[Sharchaster]

7970 Crossfire...but not the XFX model.

Edit : Didn't see the price between CF 7970 and 670 SLI, though. If that's the case, then I think 7950 Crossfire is the best option you can choose.

 

[zylonite]

>> The games I play are Crysis 3, Diablo 3, Mass Effect 3, Dead Space 3, Dragon Age 1 and 2, Guild Wars 2, Battlefield 3, Star Wars The Old Republic, and the big one I play most is World Of Warcraft.
Get a single 7970 OC or GHZ edition and you are set for two years at least

 

[estabya]

If its between 7970s for $770 and 670s for $638 I'd say go for the 670s. Really though, you'd probably be better going for 7950s. They are about the same performance as 670s, but they are slightly cheaper and have 3gb vram like the 7970s. Plus with an OC they can easily hit stock 7970 clocks and only be 2-5% slower. I think that 7950s are the most cost effective option and you will be future proof for AT LEAST 2-3 years.

 

[JTHMfreak]

670 ftws are nice, a little more expensive but better quality. Crysis 3 will really only be the game that puts the two cards to any real use. Maybe wow also, I have read that in highly populated cities that the cards get a good workout. But the other games are easily maxable on a single card setup pretty much. At 1080p on sli 670 ftws playing crysis 3 at the absolute max settings resulted in very playable frame rates on the first level. Sure I got knocked down quite a bit during the rope physics moments, but I have heard that is a problem for everyone. I'm sure I could lower a couple settings while not missing out on anything visually, but I just did the first level real fast as a baseline. Game crashed at second level so I'm waiting on the patch to finish downloading, then I can see how the rest of the games fares as I have heard that the first level tends to be the most demanding on gpus.

 

[Nevk]

2560*1440.... 7970 CrossFire

 

[Stay Puft]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevk

2560*1440.... 7970 CrossFire

This

 

[JinxyJ08]

Lol see, so many different opinions!

Arent 7950's a good bit slower?

 

[estabya]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JinxyJ08

Lol see, so many different opinions!

Arent 7950's a good bit slower?

They are roughly 10-12% slower than a 7970, but with a solid OC they can meet or beat stock 7970 performance. The real appeal is the cost. You could Tri-fire 7950s for pretty much the cost of two 7970s.

Check out this Sapphire. It has the boost clock, and it's on sale for $290. You'd have a hard time beating Tri-7950s for $870.

 

[JinxyJ08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by estabya

They are roughly 10-12% slower than a 7970, but with a solid OC they can meet or beat stock 7970 performance. The real appeal is the cost. You could Tri-fire 7950s for pretty much the cost of two 7970s.

Check out this Sapphire. It has the boost clock, and it's on sale for $290. You'd have a hard time beating Tri-7950s for $870.

Now I keep hearing about how bad 3 or more GPU's scale so wouldn't 7950's in Tri-fire be a worse setup than 7970's in crossfire?

Also cant the 7970 overclock to then have a larger advantage in the end?

If its really not all that different I guess I don't really see the point of the 7970 if the 7950 is practically the same gpu, but hey I'm all for a big price savings.

I see no one is too hot on the GTX 690 option. I figured it might be that way.

 

[sugarhell]

Actually a 7950 is 2-5 % slower than a 7970 clock to clock. So your best deal is to grab 2 or more 7950. The scaling is good on tri-fire if you know how to setup your system

 

[JinxyJ08]

Well then I completely dont see the point of going 7970 is the 7950 is that close. Thats crazy!

 

[Stay Puft]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhell

Actually a 7950 is 2-5 % slower than a 7970 clock to clock. So your best deal is to grab 2 or more 7950. The scaling is good on tri-fire if you know how to setup your system

Not sure how thats possible when it has like 12% less stream processors

 

[JinxyJ08]

Double post.

 

[sugarhell]

Well a 7950 cant clock high enough. If you get 1200 you are really lucky. Basically 7950 is a low binned 7970. I would choose 7950.7970 if you care about top performance

 

[Kinaesthetic]

7950 can hit STOCK 7970 speeds. The reason you would go 7970 is because the 7970 can ALSO be overclocked, making it pull away from the 7950. If you can actually afford it, go 7970, the 7950 is more "budget" oriented.

 

[sugarhell]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stay Puft

Not sure how thats possible when it has like 12% less stream processors

12% less stream doesnt mean that is 12% slower. If you have a 1000 mhz 7970 a 1075-1100 7950 will match it

 

[JinxyJ08]

Yes I can afford It, but spending less for the same performance is a great option. I already ordered and now have two of the XFX 7970 BE DD's sitting here right next to me that I haven't opened because I wanted to get some opinions before I put them in my system.

 

[sugarhell]

XFX? They have awful vrms cooling...

 

[estabya]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kinaesthetic

7950 can hit STOCK 7970 speeds. The reason you would go 7970 is because the 7970 can ALSO be overclocked, making it pull away from the 7950. If you can actually afford it, go 7970, the 7950 is more "budget" oriented.

Of course you could OC the 7970s faster, but at some point diminishing return comes in. Like for most setups two 7950s will give you plenty of power even without OC. Now if we are comparing three 7950s to two 7970s, it's no contest. If the 7950s had less memory or a narrower memory bus than the 7970s I would think differently, but if you are spending 850-900, and your mobo is capable, it wouldn't make much sense to do two 7970s over three 7950s.