that was the article I was referencing and he made it seem like amd was a second place player .
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti at High AA Settings Review @ [H]
- Thread starter FrgMstr
- Start date
its no use. good bye.
D
Deleted member 134608
Guest
To be fair, I could see how he got the impression (as others) that [H] just likes the 660 Ti more. I certainly did get that impression at a few points reading the last articles as well.
We are reading text, not listening to audio or watching a youtube clip. Our brains are going to read into things and get the wrong impression at times.
Then I just considered the simple fact that the 660 Ti is new and 7950 is old news. Of course its going to get lots of attention, and not just here but on every tech site. That fact alone is going to create an illusion of bias.
Does that mean AMD doesn't deserve credit, shouldn't be recommended or [H] isn't recommending them? Of course not. The fact AMD released cards that beat the 580 was a massive triumph and the fact their cards can compete with the new 600 series cards is fantastic.
Second, I considered nVidia deserves a bit of fanfare at the moment because Kepler actually delivered what nVidia promised long ago. A big jump in performance and power efficiency over Fermi. Considering the heat and power draw of the 480 few believed this would happen. Hell the first review of the 680 shocked the hell out of me.
TLDR: I don't believe [H] is biased at all. They have recommended AMD cards countless times in the past.
You don't understand what's important ... Goals/shmoals ... THEIR HORSE DIDN'T WIN ... therefore, they must cry foul.
For my part, I just want to say thanks, I found this article extremely illuminating, and I'm certainly capable of filling in the necessary blanks given all the facts as presented here.
One thing I do feel compelled to point out, however, is that the notion that you've isolated the effect of memory bandwidth between the 660ti and 670 in these tests strikes me as flawed. Does not the 670 come equipped with 32 ROP's, and the 660ti with only 24 (i.e. the 670 also has a 33% advantage in raster power as well as the bandwidth advantage)? Does this not make isolating the effect of memory bandwidth alone as you claim to have done here ... impossible? Or am I missing something obvious?
It seems to me that the existence of these two cards actually presents the rather rare opportunity to isolate and analyze the impact of ROP count ... all you'd need to do is equalize core clocks and memory bandwidth between the two cards, and do the same set of benchmarks.
I suspect that if you were to do these tests under the conditions I describe, you would find that the difference in ROP count is actually responsible for a sizable portion of the difference you are presently assigning purely to the 670's advantage in memory bandwidth
I'm sure you don't have time for it, but it would sure be neat to see. And thanks again for what you HAVE done to show us all what the 660ti is capable of
EDIT: Just got through reading all the comments, turns out I'm not the first to point this ROP discrepancy out. Oops.
However, unless I missed it, I saw no official 'comment' on the subject, and hence am wondering what the [H] guys have to say about this question? Does the ROP count difference not, in a sense, invalidate the bedrock premise of the article, to whit that they are isolating the effect of memory bandwidth on the 660 vs 670 comparison?
Last edited:
SonDa5
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2008
- Messages
- 7,437
Totally agree.
I'd like to see some [H] reviews with GTX 660 ti over clocked vs. HD7800 series over clocked.
SonDa5
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2008
- Messages
- 7,437
Thanks for your extremely informative posts. I took my time and read them and had no problems understanding what you posted.
totally agree. i'd also love to see how close an overclocked 7850 can approach the performance of a stock 7950. especially considering there's an his 7850 on the egg for 199.99 shipped. i dig the 7950's at their current price point, but they won't fit in my htpcs.
There's a factory OC'ed 7870 in the mix for the next GTX 660Ti review.
I'm not sure that exercise is warranted. Yes, all three suggested cards(7850,7870 and 7950) have
32 rops, but there are differences between these cards that make them all good values at their current
respective price points. Since 660ti dropped, prices on all three of these cards dropped too, even though
they didn't have to. For 7870 vs 7950, yes even a slightly OCed 7870 can rival or beat a7950, but the
7950 has far more OC potential, and its increased amount of shaders will give it an advantage when
the 2 are compared clock for clock. As for comparing 7850 to 7950, it is even more of a gap since while
both have lots of head room, the 7950 has a massive advantage in shaders.(Important:all are gcn cards.)
edit: when i say the 7950(and 7850) have lots of oc potential vs 7870, what i meant is that while all 3
can reach very high clocks, the 7950 and 7850 start at 800 and 860 respectively while the 7870 starts at
1ghz and has less room to grow. Also, i might mention the 7850 has a 130w tdp constrained to 150w on
one pcie 6pin connector and the PEG slot while the 7970 and 7850 at 200w(typically 140w in games)
and 175w respectively have 2pcie 6pin lines and the peg slot to work with in games.
