techPowerUp! Forums

techPowerUp! Forums (http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/index.php)
-   Reviews (http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X 3072 MB (http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=171019)

W1zzard Aug 24, 2012 09:10 AM

Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X 3072 MB
 

Introduction



http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...mages/logo.jpg

AMD's Radeon HD 7970 has been on the market for a while now. The card introduced a new shader architecture and brought numerous improvements in power consumption. It met heavy opposition from NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 680 and 670, which has caused HD 7970's pricing to go down quite a bit.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S.../pressshot.jpg

Sapphire's HD 7950 Vapor-X comes with a large dual-fan cooler that uses the company's famous vapor-chamber technology. On the Vapor-X you will also find a "Lethal Boost" button which switches to a second BIOS with higher clock speeds. With this BIOS, clocks are increased to 950 MHz GPU and 1250 MHz memory.

In our Sapphire's HD 7950 Vapor-X review, we will test both the normal and the boost BIOS (results marked as "Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X Boost 3072M").

Pricing of the Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X is 330 USD, which is a 10% premium, or $ 30 over the reference design.

<table class="tputbl hilight" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3">
<caption>
HD 7950 Market Segment Analysis
</caption>
<tr>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Radeon <br />
HD 7870</th>
<th scope="col">GeForce <br />
GTX 580</th>
<th scope="col">GeForce <br />
GTX 660 Ti</th>
<th scope="col">Radeon <br />
HD 7950</th>
<th scope="col">Sapphire HD <br />
7950 Vapor-X</th>
<th scope="col"> HD
7950 <br />
Vapor-X Boost</th>
<th scope="col">GeForce <br />
GTX 670</th>
<th scope="col">Radeon <br />
HD 7970</th>
<th scope="col"> HD 7970<br />
GHz Ed.</th>
<th scope="col">GeForce <br />
GTX 680</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Shader Units</th>
<td align="right">1280</td>
<td align="right">512</td>
<td align="right">1344</td>
<td align="right"><strong>1792</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>1792</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>1792</strong></td>
<td align="right">1344</td>
<td align="right">2048</td>
<td align="right">2048</td>
<td align="right">1536</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">ROPs</th>
<td align="right">32</td>
<td align="right">48</td>
<td align="right">24</td>
<td align="right"><strong>32</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>32</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>32</strong></td>
<td align="right">32</td>
<td align="right">32</td>
<td align="right">32</td>
<td align="right">32</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Graphics Processor</th>
<td align="right">Pitcairn</td>
<td align="right">GF110</td>
<td align="right">GK104</td>
<td align="right"><strong>Tahiti</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>Tahiti</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>Tahiti</strong></td>
<td align="right">GK104</td>
<td align="right">Tahiti</td>
<td align="right">Tahiti</td>
<td align="right">GK104</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Transistors</th>
<td align="right">2800M</td>
<td align="right">3000M</td>
<td align="right">3500M</td>
<td align="right"><strong>4310M</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>4310M</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>4310M</strong></td>
<td align="right">3500M</td>
<td align="right">4310M</td>
<td align="right">4310M</td>
<td align="right">3500M</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Memory Size</th>
<td align="right">2048 MB</td>
<td align="right">1536 MB</td>
<td align="right">2048 MB</td>
<td align="right"><strong>3072 MB</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>3072 MB</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>3072 MB</strong></td>
<td align="right">2048 MB</td>
<td align="right">3072 MB</td>
<td align="right">3072 MB</td>
<td align="right">2048 MB</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Memory Bus Width</th>
<td align="right">256 bit</td>
<td align="right">384 bit</td>
<td align="right">192 bit</td>
<td align="right"><strong>384 bit</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>384 bit</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>384 bit</strong></td>
<td align="right">256 bit</td>
<td align="right">384 bit</td>
<td align="right">384 bit</td>
<td align="right">256 bit</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Core Clock</th>
<td align="right">1000 MHz</td>
<td align="right">772 MHz</td>
<td align="right">915 MHz+</td>
<td align="right"><strong>800 MHz</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>850 MHz</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>950 MHz</strong></td>
<td align="right">915 MHz+</td>
<td align="right">925 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1050 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1006 MHz+</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Memory Clock</th>
<td align="right">1200 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1002 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1502 MHz</td>
<td align="right"><strong>1250 MHz</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>1250 MHz</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>1250 MHz</strong></td>
<td align="right">1502 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1375 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1500 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1502 MHz</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Price</th>
<td align="right">$250</td>
<td align="right">$430</td>
<td align="right">$300</td>
<td align="right"><strong>$300</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>$330</strong></td>
<td align="right"><strong>$330</strong></td>
<td align="right">$380</td>
<td align="right">$430</td>
<td align="right">$400</td>
<td align="right">$480</td>
</tr>
</table>


Packaging


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...age1_small.jpg http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...age2_small.jpg

Contents



http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ents_small.jpg

You will receive:
  • Graphics card
  • Driver CD + Documentation
  • 2x PCI-Express power cable
  • CrossFire bridge
  • HDMI cable
  • DVI adapter


The Card


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ard1_small.jpg http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ard2_small.jpg
Sapphire's card looks very powerful thanks to the large cooler with its edgy design.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ard3_small.jpg
The card requires two slots in your system.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...puts_small.jpg
Display connectivity options include one full-size DisplayPort, one full-size HDMI port, and two dual-link DVI ports. You may use all outputs at the same time.

The GPU also includes an HDMI sound device. It is HDMI 1.4a compatible which includes HD audio and Blu-ray 3D movies support. The DisplayPort outputs are version 1.2, enabling the use of hubs and Multi-Stream Transport.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...fire_small.jpg
You may combine up to four HD 7950 cards from any vendor in a multi-GPU CrossFire configuration for higher frame rates or better image-quality settings.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ront_small.jpg http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...back_small.jpg
Pictured above are the front and back, showing the disassembled board. High-res versions are also available (front, back). If you choose to use these images for voltmods, etc., please include a link back to this site or let us post your article.


