AMD Radeon HD 7950 Review: Up Against GeForce GTX 580

[slabbo]

aren't 2 Radeon 6870's in crossfire faster than the 7970, and cheaper too I might add. ~$300 6870 crossfire > ~$550 7970. If you're planning to get any $400+ card, you really should be considering crossfire. more bang for the buck. But if you really need a single card solution, upgrade your mother board to one that supports dual gpus.

 

[Gordon Freeman]

[citation][nom]BigMack70[/nom]This is only true if you're thinking about current games at 1080p or less and don't have a wife who won't be thrilled if you're coming back in a year or two saying "hey can we spend $xxx on a computer upgrade?"If you're only concerned about getting to 60fps on current games, then you shouldn't be buying flagship cards anyways, unless you game above 1080p.My concern is to be playing games at high frames for as long as possible, so that I can come back to my wife in 4+ years talking about a computer upgrade, rather than in 2. For that, I want the best card available, not the minimum card necessary for 60fps now.Life lesson buddy: different people have different desires/needs for graphics cards, and that doesn't make them, as you suggest, stupid.[/citation]
Pay more today for 60fps or pay less today for 60fps = you still have to pay down the road for an upgrade to maintain 60fps whether you paid more or less today you still have to upgrade down the road in relativity to what you payed for your outdated card/s. If it is the last GPU you will ever buy than yes get the best there is LOL.

 

[megamanx00]

Looks like it's a little faster than the 580 most of the time. Driver optimizations will only make that trend more consistent. This card looks like a winner.

 

[clownbaby]

[citation][nom]Gordon Freeman[/nom]Well when a 6850 that is currently $140 blows away any console do I need to explain why that is a far better deal than any console LOL unless you are anti PC and do not and never will own one.[/citation]

When the ps3 came out, it gave a gaming experience as good or better than pc at the time. Comparing a current 6850 to a console that is 5 years old is stupid and illogical. The next gen of consoles will be even better as game developers are concentrating on consoles MUCH more than pc. Todays top PC games are console ports. Skyrim is a joke. I don't understand how a game so buggy and sloppy is so highly rated. PC graphics haven't advanced considerably since crysis came out in 2007. What was the last truely great PC only title? They don't exist anymore. The only really good pc games today are being put out by low end indy producers and don't require top end graphics acceleration.

Consoles are gaining ground in gaming experience on PC and surpassed PC in gaming value years ago. I LOVE gaming on pc. But if I can buy a whole game system, that plays blu-rays, streams movies and has a great gaming experience for the price of a single graphics card, why wouldn't I? I could use a console in my theater room instead of another htpc. Gaming on a 100in screen with real surround sound (not joke logitech trash), is in all ways a better experience than on a puny 24" monitor, in an uncomfortable office chair.

All I'm saying is that it'll be a tough choice between buying an overpriced graphics card or a console in my next upgrade cycle.

 

[Gordon Freeman]

[citation][nom]slabbo[/nom]aren't 2 Radeon 6870's in crossfire faster than the 7970, and cheaper too I might add. ~$300 6870 crossfire > ~$550 7970. If you're planning to get any $400+ card, you really should be considering crossfire. more bang for the buck. But if you really need a single card solution, upgrade your mother board to one that supports dual gpus.[/citation]
6850 CF or 6870 CF is the best high end setup Price/Performance to date Nvidias counter Microstuttering that doesn't exist anymore or is mitigated to the point of redundancy and could be said about there card too.

 

[Gordon Freeman]

