Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33
  1. #1
    Member
    TURN & BURN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    375

    MSI 7970 vs Evga 680 The real bench results T&B

    Hi All,

    Well me and a friend dont beleive everything we read including web reviews on new product, so we did some real time testing under a level playing field between the 7970 and the 680.

    It was no suprise to Me as to the outcome however my friend did expect better.

    Lets start with the field!!! or system specs:

    T&B
    Asus Rampage 4 Formula bios 1202
    8320 @ stock 38x100.3 turbo mode
    GSkill RipjawZ 2133 16GB CL9-11-10-28 @ 1600MHz
    MSI 7970 Clocked to 1099/1502 2 MHz high on the GPU to the 680 but as close as I can get it memory clocks same making the cards equal in speed respect.
    OCZ Vertex 3 120GB windows 7 64bit

    Abeeftec
    Asus Rampage 4 Extreme bios 1202
    8320 @ stock 38x100.3 turbo mode
    GSkill RipjawZ 2133 16GB CL9-11-10-28 @ 1600MHz
    Evga GTX 680 1097/1502
    2x OCZ 120GB raid 0 windows 7 64 bit

    Bench programs, we used HWbot video card bench programs and cine.

    06 Marks
    3D Marks Vantage
    11 Marks
    Unique haven Extreme D11
    Cine-Bun 11.5+

    Now for the not so startling results from the 680 which is rated to have 10% and them some better power than the 7970.

    First are the cards under load with clocks!!

    MSI 7970 Load test clocks


    Evga GTX 680 load test clocks


    As you can well see the cards are set to run at the same GPU and MEMORY speeds so there is no advantage in this respect providing a much more true and stable reading on all testing!!

    I will have Abeeftec also put up his point of view on this as it was a joint venture and he was expecting the 680 to BLOW away the 7970!

    Note in every screen shot to follow we loaded 3 CPUZ's showing
    Mobo
    CPU
    Memory

    Also loaded is GPUZ on all screenshots!

    NOW FOR THE FUN READY>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    First up lets do simple Cinebench MSI 7970 will be first in all benching picks.

    CINE-BUNS MSI 7970 OpenGL


    CINE-BUNS Evga GTX 680 OpenGL


    This was rather a blow out we didn't expect this much of a difference at all very suprised with the MSI 79.86 to the Evga's 53.40

    Now things get closer on the next few but!!!!!!

    06 MARKS MSI 7970


    06 MARKS Evga GTX 680


    On 06 marks we were looking at the MSI 7970 28264 vs Evga 27374 still a rather LARGE difference seems its not getting any better for the 680!

    We move on now lets see VANTAGE up!!

    3D Marks Vantage MSI 7970


    3D Marks Vantage Evga 680


    Still I'm not seeing the 10%+ out of the 680?? MSI 7970 GPU score 35511 vs Evga 680 GPU score 33476 OUCH?

    So far I have to say give me the 7970

    OK some UH extreme again 7970

    UH Extreme MSI 7970


    UH Extreme Evga 680


    Once again proper testing at same card speeds shows the 7970 beating the 680 what can I say..... MSI= 2138.752 Evga= 1837.98 maybe a bad 680?? I dont think so especially since my 7970 been clocked to near death for the last 2 months!

    Finaly the Evga shines but to little to late?

    11 Marks MSI 7970


    11 Marks Evga 680


    Here the Evga 680 SHINED horay!!!

    Now I will have Abeeftec chime in on his thoughts as we did this beacuse he expected alot more from the 680. We may also be doing more benching between the cards soon to add to this post.
    Last edited by TURN & BURN; 03-31-12 at 09:22 PM.
    Gig Z77A-UD5H / MSI Z77A- GD65
    G1 Sniper / X79-UD3 / X79A MSI 65 (8D)
    Asus R4 Formula
    3930/2x 3820 / 2700k / 5x 3770K IB
    2x 7970 LT MSI - 2X 7970 OC Gigabytes
    1x LT 680
    4X120 SSD OCZ 22NM
    Team Extreme 2400MHz & 2600Mhz
    1200w Corsair AX + Corsair 1050w + XFX 1250w
    DVD/BR/RW[/COLOR]
    LN2 - Cooler Express Chiller