A Closer Look


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ler1_small.jpg http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ler2_small.jpg
Sapphire's cooler uses a large copper vapor-chamber to soak heat up from the GPU surface. You can also see the thermal pads that cool the memory chips on the front side of the GPU.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ler3_small.jpg
Once we remove the main heatsink, you can see two smaller heatsinks that keep voltage-regulation circuitry cool.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ower_small.jpg
The card requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin PCI-Express power cable for operation. This power configuration is good for up to 300 W of power draw.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...itch_small.jpg
The button located near the CrossFire connectors switches between two BIOSes on the card. On other HD 7900 Series cards, this dual BIOS feature only acts as a safeguard against problems during BIOS flashing. On the Sapphire Vapor-X, this feature has been extended to provide a BIOS that runs clocks beyond Sapphire's default clock for the HD 7950without any voltage changes, which will help keep power consumption in check.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...vreg_small.jpg
For voltage control, the card uses a CHiL CHL8228G, which is a common voltage controller nowadays. It offers software voltage control, comprehensive monitoring features, and is well supported by most overclocking software.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...mory_small.jpg
The GDDR5 memory chips are made by Hynix and carry the model number H5GQ2H24MFR-T2C. They are specified to run at 1250 MHz (5000 MHz GDDR5 effective).

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S.../gpu_small.jpg
AMD's Tahiti graphics processor introduced the GCN shader architecture. It is also the first GPU to be produced on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The transistor count is 4.31 billion.


Test System



<table class="tputbl">
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="2">Test System - VGA Rev. 17</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tr>
<th width="120" scope="row">Processor:</th>
<td align="center">Intel Core i7-3770K @ 4.7 GHz<br />(Ivy Bridge, 8192 KB Cache)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Motherboard:</th>
<td align="center">ASUS Maximus V Gene<br />
Intel Z77</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Memory:</th>
<td align="center">2x 4096 MB Corsair Vengeance PC3-12800 DDR3 <br />
@ 1600 MHz 9-9-9-24</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Harddisk:</th>
<td align="center">WD Caviar Blue WD5000AAKS 500 GB</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Power Supply:</th>
<td align="center">Antec HCP-1200 1200W</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Software:</th>
<td align="center">Windows 7 64-bit Service Pack 1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Drivers:</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">NVIDIA: 304.79 Beta<br />ATI: Catalyst 12.7 Beta</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Display:</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">
LG Flatron W3000H 30&quot; 2560x1600<br />
3x Hanns.G HL225DBB 21.5&quot; 1920x1080
</td>
</tr>
</table>
Benchmark scores in other reviews are only comparable when this exact same configuration is used.
  • All video card results were obtained on this exact system with exactly the same configuration.
  • All games were set to their highest quality setting unless indicated otherwise.
  • AA and AF are applied via in-game settings, not via the driver's control panel.

Each benchmark was tested at the following settings and resolution:
  • 1280 x 800, 2x Anti-aliasing. Common resolution for most smaller flatscreens today (17" - 19"). A bit of eye candy turned on in the drivers.
  • 1680 x 1050, 4x Anti-aliasing. Most common widescreen resolution on larger displays (19" - 22"). Very good looking driver graphics settings.
  • 1920 x 1200, 4x Anti-aliasing. Typical widescreen resolution for large displays (22" - 26"). Very good looking driver graphics settings.
  • 2560 x 1600, 4x Anti-aliasing. Highest possible resolution for commonly available displays (30"). Very good looking driver graphics settings.
  • 5760 x 1080, 4x Anti-aliasing. Typical high-end gaming multi-monitor resolution. Very good looking driver graphics settings.


Alan Wake


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...s/alanwake.jpg
Alan Wake, released in 2012 for the PC, is a highly successful third-person horror shooter that revolves around the adventures of novelist Alan Wake who has to battle the "darkness" which takes over living and dead things. Alan's signature flashlight is used to strip the forces of darkness of their protection, making them vulnerable to conventional weapons.

The engine of Alan Wake uses DirectX 9, but features complex lighting effects that make it quite a demanding title. We benchmarked with the highest settings possible.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...e_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Batman: Arkham City


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...arkhamcity.jpg
Batman is back on the LCD screen with Batman: Arkham City, a sequel to Batman: Arkham Asylum, by Rocksteady Games and WB. It was released on the PC platform in November. Batman is imprisoned in Arkham City, an infamous district of the DC Universe that contains the scum of Gotham, most of whom Batman helped put in there. In order to get out, he must go through scores of baddies and encounters many of the iconic supervillains along the way. He's not entirely alone.

Batman: Arkham City uses the same Unreal Engine by Epic as Batman: Arkham Asylum does, but thanks to the engine's modularity, it has been overhauled, being outfitted with the latest technologies, including a graphics engine that takes advantage of DirectX 11.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...y_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Battlefield 3


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...images/bf3.jpg
Arguably one of the most anticipated online shooters in recent times, Battlefield 3 is the latest addition to some of the most engaging online multiplayer shooter franchises. It combines infantry combat with mechanized warfare including transport vehicles, armored personnel carriers, main battle tanks, attack helicopters, and combat aircraft; pretty much everything that goes into today's battlefields. The infantry combat is coupled with role-playing elements, which makes the experience all the more engaging. It also has a single-player campaign which added a few gigabytes to its installer.

Behind all this is a spanking new game engine by EA-DICE, Frostbite 2. It makes use of every possible feature DirectX 11 has to offer, including hardware tessellation and new lighting effects, to deliver some of the most captivating visuals gamers have ever had access to. Not playing this game on the PC is a grave injustice to what's in store. Faster PCs are rewarded with better visuals.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...3_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


BattleForge


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...attleforge.jpg
BattleForge, a card-based RTS, is developed by the German EA Phenomic Studio. A few months after the launch, the game was transformed into a Play4Free branded game. That move, and the fact that it was included as a game bundle with a large number of ATI cards, made it one of the more well-known RTS games of 2009. You as a player assemble your deck before the game to select the units that will be available. Elemental force choices can come from the forces of Fire, Frost, Nature, and Shadow to complement each other.

