Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › 7970 vs GTX 680 - Who is the real KING? UPDATE: 7970 ~8% better clock per clock
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

7970 vs GTX 680 - Who is the real KING? UPDATE: 7970 ~8% better clock per clock - Page 38  

Poll Results: AMD 7970 of GTX 680, Who is King?

 
  • 37% (130)
    AMD 7970
  • 62% (214)
    GTX 680
344 Total Votes  
post #371 of 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger View Post

So your solution to get the same performance from an already-more-expensive-by-$50 card is to spend another $100+ on water cooling, further worsening the value, and resulting in a ton of work? I don't see how that is an objective opinion whatsoever as to what most people should do.
The number of people who watercool with custom loops is MINUTE compared to the number who overclock. It's a niche of a niche, and adds even further large expense to an already costly card, all to match/slightly beat it finally. For virtually everyone, the GTX 680 is the better choice... if you are doing custom watercooling, well, that's an exceptional case and in your particular circumstance you may be better served with a Radeon 7970.

No i am saying HD 7970 has more potential under water. Its a root many people take. You dont want to go water and end up spending 100+ and not gain a single MHz.
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AMD Radeon R9 16GB DDR3-2400MHz  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AMD Radeon R9 16GB DDR3-2400MHz  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
post #372 of 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

No i am saying HD 7970 has more potential under water. Its a root many people take. You dont want to go water and end up spending 100+ and not gain a single MHz.

Not many people even as a percentage of overclockers go for custom water. Obviously the 7970 would have higher mhz speeds if you used that cooling method, but then it costs even more money just to trade blows and finally slightly beat a stock-cooled stock-oc'd, $500 GTX 680, with a total cost of minimum $650+ for a watercooled 7970 being generous ($550 + 100 or more for blocks/etc.). At that point you've eliminated the noise problem, but made the cost, perf/price, etc. even worse as well as put work into physically changing everything over. I have no question that a custom-loop water-cooled 7970 would beat out a GTX 680, but that's A) not something most people do, and B) adds even further expense.
Edited by GoldenTiger - 3/25/12 at 3:36pm
The Sig Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K @ 4.xghz MSI Z68A-GD65 (G3) MSI GTX 970 Gaming SLI @ 1504mhz core/8020mhz m... 16GB DDR3 2x 8gb @ 1866mhz C8 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
240GB Sandisk Extreme A few 2tb hdd's. DVDRW Corsair H75 CLC on the CPU 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit ACER B326hk 4k 60hz 3840x2160 IPS sst display Coolermaster Cherry MX Brown switch mechanical ... Corsair TX 950w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R3 Black Pearl Logitech MX518 EverGlide Titan "Medium" Soundblaster Z PCIE 
  hide details  
The Sig Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K @ 4.xghz MSI Z68A-GD65 (G3) MSI GTX 970 Gaming SLI @ 1504mhz core/8020mhz m... 16GB DDR3 2x 8gb @ 1866mhz C8 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
240GB Sandisk Extreme A few 2tb hdd's. DVDRW Corsair H75 CLC on the CPU 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit ACER B326hk 4k 60hz 3840x2160 IPS sst display Coolermaster Cherry MX Brown switch mechanical ... Corsair TX 950w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R3 Black Pearl Logitech MX518 EverGlide Titan "Medium" Soundblaster Z PCIE 
  hide details  
post #373 of 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

No i am saying HD 7970 has more potential under water. Its a root many people take. You dont want to go water and end up spending 100+ and not gain a single MHz.

Then again, another way of looking at it is to say that the 680 renders water cooling an expensive and unnecessary addition.
post #374 of 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Then again, another way of looking at it is to say that the 680 renders water cooling an expensive and unnecessary addition.

An interesting way of looking at it, too...
The Sig Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K @ 4.xghz MSI Z68A-GD65 (G3) MSI GTX 970 Gaming SLI @ 1504mhz core/8020mhz m... 16GB DDR3 2x 8gb @ 1866mhz C8 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
240GB Sandisk Extreme A few 2tb hdd's. DVDRW Corsair H75 CLC on the CPU 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit ACER B326hk 4k 60hz 3840x2160 IPS sst display Coolermaster Cherry MX Brown switch mechanical ... Corsair TX 950w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R3 Black Pearl Logitech MX518 EverGlide Titan "Medium" Soundblaster Z PCIE 
  hide details  
The Sig Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K @ 4.xghz MSI Z68A-GD65 (G3) MSI GTX 970 Gaming SLI @ 1504mhz core/8020mhz m... 16GB DDR3 2x 8gb @ 1866mhz C8 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
240GB Sandisk Extreme A few 2tb hdd's. DVDRW Corsair H75 CLC on the CPU 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit ACER B326hk 4k 60hz 3840x2160 IPS sst display Coolermaster Cherry MX Brown switch mechanical ... Corsair TX 950w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R3 Black Pearl Logitech MX518 EverGlide Titan "Medium" Soundblaster Z PCIE 
  hide details  
post #375 of 679
Thread Starter 
Now it is a misconception that the GTX 680 runs cooler than a 7970 with stock heatsink.. I have seen reviews showing both ways.

