1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Why aren't people upset about the HD 7970?

Discussion in 'AMD / ATI' started by Trackr, Dec 22, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Trackr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    265 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    15
    This is the first time in history where a new generation (not a refresh), based on a lower process doesn't even manage 50% performance boost, let alone 100%.. heck, it's barely 25%!

    HD 4870 was more than twice as powerful than HD 3870.
    HD 5870 was exactly twice as powerful as HD4870.
    HD 6970 was a refresh, on the same process, and thus was only 25% better.

    Now, HD 7970, on the 28nm process(!) manages what, 10-25%?!

    And everyone is acting like this is fine...

    What gives, people?! :banghead:
     
    qubit says thanks.
  2. acerace

    acerace

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    252 (0.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Location:
    Malaysia
    Don't just look at the FPS performance. Look also the power consumption. ~15W at idle, that's great!
     
  3. DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,553 (2.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,383
    Antidepressants.

    A 4870 is still sufficient in most games anyway. Upgrading every generation really isn't worth the money these days.
     
    snuif09 and AlienIsGOD say thanks.
  4. DannibusX

    DannibusX

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    2,528 (1.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    979
    Location:
    United States
    My, what a nice GTX590 you have.
     
  5. uuuaaaaaa

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    181 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    beta drivers. and this card is more than 15% faster than the 6970...
     
  6. Trackr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    265 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    15
    You mean 15w LESS at idle, not 15w.

    Personally, I want more performance, not lower power consumption.

    If I wanted lower power consumption, I'd get a mid-range card.

    It's not about that. It's about every generation being 50-100% faster.

    If that is broken, what is to stop AMD/nVidia from selling us a card that is 10% faster for twice the price?

    I sold the GTX 590 in anticipation of HD 7970/Kepler.

    I'm now running a GTX 480, pretty disappointed with what I'm seeing as my upgrade path..
     
  7. Bo$$

    Bo$$ Lab Extraordinaire

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    5,314 (2.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    867
    Location:
    London, UK
    show me.
     
  8. DannibusX

    DannibusX

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    2,528 (1.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    979
    Location:
    United States
    Don't get all upset over it man. Sucks you sold your beastly card in anticipation of the next gen of cards, but next time you should wait for performance reviews before overcommiting to new hardware.

    I'm going to hold out for some driver refreshes and see if performance creeps up at all.
     
  9. Trackr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    265 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Look at the HD 5870:

    It was 100% faster than the HD 4870 and 50% faster than the GTX 280.

    Now, look at the HD 7970:

    It is <50% faster than the HD 6970 and ~20% faster than the GTX 580.

    And I just don't understand it..

    1536 @ 40nm =/= 2048 @ 28nm.
     
  10. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,158 (1.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    915
    We are reaching a point where performance will stagnate. This is normal, it's a scientific fact that GPUs and CPUs performance will not increase as fast as it once did. Hence the push for multi-GPU PCBs and multi-core processors.
     
  11. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    18,677 (9.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,153
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    Why would you think the 7970 would be an upgrade to a GTX 590? If you have followed ATI/AMD's naming scheme then you would realize that xx70 is mid-high scale. Wait for the 7990 before you decide to upgrade if the 7970 does not do you justice.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  12. Trackr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    265 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Why should I when you can just Goog.. oh, whatever.

    [​IMG]

    I'm fine with my mistake.

    What I am not fine with is everyone talking about how awesome the HD 7970 is..
     
  13. Trackr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    265 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    15
    I'm not stupid.

    I was going to either get HD 7970 Triple-Crossfire, or whatever comes out of Kepler.
     
  14. Trackr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    265 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Why is it normal?

    28nm means that you can fit 3000 ALUs in one GPU.
     
  15. Maban

    Maban

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,428 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,035
    Location:
    Minnesota/Norway
    Apparently double means 56% these days. Nice triple post there BTW.
     
    DannibusX says thanks.
  16. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    18,677 (9.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,153
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    I thought based on your OP that you expected one card to be close to GTX 590. This card in the beginning was suppose to swap blows with the GTX 580.

    Wiz will probably do a review of them in crossfire soon I would assume.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  17. DannibusX

    DannibusX

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    2,528 (1.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    979
    Location:
    United States
    I'm still rockin' 5000 series cards which the 7970 shows a nice performance increase over what I have, so it's awesome to me. Hell, I may just skip this generation too and see what the future holds.
     
  18. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,683 (6.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    Other than your math fucking sucking nothing

     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2011
    JrRacinFan and the54thvoid say thanks.
  19. Celeras New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Registering solely to point out your stupidity. The 3870 is 56% when the base(100%) is the 4870. If the 3870 was the base, the 4870 would be nearly twice as fast. Guy above me made the same mistake.

    Apparently posting on a tech site doesn't require that you pass third grade math.
     
  20. the54thvoid

    the54thvoid

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,364 (1.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,593
    Location:
    Glasgow - home of formal profanity
    I lolled.

    How so.

    By your own comment, 3870 is 56% the power of a 4870. Which makes the 4870 short of being twice as fast (would require 3870 @ 50%).

    The OP states the 4870 was more than twice as fast as the 3870.

    So wrong there. Dont bring significant statistical innaccuracies to a tech forum. If you're going to start quoting numbers, make damn sure you're 100% correct.
     
  21. Maban

    Maban

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,428 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,035
    Location:
    Minnesota/Norway
    Apparently it doesn't. 36 / 64 = 56.25. You cannot simply count the difference in percentages in the graph. The 3870 is 64% AS FAST as the 4870. The 4870 is 56% FASTER THAN the 3870.
     
  22. Celeras New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    I'm sorry, was my original explanation not clear enough? I'll break it down for you.

    Card A averages 100FPS
    Card B averages 50 FPS

    From the perspective of Card A, Card B is half (50%) as fast. From the perspective of Card B, Card A is twice (200%) as fast. It's always relative to the starting point, which in the case of the above example, is the 4870.

    Again, third grade. And if you're really going to nitpick about the 12% in the guys OP, which would equate to probably less than 1-2 FPS, you deserve where this conversation is going.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2011
  23. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,730 (5.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,535
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    Since one or two are talking about education......

    1. Trackr - Please learn to use the "Multiquote" button, that certainly does not require genius........ triple posting is somewhat tiresome.

    2. Please keep things civil!
     
    Damn_Smooth and Maban say thanks.
  24. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,158 (1.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Moore's Law, 101

    To summerise, computers are not becoming faster, as time goes on transister count will do less to improve performance, hence the push for multi CPU or GPU and multithreaded application. AMD Bulldozer is proof of Moores Law!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law
     
    berwick53 says thanks.
  25. Maban

    Maban

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,428 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,035
    Location:
    Minnesota/Norway
    I basically just said that in my post. 4870 is 156% as fast as the 3870. Are you going by the 3850 which was 56% as fast as the 4870?
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page