The BattleForge engine has full support for DX9, DX10, and DX10.1. We used the internal benchmark tool in DirectX 11 mode with the highest settings possible to obtain our results.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...e_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Civilization 5


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...mages/civ5.jpg
Sid Meier's Civilization V (or Civ 5 in common jargon) is the latest addition to the franchise of masterfully crafted turn-based strategy games that let you play God to a nascent civilization of your choice all the way up to the space age. Civilization V uses large 3D worlds that are procedurally generated and takes advantage of the hardware tessellation features offered by DirectX 11 to exponentially step up the complexity of cities, models, terrains, and objects. This generation of GPUs can also be expected to handle large texture loads that come with such eye candy.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...5_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Crysis


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ges/crysis.jpg
After the tremendous success of Far Cry, the German game studio Crytek released their shooter Crysis in 2007. The game was by far the most hyped and anticipated game in 2007, and forums were full of "Can my system run Crysis?" threads because of the high hardware requirements of this game. Just like in Far Cry, the plot evolves on a small island with a thick and richly detailed jungle world. A lot of attention has been given to small details like accurate physics. When you, for example, fire on a tree trunk, it will shatter and the tree will fall over and leave a stump behind. Enemies in a car can be stopped by shooting the tire of the car. The game graphics are, even today, top notch, yet the game still runs well on most computers.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...s_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Crysis 2


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...es/crysis2.jpg
Crysis 2 takes the player into an alien-infested New York City. The game adds a tactical options mode that allows several ways to attack a heavily infested enemy location. The new Nanosuit 2.0 that the player uses offers more freedom in ability use; multiple abilities can, for example, be used at the same time. To better accommodate a given play style, weapons can be customized with silencers, laser sights, or even a sniping scope.

For rendering, Crytek's CryEngine 3 is used. It comes with reduced system requirements compared to the first Crysis game. Since Crysis 2 is a multi-platform game with major development focus on the console, the graphics on launch day were only DirectX 9. DirectX 11 functionality was added later in a patch. We used the DX11 version and the high-res texture pack for our benchmarking.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...2_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Diablo III


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...es/diablo3.jpg
Blizzard's Diablo 3 is the latest release in one of the most popular action RPG series of all time. You, the hero, will experience epic adventures on your journey to defeat Diablo, the master of Hell. Diablo 3 set the record for the fastest-selling PC game, selling over 3.5 million copies on the first day of its release. It was also the most pre-ordered game on Amazon.

Blizzard's DirectX 9 engine provides the player with an isometric view on the action. The game has been tuned to run well on most computer systems to let as many players as possible experience the game. We tested Diablo 3 running at the highest image quality settings.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...3_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif


Dragon Age II


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...dragonage2.jpg
Dragon Age II is the second game in BioWare's Dragon Age franchise and was released in March 2011. You will be able to pick your hero, named Hawke, from several classes and grow him over the course of the adventure. Gameplay takes you through a linearly narrated story of Hawke's rise to become the legendary "Champion of Kirkwall".

BioWare's Lycium Engine has support for DirectX 11, using tessellation, advanced dynamic lighting, and camera effects like depth of field. We benchmarked the DX11 version with the highest possible details setting.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...2_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Hard Reset


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S.../hardreset.jpg
Developed by Flying Wild Hog, a studio that prides itself with the fact that its creation is PC exclusive (bless them), Hard Reset is a first-person shooter that's set in a future cyberpunk setting of a dystopian world. It reintroduces many of the gameplay mechanics that have made classics such as Quake wickedly fun to play and that are sorely lacking in today's tactical military shooter, creating a 'void' for Flying Wild Hog to fill.

The game uses the studio's in-house Road Hog Engine, which isn't particularly heavy on new-generation DirectX features, but can still be taxing for some GPUs.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...t_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Max Payne 3


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S.../maxpayne3.jpg
Max is back! The long anticipated third release in the Max Payne series is the first game developed by Rockstar, which took over the title from Remedy Entertainment. In this first-person shooter, using an over-the-shoulder camera view, you battle the bad guys using game-changing features like Bullet Time or Last Stand. The maps have scenic locations taking the player to places like New York, Sao Paulo, and Panama.

The Max Payne 3 game engine uses DirectX 11 with tessellation and very detailed textures. We tested the game with details set to the maximum possible.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...3_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Metro 2033


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S.../metro2033.jpg
Metro 2033 is a first-person shooter that is set in a post-apocalyptic Moscow - inside the metro system as the name suggests. You will fight mutants or other humans who want to take away your shelter. The game has many gameplay elements similar to STALKER; the engine also has similar features. This is because two STALKER engine programmers left GSC Game World and started their own company which made Metro 2033.

The engine has support for all the latest eye candy like DirectX 11 and tessellation. Unfortunately, it leaves a less than satisfactory impression, making it a candidate to surpass Crysis for the highest hardware requirements. We tested the game in DirectX 11 mode with details set to "Very High".

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...3_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Sniper Elite V2


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...perelitev2.jpg
Sniper Elite V2 is a tactical shooter letting you play the Battle of Berlin during early May 1945. You are an American elite sharpshooter who is located behind enemy lines to stop the German V-2 rocket program. Gameplay does not only focus on full frontal assault, but also requires elements of stealth and patience to gain the upper hand. Sniper Elite V2 features a complex ballistics simulation, forcing players to account for factors including gravity, wind, velocity, bullet penetration, and aim stability.

Sniper Elite V2 uses DirectX 11, including tessellation, contact hardening shadows, and DirectCompute-based effects, including anti-aliasing.

For our testing, we used the Sniper Elite V2 benchmark tool in DX11 mode with highest settings and super sampling disabled.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...2_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


STALKER: Call of Pripyat


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...stalkercop.jpg
STALKER: Call of Pripyat continues shortly after the events of the prequel STALKER: Shadow of Chernobyl. The player is one of many stalkers who are attracted by the Zone in hopes of finding fame, wealth, and artifacts. Over the course of the game you meet Strelok, the protagonist of the first STALKER game, and team up with him to progress through the Zone.

The game uses an updated X-Ray Engine 1.6 with support for DirectX 11 using DirectCompute Shaders to improve shadow rendering and tessellation to improve model quality.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...p_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


StarCraft II


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...images/sc2.jpg
StarCraft II, released in July 2010, is a sequel to Blizzard's award-winning strategy game StarCraft. In the 26th century, three species, namely, Terrans, Protoss, and Zerg, are at war. The campaign takes you through many missions on different planets where you have to face various enemy factions or, sometimes, several of them at once. StarCraft II features a similar number of units - some of them new - as the original game. Due to the massive success of the first game, Blizzard chose to focus a large aspect of the game on multiplayer combat through Battle.net. The campaign serves as a good introduction to units and concepts – the real action is in competitive multiplayer combat.

