New i5 ivy bridge build...What Graphics Card Should I get?

[dcwt2010]

Didn't say you couldn't, I was merely mentioning what I did. I'll stress again, the 7950 is a very good deal right now but the 660ti isn't a complete turd. It is about 10 to 15% overpriced and I certainly wouldn't have paid more than £220 (I knew I could sell the Borderlands 2 code as I had steam friends who were interested) for it but it is still a very capable card.
It does exactly what I want, play Battlefield 3 on ultra settings at 1080. As I don't plan to buy a new monitor for another two years it'll do just fine (in two year's time I'll probably want to upgrade the graphics card too).

[Willzzz]

Oh absolutely I agree.

Some people make up ridiculous stories about the 192bit bus and how it can't handle MSAA and future games. It's mostly rubbish.

When you turn up the settings the 660 cards actually do a fine job with 4xMSAA in most games. Sometimes it is the AMD cards that can't handle it, turn on 4xMSAA in Shogun 2 and the 7870 plummets from a healthy 40fps minimum to a pathetic 22fps, while the 660 manages a playable 30fps minimum.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-16.html

We see the 660 series happily handling 4xMSAA in other games as well, and even placing above (technically) the 7950 in Batman with 8xMSAA.

Ah but then they say the 660 will suck at future releases due to the memory issues, but will it? It actually does very well on Unigine, a future 3D engine and will be able to take advantage of TXAA in future titles.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Oh absolutely I agree.

Some people make up ridiculous stories about the 192bit bus and how it can't handle MSAA and future games. It's mostly rubbish.

Not really as it more like you are the one making up stories. All you do is cherry pick examples to suit your short term advice and anyway the HD7950 is still faster overall in your example. Funny how you seem to ignore all other articles which show performance dropping much higher on the GTX660TI with AA and mods!

This is why GTX670 and GTX680 owners on OcUK who are recommending HD7950 cards over GTX660TI cards. I wonder why?? They seem to be quite objective or maybe they are talking rubbish. Perhaps I should ask them?

This is why GTX660TI sales have been poor:
http://www.kitguru.net/components/gr...very-sluggish/

The same arguments were made about the GTX460 768MB and 8800GT 256MB too by people. Good short term cards since especially pre-overclocked but started losing their way after a while.

This is why the GTX670 is a better buy than a GTX660TI. At well over £200 you can go on how great it is,but with the GTX660 cards under £200 now,it is just a white elephant.

If Nvidia had launched a £200 GTX660TI in a world of £250 HD7950 cards it would be different,but alas this is not the case.

Cards like the GTX460 1GB and 8800GT 512MB lasted much longer,but where are they proponents now of the other cards now?? Nowhere - just poor short term advice to win the argument for the day,and not a peep when these cards started hitting issues. The same goes with all the proponents of the £200+ 1GHZ GTX560TI against the cheaper GTX570 cards and so on.

I have been here six years and seen all the arguments TBH with various cards,but we will have to agree to disagree on this one!

[Willzzz]

Yeah I cherry picked to make a point, but I didn't pretend that was typical. The Toms article cherry picked and then tried to make a general point out of it.

Let's have a look at the conclusion:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-24.html

At 1920 4xAA the 660 Ti is faster than the 7950 across an average of all benchmarks. It is only at 2560 or 'extreme' settings that the 7950 is better.

Yeah some cards didn't work long term because of a lack of total RAM, the 660 series has 2gb which is going to be perfectly fine for a long long time.

Anyone don't think I am some Nvidia fan boy, I have a completely open mind about the next card I am going to buy.

[dcwt2010]

As I said, the 7950 is the better card judged on just performance but the 660ti is no slouch. As I said, the Hardocp article specifically looks at what happens when you turn on high FSAA in several games (unlike Tomshardware which based it on one) and even if you don't like what they write you can see the full data in the form of graphs. This is far more helpful than just a table with averages (if a card framerate dips below 30fps frequently then an average of 60fps doesn't mean jack etc) and you can make up your own mind.
A piece of hardware is only as good as software that goes with it so as long as Nvidia keeps paying developers to optimise their games I don't think I have anything to worry about.

[bendabanga]

I would go for an AMD card if they are still running their 3 for Free program.

[shaithis]

Some people make up ridiculous stories about the 192bit bus and how it can't handle MSAA and future games. It's mostly rubbish.

Rubbish? You need to go back and look at reviews and draw your own conclusions.

You can see that depending on what you are throwing at it, the difference between a 580 and 680 can be anywhere from 5% to 50%......funnily enough you only get a 5-10% performance benefit over the previous generation when you are maximising the available bandwidth of a 580.....you get 50% (and in some cases more) when bandwidth is kept to a considerably lower level.