(That 140w tdp thing came from the 7970 and 7950 having the same tdp as 6970 and 6950 respectively)
Both the 7850 and 7870 likely use far less than their rated tdp while playing games , but the 7870 is
already closer to its max oc potential compared to 7850(or 7950).
The amd reference blower cooler wasnt/isnt bad on the 7870 either.
Someone mentioned yet another way to compare 660ti to 670. Think back to the original launch of the
gtx460, That card came in 2 flavors that were basically identical except for 3 things:
ROPs, memory interface, and frame buffer size. They both had a core clock of 675 and a shader clock
of 1350. Both had 336 shaders and 56 texture units. They both had 900mhz gddr5. Where they varied
was the gtx460 1GB had 256 bits to/from memory and 32 rops, while the gtx 460 768(MB) had 24 rops
and a 192bit path to/from memory. In testing at lower resolutions and settings(like low or no aa), they
performed pretty close. When resolutions and settings(aa)were cranked, the gtx460 768 kept pace in
some games but fell on its face in others. This can likely be accounted for both by it's relative lack of
ROPs/vram bandwidth and the fact that that was about the time we were realizing you really ought to
have at least 1GB of frame buffer available going forward(esp. at 1080p and above). Oh, and the 768MB
version launched at 199 while the 1GB card launched at 229. I think most sites advocated ponying up
the extra 30 bucks to get the 1GB model for future proofing purposes(doesn't hurt that those cards
overclocked like crazy, too. Oh yeah, the 1GB had 160w tdp and the 768 had 150w tdp, but they
both had 2 pcie 6pin power connector....handy for pushing them to their full potential. They had fairly
capable reference coolers that helped in that regard as well , compare to gtx465, 470 and 480.
Edit: The previous 2 paragraphs were in reference to another post, but reference card length is another
difference to consider in the performance tranisitions from 7750, 7770, 7850( supposedly all 7850s are
custom jobs, but not sure that's true), 7870 and 7950. 7950 and 7970/ghz ed. have similar PCBs, tho.
Edit:If it's of interest to anyone, the gtx460 768 has a weird amount of vram cuz it was matching the
rops/192bit interface. Nvidia didn't start using mixed sized memory modules until gtx550ti.
Last edited:
§kynet
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2003
- Messages
- 414
jtenorj please stop putting a forced carriage return after every line, let things wrap by themselves.
the exercise is warranted for any gamer that has specific space requirements. in my scenario, a video card no longer than 9.5" in length. what do i care about the overclockability of a 7950 when i can't fit it the machine its intended to go into? if there's a $200 product that once overclocked might be able to perform similarly to a $300 product, and at the same time is available in a form factor attractive to space limited buyers, then i'm interested in seeing an article about it. jtenori, find me a goddamn 9.5 inch 7950 and i'll but it.
Sodapopjones
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 1,936
Well at 1250 core on the 7850 its close, but unless you're running the Hawk or maybe the Double D XFX card, don't expect to get that high without an aftermarket cooler for 24/7 use.
At 1200 core, my old 7850 was within 60 points in Heaven of my 660Ti at its factory specs.
Ok. You mention the combination of both card length and card price and they are somewhat linked. You say that your budget is 200(7850 territory) but you would glady get a 7950(300) if you could find one at 9.5 inches or less. I agree you are unlikely to find such a creature in the wild, but you should be able to find a 7870 like that, possibly with the amd reference pcb and blower style hsf(good combo of both cool running and fairly quiet performance). And of course you should be able to oc the 7870 in such a fashion that it would handily beat a 7950, while setting you back the in between price of 250. You didn't mention power, though. I'm sure you know the 7850 requires only one pcie 6pin power connector while both the 7870 and 7950 require 2 6pin connectors. Does your psu have 2 6pin leads? Otherwise you would need to purchase a card with an adapter(2 molex to 1 pcie 6pin) or purchase the adapter separately. (edit: I forgot about the review I saw of an overclocked Zotac 660 ti with dual fans that was only about 7.5-7.8 inches in length. Cool, quiet, and OCs ok above the factory clocks too. If you're not a brand loyalist, are willing to shell out the cost of a 7950 and truly want the best physical size to performance ratio card on the market, there you go. Seek(google) and yee shall find. Or just search for it on a major tech buyers site like amazon, ncix or newegg(or for where ever you live).)
