Radeon HD6990/Nvidia GTX 590

[MrTub]

The GTX590 is a Fermi GPGPU(Complete GPU)
The AMD is not, and i Say AMD because ATI is being discontinued this year(2011)
AMD is dropping the ATI brand and just going AMD
Nvidia was the first and still is the only system with a completed GPU, ECC, and complete PhysX+Graphics support. Not to mention Nvidia cards are more consistent than ATI.
ATI's card may pack a bit more "power" but Nvidia's cards are more solid and better designed.

As a whole? We've reached the pre pinnical point of graphics.
Same with RAM being pinical at 8GB(anything more is "future proof")
Same with Intel CPU clockspeeds(no need for anything more than 3.8ghz at all).
The graphics pinnical is almost within reach. Fermi is the GPU to beat. ATI does not have a direct competitor in the same way that AMD does not have a direct competitor to the Core i7.
Closer specs and higher over all frame rates(Nvidia), is better than higher peaks and lower consistancy(ATI)
Every true gaming rig has Nvidia single or SLIed but most gaming rigs with ati need two cards for complete support.

Uh...

No.

While AMD might not yet have a strong competitor to Intel's i7s (which is fine because you only need a quad core for gaming anyway), you're just being foolish in saying that every "true" gaming PC has an NVIDIA card. AMD has plenty of competent contenders for the GPU market.

Pretty much this. As long as Intel continues to be way overpriced, AMD will continue to be strong competition for them. Once I add crossfire HD 6870s to my rig, I'll be running anything on DirectX 11 maximum settings at 60+ FPS. Nvidia's closest competitor at that price, the GTX 570 OC, doesn't even come close in benchmark scores, and I don't know of any card that you can SLI to get the same results without going at least $100+ over the cost of the AMD cards.

No you wont. Metro 2033 simply takes to much power for to play stable 60+ fps, neither will Crysis & Warhead. And Gtx 560 Ti SLI will perform as good as 5870CF for the same price.

Maybe not stable, but 60 FPS average on Metro 2033:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-10.html

The SLI GTX 470s run roughly $100 more. SLI GTX 560s are anywhere between $100 to $150 more than the CF HD 6870s. So yea.

Low resolution.

This test will be in Swedish but our numbers are the same as english so you will probably understand it.
http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13610-amd-radeon-hd-6990/12#pagehead

 

[MercurySteam]

Every true gaming rig has Nvidia single or SLIed but most gaming rigs with ati need two cards for complete support.

Scuse' my language but...... bull fucking horse shit.

I know people on a budget running two or three was Crossfire which more than qualifies for a gaming rig. Nvidia isn't as cost effective as ATI and they'll always be a part of gaming. Bloody Nvidia fanboys......

1.You are blowing that out of perportion soooooooo bad. But thats my fautl cause i totally worded that wrong so i fucked up.
2.Imma girl, I don't think i know of any dude that wans to be refered to as "Bunny"
3.Fangirl I Maybe, but independant researcher I am also, and I don't remember stating "nvidia is better"

1. Probably, but for as longas I've been building computers, I've known that there more to building PCs than just siding with Intel/Nvidia. AMD/ATI will always have a place for people on a budget.
2. I've known some guys that call themselves stange things.
3. Perhaps not, but it's not hard to see when people are unwilling to look at both sides of the coin.

 

[MrTub]

May I ask why you want his 3dmark11 score?

Because of his claim about "every true gaming rig has Nvidia single or SLI blah blah blah". I'm running a pair of 5850s I want to see this big mouthed guy show me the money.

Well I can say a number but i cannot link its cause for some odd reason my 3dmark do not want to connect to internet...................: So do you want entry/performance/Extreme?

Would be fun to see anyway although I'd need to know your setup to have any sort of frame of reference lol. But yeah, let's go with Performance since that's all I could run on the free version of it (although I have Vantage scores too, full version came with my RAM)

It shows my system in the link, at my "everyday" settings I scored 7529 http://3dmark.com/3dm11/526273

But my highest score was 8418 http://3dmark.com/3dm11/526616

Your 3dmark 11 score: P10054
Graphics score: 10410
Physics Score: 9884
Combined Score: 8170

GT1: 44.34
GT2: 48.93
GT3: 65.91
GT4: 33.10
PT: 31.38
CT: 38.00

Run Details:
GPU: Nvidia Geforce Gtx 480 (Sli)
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600k CPU @ 3,4ghz (OC to 4,5Ghz)
Time: 3/15/2011 11:01:42 pm

Not my best run since I'm having some stuff open in the background but pretty decent imo.