I've said it a number of times, and I will say it again....the nVidia 600 series cards are all being marketed 2 notches up in the range over where they should be.

[Willzzz]

The GTX 660 cards are right where they need to be in price terms, slightly below the 7870 and provides equal performance on average.

You just have to look at the games you play and make your choice based on that.

The GTX 660 series can happily handle 1080p 4xMSAA in the majority of games, and while some games are AMD favoured, there are others where AMD chokes.
The reduced memory bandwidth is a factor, but it's not a design flaw.

[dacads]

On average the 7870 is faster than the gtx 660

[Fjo]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/647?vs=550
The 7950 (no boost) is better at everything other than Dirt 3, Shogun, Battlefield 3 and Portal with MSAA.
Three of those games are known to be particularly Nvidia favoured, and on Portal both cards well exceed 60fps.
For ~£240 the 7950's better. Without MSAA and now and then at 1680x1050, the 660Ti does a bit better.
They're not worth more than ~£200 with stock specs and cooling.

[Willzzz]

Actually no, the 660 Ti wins in Skyrim @ 1080p 4xAA which is surely the most popular setting.
It also wins at Civ 5 under the same settings, but hey lets call those two a draw, because the difference is so slight.
Metro is basically a draw (47.5 vs 51).
Batman is a draw (79 vs 82)
Starcraft 2 is also a win/draw (http://www.anandtech.com/show/6276/n...pler-family/11)

The only game where the 7950 pulls out a convincing win is Crysis.

"due to the constant flip-flopping of the GTX 660 Ti and 7950 on our benchmarks there is no sure-fire recommendation to hand down there"

If you play Crysis, get a 7950, if you play BF3 get a 660 Ti, everyone else buy the cheapest of the two you can find.

[Samwood]

Just to point out that based on current games this debate is near-pointless. Anything north of 30FPS is nearly un-noticable (remember that movies run as 24FPS).

I can understand getting a card that will give you some future-proofing. But then the decision cant really be based on specific games and/or technologies, as there is little or no way to know what games you will be playing in a year or 2's time. Any 'future-proofing' decision (IMO) should be based on general, overall, Indexed figures (i.e. tests that average the results from a large selection of games).
Such as: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts...reme,2977.html

Then take into account cost, and workout a 'points-per-pound' evaluation of each card.
If you take it that the HD 7950 and GTX 660 TI are roughly the same price, the benchmarks run by tomshardware would suggest that the 7950 is better VFM (by about 5%).

The only exception to the above would be if you play a specific nVidia sponsored title at extremely high resolution (i.e. across 3 screens).

Also, just to point out that my HD 6950 runs BF3 on max settings flawlessly... It cost my £120... why spend more?

[Fjo]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Produ...94.400.457.460
Most people at this price range will be playing at 1080p or similar. If we look at the MSAA game comparisons they're all very close - so we'll call those draws.
The only ones with significant gaps are:
Crysis - 7950.
Battlefield - 660 Ti.
That's as you said, and temps/power usage average out roughly the same depending on test.
Computation and synthetics don't necessarily matter to everyone, but the former's AMD's, and so is the latter (but by a smaller margin).

Finally, we come to the fact that these benches are at stock specs. Both cards come in a range of factory overclocks but the 7950 overclocks way further, it's a fact, and pulls the benchmarks even more in its favour. This is true whether you're talking about a standard or boost bios.
The 7950 also has greater potential for future use because its 384bit bus and 3GB of memory is not going to impede anything any time soon - the 660 Ti's 192bit, 2GB setup does seem to in certain applications now (i'll admit not in every case nor as badly as many insist, still), and that's likely to continue as games push on.

At Scan, the cheapest of either card is ~£230. You get Borderland 2 with Nvidia and Sleeping Dogs with AMD.
Right now it's down to preference, but i'm not the only one who can see the 660 Ti struggling to keep up with the 7950 not long from now, rather than the other way round.

The only exception to the above would be if you play a specific nVidia sponsored title at extremely high resolution (i.e. across 3 screens).

Most reviews i've seen don't recommend a 660 Ti for multi-screen. It's one of the applications where its bus and memory really are an issue.

[Willzzz]

While AMD generally has an edge at multi-screen resolutions it's not usually that big of an edge to reverse a game that favours Nvidia hardware.

You increase the resolution and you are increasing demands on all aspects of the hardware, not just the memory, sometimes it's the shaders that give in first and that means that AMD can't leverage their memory advantage.

[flamstead]

Still haven't purchased one yet but I have just seen this . Should I grab one?

[Fjo]

For £20 more you can get the Black edition with Sleeping Dogs. Between the two i'd pay the little extra for the nice factory OC. Be wary of XFX's customer services and warranty though.

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/3gb-x...i-hdmi-mini-dp

http://forums.hexus.net/graphics-car...ally-look.html