[citation][nom]clownbaby[/nom]When the ps3 came out, it gave a gaming experience as good or better than pc at the time. Comparing a current 6850 to a console that is 5 years old is stupid and illogical. The next gen of consoles will be even better as game developers are concentrating on consoles MUCH more than pc. Todays top PC games are console ports. Skyrim is a joke. I don't understand how a game so buggy and sloppy is so highly rated. PC graphics haven't advanced considerably since crysis came out in 2007. What was the last truely great PC only title? They don't exist anymore. The only really good pc games today are being put out by low end indy producers and don't require top end graphics acceleration. Consoles are gaining ground in gaming experience on PC and surpassed PC in gaming value years ago. I LOVE gaming on pc. But if I can buy a whole game system, that plays blu-rays, streams movies and has a great gaming experience for the price of a single graphics card, why wouldn't I? I could use a console in my theater room instead of another htpc. Gaming on a 100in screen with real surround sound (not joke logitech trash), is in all ways a better experience than on a puny 24" monitor, in an uncomfortable office chair.All I'm saying is that it'll be a tough choice between buying an overpriced graphics card or a console in my next upgrade cycle.[/citation]
Market share is on the rise for PC and Steam had there best year ever in new memberships and sales in 2011.

 

[clownbaby]

[citation][nom]Gordon Freeman[/nom]Market share is on the rise for PC and Steam had there best year ever in new memberships and sales in 2011.[/citation]

I hope your optimism is correct.

 

[bigdragon]

The 7950 looks like a solid contender. 3GB of memory and performance on par with the high-end Nvidia cards of last generation is great. I would be buying one today if I had a CPU to go with it. Unfortunately, Bulldozer turned into a train wreck and Intel's Sandy Bridge E and Ivy Bridge keep getting pushed back. It's no use for me to pick up computer parts when a decent CPU to pair them with has unknown availability sometime weeks or months from now.

I'm on a 4 year old system! Help! I suppose there's no reason to rush into a new build. There isn't any software or games that my current system cannot handle.

 

[Guest]

Why are these results so different from Anandtechs? Their tests showed the 7950 to be better than the 580 in all but two benchmarks. Also with so many separate designs and no reference design, I think it would only be fair to test more than one manufactures card. The Sapphire HD card seems to be much cooler at both idle and load (31 idle and 61 load) even though it does have a lower voltage by .1V it maintains its cooling lead when overvolted to what appears to be standard.

 

[Gordon Freeman]

[citation][nom]clownbaby[/nom]I hope your optimism is correct.[/citation]
Its not optimism its just fact based on monetary economics.

 

[Gordon Freeman]

[citation][nom]BigMack70[/nom]Let's try this again genius (perhaps 3rd time's the charm?):-I get a big tech upgrade/purchase every year & my wife doesn't mind.-There are more things to purchase/upgrade in the electronics field than GPUs-Result: about every 4-5 years I get around to upgrading my GPU, regardless of how much I plan to spend on GPU.In 2006, that was an 8800GTS 320 for about $300, and that plays all but about 3-5 games today on high or high-ish settings 1080p just fine. However, it is now time for me to upgrade my GPU to something that will handle DX11 titles into the future. It makes no sense for me to settle with something like a 7950 when I can just as easily purchase a 7970 (or, if marketing is accurate, a GTX 680) and have better performance until 2016 ish when I'll buy another high end card.If I were interested in purchasing a GPU every 2 years, your logic is fine. However, since you seem to only understand your own logic, I'll leave my explanation at that. Perhaps after you grow up a bit, you'll understand that your own logic doesn't apply well to everyone else (and if you ever get married, I sure hope you learn that BEFORE you get married...)[/citation]
Well your logic an 8800GTS is still acceptable performance LOL my GTX 275 eats the 8800GTS for breakfast lunch and diner and the GTX 275 is falling behind in allot of tittles today LOL.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Chris damn good article!!! It's bookmarked! 5-Star Approval!I agree with your setup, mythology, and conclusions - rare bird for me. I would have like to see the 3GB GTX 580, but in the resolutions tested IMO wouldn't have had much if any impact. I look forward to the upcoming GTX 600 series and I hope you do the reviews. Keep up the great work![/citation]

Thanks jaquith, that's the plan! Glad you enjoyed the piece and all of the data that went into it =)

 

[Gordon Freeman]

