Now if AMD can just get their drivers right and keep the artifact problem gone. You can't get a better deal than this right now. However I leave it at 925mhz because it has more than enough power to max most games at stock. I am glad the 270 is just the same as the 270X, I only paid $179 for it, And all I have to do is go into CCC and set my clock from 925mhz to 1050, And bam I got 270X, And with better power efficiency. P39Airacobra - Saturday, link WTH? Really? That is the dumbest thing I ever heard! That is like getting a million dollars and then saying you should have got less.Finally, both cards are 10%+ faster than the GTX 660, making this an easy win for AMD. Furthermore in this test both cards are faster than the 7870 – a Pitcairn card with higher clockspeeds – showing the potency of the memory clockspeed increase. The Asus card with its factory overclock is as to be expected faster, essentially splitting the difference between the stock clocked HIS 270 and the 270X.
Otherwise the only cards close to it are of course the 270, and the outgoing 7870.Īs for our 270 cards, they are second only to the 270X in anything near their price. 270X of course leads the pack, but the 270 cards are very close behind owing to the fact that the only difference between the cards is the GPU clockspeed.įor the 270X in particular we’re looking at performance just a few frames per second behind the more expensive GTX 760, for a deficit of 6%.
For these cards if we want framerates better than the 30s, we have to look at moving down a quality level.Īt 1080p high quality, we can get our 270 cards up to the mid-40fps range.
On the other hand it scales well with resolution and quality settings, so it’s still playable on lower end hardware.ĪMD likes to pitch the 270 series as their primary 1080p cards, and although they generally do a perfectly fine job at it, Metro is a reminder that there are scenarios where they will come up short, particularly if trying to do 1080p at the highest quality settings. The original Metro: 2033 was a graphically punishing game for its time and Metro: Last Light is in its own right too. Even a pair of GTX 660 Ti SLI graphics cards couldn't achieve the feat, falling just short with 58fps on average.As always, kicking off our look at performance is 4A Games’ latest entry in their Metro series of subterranean shooters, Metro: Last Light. It took the mighty GeForce GTX Titan to do so. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost managed just 33fps as did the Radeon HD 7850.įor a better experience we recommend using at least the GeForce GTX 660 which averaged 37fps, or the Radeon HD 7870 at 40fps.Ĭracking 60fps was no easy task at this resolution. The Radeon HD 7790 for example averaged just 27fps in either 1GB or 2GB varieties. Turning the resolution up to 2560x1600 rendered most of the lower-end graphics cards useless. This called for either the GeForce GTX 660 Ti (65fps) or the Radeon HD 7950 Boost (68fps).īudget cards such as the Radeon HD 7770 (31fps) and GeForce GTX 650 Ti (37fps) barely got by, though Nvidia's solution did fare a lot better.
While the 43fps and 37fps produced by these cards is considered playable, we were surprised by how demanding Metro: Last Light was on them using relatively low settings.Īt 1920x1200 graphics cards such as the GeForce GTX 660 drop around 8fps, meaning more serious GPUs are required to crack the 60fps mark. Going beyond the GTX 660 or 7870 on these settings can be considered overkill.īelow these cards we have the Radeon HD 7850 with 56fps and the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost with 54fps, which was the same frame rate produced by the old Radeon HD 6970.Ĭurrent generation budget graphics cards such as the GeForce GTX 650 Ti and Radeon HD 7770 provided rather poor performance. AMD required the Radeon HD 7870 to break the 60fps barrier though it did so easily with 68fps.
Using medium quality settings at 1680x1050 we see that the GeForce GTX 660 averaged 60fps, which is roughly the same result turned in by the old GTX 480.