Originally Posted by Cloudfire777
Why does it matter if its 2GB vs 3GB when most users won`t need the extra 1GB and don`t plan on play with several monitors? Look at the review again. It beats 7970 in all areas. And its still cheaper.
And I`m comparing a OCed 680 to a stock 7970 because its around the same price. AMD fanboys played the same price argument on Nvidia with Fermi. It`s still valid
You`d be a complete fool to even think about buying a 7970
For single monitor performance you are correct. However, I read a review over at Legit Reviews earlier today that said even in SLI, a pair of GTX 680's only scales an average of 63% going from one card to two on triple monitor setups. 63%... that's terrible value for money. That's something that the GTX 680 should excel at, and yet it is being held back. The culprit is more than likely the 256-bit memory bus and 2GB vram. The 4GB version may fix it, but who knows.
I would be willing to bet money that a pair of HD 7970's scales much better on a triple monitor setup, and in those instances, the HD 7970 will be the better choice. Unfortunately, we need a website to actually perform those tests to justify my claim, but until then, I can't say I'm impressed with triple monitor performance on a GTX 680 SLI setup.
And this crap with "RIP AMD" also shows your ignorance. If AMD dies, your beloved nvidia starts selling mediocre video cards for high prices because there is no one left to compete with them. A monopoly is never a good thing. In other words, you should change that "RIP AMD" into "I hope AMD bounces back so we all win."
But seriously, cut the fanboy crap. It makes you look silly.Edited by Mad Pistol - 4/10/12 at 3:32pm