The StarCraft II engine supports only DirectX 9, but several patches have improved rendering quality and available options considerably. We tested the game using a recorded 1 vs. 1 multiplayer replay in the late-game phase. Please note that StarCraft II is very CPU limited on high-end cards, especially on lower resolutions, so you may not see much scaling between some cards. StarCraft II does not support multi-monitor gaming, because it would provide an unfair advantage in competitive multiplayer as a larger portion of the map would be visible.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...2_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif


Total War: Shogun 2


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...es/shogun2.jpg
Set in 16th century feudal Japan, Total War: Shogun 2 takes the player on a quest for domination to conquer and unite the warlords of Japan. Moving away from the European setting of previous Total War games, the game is now designed around the principles of the brilliant Chinese general Sun Tzu and his book The Art of War. Gameplay switches between real-time battles, during which units on the battlefield are controlled, and turn-based strategy, which focuses on diplomacy, economy, and production management. Taking control of a castle involves several different stages, adding more complexity to the warfare in Shogun 2.

We benchmarked using the highest settings possible in DirectX 11 mode, which was added via a patch after release.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...2_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ges/skyrim.jpg
This isn't just a game, but a masterpiece. TES: Skyrim is a very large sandbox game that rejects the quality-quantity inverse proportionality. By genre, TES: Skyrim is a role-playing game. It combines some of the best elements of older titles in the franchise with some new sandbox elements to churn out an extremely engaging and addictive game. It makes use of Bethesda's Creation Engine which isn't visually intensive in that it doesn't use taxing graphics features; instead, the game's presentation itself, with large open worlds, ends up taxing your hardware. Faster GPUs result in smoother gameplay with most eye candy turned on.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...m_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


World of Warcraft: Cataclysm


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...images/wow.jpg
World of Warcraft is the most successful massively multiplayer online game in the world with far over 12 million monthly subscribers. The game revolves around the epic battle between the Horde and Alliance factions with many other races getting involved in a long and complex story line. Although World of Warcraft was released in 2004, Blizzard has, especially with new expansions, always added incremental improvements to the graphics. One key success factor of World of Warcraft is that it will run on a large number of slower systems, while, at the same time, also delivering a decent graphics experience on high-end systems. We tested the game in DirectX 11 mode with details set to "Ultra".

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...w_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


3DMark 11


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...s/3dmark11.jpg
3DMark 11 is the very latest benchmark test from the house of Futuremark, which has given out some of the most comprehensive benchmark applications for PC enthusiasts and gamers. 3DMark 11, as the name might probably suggest, makes use of the Microsoft DirectX 11 API and puts every feature of it at its disposal to use, creating astonishingly realistic visuals. In the process, it evaluates DirectX 11-compliant GPUs and lets gamers know what to expect from upcoming games that make use of the API in terms of visual realism. The tessellation and depth-of-field tests are particularly of interest here. 3DMark 11 has no proper support for multi-monitor configurations.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...1_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif


Unigine Heaven 2.0


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ges/heaven.jpg
Unigine Heaven was one of the first demos that supported DirectX 11. Heaven is a technology demonstration for the Unigine engine which supports DirectX 9 through 11 and OpenGL. Version 2.0 adds more scenes and, optionally, more complex tessellation features. Although there is some controversy surrounding the benchmark and as to whether it is an accurate representation of what to expect from future games in regard to DirectX 11, we still decided to use this test to get an insight into the potential of future gaming.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...n_1280_800.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1680_1050.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._1920_1200.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._2560_1600.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S..._5760_1080.gif


Power Consumption



Cooling modern video cards is becoming more and more difficult, especially with users asking for quiet cooling solutions, which is why engineers are now paying much more attention to the power consumption of new video card designs. An optimized fan profile is also one of the few things that board vendors can do to impress with reference designs where they are prohibited from making changes to the thermal solution or components on the card.

For this test, we measured the power consumption of the graphics card only, via the PCI-Express power connector(s) and PCI-Express bus slot. A Keithley Integra 2700 digital multimeter with 6.5-digit resolution was used for all measurements. Again, the values here reflect only the power consumption of the card measured at DC VGA card inputs, not of the whole system.

We chose Crysis 2 as a standard test representing typical 3D gaming usage because it offers the following: very high power draw; high repeatability; is a current game that is supported on all cards because of its DirectX 9 roots; drivers are actively tested and optimized for it; supports all multi-GPU configurations; test runs in a relatively short time and renders a non-static scene with variable complexity.

Our results were based on the following tests:
  • Idle: Windows 7 Aero sitting at the desktop (1280x1024, 32-bit) with all windows closed and drivers installed. Card left to warm up in idle mode until power draw was stable.
  • Multi-monitor: Two monitors connected to the tested card, both using different display timings. Windows 7 Aero sitting at the desktop (1280x1024 32-bit) with all windows closed and drivers installed. Card left to warm up in idle mode until power draw was stable.
  • Average: Crysis 2 at 1920x1200, Extreme profile, representing a typical gaming power draw. Average of all readings (12 per second) while the benchmark was rendering (no title/loading screen).
  • Peak: Crysis 2 at 1920x1200, Extreme profile, representing a typical gaming power draw. Highest single reading during the test.
  • Maximum: Furmark Stability Test at 1280x1024, 0xAA. This results in a very high none-game power consumption that can typically be reached only with stress-testing applications. Card left running the stress test until power draw converged to a stable value. On cards with power-limiting systems, we disabled the power-limiting system or configured it to the highest available setting - if possible. We also used the highest single reading from a Furmark run that was obtained by measuring faster than the power limit could kick in.
  • Blu-ray Playback: Power DVD 9 Ultra was used at a resolution of 1920x1200 to play back the Batman: The Dark Knight disc with GPU acceleration turned on. Playback started around timecode 1:19 which has the highest data rates on the BD with up to 40 Mb/s. Playback left running until power draw converged to a stable value.

Power consumption in non-gaming states is quite high when compared to the AMD HD 7950 reference design. One explanation is that Sapphire's card goes to 0.95 V in idle, whereas AMD's original design uses 0.85 V, which helps reduce power consumption. With 80 W during media playback, the Vapor-X has the highest power consumption of our test group.