  2. #2
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    10
    Will update in the am...
    Intel 3630K
    Gigabyte X79-UD7 ASUS RAMPAGE 4E
    3xEVGA SC 570 SLI
    16GB Mushkin 2133 9-11-10-28
    16GB Gskill 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24
    2x 120GB OCZ Vertex 3 Max IOPS Raid0
    1TB WD Caviar Black
    1200AX Corsair 1100W ABS MAJESTY
    W7U 64

    H100 Corsair, Cooler Express,

  3. #3
    White Runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Over Here!
    Posts
    1,216
    Interesting results... though I'm pretty sure you can't compare clock speed due to different architecture. They're both powerhouse cards, no doubt about it.
    Asrock Extreme4--Z68 / / / I7 2600K @ 4.5Ghz
    Phanteks PH-TC14-PE / / / DDR3-1600 2x8
    Gigabyte 290-X WF3 / / / Clocks 1100/1475
    OCZ Vertex3 120GB / / / 2 x 4TB WD Black
    Corsair HX850 PSU / / / Corsair Air-540

    \m/ OverClockers mATX L33T Club \m/ >>>JOIN NOW<<<

  4. #4
    Senior Member


    Bobnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Humboldt
    Posts
    20,950
    That, I expect, is why TiN and Vince only posted 3d11 results
    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." -- Einstein (maybe)

    Thinking about an Asus motherboard? Think again.

    How to check your PSU with a multimeter.

    17bXw5t51rEBXGavJFMJsC8g7HQgThUGc7

  5. #5
    Senior Moment Senior Member
    dejo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Tyler, Texas
    Posts
    2,861
    nice. always funny how whatever site wants to look better they can make it look that way.
    if it screams, crank it. if it cries, kill it

    Asrock z77 ex6
    2600k @4.8ghz
    Samsung 2x4gb rams
    OCZ Vertex4 256gb ssd
    EVGA GTX480
    Sparkle 1250 gold PSU
    Arc Midi case

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,492
    06 Marks = DX9: 7970 +3%
    3D Marks Vantage = DX10: 7970 +4%
    Unique haven Extreme was tested in DX9: 7970 +6%
    11 Marks = DX11: 680 +5%

    CINE: what can i say but wow...

    None of this translates into Gaming, mostly not DX10 /11 these days..

    what we want is games tested without nVidia looking over the shoulder
    Last edited by Frakk; 03-31-12 at 09:57 PM.
    “The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” -Winston Churchill

  7. #7
    Benching Team Leader
    Grabbed Senior
    Janus67's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ohio State
    Posts
    12,168
    I appreciate the testing, but keeping them at the same clock speed isn't a very good test, I think you have to go in ratio for the card (stock vs stock, 10% vs 10% OC) etc, unless you are testing maximum overclock on each card, which can be luck of the draw if you get a good/bad overclocking card.

    Overall it looks like the 7970 may be a much better card for benching, as Bobnova stated otherwise we would see a lot more results being posted on hwbot with the 680(s)
    Haswell Benching and Gaming: ASRock Z87 OC Formula : Intel i7 4770k w/ Phanteks PH-TC14 : 8GB 2x4GB G.Skill TridentX DDR3-2666 : MSI, XFX, and Sapphire R9 290X
    Other Components: Samsung 840 Evo 500GB SSD : 2TB Hitachi : Silverstone Strider Gold 1250W and Seasonic Platinum 1000W : Auria EQ276W 2560x1440


    Folding User Stats

  8. #8
    Member
    TURN & BURN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by Janus67 View Post
    I appreciate the testing, but keeping them at the same clock speed isn't a very good test, I think you have to go in ratio for the card (stock vs stock, 10% vs 10% OC) etc, unless you are testing maximum overclock on each card, which can be luck of the draw if you get a good/bad overclocking card.
    I understand what your saying but the fact is the test would be flawed to test at there stock speeds as there is a clear advantage to the card with higher clocks!

    If the cards are matched to GPU & Memory speeds then it becomes which card is better by fact of the production and drivers ect.