(Performance Level)

 

[MrTub]

The GTX590 is a Fermi GPGPU(Complete GPU)
The AMD is not, and i Say AMD because ATI is being discontinued this year(2011)
AMD is dropping the ATI brand and just going AMD
Nvidia was the first and still is the only system with a completed GPU, ECC, and complete PhysX+Graphics support. Not to mention Nvidia cards are more consistent than ATI.
ATI's card may pack a bit more "power" but Nvidia's cards are more solid and better designed.

As a whole? We've reached the pre pinnical point of graphics.
Same with RAM being pinical at 8GB(anything more is "future proof")
Same with Intel CPU clockspeeds(no need for anything more than 3.8ghz at all).
The graphics pinnical is almost within reach. Fermi is the GPU to beat. ATI does not have a direct competitor in the same way that AMD does not have a direct competitor to the Core i7.
Closer specs and higher over all frame rates(Nvidia), is better than higher peaks and lower consistancy(ATI)
Every true gaming rig has Nvidia single or SLIed but most gaming rigs with ati need two cards for complete support.

Uh...

No.

While AMD might not yet have a strong competitor to Intel's i7s (which is fine because you only need a quad core for gaming anyway), you're just being foolish in saying that every "true" gaming PC has an NVIDIA card. AMD has plenty of competent contenders for the GPU market.

Pretty much this. As long as Intel continues to be way overpriced, AMD will continue to be strong competition for them. Once I add crossfire HD 6870s to my rig, I'll be running anything on DirectX 11 maximum settings at 60+ FPS. Nvidia's closest competitor at that price, the GTX 570 OC, doesn't even come close in benchmark scores, and I don't know of any card that you can SLI to get the same results without going at least $100+ over the cost of the AMD cards.

No you wont. Metro 2033 simply takes to much power for to play stable 60+ fps, neither will Crysis & Warhead. And Gtx 560 Ti SLI will perform as good as 5870CF for the same price.

Maybe not stable, but 60 FPS average on Metro 2033:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-10.html

The SLI GTX 470s run roughly $100 more. SLI GTX 560s are anywhere between $100 to $150 more than the CF HD 6870s. So yea.

Low resolution.

This test will be in Swedish but our numbers are the same as english so you will probably understand it.
http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13610-amd-radeon-hd-6990/12#pagehead

Click mine again and scroll down, lol. Goes all the way up to 2560x1600. And the test was done with more updated drivers/a more updated game version than the one you posted. Not to mention I'd trust Tom's Hardware over any other benchmarking site. Every time I've bought something based on their recommendation, everything worked out perfectly.

Well imo 2560x1600 is quite low aswell but I can link your a newer version of the test

http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13657-nvidia-geforce-gtx-550-ti/12#pagehead

Done today so cannot really get any newer.

And it's not a benchmarking site it's very big swedish site about PC stuff.

Btw the test you linked was actually older. and omg hahaha! no AA.. wow!

 

[Wolfram23]

Your 3dmark 11 score: P10054
Graphics score: 10410
Physics Score: 9884
Combined Score: 8170

GT1: 44.34
GT2: 48.93
GT3: 65.91
GT4: 33.10
PT: 31.38
CT: 38.00

Run Details:
GPU: Nvidia Geforce Gtx 480 (Sli)
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600k CPU @ 3,4ghz (OC to 4,5Ghz)
Time: 3/15/2011 11:01:42 pm

Not my best run since I'm having some stuff open in the background but pretty decent imo.

(Performance Level)

That's a pretty sick score, nice. But then you have a 2600k @ 4.5ghz =P. Looking at the GPU scores tho, that's only 1635 better than my 5850s. Still good of course and I'm sure it would pull ahead at higher settings, but, I think it goes a ways to validate my argument that Radeon cards can hold their own just fine - "true gamers" can pick whichever brand they want.