AMD is the way to go if your looking to mod your GPU to get the most out of it. An example is my XFX 6990. I threw on a 3rd party accelero turbo air cooler on that puppy, and manages to actually squeeze out a much higher stable oc with the exact same voltage settings.

Pre cooler - 935 Mhz / 1350 Mhz stable OC - 1.23V
Post cooler - 990 Mhz / 1500 Mhz stable OC - 1.23V
Edited by polyzp - 3/25/12 at 3:40pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8150 - 4.90 ghz  GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD7 (Rev. 1.1) XFX 6990 + Accelero Twin Turbo 6990 cooler 24/7... 8192 MB - OC 1988 9-9-9-24-1T Team Xtreem 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
240 GB Revodrive 3 X2 Windows 7 SP1 1000 W OCZ ZX series - 80 Gold HAF 932 - Windy Tunnel - 22 Fans 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8150 - 4.90 ghz  GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD7 (Rev. 1.1) XFX 6990 + Accelero Twin Turbo 6990 cooler 24/7... 8192 MB - OC 1988 9-9-9-24-1T Team Xtreem 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
240 GB Revodrive 3 X2 Windows 7 SP1 1000 W OCZ ZX series - 80 Gold HAF 932 - Windy Tunnel - 22 Fans 
  hide details  
post #376 of 679
Didn't read the entire thread. But did anyone mention that the 680 runs a fair amount hotter than the amd?
post #377 of 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by StaticFX View Post

Didn't read the entire thread. But did anyone mention that the 680 runs a fair amount hotter than the amd?

Not really. Some reviews have shown it significantly cooler.
In progress.
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570k Asrock Z77E-ITX GTX670 Windforce 8gb Samsung 30nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
OCZ Agility 3 240gb OS and Steam h100i Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Asus VG236HE 120hz 
KeyboardPowerCase
Steelseries 6gv2 Antec TruePower New TP-750 Bitfenix Prodigy (White) 
  hide details  
In progress.
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3570k Asrock Z77E-ITX GTX670 Windforce 8gb Samsung 30nm 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
OCZ Agility 3 240gb OS and Steam h100i Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Asus VG236HE 120hz 
KeyboardPowerCase
Steelseries 6gv2 Antec TruePower New TP-750 Bitfenix Prodigy (White) 
  hide details  
post #378 of 679
Thread Starter 
I think it depends ion which card they reviewed , and at what turbo voltage setting the card could reach. But isnt it generally a hotter card, despite the fact it is much less power hungry?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8150 - 4.90 ghz  GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD7 (Rev. 1.1) XFX 6990 + Accelero Twin Turbo 6990 cooler 24/7... 8192 MB - OC 1988 9-9-9-24-1T Team Xtreem 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
240 GB Revodrive 3 X2 Windows 7 SP1 1000 W OCZ ZX series - 80 Gold HAF 932 - Windy Tunnel - 22 Fans 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8150 - 4.90 ghz  GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD7 (Rev. 1.1) XFX 6990 + Accelero Twin Turbo 6990 cooler 24/7... 8192 MB - OC 1988 9-9-9-24-1T Team Xtreem 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
240 GB Revodrive 3 X2 Windows 7 SP1 1000 W OCZ ZX series - 80 Gold HAF 932 - Windy Tunnel - 22 Fans 
  hide details  
post #379 of 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by polyzp View Post

I think it depends ion which card they reviewed , and at what turbo voltage setting the card could reach. But isnt it generally a hotter card, despite the fact it is much less power hungry?

Of course that can be dependent on the fan profile/heatsink dissipation/fan effectiveness. You can generally let a GPU run a little bit hotter and get away with a little less fan RPM. In this case I would say that the 680 is 4*C hotter in gaming benchmarks because NV lets it be.

You can see that when the GPU is put under extreme load, it dissipates on par with the 7970 and is less noisy which means either the heatsink is more effective or/and the fan is more effective or/and the power consumption is showing it's benefit.
550550
Edited by bezelbeater - 3/25/12 at 4:16pm
post #380 of 679
Although I have my eyes set on the 680, I'm going to wait for a couple of months to make my final decision. Who ever has the lowest price between the 680 & the 7970 (lowest being $40 to $50 cheaper) will be the lucky GPU thumb.gif BY that time, all the kinks should be fixed by updated drivers for both AMD & Nvidia thinking.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Graphics Cards - General
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › 7970 vs GTX 680 - Who is the real KING? UPDATE: 7970 ~8% better clock per clock