Radeon HD 7870 or gtx 660 ti?

I'm having trouble deciding between these two cards..

All of the benchmarks make it seem like it's dependent on the game and since the 7870 is about $60 cheaper, I'm leaning towards that. However, that means that I won't have access to physx and the 660 ti comes with Borderlands 2, which I plan on buying anyway.

What do you guys think?

GTX 660ti is the bettter buy because it is faster then the 7870 by 10-15% and it includes BL2

So in the end their around the same price if you include 7870 + BL2

I'm having trouble deciding between these two cards..

All of the benchmarks make it seem like it's dependent on the game and since the 7870 is about $60 cheaper, I'm leaning towards that. However, that means that I won't have access to physx and the 660 ti comes with Borderlands 2, which I plan on buying anyway.

What do you guys think?

starwarsgeek112

Get a 7950. It's the same price as the the 660ti and has more vram and a MUCH better memory bandwidth.Toxic-Seahorse

7870 and 660ti are pretty close performance wise. U can also get physx if u really want on radeon cards so no big deal.

7950 > 7870 > 660 Ti (price/performance)

If you find a 660 Ti for the same/close price as the 7870, I'd choose the 660 Ti.

7870 and 660ti are pretty close performance wise. U can also get physx if u really want on radeon cards so no big deal.

blaznwiipspman1

And how do you do that?

I was trying to spend a max of $300 on GPU, but since the 7950 is around that price it seems like that might be the best decision here..

Still, I'm not sure if the extra cost is worth it. From the benchmarks I've seen the 7870 performs well on everything currently out. Also, I wasn't aware that it was possible to get physx on an AMD card?

I was trying to spend a max of $300 on GPU, but since the 7950 is around that price it seems like that might be the best decision here..

Still, I'm not sure if the extra cost is worth it. From the benchmarks I've seen the 7870 performs well on everything currently out. Also, I wasn't aware that it was possible to get physx on an AMD card?

starwarsgeek112

I was trying to spend a max of $300 on GPU, but since the 7950 is around that price it seems like that might be the best decision here..

Still, I'm not sure if the extra cost is worth it. From the benchmarks I've seen the 7870 performs well on everything currently out. Also, I wasn't aware that it was possible to get physx on an AMD card?

starwarsgeek112

I was trying to spend a max of $300 on GPU, but since the 7950 is around that price it seems like that might be the best decision here..

Still, I'm not sure if the extra cost is worth it. From the benchmarks I've seen the 7870 performs well on everything currently out. Also, I wasn't aware that it was possible to get physx on an AMD card?

starwarsgeek112

The 7950 is the best card out there in the $300 neighborhood. I recommend that anyone who is planning on spending anything over $250 on a GPU stretch it a bit and pay the extra to get it. It will pay off in the long run.

Well it looks like I'll have to go with the 7950 then..

Who needs physx anyways?

Well it looks like I'll have to go with the 7950 then..

Who needs physx anyways?

starwarsgeek112

Physx isn't really needed unless you are playing games that utilize it, but not very many do.

If you feel the need for have physx, I would just look for an inexpensive Nvidia card to handle that.

I agree with the 7950...in the $300 price range it's the best deal out there.

*+

Well it looks like I'll have to go with the 7950 then..

Who needs physx anyways?

starwarsgeek112

I agree with everyone else that the HD 7950 offers the best price to performance ratio right now. Honestly, all of these cards are pretty damn good for current games at 1920 x 1080 resolution, but the HD 7950 will likely be better for future games.

PhysX can still work even if you have an AMD card. It simply runs on your processor (cpu). I see that you are looking forward to Borderlands 2. Well, you will be happy to know that it runs very well on AMD cards...even if you enable PhysX. Have a look at this Borderlands 2 comparison that Techspot did:

http://www.techspot.com/review/577-borderlands-2-performance/page5.html

With PhysX set to 'high' the HD 7970 was actually faster than the GTX 680!

The HD 7950 is an amazing card. It will perform exceptionally well in Borderlands 2 with PhysX enabled and you will be very happy with it.

[QUOTE="starwarsgeek112"]

I was trying to spend a max of $300 on GPU, but since the 7950 is around that price it seems like that might be the best decision here..

Still, I'm not sure if the extra cost is worth it. From the benchmarks I've seen the 7870 performs well on everything currently out. Also, I wasn't aware that it was possible to get physx on an AMD card?

hartsickdiscipl

The 7950 is the best card out there in the $300 neighborhood. I recommend that anyone who is planning on spending anything over $250 on a GPU stretch it a bit and pay the extra to get it. It will pay off in the long run.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

7870 and 660ti are pretty close performance wise. U can also get physx if u really want on radeon cards so no big deal.

hartsickdiscipl

And how do you do that?