Last edited:
Trepidati0n
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 9,269
No problem. While people with higher resolutions it isn't an issue...but on mobile & tablet platforms it creates a very "wonky" display.
Unigine Heaven is NOT a GAME. Who cares about CANNED BENCHMARKS? This is [H]ardocp, by golly, and we buy our graphics cards to play REAL GAMES here. Heaven and 3D Mark might use game engines(that to the best of my knowledge are not actually used in any major shipping title),but a card's results in those CANNED BENCHMARKS are definitely NOT the best indicators of how a it will perform in ACTUAL GAMES. That is why Kyle and Brent test these cards using ACTUAL GAMES so that gamers such as you and I don't get duped by marketing hype!
Stepping off the soapbox now...
No problem. While people with higher resolutions it isn't an issue...but on mobile & tablet platforms it creates a very "wonky" display.
Ya know, it's funny. When I first go to type a forum reply, the text box on my smallish Dell crt running 1152x864@75hz vs 1280x960@60 or a lower res/higher refresh(thank God I found it lying on a curb walking home one day before my old Dynex [a Best Buy store brand] 19in./18vis. 1600x1200@75hz died on me)is all narrow compared to how the preview or final in forum results look.It's not like it needs to be narrower. There's nothing to the left or right of the text box...
Oh, maybe that's what you mean? The text box is better suited to mobile phones like Androids @800x480 or my somewhat fondly missed crappy 7in. chinese android tablet(that took many hours to charge but only held the charge an hour or 2 at best) at the same res? (edit: often with that tablet I would zoom in on a page a bit for what I guess was better compatability with sites optimized for 1024x768.)
Caution: To people who spent good money on a quality mobile device, be selective about where you plug it in to charge while out and about. Most indoor outlets should be ok, but avoid what might appear to be a beefed up, somewhat industrial strength outdoor socket at all costs! I learned the hard way and now my somewhat glitchy and underpowered chinese made Android tab(at least it was functional) is an animated paperweight with a little green android spinning around on the screen forever and ever...
Last edited:
That could be interesting. The 7870 is already close to 660ti when both are at reference clocks. However, since most 660ti for around 300 are reference clocked at a little over 900 plus turbo and most 7870 that are around 250 are reference clocked at 1ghz( and both should reach similarly high overclocks), the 660ti will have more room to grow. So at reference clocks, the 7870 is a better deal but at max overclocks the 660ti might be worth the price premium. When you factor in higher priced custom pre-overclocked-from-the-factory models of each of those, the price/performance equation becomes a bit of a mess. They can both have relatively shorter card lengths and they do have similar TDPs, though.
Edit:I should have likely made this post a bit back in the thread compared to some of my others. I've learned to edit and quote , but can someone maybe give me a brief tutorial on the proper use of multi quote posting and the difference between a normal quote and quick reply? Or just a link to something explaining how they work on here? Don't know if the quick reply would change much, but being able to properly multiquote would lower my post count and maybe make me seem a little less noobish for as long as I've been a reader of [H]. I'd experiment and just try it out, but I'm afraid I'll royally screw it up. And thanks again to whoever steered me to letting the page wrap versus the line stops I was putting in. Now my paragraphs are much more vertically compact. Maybe if I learn to use multiquote properly, my overall posting profile will be smaller on this thread and others as well. I appreciate any help that comes my way in these regards.
Also, I rarely post in the forums because after reading primarily gpu articles/their discussion threads that have been going a little while, most anything that needs to be said has been said by someone else already. However, in the case of my first post on this thread and some of the ones following, I felt I had to expand on the thought mentioned a few posts prior to that, since I don't recall reading any mention of the various cards ROP counts(or render back ends,etc. Whatever AMD and nvidia are calling 'em these days) in any of these last four articles or the comments that followed them until that post 2 posts before my first post in this thread.
If someone can either link a page from at least one of the articles that references this/a comment in the previous 3 comment threads that isn't a millon pages on down the road from the start of the thread(you can only read so many comments on a thread before your brain melts) or quote a spot in one of the articles/comment threads about rops, that would be fantastic.
