GTX 960 v GTX 670

[miker1]

I am looking to upgrade my GTX460 [for gaming].

I used GPUBoss to compare the above two cards.

It reckons the 960 is slightly better overall.

Having looked at the stats however, the 670 has better stats on things that I thought would be important to gaming.

Could I have some advice on this please?



********* 670 better stats ***************************
Higher memory bandwidth
192.3 GB/s vs 96 GB/s More than 2x higher memory bandwidth

Higher texture rate
102.5 GTexel/s vs 72.1 GTexel/s More than 40% higher texture rate

More texture mapping units
112 vs 64 48 more texture mapping units

Wider memory bus
256 bit vs 128 bit 2x wider memory bus

More shading units

 

[HeX]

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/2015-vga-charts/compare,3675.html?prod[7378]=on&prod[7249]=on

Very similar performance, the 960 is slightly faster, while also using much less power, and runs considerably cooler.

 

[africanos23]

vs the GTX680 though I think it loses right ?

 

[Marine-RX179]

vs the GTX680 though I think it loses right ?

Yea both on stock vs stock and max oc vs max oc.

The 128-bit bus make the real world performance gain on the 960 less than the 680 on overclocking.

 

[africanos23]

Yea both on stock vs stock and max oc vs max oc.

The 128-bit bus make the real world performance gain on the 960 less than the 680 on overclocking.

I guess thats a good reason I paid upwards of £400 for each on release 3 years ago

 

[nashathedog]

A 670 versus a 960?

Considering any additional support it get's for DX12 etc I'd go 960. Plus it will sell better in the future where as a 670 or 680 will look positively ancient in comparison.

The stat differences in the op aren't as good as they look because of the architecture update, plus the 960 will be supported for longer.

 

[ShivP]

If you can get a 670 for considerably cheaper I'd opt for that, taking into consideration some of them are factory OC'd to stock 680 speeds

 

[miker1]

Just to confirm then - the 960 will be better. or the same, in gaming?

Will this include multiple [3] screens?

 

[HeX]

If you are driving games over 3 screens you are going to need something considerably more beefy than a 960...

 

[miker1]

If you are driving games over 3 screens you are going to need something considerably more beefy than a 960...

The Nvidia webpage spec on this says it can handle up to 4 screens.

If you will be so kind as to explain why not, I would appreciate it! BEFORE I splash the cash

 

[ShivP]

It can run up to 4 screens yes, but if you are planning on gaming on all 3 screens together then the graphics card likely won't have enough power to drive it at good settings, or possibly even low settings depending on the game.

 

[RanxZy]

The Nvidia webpage spec on this says it can handle up to 4 screens.

If you will be so kind as to explain why not, I would appreciate it! BEFORE I splash the cash

The 960 can run multiple screens fine for desktop uses. What the guy above means is that because the 960 is not the most powerful GPU, it will struggle playing games on multiple screens.

 

[africanos23]

You can run 3 monitors for gaming + a peripheral monitor (for the fourth) or all 4 for the desktop

HeX and Shivy011 are right, you are going to need something beefier than a 960 to run games on 3 monitors IMHO

 

[miker1]

Thanks peeps.

GTX970 is beyond the wallet atm, sadly.

 

[arc@css]

Have you considered something like an AMD R9 290? This is cheaper than a GTX970 and is nearly as fast.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-334-AS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1752

 

[miker1]

Thanks for the suggestion .

However, Over the years, if I have had a problem with a card it's been a Radeon.
Maybe it's just bad luck on my part but I won't buy them now.

 

[arc@css]

Fair enough.