During gaming, power consumption is reasonable and where we expected it to be given the Tahiti GPU used on the card. One important difference to the HD 7970 GHz Edition is that the GHz Edition increases voltages in Boost to keep the card stable, resulting in much higher power consumption, heat, and noise. Sapphire does not use that trick, so power consumption with the boost BIOS is only slightly higher.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...power_idle.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...r_multimon.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...er_average.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...power_peak.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...er_maximum.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...wer_bluray.gif


Fan Noise


In past years, users would accept everything for a little bit more performance. Nowadays, users are more aware of the fan noise and the power consumption of their graphic cards.

In order to properly test the fan noise that a card emits, we use the Bruel & Kjaer 2236 sound level meter (~$4,000), which has the measurement range and accuracy we are looking for.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...2236_small.jpg http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...jaer_setup.jpg
The tested graphics card was installed in a system that was completely passively cooled. That is, passive PSU, passive CPU cooler, passive cooling on the motherboard, and on a solid state drive.

This setup allows us to eliminate secondary noise sources and test only the video card. To be more compliant with standards like DIN 45635 (we are not claiming to be fully DIN 45635 certified), the measurement was conducted at 100 cm of distance and at 160 cm over the floor. The ambient background noise level in the room was well below 20 dBA for all measurements. Please note that the dBA scale is not linear but logarithmic. 40 dBA is not twice as loud as 20 dBA. A 3 dBA increase results in double the sound pressure. The human hearing perception is a bit different and it is generally accepted that a 10 dBA increase doubles the perceived sound level. The 3D load noise levels were tested with a stressful game, not with Furmark.

The Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X is reasonably quiet in both idle and load, much quieter than the AMD reference design. Temperatures are very low with below 70°C under load. There is some additional potential to quiet down the fan to match those super quiet custom GTX 670s.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...noise_idle.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...noise_load.gif


Performance Summary


The graphs on this page show a combined performance summary of all tests and resolutions from previous pages. Each graph shows the tested card as 100% and all other cards' performance as relative to it. A sixth graph summarizes all tests in all resolutions to calculate the total relative performance of the review sample.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...es/perfrel.gif

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...rfrel_1280.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...rfrel_1680.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...rfrel_1920.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...rfrel_2560.gif


Performance per Watt


The following graphs show the efficiency of the cards in our test group using the relative performance scores from the previous page, and the typical gaming power consumption result.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...s/perfwatt.gif

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...fwatt_1280.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...fwatt_1680.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...fwatt_1920.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...fwatt_2560.gif


Performance per Dollar


If you are looking for the best bang for the buck, you will love this graph. We looked up the current USD price of each card on the popular online shop Newegg and used that value with all relative performance numbers to calculate the Performance per Dollar Index.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...perfdollar.gif

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ollar_1280.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ollar_1680.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ollar_1920.gif http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ollar_2560.gif


Overclocking


The overclocking results listed in this section were achieved with the default fan and voltage settings as defined in the VGA BIOS. Please note that every single sample overclocks differently, which is why our results here can only serve as a guideline for what you can expect from your card.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...es/gpuz_oc.gif

The maximum stable clocks of our card are 1135 MHz core (34% overclock) and 1635 MHz memory (31% overclock).

<table class="tputbl" width="425px">
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="3">Maximum Overclock Comparison</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tr>
<th width="210" scope="col"></th>
<th align="center" scope="col">Max. GPU Clock</th>
<th align="center" scope="col">Max. Memory Clock</th>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">1135 MHz</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1635 MHz</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Sapphire HD 7950 Flex</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">1025 MHz</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1865 MHz</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">MSI HD 7950 TF III</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">1020 MHz</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1650 MHz</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">PowerColor HD 7950 PCS+</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">1075 MHz</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1775 MHz</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">AMD HD 7950</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">1085 MHz</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1785 MHz</td>
</tr>
</table>
Important: Each GPU (including each GPU of the same make and model)
will overclock slightly differently based on random production variances.
This table just serves to provide a list of typical overclocks for similar cards,
determined during TPU review.


Overclocked Performance


Using these clock frequencies, we ran a quick test of Battlefield 3 to evaluate the gains from overclocking.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...es/perf_oc.gif
Actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 31.5% (vs. stock) and 25.7% (vs. Boost BIOS).


Temperatures


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...mages/temp.gif

Good temperatures, even with Boost mode enabled.

<table class="tputbl" width="404px">
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="3">GPU Temperature Comparison</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tr>
<th width="210" scope="col"></th>
<th align="center" scope="col">Idle</th>
<th align="center" scope="col">Load</th>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">45°C</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">67°C</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Sapphire HD 7950 Flex</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">38°C</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">67°C</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">MSI HD 7950 TF III</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">32°C</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">59°C</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">PowerColor HD 7950 PCS+</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">37°C</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">70°C</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">AMD HD 7950</th>
<td valign="top" align="center">43°C</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">75°C</td>
</tr>
</table>
Important: GPU temperature will vary depending on clock speed, voltage settings,
cooler design, and production variances. This table just serves to provide
a list of typical temperatures for similar cards, determined during TPU review.


Clock Profiles


Modern graphics cards have several clock profiles that are selected to balance power draw and performance requirements.

The following table lists the clock settings for important performance scenarios, and the GPU voltage that we measured. We performed the measurement on the pins of a coil or a capacitor near the GPU voltage regulator.

Normal BIOS:
<table class="tputbl">
<tr>
<th scope="col"></th>
<th align="center" scope="col">Core <br />
Clock</th>
<th align="center" scope="col">Memory <br />
Clock</th>
<th align="center" scope="col">GPU Voltage <br />
(measured)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Desktop</th>
<td align="right">300 MHz</td>
<td align="right">150 MHz</td>
<td align="right">0.95 V</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Multi-Monitor</th>
<td align="right">500 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1250 MHz</td>
<td align="right">0.95 V</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Blu-ray Playback</th>
<td align="right">501 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1250 MHz</td>
<td align="right">0.96 V</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">3D Load</th>
<td align="right">850 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1250 MHz</td>
<td align="right">0.98 V</td>
</tr>
</table>