Someone was wondering about an "offical" response to the subject(guessing from head honchos like Kyle or Brent or even other editorial staff[Dave?]). I've got to admit to my curiousity about that as well. I know y'all([H] staff) have moved on with other projects by now, but a comment, edit, clarification, SOMETHING would be appreciated. I was going to post this in a different post I was composing, but I may as well put it here. I don't believe I've ever detected any sort of long term bias and/or fanboyism(or any bias at all, for that matter) from Kyle or Brent based on what they've written here, and they both write very well. They do examine various pros and cons of the 2 titans biggest and somewhat smaller GPUs when they come out compared to what's available and give you the skinny on which card at a certain level of price and performance will give you the best value in playing the demanding and popular new games that many of us are into(Had a bit of an issue last gen or 2 comparing 480/5870, 470/5850 or 580/6970, 570/6950 and 560ti/6870 because even though those were the top tier and down from each side, they were at quite different prices from each other on the market and should have been compared at different levels. The amd cards held up pretty well in a number of cases despite that, though). I know they have had both brands of cards in their personal rigs and will upgrade when something better comes along(like going from crossfire 7970s to sli gtx680s when they provided better top level performance at a better price). If they accidentally gave the implication to anyone(myself included)of favorism toward nvidia(660ti in particular), I'm sure it was totally unintentional. If they were totally backing nvidia's latest more mainstream card versus its competition, I'm sure they would have made that abundantly clear to us all, because thats how they roll. (edit: It seems that according to wikipedia.org, Kyle has owned and operated [H] since 1997. 15 years. Awesome! Looking at the list of the last several months of gpu articles/reviews under that main page tab, it seems most of them have been written by Brent and Grady with a few by both Kyle and David as well. I guess Brent is the author of this 4 part series on gtx660ti with Kyle as his editor on all of them.)
(edit: I don't know if this is the situation for other people trying to reference older articles like the launch articles for 7950 and 7970, but when I click next page again after having done so several times it loops me back around to current articles. What if someone wanted to look up the [H]s articles on geforce 7s or radeon x1000s(that's about when I started reading them.) I know that most reviews of custom cards centered around a certain gpu have links to the launch article of that card or even other members of the series(not always though), but searching that way is more cumbersome. Could someone maybe fix that feature on the site? I also know we can use the little search oval up in the corner of any site page to get a list of pertinant [H] articles we can click on, but my pc has some form of crap on it that is redirecting search results for it and google which I have yet to get rid of. I also have an unknown svchost process that keeps popping up in task manager and hogs as much as half or more(500MB+) of my 1GB system/4.5GB virtual memory when my network port is hooked up to the dsl modem. Perhaps those two things are related, perhaps not. I'd run microsoft's free anti whatever software, but my computer seems to not want to fully update to xp sp3. Any suggestions of another couple good free programs to help me cleanse my computer without having to wipe the hdd? Oh, I get a couple popup windows from time to time while connected too.)
Maybe this isn't the best place to ask some of these questions, but since I'm here maybe someone can help me out...
Edit: about forum page formatting(or maybe even article formatting). Does the page wrap text to fit any monitor res(1680x1050, 1080p, 2560) or is it limited to something like 1280? I noticed the edit box is a lot wider for me than the one before you first submit a post(seems a lot closer to how threads apear as a whole on my screen at 1152) but when I submitted my last edit I must have accidentally thown some enters in there cause parts got goofed up. This should fix it but I have to wonder. If the text does wrap to fit larger/and or full HD+ screens/windows, wouldn't that also make the text harder to read( perhaps those with wider screens than mine use less than full screen windows and/or multitask with 2 windows side by side to fix the problem). Oh well. Will correct again if need be. Edit: fixed again...
Last edited:
i've perused all of the 7850s on newegg and they all seem to conform to my space requirement. the $200 his model does have an aftermarket cooler but it may not allow voltage adjustment. there's a twin frozor unit well within my needed length. the reference gtx660 is both too long and in my opinion not a great value. i'm also likely to buy two for crossfire so a reference cooled unit that exhausts hot air out the back of the card maybe a wiser decision. ever since the release of the gtx660s i've been thinking about replacing the hd 68xx cards in my htpcs but i'm going off topic of this thread so i'll stop here.