    They both have the same die size and running them at the same clocks gives a even play ground.

    Anything else would be a waste as the higher clocked card will beat the lower card evertime!

    This test was just to show if the cards were indeed clocked the same, which would pove to be better overall and thats not to say there was any great crushing defeat.

    We will also try sli vs crossfire if we can to see how the scaling is between cards.

    But the main reason for this post was to show that with the same clocks which card prevails nothing more.

    Thanks for the input as we expected it.

    T&B
    Gig Z77A-UD5H / MSI Z77A- GD65
    G1 Sniper / X79-UD3 / X79A MSI 65 (8D)
    Asus R4 Formula
    3930/2x 3820 / 2700k / 5x 3770K IB
    2x 7970 LT MSI - 2X 7970 OC Gigabytes
    1x LT 680
    4X120 SSD OCZ 22NM
    Team Extreme 2400MHz & 2600Mhz
    1200w Corsair AX + Corsair 1050w + XFX 1250w
    DVD/BR/RW[/COLOR]
    LN2 - Cooler Express Chiller

  9. #9
    Benching Team Leader
    Grabbed Senior
    Janus67's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ohio State
    Posts
    12,168
    The higher clocked card would only (should only) be faster if comparing the same architecture. It's for the same reason that a higher clocked AMD chip loses to Intel even with the same die size/etc.
    Haswell Benching and Gaming: ASRock Z87 OC Formula : Intel i7 4770k w/ Phanteks PH-TC14 : 8GB 2x4GB G.Skill TridentX DDR3-2666 : MSI, XFX, and Sapphire R9 290X
    Other Components: Samsung 840 Evo 500GB SSD : 2TB Hitachi : Silverstone Strider Gold 1250W and Seasonic Platinum 1000W : Auria EQ276W 2560x1440


    Folding User Stats

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,492
    @ TURN & BURN

    I tend to agree with that, in the same way that a lot of CPU's are the same but simply clocked higher,- i did not get the Phenom II 1100T because its exactly the same as a 1090T just factory set a little higher.... i can easily do that myself and save the extra money.

    Yes the GPU's are not even the same brand and for now the 680 is cheaper (in the USA, but not the UK)

    Yes if they run at the same clock speed's and are as good as eachother clock for clock, or one is better... then for me that changes everything.

    Then it depends on which gets the most out of your games at there 24/7 stable clocks.
    “The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” -Winston Churchill

  11. #11
    Member
    TURN & BURN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by Frakk View Post
    06 Marks = DX9: 7970 +3%
    3D Marks Vantage = DX10: 7970 +4%
    Unique haven Extreme was tested in DX9: 7970 +6%
    11 Marks = DX11: 680 +5%

    CINE: what can i say but wow...

    None of this translates into Gaming, mostly not DX10 /11 these days..

    what we want is games tested without nVidia looking over the shoulder
    I coulden't agree more, we weren't looking to compare gaming but just simple benching, we know we will get alot of flack on this as was posted already about the clocks being the same, but we feel it makes it a good way to see how they both run at matched speeds.

    This is in no way a bashing post for either AMD or Evga just a experiment of the cards in benching.

    In fact they are very closely matched in most respects except cine & 11 marks where we got some oppsite ends of the spectrum.

    SO everyone please enjoy post what you may.
    Gig Z77A-UD5H / MSI Z77A- GD65
    G1 Sniper / X79-UD3 / X79A MSI 65 (8D)
    Asus R4 Formula
    3930/2x 3820 / 2700k / 5x 3770K IB
    2x 7970 LT MSI - 2X 7970 OC Gigabytes
    1x LT 680
    4X120 SSD OCZ 22NM
    Team Extreme 2400MHz & 2600Mhz
    1200w Corsair AX + Corsair 1050w + XFX 1250w
    DVD/BR/RW[/COLOR]
    LN2 - Cooler Express Chiller

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,492
    Quote Originally Posted by TURN & BURN View Post
    I coulden't agree more, we weren't looking to compare gaming but just simple benching, we know we will get alot of flack on this as was posted already about the clocks being the same, but we feel it makes it a good way to see how they both run at matched speeds.