 

[MrTub]

Your 3dmark 11 score: P10054
Graphics score: 10410
Physics Score: 9884
Combined Score: 8170

GT1: 44.34
GT2: 48.93
GT3: 65.91
GT4: 33.10
PT: 31.38
CT: 38.00

Run Details:
GPU: Nvidia Geforce Gtx 480 (Sli)
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600k CPU @ 3,4ghz (OC to 4,5Ghz)
Time: 3/15/2011 11:01:42 pm

Not my best run since I'm having some stuff open in the background but pretty decent imo.

(Performance Level)

That's a pretty sick score, nice. But then you have a 2600k @ 4.5ghz =P. Looking at the GPU scores tho, that's only 1635 better than my 5850s. Still good of course and I'm sure it would pull ahead at higher settings, but, I think it goes a ways to validate my argument that Radeon cards can hold their own just fine - "true gamers" can pick whichever brand they want.

Yeah of course radeon can hold their own, they make a lot of great cards but if you really want that extra unnecessary amount of power Nvidia usually is a better choice. And I use 5760x1080 resolution so I kinda need that extra power

 

[MercurySteam]

ADM has no strong grounds in the Processor market anymore. The Intel Core i7 series literally changed the entire game. And now AMD's coperate heads are spinning trying to figure out why a quad core blew away their hexcore.
AMD is the cheapo processor for a reason.
lower power, lower quality, no longer on par with the curve.

I wouldn't count AMD out yet. Benchmarks always prattle on about how the i7 rapes the competion but my friend put his AMD Phenom II X6 1090T against an Intel i7 960 (Intel's best quad core) and the 1090T kept up with the 960 the entire way. Because of crazy overclockability, he could've beaten the Intel if he'd setup his CPU with an overclock but acccording to the benchmark tests and CPU stress tests it was a tie most of the way.

AMD - Better for multi tasking, some of the best overclockability, cheaper.

Intel - Better for gaming, great overclockability, more expensive.

Besides, AMD's Bulldozer microarchitecture isn't out yet. Though I suppose that intel's socket 2011 will be announced by then.

 

[MrTub]

The GTX590 is a Fermi GPGPU(Complete GPU)
The AMD is not, and i Say AMD because ATI is being discontinued this year(2011)
AMD is dropping the ATI brand and just going AMD
Nvidia was the first and still is the only system with a completed GPU, ECC, and complete PhysX+Graphics support. Not to mention Nvidia cards are more consistent than ATI.
ATI's card may pack a bit more "power" but Nvidia's cards are more solid and better designed.

As a whole? We've reached the pre pinnical point of graphics.
Same with RAM being pinical at 8GB(anything more is "future proof")
Same with Intel CPU clockspeeds(no need for anything more than 3.8ghz at all).
The graphics pinnical is almost within reach. Fermi is the GPU to beat. ATI does not have a direct competitor in the same way that AMD does not have a direct competitor to the Core i7.
Closer specs and higher over all frame rates(Nvidia), is better than higher peaks and lower consistancy(ATI)
Every true gaming rig has Nvidia single or SLIed but most gaming rigs with ati need two cards for complete support.

Uh...

No.

While AMD might not yet have a strong competitor to Intel's i7s (which is fine because you only need a quad core for gaming anyway), you're just being foolish in saying that every "true" gaming PC has an NVIDIA card. AMD has plenty of competent contenders for the GPU market.

Pretty much this. As long as Intel continues to be way overpriced, AMD will continue to be strong competition for them. Once I add crossfire HD 6870s to my rig, I'll be running anything on DirectX 11 maximum settings at 60+ FPS. Nvidia's closest competitor at that price, the GTX 570 OC, doesn't even come close in benchmark scores, and I don't know of any card that you can SLI to get the same results without going at least $100+ over the cost of the AMD cards.

No you wont. Metro 2033 simply takes to much power for to play stable 60+ fps, neither will Crysis & Warhead. And Gtx 560 Ti SLI will perform as good as 5870CF for the same price.

Maybe not stable, but 60 FPS average on Metro 2033:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-10.html

The SLI GTX 470s run roughly $100 more. SLI GTX 560s are anywhere between $100 to $150 more than the CF HD 6870s. So yea.

Didnt see your post about the price so here is a new quote.

Gigabyte GeForce GTX 560 Ti OC 1GB - 2 038 kr - 364,57$
PowerColor Radeon HD6870 1GB - 2 082 kr - 326,84$
So yeah.. 100-150$..

 

[MercurySteam]

If you are going for the top of the line the best performance card is the best not the cheapest of the top of the line. Or you simply call them AMD?

