So who's ditching 6900 series for 7900?

[=VTA=MANFACE]

I doubt very much that I'll be ditching my X-Fire 6970 MSI lightings for these.

 

[ALXAndy]

Do yourself and everyone else a favour and read back to yourself what you have posted and then tell me if it makes sense...

I do. And, it does indeed make sense.

Because it's pretty much sensible stuff.

But then, I suppose by asking people why they have a compulsive nature and buy things that really won't change anything I am asking too much right?

Sorry, but I just don't see "Because it's fun" as a reason to spend £500. Especially when I feel that all it does is contribute to the problem.

Laughably games will improve when the consoles do. Sad eh?

 

[OpenToSuggestions]

Can I ask why?

I'm honesty, truly not being sarcastic, I would just like to be able to understand the mentality of fixing what isn't broken a little more.

Might even do my miserable old self some good.

I have two nice Dell monitors and may add a third, but a single 6950 won't really cut eyefinity and I don't really want two due to the space in my case and that my 2nd pcie slot is not 8x.

If the new cards are a huge improvement then I may get one, but long gone are the days of me wanting one just because it is the latest thing.

 

[Schizo]

ive just got rid of my 6870 and gone to nvidia after quite a few years,i think ill stick with what ive got for a while yet.

all this hype of new card's dosent get me excited one bit,there bound to be problems with them (as all new cards seem to have) and ill hang fir for a year or so.

there is to much hype surrounding new cards that most of the time it's a let down for many people.

 

[sparky05084]

We need to get Harry Hill in here.

"Which offers the best performance and value for money? The AMD 6990 or the 7970?

There's only one way to find out. . . . . . . .FIGHT!"

 

[ALXAndy]

You do realise despite your rational response alxandy will still find fault somewhere, expand upon it and then use that to reinforce his own opinions?

Edit: too late, guess I shouldn't wonder off to other pages in the middle of a response.

Sorry. "But it's faster !" and gems such as "But I need it !" are not rational responses.

We are in the situation we are RE - PC gaming because of what we have been noted to put up with. IE - a lot.

It began with Tony Hawk's Pro Skater you see. They began to realise that they could stick out another regurgitated game with a "2" on the end with a week's worth of work in it and we would be stupid enough to keep buying them.

And then once we were sick of that they would take another fantastic game (like Call of Duty or Need for speed) and then latch onto that using capitalism to part us with our cash.

And like morons we keep lapping it up, stubbornly refusing to put our feet down.

As such technology as a whole isn't really moving on at all. We're still playing Doom, only with better graphics and more shadows.

 

[Frenzy]

People have given you many reasons for spending large amounts of currency on said items. Yet you refuse to take any reason as valid.

Again I await your response on this scientific proof that irrefutably shows that the eye cannot see above 30 fps.

 

[ALXAndy]

I have two nice Dell monitors and may add a third, but a single 6950 won't really cut eyefinity and I don't really want two due to the space in my case and that my 2nd pcie slot is not 8x.

If the new cards are a huge improvement then I may get one, but long gone are the days of me wanting one just because it is the latest thing.

Then fair play to you. That is a reasoned response.

But I guess you already worked out that it wasn't you I was trying to talk sense to, right?

Either that or because you were so dead set on this card (and had made your mind up) you some how found what I have to say about it offensive.

Either way, there was certainly no offense meant.

 

[OpenToSuggestions]

Then fair play to you. That is a reasoned response.

But I guess you already worked out that it wasn't you I was trying to talk sense to, right?

Either that or because you were so dead set on this card (and had made your mind up) you some how found what I have to say about it offensive.

Either way, there was certainly no offense meant.

Don't worry . I realise it is hard to tell the tone from text (I use lots of smilies!).
I have not heard much about the new cards to be honest. All I do know is most people just want a good card for their money but a small percentage are sat at their desks furiously masturbating over their preferred brand, filling the forum will all kinds of rumour crap in the mean time. "Nvidia owners are ghey!" etc.

I draw my opinions when reviews are out and the UK prices are on Overclockers .

 

[ALXAndy]

People have given you many reasons for spending large amounts of currency on said items. Yet you refuse to take any reason as valid.

Again I await your response on this scientific proof that irrefutably shows that the eye cannot see above 30 fps.