Boost BIOS:
<table class="tputbl">
<tr>
<th scope="col"></th>
<th align="center" scope="col">Core <br />
Clock</th>
<th align="center" scope="col">Memory <br />
Clock</th>
<th align="center" scope="col">GPU Voltage <br />
(measured)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Desktop</th>
<td align="right">300 MHz</td>
<td align="right">150 MHz</td>
<td align="right">0.96 V</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">Multi-Monitor</th>
<td align="right">500 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1250 MHz</td>
<td align="right">0.96 V</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Blu-ray Playback</th>
<td align="right">501 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1250 MHz</td>
<td align="right">0.95 V</td>
</tr>
<tr class="alt">
<th scope="row">3D Load</th>
<td align="right">950 MHz</td>
<td align="right">1250 MHz</td>
<td align="right">0.97 V</td>
</tr>
</table>

<table class="tputbl">
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="2">CCC Overdrive Limits</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Core</th>
<td align="right">1200 MHz</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">Memory</th>
<td align="right">1575 MHz</td>
</tr>
</table>


Value and Conclusion


<table width="100%" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" id="result">
<tr><th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/dollar.gif</th>
<td>
  • The Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X is available online for $330.
</td></tr><tr>
<th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/thumbup.gif</th>
<td>
  • Overclocked out of the box
  • Fantastic overclocking potential
  • Dual BIOS feature adds "Lethal Boost" for higher performance
  • Native full-size HDMI & DisplayPort output
  • Good bundle
  • Low temperatures
  • Support for PCI-Express 3.0 and DirectX 11.1
  • AMD ZeroCore power
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/thumbdown.gif</th>
<td>
  • High non-gaming power consumption
  • Memory not overclocked
  • CCC Overdrive limits too low
</td></tr>
<tr><th>9.1</th>
<td>Sapphire's HD 7950 Vapor-X is a well-rounded custom design HD 7950. It comes with an overclock out of the box that gives it a 4% performance lead over the reference design HD 7950. Sapphire used AMD's dual BIOS feature to put a second BIOS on the card that runs the card at even higher clocks of 950 MHz, resulting in another 3% improvement. What makes this mode much more appealing is the fact that Sapphire did not increase the GPU voltage to achieve stability. As a result, power, noise, and heat are not significantly higher than in normal mode, which is why I recommend all users activate Boost mode as default. This leaves normal mode without a real benefit. It would have been nice if Sapphire had optimized the normal BIOS for super-low noise-levels, easy given the low temperatures. I also miss an overclock on the memory.<br />
The card's Vapor-Chamber cooler does a great job keeping the card cool and improves noise levels greatly compared to the AMD reference design. I still see some headroom for improvement, which would come in handy against competing low-noise GTX 670 / 660 Ti cards like the ASUS DC II, one of the best choices for low-noise high-end gaming on the market.<br />
Overclocking on our sample worked amazingly well, reaching over a 30% real-life performance improvement. In our testing at maximum clocks, the card ended up faster than GTX 680 or HD 7970 GHz Edition - at a fraction of the price. Of course overclocking varies from sample to sample, so your mileage may vary.<br />
In terms of pricing, Sapphire is asking a not unreasonable $330, which is $30 higher than the currently cheapest HD 7950 card available; the GTX 660 Ti does offer a better price/performance ratio though. Overall, you should definitely consider the Sapphire HD 7950 Vapor-X if you are in the market for a HD 7950.<tr><th></th><td>http://www.techpowerup.com/images/recommended.gif</td></tr>
</table>

Dj-ElectriC Sep 6, 2012 08:56 PM

An HD7950 that goes 1135Mhz core (41% over stock 7950 clock) at stock voltage.
People should freaking riot in the streets. As much as this is amazing, i am not surprised, Sapphire after all.

Please w1zzard, share some over-voltage OC results.

cadaveca Sep 6, 2012 09:27 PM

This card is basically using refinded 7970 PCB, including 8-pin + 6-pin, so OC is not surprising, to me.

Which sucks, I'd like ot try a 950 MHz boost BIOS, but VRM section is different than my 7950s!

Casecutter Sep 6, 2012 10:03 PM

With a great construction and components it makes it an undeniable value at that MSRP. Though consider Sapphire has been aggressive right out of the gate on some of these Vapor-X with rebates. Definitely a top-shelf consideration that’s easy-going on the wallet.

happita Sep 6, 2012 10:13 PM

Still slower and draws more power than a 670 at stock :( The only good you get out of these specialized cards is the OC potential which then exceeds MOST of the other cards in performance. And the cooling solution is GREAT for low noise environments. Now this should have been the kind of performance we should have gotten when the 7950 cards were first released.
But then, what would manufacturer's do to milk the series for all its worth? Oh, that's right, initially release cards at a subprime clock speed then re-release the cards at higher frequencies and charge another premium over reference. I hate that ideology, but I guess thats business :shadedshu
Anyway, nice review W1z, always a pleasure looking at the numbers you come up with :D

eidairaman1 Sep 6, 2012 10:22 PM

This would be the card I would get Honestly less if MSI had a Hawk/Lightening Edition

HumanSmoke Sep 7, 2012 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casecutter (Post 2715555)
Definitely a top-shelf consideration that’s easy-going on the wallet.

Nice to see some people getting the benefit of overlapping AIB distribution. Around here, the HD 7950 ( non-boost version) retails about 20% higher than a GTX 660 Ti, and around the same price as the GTX 670. If you're willing to drop to a reference 670, you can pick up a Palit/Galaxy/Leadtek for around 10% less than a reduced-BoM Sapphire 7950 Flex :ohwell:

Casecutter Sep 7, 2012 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HumanSmoke (Post 2715737)
HD 7950 (non-boost version) retails about 20% higher than a GTX 660 Ti,

Wow, that stinks... here state side a Sapphire 100352OCSR is 15% less than the cheapest 670 on a smurf board. While an XFX Double D FX-795A-TDJC is $290 -AR$30. The lowest GTX670 I've seem is for an EVGA 02G-P4-2670-KR $375 -$20 off coupon (click "Clip this coupon")= $355 with free shipping at Amazon.

Heck this Sapphire Vapor-X 100352VXSR (950MHz Boost State) is now $330 8.50 to ship.

Jacob XP Sep 7, 2012 08:37 AM

Great review thanks.

Power consumption in idle is EXTREMELY high. It's a little over 30 watt... A reference 7950 is 11 watt.