[citation][nom]BigMack70[/nom]Let's try this again genius (perhaps 3rd time's the charm?):-I get a big tech upgrade/purchase every year & my wife doesn't mind.-There are more things to purchase/upgrade in the electronics field than GPUs-Result: about every 4-5 years I get around to upgrading my GPU, regardless of how much I plan to spend on GPU.In 2006, that was an 8800GTS 320 for about $300, and that plays all but about 3-5 games today on high or high-ish settings 1080p just fine. However, it is now time for me to upgrade my GPU to something that will handle DX11 titles into the future. It makes no sense for me to settle with something like a 7950 when I can just as easily purchase a 7970 (or, if marketing is accurate, a GTX 680) and have better performance until 2016 ish when I'll buy another high end card.If I were interested in purchasing a GPU every 2 years, your logic is fine. However, since you seem to only understand your own logic, I'll leave my explanation at that. Perhaps after you grow up a bit, you'll understand that your own logic doesn't apply well to everyone else (and if you ever get married, I sure hope you learn that BEFORE you get married...)[/citation]
I remit my previous statement what I should have said is for you a Console would be the best way to go stick on the 10 year plan with Sony and or Microsoft.

 

[Marcus52]

"When the Radeon HD 7970 launched at $550, it looked like a reasonable alternative to the GeForce GTX 590 and Radeon HD 6990. Both dual-GPU boards are measurably faster, but they’re also $700+, power-hungry, and in the case of the 6990, embarrassingly loud. Even still, the 7970's asking price is still pretty steep."

I fail to see how a piece of equipment that can't do what it's supposed to replace makes it into something you would consider because the price is lower.

If you need the power of the previous gen dual-GPU option, the 7970 won't fill that need, regardless of it's price. It's the best single-GPU now, no question, but it's not so much better than the GTX 580 that it makes up for a second GPU.

Maybe you can't afford a Radeon 6990 or GTX 590, but you can afford a 7970 so you buy it instead. That's great, and you'll get better performance than any other single GPU option, especially if you overclock, but it still won't replace the previous gen dual-GPU option. It will still be a "pay less for less performance" option. Nothing wrong with that, just don't say it's some kind of replacement for something that gives more performance because the price is lower. Performance/dollar ratio won't get you 60fps when you needed 2 GPUs to get that in your particular application, period.

Going by that philosophy, you might as well stick with the on-board graphics capability, because the added cost of that is - zero. You can't beat a performance/dollar cost when the cost is zero.

 

[Gordon Freeman]

[citation][nom]BigMack70[/nom]You don't know how to read very well, do you Mr. Freeman? You're sounding more and more like a 16 year old nVidia fanboy. The 8800GTS doesn't play Crysis 2, BF3, or modded Skyrim well at all. I own all those games, and at least the first 2 are representative of what the next iteration of game engines is bringing to the table. Combined with the fact that it's the year I'm planning to upgrade my GPU, and you do the math (if your small little brain can).BTW my OC'd 7970 CRUSHES your GTX 275 in basically everything. And, it's the closest single GPU card to being able to hit vsync on Crysis 2 and BF3 and sit at 60fps. So even by your own logic, it is necessary for those titles.You sir, are full of fail.[/citation]
Well if you want to play on PC dude not trollin do what you want to man some people like to save instead of spend tho.

 

[Marcus52]

At my level of monitor (2560x1440), the GTX 580 is still a significantly better option for my application (World of Warcraft, max settings). Even the GTX 570 is a toss-up. Basically, I wouldn't get any better than the single GTX 570 in my primary game, and I'd pay another $100.

I always say, look at your app before you buy. Overall wins for a piece of hardware don't mean anything unless your applications fit the "everything but the kitchen sink" category. You also have to consider your system and what your needs are - a win in the "1680x1050" category doesn't mean squat if you're running 2560x1600.

 

[joemama069]

560ti sli is workin like a champ for me

 

[Gordon Freeman]

[citation][nom]BigMack70[/nom]I own an Xbox 360. If I wanted to play games at dumbed down graphics settings at 1280x720 at 30fps, I would only play console.Unfortunately, I like PC games.What's your problem anyways? Get your panties out of a bunch. If you talk like this in real life, you're in big trouble if you ever get married buddy.[/citation]
Just in case you haven't figured it out yet Computers and especially PC gaming are not conducive to getting layed let alone married LOL. Lets see how many times this one thruth gets thumbed down I know 1 is from you LOL.

 

[xenol]

People who are complaining about the price: This is the only "next gen" part. Every company does this until the competitor comes out with something.

 

[dontcrosthestreams]

i dont see any reason to pay more than 400 total for graphics in a computer. my 260$ 6950 2gb is just fine. 880/1300

 

[ojas]

Hey great article man! You actually surprised me, i though this would be a post-release 7970 article. Anyway, still a great read! Power consumption is great. Reminds me of the diesel Panamera

Glad to know AMD is trolling Nvidia. They've needed a reason to cheer in the high-end market for a while now. Though i think Nvidia will be busy tweaking kepler now...interesting year, this...

p.s.
Do you what AMD's done here in India? The 7970 is priced between Rs.36k to 45k, which currently converts to $727 to $910. I know, it's nuts. The best deal here at that price is still a 2x6970 or 2x560 dual GPU setup.

And do you know what's worse? The 6990 and 590 go for the same price here. No wonder only a fraction of PC owners buy GPUs here.

 

[Onus]

My wife is perhaps more frugal than I am, but she knows computers are my hobby. If I told her I needed a GPU upgrade, and showed her some game that was jittery due to poor FPS, I could buy pretty much whatever I wanted. Last time, I got a GTX560Ti, which is still all my games need. I suspect my next upgrade will be to go to a pair of HD78xx or HD77xx to get equivalent performance of a GTX580, but with the power savings of the new AMD cards. For an unneeded card to spin down is awesome.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]Hey great article man! You actually surprised me, i though this would be a post-release 7970 article. Anyway, still a great read! Power consumption is great. Reminds me of the diesel Panamera Glad to know AMD is trolling Nvidia. They've needed a reason to cheer in the high-end market for a while now. Though i think Nvidia will be busy tweaking kepler now...interesting year, this...p.s. Do you what AMD's done here in India? The 7970 is priced between Rs.36k to 45k, which currently converts to $727 to $910. I know, it's nuts. The best deal here at that price is still a 2x6970 or 2x560 dual GPU setup.And do you know what's worse? The 6990 and 590 go for the same price here. No wonder only a fraction of PC owners buy GPUs here.[/citation]

Funny thing--that was the plan. I still might do a follow-up. But without certain features working still, and with CrossFire data already making it into this story, I'm not sure there's much to add. Anything additional you'd like to see, personally?

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]Marcus52[/nom]"When the Radeon HD 7970 launched at $550, it looked like a reasonable alternative to the GeForce GTX 590 and Radeon HD 6990. Both dual-GPU boards are measurably faster, but they’re also $700+, power-hungry, and in the case of the 6990, embarrassingly loud. Even still, the 7970's asking price is still pretty steep."I fail to see how a piece of equipment that can't do what it's supposed to replace makes it into something you would consider because the price is lower.If you need the power of the previous gen dual-GPU option, the 7970 won't fill that need, regardless of it's price. It's the best single-GPU now, no question, but it's not so much better than the GTX 580 that it makes up for a second GPU.Maybe you can't afford a Radeon 6990 or GTX 590, but you can afford a 7970 so you buy it instead. That's great, and you'll get better performance than any other single GPU option, especially if you overclock, but it still won't replace the previous gen dual-GPU option. It will still be a "pay less for less performance" option. Nothing wrong with that, just don't say it's some kind of replacement for something that gives more performance because the price is lower. Performance/dollar ratio won't get you 60fps when you needed 2 GPUs to get that in your particular application, period.Going by that philosophy, you might as well stick with the on-board graphics capability, because the added cost of that is - zero. You can't beat a performance/dollar cost when the cost is zero.[/citation]

For me, it'd be because the GTX 590 and 6990 weren't particularly attractive products, whether as a result of cooling, noise, or power use. The 7970 came closest to matching their *performance* without the same issues, though its noise is, admittedly, unattractive under load.

 

[dragonsqrrl]

[citation][nom]Gordon Freeman[/nom]Well if you want to play on PC dude not trollin do what you want to man some people like to save instead of spend tho.[/citation]
Dude, you spammed for 3 pages, and you're criticizing someone else for trolling?