• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What's happening at BTR 4 .. and report issues here
#81
It's good to hear you're feeling better. :)

As for the 280x, yes it is starting to show its age in a few games but by and large it is more than good enough for 1080p gaming. I have really enjoyed it. I didn't have $500 to spend on a GTX 970. I paid only $165 for my card and it was a steal at that price. Even over a year later the GTX 970 is still $349 here on sale which is still outside of my budget right now. You guys know me, I will find a deal on a new card at some point. But for right now I'm very content with what I have. I have had to turn down a couple of settings in the latest Assassin's Creed games but I don't notice a huge difference visually. The one setting I wish I could use more is HBAO but I'm going to try tweaking the games some more to see if I can run them with it enabled.
#82
I'm not putting down 280X/7970. They have endured the past 3 years admirably considering they are unchanged from their late 2011 launch except for increased clock speeds they have always been capable of. And anyone buying one for $550 at launch (me! me!) or last year for $165 (you :) ) has certainly got their money's worth if they are still using it.

I'm feeling better but my knee/leg still really hurt bad and my foot will balloon up to nearly double its size if I try to do normal chores (like I did this morning)
- back to on the couch. BUT I am fixing up a tray so I can write while lying down .... not ideal ... but ...
Blush

HOWEVER, I am just about blown away by how FAST my body appears to be healing where my digestion is concerned. Once I got an accurate diagnosis of "gastroenteritis" (usually a pronouncement of doom by the medical establishment) from the ER/CAT scan, and skilled help (from my doctor friends in Hawaii to use the glutinous white mochi-gnome rice), the relief was almost immediate. I am adding new foods to my diet at an alarming rate and stuffing copious amounts down, with no evidence of the stricture that I was plagued with for the past ... many years.
Cool
#83
That's great!
#84
The HD 7970 vs. the GTX 680 – revisited 3 years later

http://www.babeltechreviews.com/hd-7970-.../view-all/

Surprise!
[Image: MainChart-1.jpg]
[Image: 680v7970.jpg]

The 2012 launch of the GTX 680
[Image: Untitled-one1.jpg]
[Image: Untitled-onefix.jpg]
Things have changed .... a little
#85
Awesome! Great job and thanks very much! I gave it a quick read and it looks amazing. I will chat more later I'm not at home now.
#86
So all the extra bus width, shaders etc in the 7970 vs 680 are worth squat diddly?

With the exception of two games that scored 30 fps or more, 4K is unusable on 7970.

The rest of the results show the 7970 only being single digits faster than 680. If the 680 here is stock then the factory OC models that were very popular would gobble most of that difference right up.

These results hardly show the "collapse of Kepler" that certain idiots on other forums constantly trumpet and proclaim.

AMD should be embarrassed at how small the difference is given how superior they claim GCN to be and the extra hardware resources at their disposal.

What you need to do now apoppin, is a "what would it take" article for all the games that can't hit 60 fps @ 1080p.

By that I mean, reduce settings on each card until the game does run 1080p @ 60 fps, then show the settings and the IQ. If the game has a console port compare what you end up with IQ wise to the console.
#87
I will say that even ignoring the games that were clearly held back by the 2gb of vram, the 7970 held up better than I thought against the GTX 680. Remember that at launch the GTX 680 was the clear winner. Either AMD has done a better job improving performance via drivers (which I doubt), or actually GCN has held up better as an architecture, which I also find surprising but more possible.

It's actually astounding to see how many games need more than 2gb of vram now and it really makes you scratch your head about cards like the Fury X with only 4gb.

This was a very interesting article! Not only does it create a rematch between two classic cards, but you have also shown which games need more than 2gb of vram. Great job as always! I loved the write up. Thank you again for doing this!
#88
I mainly paid attention to 1080p results. I don't expect cards released in 2012 to be delivering decent results at 1440p or 4K. 1080p (or less) is where at least 97% of gamers are at.
#89
(02-01-2016, 02:29 AM)SickBeast Wrote: I will say that even ignoring the games that were clearly held back by the 2gb of vram, the 7970 held up better than I thought against the GTX 680.  Remember that at launch the GTX 680 was the clear winner.  Either AMD has done a better job improving performance via drivers (which I doubt), or actually GCN has held up better as an architecture, which I also find surprising but more possible.

It's actually astounding to see how many games need more than 2gb of vram now and it really makes you scratch your head about cards like the Fury X with only 4gb.

This was a very interesting article!  Not only does it create a rematch between two classic cards, but you have also shown which games need more than 2gb of vram.  Great job as always!  I loved the write up.  Thank you again for doing this!

You're welcome!

And I have a little different conclusion from you about the HD 7970 and GCN and why it has got better. When you start with drivers that are a MESS at launch, you are bound to improve.

No mystery. Just AMD's sloppiness in rushing new cards to market IMO. And just wait until AMD stops optimizing games for Fury X' limited vRAM and watch performance tank at the same settings.
Dodgy
#90
Even only one fairly popular article (in the past 3 months) makes a difference (680 v 7970) in traffic.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/babeltechreviews.com

Global Rank - 1,470,352
Rank in United States - 628,968

Update: I am playing Rise of the Tomb Raider today and should generate a benchmark so as to begin benching for the "Driver Performance Analysis Featuring RotTR". My knee actually hurts more now in the specific spot where the injury occurred, but the swelling is down a little, so I don't have to spend so much time lying flat on my back with my leg up. However, I have been delayed a week and the article will take a week longer.
Cry

I decided against the $200 Dyson Vacuum cleaner and got a $120 Hoover upright for $70 shipped from Newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...004B-00024&RandomID=17325721731877720160203103321

My 15-year old Bissell upright is worn-out and fairly heavy at 22 lbs, and this Hoover is a bit less than 17 pounds (Dyson uprights average about 15 pounds at more than double the price of this new Hoover for refurbished) This one has a 2-year warranty which should be fine. So I have my work cut out for me today. I don't think my floors are really clean any longer and I need a vacuum that really sucks ....
Blush

And to compliment my new notebook, (of course) I got a new mouse
:D

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...6826193088

It's a Rosewill with good reviews. Not bad for $11 shipped. It fits my hand perfectly and the DPI is adjustable. The only strange thing is that the mouse will go to sleep after 10 minutes of inactivity and you wake it by pressing a button.


Final Update on this Post.

I ordered the Hoover yesterday - 24 hours ago. Newegg said to expect it next week as there was no Premier advantage on shipping. But they now use OnTrac which delivers next day ... My house floors are dirty and this is the first time that I ever got excited to get a vacuum cleaner early :P


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)