Hybrid PhysX. Look it up. I believe there's a large thread on either Anandtech forums, or Overclock.net.

[QUOTE="starwarsgeek112"]

Well it looks like I'll have to go with the 7950 then..

Who needs physx anyways?

kalipekona

I agree with everyone else that the HD 7950 offers the best price to performance ratio right now. Honestly, all of these cards are pretty damn good for current games at 1920 x 1080 resolution, but the HD 7950 will likely be better for future games.

PhysX can still work even if you have an AMD card. It simply runs on your processor (cpu). I see that you are looking forward to Borderlands 2. Well, you will be happy to know that it runs very well on AMD cards...even if you enable PhysX. Have a look at this Borderlands 2 comparison that Techspot did:

http://www.techspot.com/review/577-borderlands-2-performance/page5.html

With PhysX set to 'high' the HD 7970 was actually faster than the GTX 680!

The HD 7950 is an amazing card. It will perform exceptionally well in Borderlands 2 with PhysX enabled and you will be very happy with it.

They were using an i7 3960x six-core CPU in that test. That's why the CPU was able to handle the Physx workload so well. Pretty irrelevent to most of us here. I am curious to see how it would work with a Phenom II X6 as the CPU. 3ghz+ Phenom II X4's are good enough to run Borderlands 2 fairly well without it.. I wonder if the 2 extra cores would be strong enough to handle the Physx.

[QUOTE="kalipekona"]

[QUOTE="starwarsgeek112"]

Well it looks like I'll have to go with the 7950 then..

Who needs physx anyways?

hartsickdiscipl

I agree with everyone else that the HD 7950 offers the best price to performance ratio right now. Honestly, all of these cards are pretty damn good for current games at 1920 x 1080 resolution, but the HD 7950 will likely be better for future games.

PhysX can still work even if you have an AMD card. It simply runs on your processor (cpu). I see that you are looking forward to Borderlands 2. Well, you will be happy to know that it runs very well on AMD cards...even if you enable PhysX. Have a look at this Borderlands 2 comparison that Techspot did:

http://www.techspot.com/review/577-borderlands-2-performance/page5.html

With PhysX set to 'high' the HD 7970 was actually faster than the GTX 680!

The HD 7950 is an amazing card. It will perform exceptionally well in Borderlands 2 with PhysX enabled and you will be very happy with it.

They were using an i7 3960x six-core CPU in that test. That's why the CPU was able to handle the Physx workload so well. Pretty irrelevent to most of us here. I am curious to see how it would work with a Phenom II X6 as the CPU. 3ghz+ Phenom II X4's are good enough to run Borderlands 2 fairly well without it.. I wonder if the 2 extra cores would be strong enough to handle the Physx.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="kalipekona"]

I agree with everyone else that the HD 7950 offers the best price to performance ratio right now. Honestly, all of these cards are pretty damn good for current games at 1920 x 1080 resolution, but the HD 7950 will likely be better for future games.

PhysX can still work even if you have an AMD card. It simply runs on your processor (cpu). I see that you are looking forward to Borderlands 2. Well, you will be happy to know that it runs very well on AMD cards...even if you enable PhysX. Have a look at this Borderlands 2 comparison that Techspot did:

http://www.techspot.com/review/577-borderlands-2-performance/page5.html

With PhysX set to 'high' the HD 7970 was actually faster than the GTX 680!

The HD 7950 is an amazing card. It will perform exceptionally well in Borderlands 2 with PhysX enabled and you will be very happy with it.

Toxic-Seahorse

They were using an i7 3960x six-core CPU in that test. That's why the CPU was able to handle the Physx workload so well. Pretty irrelevent to most of us here. I am curious to see how it would work with a Phenom II X6 as the CPU. 3ghz+ Phenom II X4's are good enough to run Borderlands 2 fairly well without it.. I wonder if the 2 extra cores would be strong enough to handle the Physx.

id also like to try how it is on my 2700k...since my cpu has hyper threading, and is a sandy bridge, physx should run reasonably well.

id also like to try how it is on my 2700k...since my cpu has hyper threading, and is a sandy bridge, physx should run reasonably well.

blaznwiipspman1

I'm not sure if hyperthreading does anything for you in this situation. It doesn't do much if anything in the vast majority of games. I suspect that a 2500k of the same clock speed would be within 5% of your results.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

id also like to try how it is on my 2700k...since my cpu has hyper threading, and is a sandy bridge, physx should run reasonably well.

hartsickdiscipl

I'm not sure if hyperthreading does anything for you in this situation. It doesn't do much if anything in the vast majority of games. I suspect that a 2500k of the same clock speed would be within 5% of your results.