I posted all that to prove that they aren't 100% the same because someone is saying the difference is just the bios and that link from techpowerup show otherwise. I did not post that to show that 6950 will not unlock or maintain 6970 clockspeed.

Just in case you missed my quote.

Disposed said:
They are the same card for crying out loud, the only difference is the 6950 is crippled via the bios.
Click to expand...

So are they the same or not? My post only serves to answer that and nothing else.
 
alienate said:
Why do noobs ask these generic questions when the review for the card is linked at the top of the video card section. Plain as day.
If you do not trust the review. Why are you on this site?
Click to expand...

Well unless you're a sheep your opinion should be formed based on multiple reviews.
 
trinibwoy said:
Well unless you're a sheep your opinion should be formed based on multiple reviews.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the fact that Kyle's GTX 560ti review only provides apples-to-apples bench comparisons for one resolution (2560x1600), i.e. there is no one-review-to-end-all-reviews. Some reviews don't specify minimum frame rates, some reviews use different games, some reviews use a theme based on subjective playability, etc.
 
badb0y said:
That's a lie, I have HD 6950 unlocked shaders only and I am sitting at 900/1400 stock voltage...
Click to expand...

I mean in comparison to a real 6970. Lol alot of denial going on ITT
 
Last edited:
tr0dd said:
Not to mention the fact that Kyle's GTX 560ti review only provides apples-to-apples bench comparisons for one resolution (2560x1600), i.e. there is no one-review-to-end-all-reviews. Some reviews don't specify minimum frame rates, some reviews use different games, some reviews use a theme based on subjective playability, etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah I would have liked to see the 560 vs the 6950 at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. He usd 2560x1600 so that doesnt help us 1080 users. He did tell me tho that the 6950 1GB & the 6950 2GB was more powerful then the 560 in a thread I asked him.

Quoted from kyle himself
The 6950 1GB is still going to be the faster card at 1920. The 1GB is going to change the impact of AA settings, but really only going to matter at 2560 for the most part.
Click to expand...
 
trinibwoy said:
Well unless you're a sheep your opinion should be formed based on multiple reviews.
Click to expand...

I've read multiple reviews and I'm still confused as hell :eek: Some really like 560 and others call it disappoitment.

I'm kind of in the same boat as OP, (keep GTX460@840Mhz, GTX560 or HD6950) however if I went RED team I would go for HD6950 2GB for few more $$$... more vram and extra unlocakable shaders.... IMHO I think it is worth it...
 
4LC4PON3 said:
Yeah I would have liked to see the 560 vs the 6950 at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. He usd 2560x1600 so that doesnt help us 1080 users. He did tell me tho that the 6950 1GB & the 6950 2GB was more powerful then the 560 in a thread I asked him.

Quoted from kyle himself
Click to expand...

Based on the reviews I saw, they are very close at 1080P..... this of course will varry based on o/c and ulocked shadders on HD6950 2GB version (I suppose).... In general AMD is pulling away from Nvidia at 1080p+ rez...
 
tr0dd said:
Not to mention the fact that Kyle's GTX 560ti review only provides apples-to-apples bench comparisons for one resolution (2560x1600), i.e. there is no one-review-to-end-all-reviews. Some reviews don't specify minimum frame rates, some reviews use different games, some reviews use a theme based on subjective playability, etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly. With Fermi it's very important to look only at the resolutions you use or care about when making a purchase. For whatever reason Fermi based cards scale poorly with resolution increases compared to AMD's parts. Looking at 2560x1600 results could be very misleading if you're running 1920x1080. All the more reason to look at as many reviews and as many results as possible before drawing a conclusion.
+
For example according to computerbase.de, 6950 is 15% faster than a stock 560 at 2560x1600 but only 5% faster at 1920x1200. That’s quite a difference. Canned benchmarks or not, those results are valid when doing relative evaluations.
+
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...-sli/23/#abschnitt_performancerating_mit_aaaf
+
 
Dang it, thats $20 less than I paid.

The 6950 is a no brainer at that price.
 
Judging by the numbers the Gigabyte 560 SOC, it still makes for a hard decision. The SOC when OC'd is putting up better numbers than 6950s and just under 570s. Something to think about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top