How's about a 7.5-7.8 inch overclocked dual fan zotac 660ti? Are you an amd fanboi or do you want the best combo of price/performance? Or did you not mean it when you said you'd buy a card with that level of performance that fit in your case? Or maybe a reference blower style cooler on a 7870 at 9.5 for 250 and oc it?
Last edited:
Slyr7.62
Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 759
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Exactly. That's the 660ti in question alright. 300 and free shipping. Or there's this:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B007NTTJYO/ref=dp_olp_new?ie=UTF8&condition=new
Diamond 7870 with reference blower. 250 free shipping.
Edit: Price after rebate is 240. Edit:Just looked at 7870 reference review on techreport. Is 9.7in .2in too long?
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
If the games in the article are the games you play/want to play and they were maxed at 1080p or higher, I'd say that would be a fairly solid yes. If you play/want to play other games, you may have to check results at other sites as well. I highly suggest checking out techreport. They don't test like here at [H](the way people actually play games), but their method is very scientific and goes a long way to explain why a card is more or less playable at a given resolution and settings. I believe I recall recently reading a response on another comment thread here where either Kyle or Brent mentioned getting together the funds to get equipment which would allow [H] to adopt some of the same methods for future gpu(and maybe cpu?) reviews.
So this might be posted in the wrong spot, but goes to things being missed when closing out an article. I'd post it where it ought to be, but no one has added anything to that article's comments since April Fools Day, and it wasn't mentioned on any of those 17 pages(I checked).
When y'all were wrapping up the launch review of 7870 and 7850, you said that 7850 was an underwhelming release since it cost more than the gtx560ti but didn't improve performance in a meaningful way. Did you read through your own article? In three out of the four games in which you tested those cards, the 7850 allowed for higher playable settings than the gtx560ti. You mentioned it on the corresponding pages, but seem to have forgotten what you wrote earlier between the middle and the end of the article. It's like everyone(author, editor, commnetators) caught a case of A.D.D. and forgot to take their Ritalin or something.In addition to the reitorated level of tesselation in Batman, the 7850 also allowed for a higher level of aa in Skyrim(matching the pricier radeons on the other page and even beating the gtx570), and ran at a higher res in Deus Ex(with a minor tweak). To quote that page:
"We were impressed with the Radeon HD 7850 in this game, as it was the only video card that allowed us to play at 2560x1600 well enough. However, we did have to turn SSAO down a notch to normal, instead of high, at 2560x1600. Once we did this, then we had an enjoyable gameplay experience at 2560x1600. The other two video cards were only playable at 1920x1200 with the highest in-game settings. At 2560x1600 we would have had to drop more than just SSAO in order to get playable performance, but at 1920x1200 we could run the highest in-game settings. Of course, the Radeon HD 7850 was also playable with the highest in-game settings at 1920x1200. "
Worth mentioning is the higher framerate in BF3. Now I know that the 7850 was stuck with the same playable settings as the other 2 cards, but you generally show results for single player mode and sometimes comment on what settings you had too tweak on a card to be able to compete online(such as dropping from hbao to ssao). What if the 7850's higher framerate had allowed it to play at the same settings in multiplayer as in singleplayer(though motion blur is probably more of a hindrance than a help in multiplayer, what with reducing your frame rate AND obscuring your vision)? I think ya'll usually turn off motion blur in multi just for that reason. Maybe the 7850's extra framerate might have allowed ambient occlusion to remain at maximum versus turning it down on the other cards? The average and maximum framerates weren't much higher than the other 2 cards, but the minimum frame rate sure was.
I guess you tested the Mass Effect 3 demo too, but that was only a demo, not a final version of a shipping game. All the cards were more than playable at 2560x1600 max settings, but all the radeons ran substantially faster than similarly priced geforces(for framerate monkeys the 7850's 17% fps increase over the gtx560ti which was 16% cheaper can be a big deal). I am not one of those monkeys. I much prefer your usual style of testing versus the apples to apple comparison on that page, but you weren't given much choice in the matter.
I might mention that in these last 4 gtx660ti focused articles y'all used your normal highest playable settings method for the first and last article, but restricted the overclocking articles to apples to apples. This is not unusual at [H],but what good are higher frames rates if you can't raise the settings? Why not test that? Same goes for the extreme aa article. That is a a place where a high overclock may have made the difference between being playable or not at the settings you used.
