[The Tech Report] Radeon HD 7950 vs. GeForce GTX 660 Ti revisited - Page 65  

agreed saying the games are better for nvidia is a cop out, when it comes down to it, it shouldnt matter the game if the gpu is good enough... what exactly makes the nvidia run better anyway?

those results are all with HD 7950(800 Mhz). the benchmark without MSAA runs at 51 fps at 1920 x 1080. thats definitely playable. suffice to say that HD 7950 boost at 925 mhz boost speeds would be slightly faster than GTX 670. with +20% power the HD 7950 boost runs at 925 mhz without throttling and is around 5% slower than HD 7970(925 mhz).

you forgot to check techspot results with ultra 4x msaa where hd 7950 boost is faster than GTX 660 ti. At 1680 x 1050 and 1920 x 1080 the fps is definitely playable in techspot review.

I guess that's why the HD 7970 Ghz Edition, AMD's top-end single GPU card beats a GTX 680, nvidia's top-end single GPU card, right? The drivers are so terrible that AMD now holds the Single-GPU crown. If what you say is in fact true, then the engineers at nvidia should hang their heads in shame at their terrible failure. Have you seen how badly nvidia is getting beaten in BF3 on the 7970 Ghz edition? At the top end, it's a slaughter fest. AMD has BEATEN NVIDIA in games that are optimized FOR NVIDIA!

Sorry, but I don't see things the way you do. AMD is so terrible that they're faster than Nvidia. Ouch.


Thanks. I did read the article, and the entire time I was reading it, I couldn't help but think "the numbers do not add up. Every other tech review site is reporting different results." I guess that means it's Tech Report against the world. Talk about an uphill battle. According to every other review I've read (because only reading one review is foolish.) the stock 7950 and 660 Ti trade blows at stock speeds. However, the 7950 boost is decidedly faster, and if you overclock either the 7950 or 660 ti a little, the card pulls away. Of course, in TR's review, they compared a 660 ti with a stupidly high factory overclock to a stock 7950 boost. And to think...Tech Report was surprised at their results? Of course the 660 Ti AMP is going to be faster and have lower frame latency. That's what happens when you take a stock architecture and overclock it to the moon and back.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I will not attempt to discredit yours, but you really should take Tech Report's findings with a grain of salt until it's confirmed by another source or retested with a couple cards that actually compete with each other. At those speeds, a 660 Ti probably beats a stock GTX 670.
Edited by Mad Pistol - 12/11/12 at 12:36am

Yes, the whopping 2 FPS advantage. You got me there. I'd still call that "competitive" though.

I didn't see anywhere in the gamegpu review where it lists the card specs. It doesn't list it as a 7950 Boost, but that doesn't mean it isn't. And again, the Techspot review, which is testing a 7950 Boost, has it behind the 670 across the board, so why do you automatically assume that the 7950 Boost is ahead of the 670?

See, again, you are discounting the TechSpot review and Techpowerup's Cat 12.11 review (which both show the 660 Ti ahead) in favor of the reviews that show the 7950 ahead. That's what I'm talking about. You find reviews that show one ahead, and I find reviews that show the other ahead. Doesn't that indicate that they are pretty close? That the 660 Ti "competitive" to the 7950 Boost, to use your words? Why are you having trouble admitting that? I have no trouble admitting that the 7950 pulls ahead when overclocked.
Edited by Forceman - 12/11/12 at 12:59am

Once more: they did not. They had the fastest 7950 there is. Not only does the Sapphire have a 950MHz boost, it might actually run at that boost frequency unlike the reference 925MHz 7950 Boost.

Still not sure how you can not see that the cards they compared are price matched. That is legit, overclocking is a totally different thing. Is stock performance really banned from OCN? I didn't get that memo. Jeez, I even run my cards at stock Why? Because they OC like crap with stock voltage and don't do well in CF with more voltage...

One of user tests back here at ocn. I don't see 660ti being better bang for buck in neither fps/$ or fps/w here.

Actually I feel bad for Dimaggio1103 now. A group of people here are bashing the GTX 660 Ti and he is only the one that is defending it ...
But at $225 you shouldn't feel bad because it is priced like the HD7870 and it competes with it but with better support and technologies PhysX, TXAA & Nvidia Inspector all this makes the GTX 660 Ti worth it more than HD7870 if they are at the same price IMO .

========

I agree with you in that statement. Even a good overclocking HD7950 when compared to an overclocked GTX 680, the GTX 680 won't stand a chance against it in bandwidth limited games.
I actually sold my GTX 670 because it feels a little bit weak especially after drivers 12.11 . In any game that is bandwidth dependent it sucks pretty bad compared to the HD7900 series, at 2560x1440 the performance is sub-par compared to Tahiti based cards and when 8x MSAA is enabled it falls behind even the 7870 sometimes.
Also I payed the full retail price for it about ~ US $425 and I think I wasted my my money on it and decided to sell it at a huge loss.
If the next generation of GPUs aren't close from now, I would order myself an Asus Matrix 7970 or a high-end 7950.
Edited by HeadlessKnight - 12/11/12 at 2:01am

Bashing or not , cheapest 660ti here is in same price as 7950b (sapphire,vtx3d (basically a powercolor) 7950b is actually like 40$ cheaper than 660ti here...)

Why are fps numbers still being posted here? Whatever they demonstrate, it's not evidence against the Tech Report article.

Why is there still no "post your frame time data here, no fps numbers allowed" thread? Why do we not have any direct comparison between Win 7 and Win 8 frame times?

you are acting naive here. gamegpu knows to name an official AMD product if they use it in the review. no reviewer would post a HD 7950 boost score under the HD 7950 name. thats ridiculous.

you are wrong. Techpowerup Cat 12.11 review uses a stock HD 7950 at 800 Mhz. and still GTX 660 Ti is not faster.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Catalyst_12.11_Performance/23.html

1920 x 1200

GTX 660 Ti - 89
HD 7950 (12.11 ) - 91

2560x 1600

GTX 660 Ti - 82
HD 7950(12.11) - 88

You want a HD 7950 boost review.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/28.html

1920 x 1200

GTX 660 Ti - 87
HIS HD 7950 Iceq Boost - 100
GTX 670 - 101
HD 7970 - 105

2560 x 1600

GTX 660 Ti - 82
GTX 670 - 96
HIS HD 7950 Iceq Boost - 100
GTX 680 - 105

remember the HD 7950 boost depending on power headroom might run at less than its max boost clocks . once you max out power to +20% the HD 7950 runs at max boost clocks and is even more slightly faster.

techspot review was very clear. HD 7950 boost is close to GTX 670 at 1080p and at 1600p its slightly ahead.

http://www.techspot.com/review/603-best-graphics-cards/page12.html

" At 1920x1200 the GeForce GTX 670 is 12% faster than the Radeon HD 7950 and just 2% faster than the 7950 Boost. However the GTX 670 is 27% more expensive than both cards, so whichever way you slice it the Radeon HD 7950 Boost is the better proposition and things just get worse for the GTX 670 as the resolution is increased."

hardocp did not mince any words in their HD 7950 vs GTX 660 Ti comparison

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/11/12/fall_2012_gpu_driver_comparison_roundup/8

"Middle pricing band – This pricing band was far less competitive as the Radeon HD 7950 with Boost simply demolished the GTX 660 Ti across the board with regards to raw frame rates and overall game play experience across our suite of testing. "

If you want to believe that GTX 660 Ti is competitive with HD 7950 boost thats fine. don't expect others to do the same.