Yes Nvidia is still top of the line, but the difference is marginal at best. It's the features, lineups and bang for you buck that make a card worth buying. And as long as they're called ATI Radeon cards, I'll call them ATI even if they've been absorbed by AMD, they still exist.

 

[Wolfram23]

snip

Ah, yes. Well at least we're on the same page. I game at 1920x1080 currently and my cards have never failed to max a game at that res. I've been considering going eyefinity, but I know I couldn't pump that many megapixels. I was thinking something like 3 1440x900 monitors flipped sideways if they have small enough bezels. But I've mostly decided I'm happy with it for now and my next PC will be either 3D or 3 monitor. 3D is the only thing I really wish Radeon could get working properly, although it's still not something I'd get quite yet. But I do appreciate Nvidia's progress in that area.

 

[MrTub]

The GTX590 is a Fermi GPGPU(Complete GPU)
The AMD is not, and i Say AMD because ATI is being discontinued this year(2011)
AMD is dropping the ATI brand and just going AMD
Nvidia was the first and still is the only system with a completed GPU, ECC, and complete PhysX+Graphics support. Not to mention Nvidia cards are more consistent than ATI.
ATI's card may pack a bit more "power" but Nvidia's cards are more solid and better designed.

As a whole? We've reached the pre pinnical point of graphics.
Same with RAM being pinical at 8GB(anything more is "future proof")
Same with Intel CPU clockspeeds(no need for anything more than 3.8ghz at all).
The graphics pinnical is almost within reach. Fermi is the GPU to beat. ATI does not have a direct competitor in the same way that AMD does not have a direct competitor to the Core i7.
Closer specs and higher over all frame rates(Nvidia), is better than higher peaks and lower consistancy(ATI)
Every true gaming rig has Nvidia single or SLIed but most gaming rigs with ati need two cards for complete support.

Uh...

No.

While AMD might not yet have a strong competitor to Intel's i7s (which is fine because you only need a quad core for gaming anyway), you're just being foolish in saying that every "true" gaming PC has an NVIDIA card. AMD has plenty of competent contenders for the GPU market.

Pretty much this. As long as Intel continues to be way overpriced, AMD will continue to be strong competition for them. Once I add crossfire HD 6870s to my rig, I'll be running anything on DirectX 11 maximum settings at 60+ FPS. Nvidia's closest competitor at that price, the GTX 570 OC, doesn't even come close in benchmark scores, and I don't know of any card that you can SLI to get the same results without going at least $100+ over the cost of the AMD cards.

No you wont. Metro 2033 simply takes to much power for to play stable 60+ fps, neither will Crysis & Warhead. And Gtx 560 Ti SLI will perform as good as 5870CF for the same price.

Maybe not stable, but 60 FPS average on Metro 2033:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-10.html

The SLI GTX 470s run roughly $100 more. SLI GTX 560s are anywhere between $100 to $150 more than the CF HD 6870s. So yea.

Low resolution.

This test will be in Swedish but our numbers are the same as english so you will probably understand it.
http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13610-amd-radeon-hd-6990/12#pagehead

Click mine again and scroll down, lol. Goes all the way up to 2560x1600. And the test was done with more updated drivers/a more updated game version than the one you posted. Not to mention I'd trust Tom's Hardware over any other benchmarking site. Every time I've bought something based on their recommendation, everything worked out perfectly.

Well imo 2560x1600 is quite low aswell but I can link your a newer version of the test

http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13657-nvidia-geforce-gtx-550-ti/12#pagehead

Done today so cannot really get any newer.

And it's not a benchmarking site it's very big swedish site about PC stuff.

Btw the test you linked was actually older. and omg hahaha! no AA.. wow!

Well, personally I'm quite happy with 1920x1080. Especially since that's my monitor's max resolution ATM. Generally I play with just 2xAA and 8xAF as well. So yea, if CF 6870s can get me an average of 60 FPS on Metro 2033 with those settings, I'm perfectly fine with that. Especially since chances are that means they would run everything else at 60 FPS or MORE, given that Metro 2033 isn't very well optimized.