When y'all were wrapping up the launch review of 7870 and 7850, you said that 7850 was an underwhelming release since it cost more than the gtx560ti but didn't improve performance in a meaningful way. Did you read through your own article? In three out of the four games in which you tested those cards, the 7850 allowed for higher playable settings than the gtx560ti. You mentioned it on the corresponding pages, but seem to have forgotten what you wrote earlier between the middle and the end of the article. It's like everyone(author, editor, commnetators) caught a case of A.D.D. and forgot to take their Ritalin or something.In addition to the reitorated level of tesselation in Batman, the 7850 also allowed for a higher level of aa in Skyrim(matching the pricier radeons on the other page and even beating the gtx570), and ran at a higher res in Deus Ex(with a minor tweak). To quote that page:
"We were impressed with the Radeon HD 7850 in this game, as it was the only video card that allowed us to play at 2560x1600 well enough. However, we did have to turn SSAO down a notch to normal, instead of high, at 2560x1600. Once we did this, then we had an enjoyable gameplay experience at 2560x1600. The other two video cards were only playable at 1920x1200 with the highest in-game settings. At 2560x1600 we would have had to drop more than just SSAO in order to get playable performance, but at 1920x1200 we could run the highest in-game settings. Of course, the Radeon HD 7850 was also playable with the highest in-game settings at 1920x1200. "
Worth mentioning is the higher framerate in BF3. Now I know that the 7850 was stuck with the same playable settings as the other 2 cards, but you generally show results for single player mode and sometimes comment on what settings you had too tweak on a card to be able to compete online(such as dropping from hbao to ssao). What if the 7850's higher framerate had allowed it to play at the same settings in multiplayer as in singleplayer(though motion blur is probably more of a hindrance than a help in multiplayer, what with reducing your frame rate AND obscuring your vision)? I think ya'll usually turn off motion blur in multi just for that reason. Maybe the 7850's extra framerate might have allowed ambient occlusion to remain at maximum versus turning it down on the other cards? The average and maximum framerates weren't much higher than the other 2 cards, but the minimum frame rate sure was.
I guess you tested the Mass Effect 3 demo too, but that was only a demo, not a final version of a shipping game. All the cards were more than playable at 2560x1600 max settings, but all the radeons ran substantially faster than similarly priced geforces(for framerate monkeys the 7850's 17% fps increase over the gtx560ti which was 16% cheaper can be a big deal). I am not one of those monkeys. I much prefer your usual style of testing versus the apples to apple comparison on that page, but you weren't given much choice in the matter.
I might mention that in these last 4 gtx660ti focused articles y'all used your normal highest playable settings method for the first and last article, but restricted the overclocking articles to apples to apples. This is not unusual at [H],but what good are higher frames rates if you can't raise the settings? Why not test that? Same goes for the extreme aa article. That is a a place where a high overclock may have made the difference between being playable or not at the settings you used.
Last edited:
the zotac card is 7.5" in size FYI, it is the shortest of the 660 cards
its the only one that will fit in my case so it is kind of a big deal
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
To whoever fixed it so that by clicking gpu from the homepage, then next page repeatedly you get older and older results, thanks so very, very much! Very much appreciated.(Edit: Now it seems to be glitching the same way as before. Maybe my computer is playing tricks on me...)
Last edited:
Sodapopjones
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 1,936
You can adjust voltage on all the 7850's with TriXX, but I wouldn't recommend the HIS card, the cooler isn't that great. When I said aftermarket cooler, I meant, like a Clio or Accelero, you won't see more than a couple degree difference between it and the HIS/VisionTek reference clone without one.
TheReproducer
Weaksauce
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 116
Contrary evidence?
I trust Tomshardware as far as I can throw an elephant but what do you guys make of their data and analysis?
I trust Tomshardware as far as I can throw an elephant but what do you guys make of their data and analysis?
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,719
Yes we are looking at measuring frametime in the future when the proper tools are there to allow that data to be collected.
As for Techreport, I am fairly sure it made a statement that the way it was pulling the data was incorrect.
Frametime has to be captured "at the monitor" not at the GPU and I am think this was the way TR was doing it.
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,719
We always hope to give you enough gameplay data that you can draw your own conclusions if you wish. We do not expect all our readers to agree with the conclusion statements, as I have yet to see this happen since doing reviews.