My overclocked 670FTW is faster than stock 680s, so what? Your card performs well, be happy with it. I got lucky witha card tthat would clock to 1463core/7668mem, and I don't have voltage control... It is faster than your 7950, and there's simply no argument about it; it is faster than my 680 Lightnings until I up the volts and the Lightnings take off.
Fact is, the 7970/7950 DO NOT overclock "like crazy" despite what you and many other people say or imply. They almost all will hit 1100-1175, but they don't just stop, they hit a brick wall after that. Somewhere around here I still have the handwritten list I made of exactly what voltage was required for exactly what frequency for each of my 7970 Lightnings, and the fact is, they are not efficient cards at all. It is two bumps in voltage for one in clockspeed after not too long, and the 79xx cards are a perfect example ofddiminishing returns.
Even if they hadn't died from MSI apparently not communicating the change in component layout with block mfgrs, I would have gotten rid of them as even running one I literally got headaches within an hour due to the stuttering, and in CFX they gave me multiple migraines it was so bad. I have seen the "Second Coming" drivers that supposedly fix the frame time issue first hand, but it is still there.
AMD cards may work well for you and other people, but some of us want a more efficient, elegantly designed, and buttery smoothcard, rat her than a simple brute force card, and this time it was Nvidia.
I will be one of the first to say that the price on the AMD cards right now is very low, but also to remind that when they came out, they were WAY overpriced. AMD is not some saintly company, they're here to make money and the more people who actively ignore issues with their products, much less vocalize their "I don't see it", the less likely they are to ever fix the problems.
I am not writing this to flame/bait, I am writing it because I've spent thousands on cards from BOTH companies this round, and countless thousands on past generations, and despite the typical fanboy verbal diarrhea I see constantly, I am actually in a position to compare the two directly and I don't have to justify my purchases to myself or anyone else, since I just bought the absolute top card for each company instead.
I am tired of the fanboy trash, so cut it out. If you can't provide a pros and cons list for the 7950 that's just as long as your list for the 670, both for the pros and the cons, you need to refrain from saying anything.
Also, why would you give advice when you don't own either of these cards that the OP is asking about?
It's like asking "which is better, chicken or beef?" and your response is "I don't eat anything but Rocky Mountain Oysters so they're clearly the best, and You have to prove otherwise!".
To the OP:
CUDA cores are the processing cores/shaders, and yes the difference is fairly significant. The 760 tries to make up for this with higher factory clocks, but bring both up to 1250core and you'll see the 670 come out significantly ahead (as well as better than the 7950; also, ignore benches for the two as AMD has their Ghz Editions because it places the cards at a higher clock rate out of the box than the Nvidia sample, doing nothing more than making them look better in benchmarks... An average enthusiasts overclock will take the 670 further, assuming it's one of the better 50pct of cards out their, and if it's like the FTW and uses the 680 PCB, you are GOING to outperform either the AMD card or the 760, and that's not even counting the extra 70-130Mhz from a simple 1.212v BIOS!).
As I mentioned, I have had all the top cards from the generation, but the ones I'm keeping are the 670FTW. They are the most efficient, allowing me to run 3-way SLI with a hugely OC'd 2011 system using less power than just two 7970s consumed, both types overclocked
.The 760 is to the 660 as the 770 is to the 680. Nvidia didn't releasea nnew 670 presumably because the gap in performance was alreadyso small...