Stop skimming what I say and read it. You only make yourself look like an idiot when you pretend that you have read what I have been saying, and then return and try to put words into my mouth.

I said, quite clearly that the human eye will start to detect a framerate of 30 FPS or less. I also said that the human eye can indeed make a difference up to 60 frames per second, at which point you would need to be called Clark Kent to notice any significant boost.

If you were actually interested in reading about it then great, start by looking up Thomas Edison. He was an inventor born in New Jersey. He began research there, and scientists have updated it along the way.

Oh. And there is a large difference between the meanings of "reason" and "excuse".

 

[ALXAndy]

Don't worry . I realise it is hard to tell the tone from text (I use lots of smilies!).
I have not heard much about the new cards to be honest. All I do know is most people just want a good card for their money but a small percentage are sat at their desks furiously masturbating over their preferred brand, filling the forum will all kinds of rumour crap in the mean time. "Nvidia owners are ghey!" etc.

I draw my opinions when reviews are out and the UK prices are on Overclockers .

Well yes, context is indeed a problem that even technology can't decipher

Haha, maybe there's an idea ! make a keyboard that detects the strength of the keystrokes and speeed to decipher how one is feeling when typing it

 

[Frenzy]

Granted I've skimmed what you said as I'm on a projector in bed and text isn't easy on my eyes but then again what your saying is pretty much the same rubbish you have been saying the entire thread.

Yes what you say about thomas edison was correct BUT the research was not conclusive as you pointed out scientists have had to improve upon his theories along the way. Again there is no solid evidence that these revisions are correct.

There are many sources of information stating that higher is better including the source of your thomas edison extract (wikipedia).

This is an interesting read http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

I know there is a difference between fps because I can detect it. Others can tell the difference. There is however no solid proof that 30-60 fps is the limit.

 

[zoomee]

Whilst I agree with you ALXAndy about how technology is not changing things we do as drastically as before I do think you've made your point mate. Take a chill pill dude.

Let those people who want to get all hyped etc get on with it, and we'll wait for the REAL figures to appear before we jump in lol. After all this is an enthusiasts forum where people get excited over these things (me 3 sometimes lol - doesn't mean I'm gunna be silly though and rush out to buy one when I know its gunna be silly stupid prices!)

 

[ALXAndy]

It is very interesting tbh. No doubt as humans evolve we will be able to detect more things as our senses evolve.

I mean it's like human strength. Rocky Marciano and all that. Pitted against Tyson he would have lasted about ten seconds.

As for the 30-60? all scientists can really do is perform science. Study the human retina and then perform experiments on a given amount of people.

Same thing can be said for audio systems. Something crazy like 5% of humans have the critical listening skills needed to decipher a £200 stereo from a £20,000 stereo.

But honestly put? I have a highly elevated set of senses due to a condition I suffer from. And I can honestly say that if you took away the actual FPS counter from the top of the screen (using say, FRAPS) that without any physical indication I could not tell you how many FPS my eyes were seeing unless it got to the point where they were too few and it became a problem.

As I mentioned in another thread, I game on a PC because of FSAA. I find any sort of flickering or interference on a grand scale to be really bad. My eyes will try to dart around focusing on certain aspects and I just end up with a headache.

If and when consoles can provide a decent level of FSAA (4x, too much and it makes me feel ill) then yeah, I will probably dump PCs for good. I know my bank account will be happy any way

I also can not play games with motion blur due to my condition. It makes me feel really sick and woozy.

Whilst I agree with you ALXAndy about how technology is not changing things we do as drastically as before I do think you've made your point mate. Take a chill pill dude.

Let those people who want to get all hyped etc get on with it, and we'll wait for the REAL figures to appear before we jump in lol. After all this is an enthusiasts forum where people get excited over these things (me 3 sometimes lol - doesn't mean I'm gunna be silly though and rush out to buy one when I know its gunna be silly stupid prices!)

I guess I am finally at the point where I have had it. I'm not angry as I have passed that stage (I think to be honest any PC gamer left needs to have taken an awful lot on the chin the way we have been treated for the past few years). I would say I am just growing more and more dissapointed. And that dissapointment has just turned to utter despair.

It's just not really fun any more. The fun part was the chase, the build, and then playing the games. Problem is now you chase, save, build... And for what? to play the games you already had. And you can't even make them any better. It's all very frustrating.