Your newer link shows that Crossfire HD 6870s beat out everything CF HD 6950s, which cost considerably more money. The GTX 560 Ti in SLI performs under the CF 6870s, and they cost roughly $100 to $150 more. So yea, very happy with my choice indeed.

http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13657-nvidia-geforce-gtx-550-ti/13#pagehead

In that test 560Sli beats 6870CF so and you wont get an average of 60 fps if you want to play everything on highest. Highest means the absolute HIGHEST not Highest without AA. Dont get me wrong I do think 6870 is a great card and so is 560.

 

[Wolfram23]

Btw the test you linked was actually older. and omg hahaha! no AA.. wow!

Well, personally I'm quite happy with 1920x1080. Especially since that's my monitor's max resolution ATM. Generally I play with just 2xAA and 8xAF as well. So yea, if CF 6870s can get me an average of 60 FPS on Metro 2033 with those settings, I'm perfectly fine with that. Especially since chances are that means they would run everything else at 60 FPS or MORE, given that Metro 2033 isn't very well optimized.

Your newer link shows that Crossfire HD 6870s beat out everything CF HD 6950s, which cost considerably more money. The GTX 560 Ti in SLI performs under the CF 6870s, and they cost roughly $100 to $150 more. So yea, very happy with my choice indeed.

http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13657-nvidia-geforce-gtx-550-ti/13#pagehead

In that test 560Sli beats 6870CF so and you wont get an average of 60 fps if you want to play everything on highest. Highest means the absolute HIGHEST not Highest without AA.[/quote] *quoting fail oops

560s are a tad faster than 6870s anyway, so that makes sense. 460<6870<560<6950 etc. The SLI and CF scaling are almost identical now so that's not really a consideration anymore.

 

[MrTub]

http://www.nvidia.com/object/fermi_architecture.html
Fermi GPU PDF [http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/fermi_white_papers/P.Glaskowsky_NVIDIA's_Fermi-The_First_Complete_GPU_Architecture.pdf]
read.

Why would I waste my time? It's just saying all the same crap you are. "BLAH BLAH BLAH superior technology BLAH BLAH BLAH optimized." Then the benchmark results (courtesy of Tubez):

http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13657-nvidia-geforce-gtx-550-ti/12#pagehead

come along and show the AMD cards beating out Fermi cards at a discount of $100+. So who am I supposed to believe? Nvidia's yapping? Or the benchmark results? Yea, I'll go with option two.

At least where I live the price difference is about 10-20$ so Imo both are great. And fyi 560sli is better in some games then 6870CF and in some games the 6870CF will be better... so to say a card is better by just one game test is quite wrong imo

 

[MrTub]

Didnt see your post about the price so here is a new quote.

Gigabyte GeForce GTX 560 Ti OC 1GB - 2 038 kr 364,57$
Gigabyte Radeon HD5870 1GB OC (GV-R587OC-1GD) - PCI-E / 2xDVI / HDMI / DP 1990 kr(On sale) 355,98$
So yeah.. 100-150$..

It's the 6870s, not the 5870s. Best rated 6870 at newegg:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102909&cm_re=hd_6870-_-14-102-909-_-Product

$190 each, $370 total.

Best rated GTX 560 ti at newegg:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127565&cm_re=gtx_560_ti-_-14-127-565-_-Product

$250 each, $500 total.

Here are the complete lists:
6870s: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&Description=hd%206870&bop=And&Order=RATING&PageSize=20
560 Ti: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&Description=gtx%20560%20ti&bop=And&Order=RATING&PageSize=20

All around roughly the same price as the best rated in their respective categories.

Oh my bad! stupid mistake of me!

http://www.inet.se/artikel/5409065/powercolor-radeon-hd6870-1gb


PowerColor Radeon HD6870 1GB - 2 082 kr - 326,84$

 

[Wolfram23]

So to try and bring this whole damn thread back on track... how much faster (or slower?) do you think the 590 will be compared to the 6990. Consider, if you will, that the 6990 already maxes out the full available power from 2 8pin connections and the PCIe lane, and even goes beyond it with the BIOS switch to clock it a bit faster. Is it possible to get more performance? I'm pretty sure the 6xxx series is still slightly more efficient than 2nd gen fermi... *shrug

 

[MrTub]

http://www.nvidia.com/object/fermi_architecture.html
Fermi GPU PDF [http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/fermi_white_papers/P.Glaskowsky_NVIDIA's_Fermi-The_First_Complete_GPU_Architecture.pdf]
read.

