Error
  • JUser::_load: Unable to load user with id: 67

Featured Articles

Intel plans Haswell refresh in Q2 2014

Intel plans Haswell refresh in Q2 2014

Intel has been executing its tick tock strategy flawlessly since January 2006 and now there is some indication that we might…

More...
Xbox One demoed running GTX card

Xbox One demoed running GTX card

It looks like the Xbox One just cannot catch a break. We have stumbled upon a report claiming that Xbox One…

More...
Haswell Pentium and Core specs surface

Haswell Pentium and Core specs surface

Haswell is out and now we have the complete specs for Intel’s first batch of fourth generation Core parts, as well…

More...
EVGA GTX 770 ACX 2GB previewed

EVGA GTX 770 ACX 2GB previewed

Nvidia is hoping that the Geforce GTX 770 will be a very popular product, and EVGA obviously share this view, as…

More...
Gainward GTX 770 Phantom reviewed

Gainward GTX 770 Phantom reviewed

Gainward has now officially unveiled its custom version of the Geforce GTX 770, the Gainward GTX 770 Phantom. Based on the…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Wednesday, 26 January 2011 11:24

1GB HD 6950 marginally slower than 2GB model

Written by


More than a match for the GTX 560 Ti
AMD has rolled out the red carpet for Nvidia’s GTX 560 Ti in the form of a more affordable 1GB version of the HD 6950. Granted, the 1GB version is only about €20/$30 cheaper than the original 2GB version, but according to Hardwarecanucks it still packs quite a punch.

In a series of real life tests the 1GB version was just marginally slower than the 2GB model and in most 1080 tests the difference is negligible. In most tests card also managed to outperform Nvidia’s GTX 560 Ti, although Nvidia proved faster in some titles, such as DIRT 2 and Lost Planet 2. On average the 1GB card was 5 percent slower than the 2GB version, but it’s also 5 percent faster than the GTX 560 Ti.

All in all it appears that the reduction in memory size had very little effect on performance. So, it’s about 10 percent cheaper than the full blown 2GB version, yet just 5 percent slower, so it’s clearly very good value.

You can check out the review here.
Last modified on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 14:15
blog comments powered by Disqus

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments