First 7970 review

[EastCoasthandle]

Bad deal for the price at $549. I find it funny how people moan and cry over Nvidia on every front and AMD rewards them with $549 MSRP for a single GPU. Where is your knight in shining armor now? Financing its failed processor segment I am assuming. I should know, I have a few machines with AMD processors.

Now if they are more reasonable on the midrange they will still do fine but $549 prices them out of the reasonable category considering its probably $50 to make the card.

If it's about 20% faster then a 580 be it overclocked or stock then what should the price be for the fastest single card offering a few other features? Well, for the next 6 or so months... Then we will see what the competition does.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

If it's about 20% faster then a 580 be it overclocked or stock then what should the price be for the fastest single card offering a few other features? Well, for the next 6 or so months... Then we will see what the competition does.

Except it's 12% faster at 1200p according to tpu. Which interestingly is roughly the gain you'd get taking a 580 to the same core speed, 925, which gives us the most direct shader count to performance comparison between nvidia and amd yet. 2048=512. That's ignoring the whole double shader speed thing on the 580 of course.

 

[pantherx12]

Except it's 12% faster at 1200p according to tpu. Which interestingly is roughly the gain you'd get taking a 580 to the same core speed, 925, which gives us the most direct shader count to performance comparison between nvidia and amd yet. 2048=512. That's ignoring the whole double shader speed thing on the 580 of course.

Disregard the performance summary section and look at individual benchmark scores.


The way Wiz averages stuff it means a low score can completely shit up the results.
( including nvidia cards)

Posted this in the main review thead.


7970vs 6970
1920x1080
AVP : +26.26
Batman AA :+ 62.55
BFBC3: +51.57
Battleforge:+ 32.57
COD4:+11.81
CIV5:+43.73
Crysis:+33.51
Crysis2:+56.26
Dirt3:+15.64
Dragonage2:+19.14
Hard reset :+34.14
Metro:+27.23
Stalker cop:+40.07
Starcraft 2 :0.93
Shogun 2 :+39.51
Skyrim:+5.95
Wow: - 6.5 that's minus 6.5 so to be absolutely clear
3dmark 11:+47.43
Heaven:+97.81 (wooo improved tessellation)


I really think that Wizz should disregard the performance summary graph and just do a write up instead.

So many people seem to not read the review in it's entirety so get the wrong impression.

It's wow skyrim and bringing down the performance summary score.
, skyrim and wow are CPU limited anyway.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Disregard the performance summary section and look at individual benchmark scores.


The way Wiz averages stuff it means a low score can completely shit up the results.
( including nvidia cards)

Posted this in the main review thead.


7970vs 6970
1920x1080
AVP : +26.26
Batman AA :+ 62.55
BFBC3: +51.57
Battleforge:+ 32.57
COD4:+11.81
CIV5:+43.73
Crysis:+33.51
Crysis2:+56.26
Dirt3:+15.64
Dragonage2:+19.14
Hard reset :+34.14
Metro:+27.23
Stalker cop:+40.07
Starcraft 2 :0.93
Shogun 2 :+39.51
Skyrim:+5.95
Wow: - 6.5 that's minus 6.5 so to be absolutely clear
3dmark 11:+47.43
Heaven:+97.81 (wooo improved tessellation)


I really think that Wizz should disregard the performance summary graph and just do a write up instead.

So many people seem to not read the review in it's entirety so get the wrong impression.

It's wow skyrim and bringing down the performance summary score.
, skyrim and wow are CPU limited anyway.

....why are we talking about the 6970 now? and that heaven score, which is totally irrelevant to actual game performance, makes up for wow and skyrim. The performance summary page is pretty accurate.

 

[pantherx12]

....why are we talking about the 6970 now? and that heaven score, which is totally irrelevant to actual game performance, makes up for wow and skyrim. The performance summary page is pretty accurate.

Way to be an ass


You'll have to excuse my post being out of context I didn't read every page I'm doing vs the 580 now.


And the performance summary page has never been accurate IMO, scores should never be averaged out.

Users should look at individual benchmark because then they can see if will effect what games THEY use or plan to use. again IMO.

 

[nt300]

....why are we talking about the 6970 now? and that heaven score, which is totally irrelevant to actual game performance, makes up for wow and skyrim. The performance summary page is pretty accurate.

I agree with pantherx12, we should compare both HD 7970 an HD 6970. He states a great point with the gaming performance. The 580 is also a beast of a card no question asked but the 7970 is taking over from the 6970.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Users should look at individual benchmark because then they can see if will effect what games THEY use or plan to use. again IMO.

Well the funny thing about that is you're going to get over 60 fps with just about any reasonably top card. The only games that aren't running at 60+ are games people just use for stress testing... in that regard this is all pretty pointless.

I agree with pantherx12, we should compare both HD 7970 an HD 6970. He states a great point with the gaming performance. The 580 is also a beast of a card no question asked but the 7970 is taking over from the 6970.

That would make a lot more sense if they were in the same price bracket. They're no where close. Comparing the 7870 and 6970 will make sense, when possible.

 

[phanbuey]

Imo there are two issues w/this card:

1. All games are console ports upscaled to PC. The price point is ridiculous.

2. It is price/performance matched to the 580/other cards. Which is pointless, since it doesn't replace the 580, in fact it makes it relevant. You want more than the 570/6970? but dont want to blow $550? buy a 580 and OC!

Compared to last gen it is a success. Compared to the market it is a disappointment... No 7970 for me until it drops at least $100, and where is the 7950?

 

[pantherx12]

For a fair comparison
1920x1080
7970 vs 580

Percentage increase or decrease.
AVP : +25.40
Batman AA :+8.71
BFBC3: +19.69
Battleforge:+4.61
COD4:+3.46
CIV5:-7.3
Crysis:+23.64
Crysis2:+20.57
Dirt3:-7.53
Dragonage2:+12.44
Hard reset :+3.06
Metro:+10.03
Stalker cop:+17.82
Starcraft 2 :+2.84
Shogun 2 :+47.36
Skyrim:-1.4
Wow:+2.5
3dmark 11:+32.18
Heaven:+27.76

I feel this is the best way to look at the data because it shows you precisely where the architecture/design falls short.

It also shows where the card shines.

Which is compute ( both from design and from looking at the results)

The shogun 2 score really shows that is a card with compute in mind.

( All the AI is run on the gpu I believe)

 

[Horrux]

Imo there are two issues w/this card:

1. All games are console ports upscaled to PC. The price point is ridiculous.

2. It is price/performance matched to the 580/other cards. Which is pointless, since it doesn't replace the 580, in fact it makes it relevant. You want more than the 570/6970? but dont want to blow $550? buy a 580 and OC!

Compared to last gen it is a success. Compared to the market it is a disappointment... No 7970 for me until it drops at least $100, and where is the 7950?

I find it interesting how many times the 7970 is being said to be comparable price/performance wise to the 580... WHICH 580? AFAIK there are 2 of them, and one of those costs a lot more because it has... 3Gb VRAM. Wait, what? Yes, yes. The 7970 is a 3Gb Vram card.

So, huh, why aren't we comparing the price/performance of the 3Gb HD 7970 to that of the 3Gb GTX 580?

That's the real comparison. I'm sure eventually some budget brands might bring out a 1.5Gb VRAM HD 7970 if they feel like it. It will probably be a few bucks less than the 1.5Gb GTX 580 is at the moment...

 

[Frizz]

AMD here at least from what I've seen in Aus always turns out to be cheaper. The GTX580 still sells for over $500 here for the 1.5gb version and for the 3GB around 565 AUD and up to 615 AUD for the high end models. Hence why I tend to buy crossfire setups eg. my 6950's since they work out to almost the same price or cheaper even.

I am predicting the 7970 to cost around the same or a little less than the GTX580 3GB, if so then at least in australia amd is WINNING.

 

[phanbuey]

I appreciate these benches.

I find it interesting how many times the 7970 is being said to be comparable price/performance wise to the 580... WHICH 580? AFAIK there are 2 of them, and one of those costs a lot more because it has... 3Gb VRAM. Wait, what? Yes, yes. The 7970 is a 3Gb Vram card.

So, huh, why aren't we comparing the price/performance of the 3Gb HD 7970 to that of the 3Gb GTX 580?

That's the real comparison. I'm sure eventually some budget brands might bring out a 1.5Gb VRAM HD 7970 if they feel like it. It will probably be a few bucks less than the 1.5Gb GTX 580 is at the moment...

The 3GB of ram is OC... the actual 3GB of ram does very little vs the 1.5, its the core speed that makes the most difference. Plus they don't have a 1.5gbvram 7970... if they did I would be more than happy to get it since 1080P is not going away any time soon and almost all games are ports anyways...

 

[pantherx12]

I appreciate these benches but this should be a % since +25 might be 5-10% better only.

It is percentages, I edited my post to make that clear now.

 

[EastCoasthandle]

The performance of the 7970 is more then expected IMO. It has a huge OC/performance potential with stock cooling, improved AF and other features. I wonder if winrar will be able to take advantage of GNC?

And as we all know drivers will eventually further improve performance.

 

[radrok]

Tahiti chip will surely be a WIN under water, will probably reach awesome clocks and run coooooooool

 

[Horrux]

The 3GB of ram is OC... the actual 3GB of ram does very little vs the 1.5, its the core speed that makes the most difference. Plus they don't have a 1.5gbvram 7970... if they did I would be more than happy to get it since 1080P is not going away any time soon and almost all games are ports anyways...

I understand what you are saying. But the card DOES have 3Gb VRAM. You just can't go and discount that under a clause of "well, I firmly believe that's not useful to me, so I'll compare it with a card that has less VRAM". That's like you saying, "well, in my fave game, the GTX 580 has 22% more FPS than the Radeon 6950, but the minimum framerate of the Radeon 6950 is 60fps, and given that my monitor is 60hz, thus all performance above 60fps can be discounted, and this makes the 6950 275% more effective in terms of price/performance than the GTX 580".

I run SLI GTX 570s and I run into my 1280mb VRAM limit ALL THE TIME. OK, 1536 is larger than 1280, but my display is a paltry 1680x1050. Either way, games are getting larger, not smaller. AND if you are a PC gamer, you probably lament that games are ports. So when the next big beautiful PC exclusive comes out... You'll be equipped to run it at console settings? No need for better, right?

AND let's face it... The card costs $550. 24" 1080p monitors cost around $200. So... You would be able to pay $550 for your video card, but not $600 for a tri-monitor setup? Get me the logic of that, coz I don't get it. Wait... Running diagnostics on my neurons... Nope, I still don't get it. This is exactly the kind of card that justifies Eyefinity in spades. So while YOU might think 3Gb is useless, there is a lot to be said for it, given that the card makes eyefinity a no-brainer. And THAT is where 3gb VRAM is more than useful. It's GREATNESS.

 

[radrok]

To confirm Horrux version I am hitting almost 2GB of VRAM on latest titles @ 1600p, so yes 3GB VRAM buffer is very well welcomed, if not necessary for newer titles

 

[The_Ish]

I get the feeling the GPU companies only improve their hardware/software enough to make sales. Like they're not even trying. I refuse to believe this is their best effort. People was sent to the moon over 40 years ago just to prove it was possible. We haven't been back since 1972 (manned). That's sort of how this is.

 

[pantherx12]

I get the feeling the GPU companies only improve their hardware/software enough to make sales. Like they're not even trying. I refuse to believe this is their best effort. People was sent to the moon over 40 years ago just to prove it was possible. We haven't been back since 1972 (manned). That's sort of how this is.

It has over 3 times the math compute power of 6970.

That's pretty good

They're shifting away from just straight up graphics processing these days is all, graphics are already quite nice, a physically simulated world be more fun then a pretty one though ( being able to smash a building up realistically would be SOOOO much fun)

GPUs are now shifting towards graphics/beafed up maths co processing units.

 

[Horrux]

I agree with the big cat above.

How much more graphics processing power do you really need?

Isn't Tri-SLI GTX 580 3GB enough for 3D Vision Surround? How much more than that do you really NEED? 24 monitors running at 240hz? Let's face it, most of us game with a single, 60hz monitor. Only a minority run 120hz or more than one monitor for gaming. And for those setups, you can find hardware to run the latest games all maxed out, with room to spare, today.

For a single monitor, any single high end card of today will render your game at very high FPS and maxed out. WHY would we even need a beast such as the 7970? I agree it is nice, but let's face it: we don't need more graphics processing power than what is available today.

I'm all for realistically virtualized worlds, though. That will be awesome.

 

[mediasorcerer]

AMD here at least from what I've seen in Aus always turns out to be cheaper. The GTX580 still sells for over $500 here for the 1.5gb version and for the 3GB around 565 AUD and up to 615 AUD for the high end models. Hence why I tend to buy crossfire setups eg. my 6950's since they work out to almost the same price or cheaper even.

I am predicting the 7970 to cost around the same or a little less than the GTX580 3GB, if so then at least in australia amd is WINNING.

Absolutely, the nvidia gtx 580 3gb is still 550-700$ depending on the model here at online stores, so i find the same price for new amd 7970-card, that offers pcie3[i know about performance but at least its new tech and future proofs to some degree] and power savings as well, to be a reasonable deal,it may even perform better when newer drivers emerge and when the pcie3 can be taken full advantage of possibly in the future.

 

[newconroer]

http://nl.hardware.info/reviews/2472/amd-radeon-hd-7970-review

Aside from the crazy tessellation performance I'm left scratching my head here. Was expecting more from such a big shrink.

That's what I was thinking.
Or not so much from the die shrink itself, but particularly the new architecture.

And I'm one of those people that tells others to stop complaining that an enthusiast product is expensive, but in this case, I'll argue with myself that the price is ridiculous.

They're charing us a premium for the new architecture, despite it not being real world beneficial(for the most part).

If anything, AMD should have apologized to their customers for not releasing a new architecture YEARS ago, and they could have showed just how sorry they are, by making the price of this card competitive in line with launch of the 6970.

People whom complain about Nvidia lording things over consumers and charging exorbitant prices, should get punched in the mouth. AMD is now doing the same because of their fancy tech and until Nvidia releases Kepler.

 

[radrok]

Ahem? The card is perfectly priced at it's performance point.

 

[newconroer]

Ahem? The card is perfectly priced at it's performance point.

What performance point?

It performs no better to the 6970 than the 6970 did to the five series cards?
10-20 frames more in games already producing 60fps means nothing to me.
And five frames more in games that are already struggling to hit 60fps says that the new architecture doesn't affect all the current 3d products on the market, and won't affect them for quite sometime.

So it's not even the price itself, it's that AMD is expecting that price for such a feeble
reason: a new architecture on paper.

 

[radrok]

I wouldn't dare to say it performs no better, let me explain :

And this is the gain ONLY at 2560x1600, this card on CFX will let you play with smoother framerates at 5760x1080 and 7680x1600, the 3GB VRAM buffer will give it a fresh breath to such eyefinity setups because my card is starving with 2GB of VRAM.
This isn't the card for who uses a single monitor, in fact they are strongly promoting eyefinity and such.
If you are going to comment based on 1080p then you start the argument by being wrong because this card is clearly not thought to be used at 1080p, for the moment of course.
It focuses itself on compute power and that's what you need to break through DX11, you'll see how it will shine when games will start to use more DX11 libraries.