Results 21 to 31 of 31
20-11-2012, 09:16 PM #21
Also, the anadtech Bench lists Unigine, with both getting about 55,5. Performed at a lower resolution?
20-11-2012, 09:55 PM #22
As for BF3, the Tom's Hardware review shows a 39.7% higher framerate with the GTX 670 than the GTX 580 at 1080p ultra without AA. The higher framerate for the 670 thus obviously has nothing to do with the amount of RAM.
20-11-2012, 10:22 PM #23
Crysis (very high)
Crysis Warhead (enthusiast)
Batman Arkham City /w physx
GTA 4 /w enbseries
20-11-2012, 10:54 PM #24
BF3 is a taxing game. Especially at 2560x1600, where the difference Anandtech measured was 17 FPS (44 to 61).
Shogun 2, eh? Anandtech measures a 33% difference at 1900x1200. Kepler cards were/are suffering from a performance bug in Shogun 2 ultra, so don't bring that up. Unless it's to admit that Nvidia are hit by bugs from time to time, just like AMD.
20-11-2012, 10:56 PM #25
20-11-2012, 11:50 PM #26
I can back up my claim that the difference isn't that big by recording and posting youtube videos. I might do that, but in any case think about this: you're pointing out a 40% increase (at best) gap between a card you can get for $200 used and a $400 card. So for a best case scenario of a 25fps gap (much lower if you count in a bunch of other games) would you seriously recommend the $200 premium?
21-11-2012, 12:11 AM #27
21-11-2012, 04:21 AM #28
- Join Date
- Jun 2012
What the kepler refresh will bring is vastly improved price/performance, but since you already get a discount it's irrelevant for you.
Right now the amd cards were a dud so nvidia just launched their midrange card (256bit bus instead of 384, and a small 294mm^2 die) and branded it geforce gtx 680, then gimped the rops and bus width for the lower end versions.
Gtx680 only has 3.5B transistors vs 3B in the gtx 580 , considering the massive process node shrink it could have been more than double, which is what you'll see in gk110.
Right now we are being sold 200 euro midrange parts that are cheap to manufacture for 400-500 euros because of a lack of competition, just like amd was pushing their 7970 for a ridiculous 550 euros when it launched 6 months before kepler was ready.
We get it mashakos , you like your gtx 580.... just stop.
I can only scoff at the unengine benchmark results, it's the most irrelevant benchmark out there;
You use that as basis for your double performance bullshit (we are supposed to give advice here, what you are doing is the opposite) and at the same time scoff at the other results that are much closer (and where the 670 wins) with lots of AA (you can extrapolate those results to using SSAA too btw , so they do matter, unlike unengine plebmark)
Then you flip flop and suddenly it's 'the extra performance doesn't matter only a framerate whore will notice'. Again, just stop , for a supposed hardcore pc man you are embarrasing yourself. Even the OP is telling you off now.
Noone gives a shit about getting 80 or 90 fps indeed, but that extra performance does matter in the form of minimum framerates, extra performance always matters. Someone will have to look up a comparison for those between the two cards if they can be arsed, I'm not even going to dignify the idea of buying a 270W gpu in 2012 when there is a 170 W alternative that is faster.
Last edited by Finicky; 21-11-2012 at 04:37 AM.
21-11-2012, 05:54 AM #29
30-11-2012, 11:39 PM #30
Well, if anyone should wonder, the GPU is very quiet and good for OC if that should be your cup of tea. So, if you can get one at the price I got it ( 215€) and if you got a a 5850 to sell ( got 100€ for it) I'd say it's probably worth it at this point in time, this can all change when new cards are released though, so...check the prices :)
01-12-2012, 12:10 AM #31
That is a nice deal, I have to admit. Even if I dislike the memory bandwidth of the GTX 660 Ti, it's definitely worth 215€.
Overclock the heck out of the memory, if you can.