    This is in no way a bashing post for either AMD or Evga just a experiment of the cards in benching.

    In fact they are very closely matched in most respects except cine & 11 marks where we got some oppsite ends of the spectrum.

    SO everyone please enjoy post what you may.

    Yeah i understand that
    “The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” -Winston Churchill

  13. #13
    Member
    TURN & BURN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by Janus67 View Post
    The higher clocked card would only (should only) be faster if comparing the same architecture. It's for the same reason that a higher clocked AMD chip loses to Intel even with the same die size/etc.
    I think thats what we are looking at is the architecture! does AMD or Evga offer more for the same clock speed who architecture seems to have the edge overall?

    I hope this better helps understand what we were after here and helped provide some insite.
    Last edited by TURN & BURN; 03-31-12 at 10:33 PM.
    Gig Z77A-UD5H / MSI Z77A- GD65
    G1 Sniper / X79-UD3 / X79A MSI 65 (8D)
    Asus R4 Formula
    3930/2x 3820 / 2700k / 5x 3770K IB
    2x 7970 LT MSI - 2X 7970 OC Gigabytes
    1x LT 680
    4X120 SSD OCZ 22NM
    Team Extreme 2400MHz & 2600Mhz
    1200w Corsair AX + Corsair 1050w + XFX 1250w
    DVD/BR/RW[/COLOR]
    LN2 - Cooler Express Chiller

  14. #14
    Badbonji's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    3,518
    But you can't just equate clocks, because you haven't taken into consideration the actual architecture. You could draw from this that the GTX680 is much more efficient because it has 75% of the SP's as the HD7970 and still beats it in most (game) benchmarks, and is only behind in your testing overall not including Cinebench (see below).

    IMO I would think the most useful clock for each card would be their average of their maximum potential (which you can't do with just 1 card obviously). Also in the results the GTX680 might have been downclocking, especially on the heavier benchmarks - since the power target is 100%. Even at 132% my card downclocks from the maximum boost when overclocked, it doesn't constantly stay at the peak clock.

    The GTX680 I think is gimped for DP, which may explain the low Cinebench score (to make the Quadro cards seem more worthwhile).
    i7 3770K 4.5GHz 1.2V | Phanteks PH-TC14PE | 16GB TeamGroup Elite 1600MHz | GIGABYTE G1.Sniper M3 | EVGA GTX680 SC 1254/1500MHz | M4 256GB + 150GB Raptor | Corsair HX+ 850W | Antec 1200
    i7 965 | 8GB OCZ Gold 1600MHz | GIGABYTE Extreme X58 | HD5450 | M4 64GB + 7TB | OCZ 500W
    MacBook Pro 15" | i7 2.3GHz | 8GB 1600MHz

  15. #15
    Senior Member


    Bobnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Humboldt
    Posts
    20,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Badbonji View Post
    The GTX680 I think is gimped for DP, which may explain the low Cinebench score (to make the Quadro cards seem more worthwhile).
    I do remember hearing rumors about that a while ago. Struck me as a very nvidia thing to do.
    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." -- Einstein (maybe)

    Thinking about an Asus motherboard? Think again.

    How to check your PSU with a multimeter.

    17bXw5t51rEBXGavJFMJsC8g7HQgThUGc7

  16. #16
    Premium Member #5


    bmwbaxter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, Ontario
    Posts
    3,599
    nice benches and comparison... but totally flawed methodology. I am not hating on you, just trying to help you do better next time.

    You cannot overclock a 7970 and compare it to a stock 680. That is no way a fair and equal representation of the 680. clock for clock comparison cannot be made across architectures and companies (intel vs AMD)

    As has been said by others, good comparisons are "stock vs stock" "stock+10% vs stock+10%" and "average OC vs average OC" (this would require a large sample size to get an accurate average since it is hit and miss how well cards OC)
    SSD > PCMark 05
    freeagent - Torture is watching all these 2600k's kicking my rig in the mosfets

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,492
    Quote Originally Posted by bmwbaxter View Post
    nice benches and comparison... but totally flawed methodology. I am not hating on you, just trying to help you do better next time.