Even in Northern Europe where electricity prices due to taxes is very high it's not really that expensive to power the 7950. I can easily afford the few $ extra that it costs

But what where they thinking when they designed the card. Some engineers have to hide in shame if you ask me.

Would it be possible to use some tricks to lower the consumption a bit. Could you lower the voltage and still get a stable card?

tt_martin Sep 7, 2012 08:59 AM

So, I've checked performance of GTX660ti on the launch review and this - it's the same. @W1zz why is that 660ti in overall performance is slower (by 1%) than 7950 then and now it's 1% faster (1920x1200p res)?

DarkOCean Sep 7, 2012 09:14 AM

the oc gain its just amazing as the graphics card and the review :toast:.

Mathragh Sep 7, 2012 09:17 AM

Whoah! Those clocks are insane for that voltage! My reference 7950 doesnt even come close to those clocks at the stock(1.07) voltage.

If only the power consumption was lower to the same degree.

tt_martin Sep 7, 2012 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkOCean (Post 2715880)
the oc gain its just amazing as the graphics card and the review :toast:.

Yep and people still prefer GTX 660Ti over HD 7950 :banghead:

DrunkenMafia Sep 7, 2012 09:23 AM

I just bought a powercolor 7950 and so far it runs fine @ 1020mhz with no voltage increase, just played some bf3 with no hassle and temps never above 60c with stock cooling.. waiting for a block for the card so I can up the voltage a little.

Awesome card though, kicks crap out of my 5870 crossfire setup :) and cost the same as selling my 5870's on ebay. :)

W1zzard Sep 7, 2012 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tt_martin (Post 2715876)
So, I've checked performance of GTX660ti on the launch review and this - it's the same. @W1zz why is that 660ti in overall performance is slower (by 1%) than 7950 then and now it's 1% faster (1920x1200p res)?

could be because wow was dropped from our benches. they released a new patch which invalidates all previous results

tt_martin Sep 7, 2012 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W1zzard (Post 2715892)
could be because wow was dropped from our benches. they released a new patch which invalidates all previous results

Still, 660ti was faster in wow than 7950 and overall it's result should be worse, not better.

DarkOCean Sep 7, 2012 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tt_martin (Post 2715886)
Yep and people still prefer GTX 660Ti over HD 7950 :banghead:

That's an example of good marketing from nvidia and to make things worse just look at the metro 2033 results.

tt_martin Sep 7, 2012 10:09 AM

One thing, this 7950 VaporX Boost BIOS works really bad.
7950@850Mhz is 4% faster than stock 7950, diff in clocks - 6.25%
but with Boost we gain only 3% over 850Mhz, diff in clocks - 11.76%

We should get better results with manual overclocking :)

Mathragh Sep 7, 2012 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tt_martin (Post 2715901)
One thing, this 7950 VaporX Boost BIOS works really bad.
7950@850Mhz is 4% faster than stock 7950, diff in clocks - 6.25%
but with Boost we gain only 3% over 850Mhz, diff in clocks - 11.76%

We should get better results with manual overclocking :)

The lack of a memory overclock in the boost bios could probably explain that:)

INSTG8R Sep 7, 2012 12:25 PM

OH how I wished I waited just a LITTLE longer for the Vapor-X :banghead:

Loved my 4870 and 5870 Vapor-X's These ones are looking just as good(As I would expect) I mean I waited until June to finally bite the bullet. 6 months, I figured they weren't coming and were just going with the "Dual X" coolers this round. Ah well lesson learned. I get 1100/1500 just using Overdrive so I shouldn't complain.

billcat479 Sep 7, 2012 11:20 PM

I hate that ideology, but I guess that's business :shadedshu
Anyway, nice review W1z, always a pleasure looking at the numbers you come up with :D[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry because I don't like flame but here it is for what it's worth. And I really am sorry to type this crap.
The clocks that certain cards come with (so I read and so I hope) are special tested GPU's that can run with stability at higher clock ratings and so they go into the special package lineup for each company that does it.
If they did it hit and miss or every chip could do it then they would all have higher clock settings starting with the reference cards because they know they can do it without a load of failed cards.
As the people or companies that buy the GPU's in large numbers they run their own tests to find GPU's that they feel can run at higher clocks with no errors or failures. They also try to make them last even longer by putting a better heatsink/fan so the card will work for at least 2 years or so.
But they would not use untested GPUs for a lot of obvious reason and these reasons end up costing them and us more for these types of cards because it makes the end user very mad at any company that sells a card that has a high failure rate, they want their customers to be happy with their products and in this segment of the industry it is really important to have a trusted name.
No company in their right mind would do this for a lot of reasons, mostly credibility because without that they don't sell products.
To search though a batch of GPU's that they buy takes time which is money so when they do put out the higher clocked ones it's reasonable to charge higher prices for their effort in finding GPU's that will be stable 100% of the time versus random ones that everyone gets and might get away with overclocking as high but have to either raise the voltage and put better cooling on or run the existing setup fan speeds at a high level with corresponding noise that no one likes and still they may see artifacts or glitches and shorten the life of their cards in the process.
And please, don't come in being a Nvidia ass kisser ok? The people that read this are smart enough to make up their own minds about which brand they want to run.
And the Nvidia cards are really not much if any faster across the line because with the new driver software the 7900 series beats it in a few game and losses in others and they are both pretty damm close to each other performance wise. They are both good cards and no one would be put out buying either one so do more reading yourself before putting you keyboard like foot in your mouth and don't come off sounding like (ugh, this I hate) a Nvidia fan only even if the facts don't bear it out.
It's cool to prefer brands and support the company so it stays in business but that should always be left at home and not thrown all over the web. If you actually think one is better then give links and proof to back it up. I've read enough to know they are pretty toe to toe performance wise and cost is really the factor in buying one over the other.
Again, very sorry to sound cruel, I don't like doing this but I really hate fan posts because it just puts mud up there to confuse people that are after credible information on what to buy.
And the second problem is using a test rig that is not what people use so the data given doesn't help anyone one bit.
If someone has a cpu clocked at 3.2GHZ and thinks they will get the same performance and goes out and buys it only to find they should have gotten a better card because they see the numbers and think they can come close or see lag spikes instead then they just learned they can't trust web site benchmarks because they really are useless. I've only seen one site that did a real comp. test of cpu/gpu performance and the results were quite a eye opener. You may get the FPS that is shown on tests like this one but it's a very very fluctuating graph {not shown here }and gives no data on actual playability.
I've seen it enough to know this is a very important area that no one (except this site called the Tech Report, yeah the name is close to this site but they are different sites) really gave a huge going over with different cpu's at different speeds with various popular video cards and the data given showed that the basic FPS on most reviews is absolutely useless because they never STAY at that speed and most have mill-second spikes that you notice at times like the game gets a little jerky even though you can test it and get 80FPS but it's still a jerky game in areas that the tested data says it will not slip down below 20FPS on a regular basis but with some computers this happens quite a bit more than is comfortable to see.

