Originally Posted by c900712
How can you guys say a 7970, 7950 is just fine while on benchmarks its a completely different result ?
What are you talking about, exactly? Benchmarks show the 7970 GHz Ed. to be slightly faster than a 680 (and quite a bit faster in a couple, select titles that are highly memory-bandwidth intensive), and a 7950 to be just slightly slower than a 670 ... but with way more OC'ing potential, such that if you get a good OC'er, the 7950 actually competes with an OC'd 680, and wins sometimes.
The AMD cards are fast as hell ... but personally I prefer the nV package and drivers overall. I don't mind giving up a few FPS (for the same $) for the benefits that the nV setup provides, but I could easily see a person choosing differently ... just depends on your priorities
Back to your original question ... I think if the cost is the same, I'd rather have the 690. It's just such a wicked-cool card. Yeah, the 2x4gb setup provides a bit more future-proofing, but, well ... check out this review
and keep in mind that the 690 is basically 680's SLI.
The takeaway from that article is that they'd recommend 2 x 680 2GB over 2 x 670 4GB, even at surround resolutions. At a single monitor resolution, one would logically presume that this conclusion would be even MORE true Edited by brettjv - 2/9/13 at 9:20am