    You cannot overclock a 7970 and compare it to a stock 680. That is no way a fair and equal representation of the 680. clock for clock comparison cannot be made across architectures and companies (intel vs AMD)

    As has been said by others, good comparisons are "stock vs stock" "stock+10% vs stock+10%" and "average OC vs average OC" (this would require a large sample size to get an accurate average since it is hit and miss how well cards OC)
    I think that's just playing on semantics.

    There are none reference 7970 running at these clock speeds out of the box, even CCC will take it to 1250.

    Whose to say nVidia have not overclocked there reference cards already? when exactly does a clock become an overclock?

    The point here is how they compare at the same clock.
    “The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” -Winston Churchill

  18. #18
    moocow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Texas State
    Posts
    2,351
    Quote Originally Posted by bmwbaxter View Post
    nice benches and comparison... but totally flawed methodology. I am not hating on you, just trying to help you do better next time.

    You cannot overclock a 7970 and compare it to a stock 680. That is no way a fair and equal representation of the 680. clock for clock comparison cannot be made across architectures and companies (intel vs AMD)

    As has been said by others, good comparisons are "stock vs stock" "stock+10% vs stock+10%" and "average OC vs average OC" (this would require a large sample size to get an accurate average since it is hit and miss how well cards OC)
    If you are comparing clock vs. clock of course you can.

    The 680 has turbo built-in to ramp up higher clocks which you could technically call overclocking.

  19. Thanks!

    Frakk (04-03-12)

  20. #19
    Researches Meritless
    LIES for the Front
    Page and Super Mutterator

    Overclockers.com Editor
    First Responders

    EarthDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Stuck in Maryland...
    Posts
    45,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Frakk View Post
    I think that's just playing on semantics.

    There are none reference 7970 running at these clock speeds out of the box, even CCC will take it to 1250.

    Whose to say nVidia have not overclocked there reference cards already? when exactly does a clock become an overclock?

    The point here is how they compare at the same clock.
    Nvidia has stated their ('there' is not possessive - sorry pet peeve of mine) reference clock speed is 1006Mhz. PERIOD. It boosts to 1058Mhz. You dont see the 2600K being listed at 3.8Ghz on the box since it will turbo to 3.8Ghz, right? Err wait you know AMD better... You dont see the FX-8150 listed at 4.2Ghz, right? Thet GTX680's reference clock is 1006Mhz with a boost feature. That out of the way, it becomes an overclock when its over the reference/boost speeds...a.k.a - above reference speeds.

    The only thing the clock for clock comparisons show are the efficiency of the architecture. You can IF IF IF and BUT BUT BUT all day, but in order to fit in AMD's own power thresholds, and likely noise, the 7970's are reference clocks are what they are regardless if they can overclock to the moon.





    Quote Originally Posted by moocow View Post
    If you are comparing clock vs. clock of course you can.

    The 680 has turbo built-in to ramp up higher clocks which you could technically call overclocking.

    "We have more information and more ways of accessing it than ever, yet seem increasingly less inclined to do so."- Michael Wilbon

  21. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,492
    Quote Originally Posted by EarthDog View Post
    Nvidia has stated their ('there' is not possessive - sorry pet peeve of mine) reference clock speed is 1006Mhz. PERIOD. It boosts to 1058Mhz. You dont see the 2600K being listed at 3.8Ghz on the box since it will turbo to 3.8Ghz, right? Err wait you know AMD better... You dont see the FX-8150 listed at 4.2Ghz, right? Thet GTX680's reference clock is 1006Mhz with a boost feature. That out of the way, it becomes an overclock when its over the reference/boost speeds...a.k.a - above reference speeds.

    The only thing the clock for clock comparisons show are the efficiency of the architecture. You can IF IF IF and BUT BUT BUT all day, but in order to fit in AMD's own power thresholds, and likely noise, the 7970's are reference clocks are what they are regardless if they can overclock to the moon.
    What are you dribbling on about? again your ranting about something completely off subject.

    AMD / nVidia set there clocks and we set our own, to see how they compare there is perfectly valid.
    Its really very simple.
    You need to learn to relax a little.
    “The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” -Winston Churchill

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •