Originally Posted by sergionography
i dont think they mean clock for clock, i think what they mean is how much performance can you squeeze out of both cards for the end user who is interested in overclocking.
im not sure on the top overclocks records but i know some people got real high overclocks with the hd7970.
of about 1180 or something, so while that is still lower than kepler, it is like 20% from stock, 1340 for kepler is also about 20% off from stock(since kepler already clocks to 1100 when needed) yet it doesnt scale well(because overclocking kepler is complex and it pretty much makes the max boast 1340 rather than making it native)
but i get what you mean tho, there is no such thing as "fair"
nvidia did a clever move to get as much power out of the envelope as possible, and they did a darn good job, not to mention how handy that will be for oems who are on a restricted thermal/power envelope for laptops and what not.
having oems and power restrictions in mind its interesting tho to see how both teams had their approach to efficiency and battery life, amd pushing for max idle time with zero power, and nvidia pushing for different power states and turbo and what not(and it makes sense since nvidia for the most part always gets paired with an intel cpu that has a integrated gpu for low power. meaning nvidia's optimus does the job for them)
EDIT: i just came across these 2 benchmarks of both cards maxed out with their clocks
my conclusion was somewhat correct, hd7970 gains more momentum when overclocked
i specifically posted the links on the battlefield because nvidia seemed to have an edge in that game, but overclocked they match eachother, even tho nvidia is clocked at 1300 something while amd is in the 1200 range.
same thing going on with arkam city
tho i would take this with a grain of salt because im not sure how legit this website is, but what do you think?
Originally Posted by N3M3515
And yet another AMD vs NVIDIA thing...........
Guys, please be more carefully and read fully when quoting me.. I said "I've read and the first one.
said same thing but went on to further say something like "the only fair way to tell is to compare clock to clock"
I said I read a couple of reviews about it.. .the "clock for clock" refers to the first article I read. Also in that ariclet they say they turned off the Nvidia turbo or something to that nature. And that's the same one I first saw that showed the 3-way and 4-way sli figures with the xfire beating it. My co-worker showed it to me and sent me the link to my work email I belive. I don' t remember where the article was from he found it not me. I think I have the link at work. If I can find it i'll post it.
PS N3M3515... it's the search for the truth thing for me and the truth is AMD hates to admit when they're wrong or when they've been beat and the AMD crowd loves to think that the GNC thing is AMDs crowning jewel and huge victory over Nvidia when in fact it's nothing more than a re-vamped Fermi; but, Kepler is a Fermi/GNC hybrid so there technology evolves no biggy but at least I can call it like it is unlike some AMD fan boys and start saying "yeah the 7970 is the best single fastest processor" before Nvidia even had the time to bring their next gen GPU to the table. The 7000 was next gen so AMD should have waited for Nvidia's next gen 600s to show up before they went around bragging cause uh.. what now ? lol
If it's an AMD vs Nvidia thing it's cause AMD fans think they are the rebel forces and Nvidia the big bad evil tyrant and personally I believe Nvidia is not the Darkside.
Sorry for late posts.. .rather busy lately.
PSS> Doesn't surprise me the GTX 680 is not as scalable, neither was the 580 or 570. The 560 was the SLI beast on scalability IMO and the 660 or 660ti is the one I'm planing for
No I didn't read much of your post today either but I'm only commenting on the parts were you replied about my post so there :P lol jk. ... swamped about to transfer data and wipe drive as we speak. peace