Why would I waste my time? It's just saying all the same crap you are. "BLAH BLAH BLAH superior technology BLAH BLAH BLAH optimized." Then the benchmark results (courtesy of Tubez):

http://www.sweclockers.com/recension/13657-nvidia-geforce-gtx-550-ti/12#pagehead

come along and show the AMD cards beating out Fermi cards at a discount of $100+. So who am I supposed to believe? Nvidia's yapping? Or the benchmark results? Yea, I'll go with option two.

At least where I live the price difference is about 10-20$ so Imo both are great. And fyi 560sli is better in some games then 6870CF and in some games the 6870CF will be better... so to say a card is better by just one game test is quite wrong imo

Right, but given the price difference, there's no reason the SLI 560 Ti shouldn't outperform the CF 6870s in EVERY test.

Oh my bad! stupid mistake of me!

http://www.inet.se/artikel/5409065/powercolor-radeon-hd6870-1gb


PowerColor Radeon HD6870 1GB - 2 082 kr - 326,84$

FYI I gave you several pages worth of the same products, not just the highest or lowest priced ones I could find. And why would I ever order from anything other than Newegg? Being a US resident and all.

Well why should I order from anything outside Sweden? Being a Swedish resident and all.

I took the lowest price for both of the cards so imo that is pretty fair. And I can give you several of pages of the same products aswell but you will not be able to understand it since it's in Swedish. You stated that the price was X amount you never said it was X amount in USA so therefor I stated what the price was for Me.

 

[MrTub]

Well why should I order from anything outside Sweden? Being a Swedish resident and all.

I took the lowest price for both of the cards so imo that is pretty fair. And I can give you several of pages of the same products aswell but you will not be able to understand it since it's in Swedish. You stated that the price was X amount you never said it was X amount in USA so therefor I stated what the price was for Me.

Fair enough. Suffice to say that here in the US, CF 6870s are the much better deal at $130 less on average. And given that they do outperform the SLI GTX 560 Ti in SOME games and benchmark tests, that makes it an even better deal.

Yeah, I'm quite surprised actually that Gtx 560 Ti is cheaper for me then for you guys since we have to 25% vat tax on everything =/ And since we have derailed the thread a bit we should end with it both being a great card

 

[Wolfram23]

Well why should I order from anything outside Sweden? Being a Swedish resident and all.

I took the lowest price for both of the cards so imo that is pretty fair. And I can give you several of pages of the same products aswell but you will not be able to understand it since it's in Swedish. You stated that the price was X amount you never said it was X amount in USA so therefor I stated what the price was for Me.

Fair enough. Suffice to say that here in the US, CF 6870s are the much better deal at $130 less on average. And given that they do outperform the SLI GTX 560 Ti in SOME games and benchmark tests, that makes it an even better deal.

Yeah, I'm quite surprised actually that Gtx 560 Ti is cheaper for me then for you guys since we have to 25% vat tax on everything =/ And since we have derailed the thread a bit we should end with it both being a great card

I think it got derailed on the first reply... lol...

 

[MrTub]

Well why should I order from anything outside Sweden? Being a Swedish resident and all.

I took the lowest price for both of the cards so imo that is pretty fair. And I can give you several of pages of the same products aswell but you will not be able to understand it since it's in Swedish. You stated that the price was X amount you never said it was X amount in USA so therefor I stated what the price was for Me.

Fair enough. Suffice to say that here in the US, CF 6870s are the much better deal at $130 less on average. And given that they do outperform the SLI GTX 560 Ti in SOME games and benchmark tests, that makes it an even better deal.

Yeah, I'm quite surprised actually that Gtx 560 Ti is cheaper for me then for you guys since we have to 25% vat tax on everything =/ And since we have derailed the thread a bit we should end with it both being a great card

I think it got derailed on the first reply... lol...

Yeah.. You might be right ^^

 

[MrTub]

So to try and bring this whole damn thread back on track... how much faster (or slower?) do you think the 590 will be compared to the 6990. Consider, if you will, that the 6990 already maxes out the full available power from 2 8pin connections and the PCIe lane, and even goes beyond it with the BIOS switch to clock it a bit faster. Is it possible to get more performance? I'm pretty sure the 6xxx series is still slightly more efficient than 2nd gen fermi... *shrug

Hard to say but I actually believe that 6990 will be faster then 590 since fermi cards really love their energy...