Still, one day every one will figure it out and start voting with their wallets. And hopefully then the corporate "cash cow" model will be done and dusted for good and we can finally get some decent stuff going on again.

But then maybe not. Ah well, a man is allowed to dream

 

[hideki]

Am I right in thinking, over the 5000 series, the 6000 simply increased the default clocks and reduced the RRPs?

But the 7000 series has a die shrink, and new GPU design on the high end models.

 

[PCM2]

Granted I've skimmed what you said as I'm on a projector in bed and text isn't easy on my eyes but then again what your saying is pretty much the same rubbish you have been saying the entire thread.

Yes what you say about thomas edison was correct BUT the research was not conclusive as you pointed out scientists have had to improve upon his theories along the way. Again there is no solid evidence that these revisions are correct.

There are many sources of information stating that higher is better including the source of your thomas edison extract (wikipedia).

This is an interesting read http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

I know there is a difference between fps because I can detect it. Others can tell the difference. There is however no solid proof that 30-60 fps is the limit.

Coming from a relevant scientific background myself (neurobiologists for parents, holder of a Biology degree, a close friend and colleague with a PhD related to the human visual system) and with a keen interest in visual output systems (i.e. monitors) I am going to have to back you up here Frenzy. Comparing the human visual system to a camera or visual output unit that processes discrete frames is absurd and contrary to practical reality.

I actually came to this thread to look for information relevant to the title. I own a Radeon 6950 and was using this as a stopgap until the 7900 series were out, if they were any good. I am surprised that nobody else has piped up (I'm sure they will given time) but ask anybody who owns and loves a 120Hz LCD monitor and can pump out a solid 120fps what kind of difference they can see and 'feel' coming from a responsive 60Hz monitor. The difference is massive, it is real and it is something people strive for. Even watching that little mouse cursor whiz around the desktop is a completely different experience at double the frame rate. You won't find a single piece of credible modern scientific literature that even edges towards suggesting a reliable comparison between something as complex as the human visual system and a specific framerate. It is true that sensitivities to such things vary but most people I have showcased such technology to can see the difference on the desktop and certainly on a game. Now I'm not going to pretend that this difference is entirely down to pure frame rate and is nothing to do with pixel behaviour and other latencies but it takes nothing away from the ludicrous comparison that's being drawn here.

 

[Frenzy]

Don't get me wrong, I think buying the new card is a waste of money as I already have a GTX580. For other people they need the horsepower on the newer games to play at higher resolutions. You then get people who want hardware that will last a good while. You then have people doing 3d modelling etc.

What I'm saying is, there is a point to the hardware and there is a point to new tech even if you personally do not use it.

The reason I went on about the fps is because you were so insistant on your statements being fact when they clearly are not.

I just get the impression if you had your way we would still be on pentium 4s playing Quake and monkey island. After all the game play is there right? It's the same thing as playing battlefield 3 or Skyrim because you get to shoot stuffs or immerse yourself in a fantasy world.

Edit: Like you say PCM2 some people really do notice the difference. I guess I should have mentioned I have a 120hz monitor but I did point out I notice the difference which was my point really.

 

[titaniumx3]

I can't believe people are still spouting this "eyes can't see over 30fps" nonsense. Seriously, 30fps??? Even 60fps to 120fps is pretty damn noticeable, and can be tested objectively with repeatable results. I'm sure theres a theoretical limit somewhere, but it's going to be way, way higher than 30fps. After a certain point, yes, even large increases in fps will become less and less noticeable, but noticeable nontheless, varying from person to person.

 

[ALXAndy]

Am I right in thinking, over the 5000 series, the 6000 simply increased the default clocks and reduced the RRPs?

But the 7000 series has a die shrink, and new GPU design on the high end models.

IMO the 6 series was a step backward. A total step backward.

It actually made me start to think that the 5 series Radeons were just luck.

So yeah, the 6950 and 6970 were slightly faster than the 5850 and 5870.. They bloody well should be

But it's laughable that the 6850 and 6870 were pretty much worse than the 5 series so completely not worth having.

 

[MaxP779]

Nope 5850 is good enough, ravages BF3, WoT, LoL, sins, BC2 and everything else i play.

Might check out the nvidia 600 series, i basically want 2x the performance sub £200 whilst still being quiet and efficient, im in no hurry.