For the most part a lot of the tests are just hit enticement for the websites income and they spend as little time as they can on these tests to bring in people to get the hit count up and that is the sad reality of the information super highway we call the web or internet where 1% is intelligent and .05% is useful while the rest is filler and disinformation with money being the driving factor in the end and that is down right sad. You really do have to be smart in the first place to be able to filter the useless from the useful.
For what it's worth to this site, it IS a good site and it may not have the time to do a good enough review and just give the basics but everyone is doing this and the readers really are not getting useful information to take to the store and pick out the right video card and this really makes me mad because video cards are not cheap and when people may have to save up money to buy one and then finds out it's not what they needed and end up blowing a lot of money.
I got zapped this way and ended up going crossfire because I didn't want to go buy the next faster card and waste the one I did buy so I got another one and ran it that way for a while and I hate going the SLI-Crossfire route because there always seems to be issues with some software that they don't work all that well and I like to keep things simple. I was mad which is why I added my dislike of the benchmark testing done here and just about everywhere else. And I'm not the only one that I know that has fallen into this trap either and I don't know that many people, that in it's self means a lot.

eidairaman1 Sep 7, 2012 11:35 PM

Billcat- that was too long of a post to read:wtf:, but on a point- performance numbers will always have variables whether they are .0001% or higher. What is posted is the average a user would get from such a system. I understand most don't read the entire review but it would be recommended to because system spec details, that is where the variables come in I recall the test bed was a core i7 920 but it switched to a core i7 2600 several months back.

billcat479 Sep 7, 2012 11:38 PM

MSI's 7950
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by eidairaman1 (Post 2715564)
This would be the card I would get Honestly less if MSI had a Hawk/Lightening Edition

Hi, I got MSI 7950 TwinFrozr card and I'm very happy with it. It comes with a 880ghz GPU and right now I have it set at 950ghz with no voltage raise but I did play with the fan setting graph so it cools when it needs it (love their overclocking software, that fan custom adjusting setup is great).
But I would recommend this MSI video card to anyone looking for one that is priced ok compared to the 7970 and it can be overclocked to out perform the stock 7970 model which to me means a lot. I have taken it up to 1,000ghz and it worked fine but I don't like pressing my luck or blowing out a new card and as of yet I haven't needed it to be any faster with all the games I have.
But It's nice to know there is more room if I need it in the future.

MSI put a real good cooling package on it, it sticks around 50-55c playing Skyrim and Battlefield3 I think and Crysis's games so it can handle the best games with high graphic's settings. If you can't afford or don't have a lot of spare money it's a very good video card and you could get a few years use out of it and if worse comes to worse there is still crossfire. Me I hate messing with that setup but to each their own ect..ect... Good luck, hope you find what your looking for and it serves you well.
P.S. This MSI also came with free games though I still haven't tried to get them but I should get around to it one of these days...

Jacob XP Sep 9, 2012 08:57 AM

I have read some other reviews about the power consumption in idle. It doesn't look that bad

Kitguru have only tested the card in boost state and they report a graphics card ( not the whole system ) consumption of 199 watt in gaming. The reference AMD7950 is measured at 187 watt. In zero core state they both consume 4 watt. Sadly no idle reporting

Hexus has also only tested in boost state and they report a system power consumption in idle of 59 watt vs 58 watt of the reference 7950

Tweaktown is reporting a system consumption in idle at 196 Watt. It's in the same range of other cards including a Geforce 660 which I thought would have a easy win in this discipline.

I'm not saying that TechPowerUp has anything wrong while testing the power consumption card in idle. You have your test setup and other sites have a different setup. And what exactly is idle when they test the card ? I took a chance a bought the card actually. I found a big company in Denmark that wanted to sell it a a very good price when the get their first shipment. I should have the card by Friday / Saturday. I might even do my own little power test if anybody is interested. I only have some cheap power consumption tester though.

W1zzard Sep 9, 2012 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacob XP (Post 2717292)
I have read some other reviews about the power consumption in idle. It doesn't look that bad

Kitguru have only tested the card in boost state and they report a graphics card ( not the whole system ) consumption of 199 watt in gaming. The reference AMD7950 is measured at 187 watt. In zero core state they both consume 4 watt. Sadly no idle reporting

Hexus has also only tested in boost state and they report a system power consumption in idle of 59 watt vs 58 watt of the reference 7950

Tweaktown is reporting a system consumption in idle at 196 Watt. It's in the same range of other cards including a Geforce 660 which I thought would have a easy win in this discipline.

I'm not saying that TechPowerUp has anything wrong while testing the power consumption card in idle. You have your test setup and other sites have a different setup. And what exactly is idle when they test the card ? I took a chance a bought the card actually. I found a big company in Denmark that wanted to sell it a a very good price when the get their first shipment. I should have the card by Friday / Saturday. I might even do my own little power test if anybody is interested. I only have some cheap power consumption tester though.

So you are saying, we are the only ones who tested it, and you like the results of people better who use invalid test methods. testing whole system's power consumption with a $10 power meter is not really reliable

edit: i'm crawling out of bed to restest idle just for you

edit2: the higher idle power consumption is because the card runs 0.945 V idle instead of 0.85 V like other HD 7950 cards, as mentioned in the power consumption page. just verified the voltage again using gpuz and multimeter measurement

edit3: retesting done

http://img.techpowerup.org/120909/Capture112.jpg

please note how the idle power consumption drifts up slightly after power up while the card reaches temperature equilibrium. the higher levels near the end are when i connected a second monitor for multi-monitor power consumption. it drifts up here, too because higher power = more heat = warmer card over time = higher power consumption

nevertheless, i think you'll be very happy with the card. it's a good product


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:20 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.