Quote:
Originally Posted by
Edge Of Pain 
The UK never sees anything like this.
The cheapest 680 I can find is £359.62 which is about $580. The most expensive I have seen is ~ £480 which is ~ $770.
On the other hand, I can find 7950s for as low as ~£225. Which is very good for the UK but still more than anything people in the USA would pay for on Newegg.
Must mean the demand for 680s and 670s is very high in the UK
Na, just means that between VAT, the extra shipping to get it to the UK, and pretty much every computer manufacturer seeming to think Euro = Dollar, you get nailed by high prices.
Be thankful you aren't in Australia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Outlawed
Price drops and the 700 series around the corner....
I remember grabbing my "top tech" 680 within the first week. Seems like it was only yesterday
lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majin SSJ Eric
The 7970 is best for tinkerers who will go the extra mile for ultimate performance.
Come on now, you're making it sound like it should be a whole next gen. If you compared that max oc'd 7970 to my 1.23ghz stock 680 the difference would be minimal. Sure maybe it has 10 or so more frames at best in certain games. It's not really make or break since nvidia has its pros too. Their drive support is top notch, heavily increasing performance in popular game titles constantly. Not only that but if you decide at any time you want 3d support, your going to wish you went with nvidia.
AMD is faster clock-for-clock then nVidia and can clock higher then your 1.23Ghz, the performance gains it has is nothing to sneeze at. Even your hypothetical 10 frames can mean a lot.
AMD drivers are fine, I have never had a driver crash that wasn't due to OCing too far. In fact, I say AMD support is better since they support Virtualized GPU BIOS (
AKA, you can pass an AMD card to a VM, they've been doing this since 2008. nVidia still doesn't.)
12.11, 'nuff said. If you mean fixes for games that just came out to optimize them, they both do that, be it by profiles or actual driver update.
Becasue we totally don't have 3d support for almost any game, and the profiles for them aren't opensource so you can get them day one instead of waiting (either for it to be made, or fixed) either. Oh right, we do and they are.
We can also use a variety of 3D modes, including passive, without having to pay more then we did for the GPU just to use "nvidia 3dvision".
Seriously, $80+ for one set of glasses? I use the ones I got from the movie theater for free with my HP 3d screen I picked up for $200. The software I use would probably work with nVidia too of course, but that would mean that the two would be exactly the same.
The 680 is an awesome card. There's no need to justify it, it runs cooler and uses less power, and it's still neck and neck for #1 with the 7970Ghz performance wise.
However, all the things you listed that nVidia has over AMD, they really don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mcg75 Quote:
Originally Posted by
Usario
Uh no. The 7970 was 20% faster clock for clock after the 12.11 driver release. I'm not sure if NVIDIA has released a new driver since then to shorten that gap though.
Clock for clock is pointless. All that matters is the end result at the maximum for each card.
My 7970 at 1250mhz edged out my 670 at 1325mhz by 500 points in 3dmark11, 2 fps in Heaven and 6 fps in Metro 2033.
A 680 oc'd to 1325mhz would close most of that gap.
How common are 1325Mhz 680s compared to 1250Mhz 7970s? Clock for clock means a lot if they clock about the same, we learned this from Sandy/Ivy vs BD/PD already.
