Radeon HD 7950 3 GB: Six Cards, Benchmarked And Reviewed

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Price and performance wise I liked the 7870 over the 7950...that was until the 670 was released for only $50 more than the 7870. The 670 takes the 7870, 7950, and 7970 out of the game @ $400 USD.

Now I'm waiting on the benches of the GTX 660 when it gets released at the end of next month for $300 USD. I see that card running head to head with the 7870 and for $50 cheaper.

http://videocardz.com/nvidia/geforce-600/geforce-gtx-660 <------ NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 660
 
[citation][nom]Why_Me[/nom]Price and performance wise I liked the 7870 over the 7950...that was until the 670 was released for only $50 more than the 7870. The 670 takes the 7870, 7950, and 7970 out of the game @ $400 USD.Now I'm waiting on the benches of the GTX 660 when it gets released at the end of next month for $300 USD. I see that card running head to head with the 7870 and for $50 cheaper.http://videocardz.com/nvidia/gefor [...] ce-gtx-660 <------ NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 660[/citation]

Eleven of the nineteen 7870s on newegg are under $340. Four of them are below $330. The 670 doesn't take the 7870 out of the game at all. The 7870 and the 670 are in two different price and performance ranges. The 7950's overclocking headroom is far greater than the 670's and it can catch up and even slightly surpass the 670 in overclocking performance. Also, there are five 7950s on newegg that are below $390 (one of which goes all the way down to $360 and has a MIR that brings it down to $340)... With overclocking considered, things don't look so great for the GTX 670. Regardless, they are all great values right now, although I'd take the 7850 over the 7870 and just overclock it. Poor value cards relative to alternatives would be cards such as the GTX 680, GT 640, Radeon 6970, GTX 570, Radeon 6950 1GB, Radeon 6870, etc. etc.

However, if we go purely by stock performance, then sure, most 7950s have poor value.
 
Okay so all of the comparisons between the 670, 680, 7970, 7950, 7870 etc are useless unless we actually test them in games or at quality levels that bring them close to 30 fps because I really don't care if I am at 60 or 70 fps. I care that I can play at above 30 fps. Although very good job on the sound part with the videos. Wish this came a bit earlier, bought a sapphire 7950 last month to upgrade my 3870x2 😀
 
Really should add a benchmark showing the ambient case temperature with the cards installed.

Put the case in 9 zones, with about the center being the video card. Right center being drives, etc.

The reason I buy HIS IceQ cards for years is that they are LOW-noise and exhaust the heat out of the case, the rest of my case fans run on LOW... overall - lower noise. I learned this when I've been using fanless cards for a while... sure they are ZERO noise... but the same case requires my fans to run faster.
 
[citation][nom]Dragh0n[/nom]Nice article. Glad to know I'm not missing much by sticking with brand loyalty.[/citation]

Brand Loyalty isn't good since it can make you miss some tremendous value or performance offerings.


Also, MSI has come a long way from being the company that sold GPUs with crappy fans that would fail within a year or two of use in dusty environments. Kudos to MSI

The Direct CUII card is way more hassle than I'd care to go through for a GPU. Triple slot cards never made much sense to me. The least ASUS could've done is include a support for such a heavy card

[citation][nom]Article[/nom]HIS' cooling solution shines under load and in a closed case, which is a testament to the effectiveness of its DHE design. And remember, it manages to excel while monopolizing only two expansion slots, while Asus requires three. [/citation]

While also removing the hot air from your case. HIS's DHE is absolutely phenomenal. It would be my pick from the six 7950s
 
I'm starting making video games
Are this graphics cards able to use texture size bigger than 4096pixels?
Hi Tom, how are you? Is possible to add the texture size limit to the next reviews
Thanks to you and your team for this incredible website job!! In the earth... tomshardware.com the best so far for hardware info
Kindly Alan Mattano
 
the HIS 7950 turbo version is now available on newegg @ $389, is it still worth getting the gtx670 which is closer to $420? is the performance gap that big (assume max ccc OC on the 7950 turbo)? much appreciated!
 
[citation][nom]dyc4ha[/nom]the HIS 7950 turbo version is now available on newegg @ $389, is it still worth getting the gtx670 which is closer to $420? is the performance gap that big (assume max ccc OC on the 7950 turbo)? much appreciated![/citation]

A simple and resounding yes. The 670's only advantages at this point are in that it has higher stock performance (not higher overclocking performance) and lower power usage. Should the power usage difference be enough to recoup the cost difference between a 670 and a 7950, then it would be a more attractive option IMO. However, it doesn't (although it does come close enough for me to not really be bothered either way for it) and the memory bandwidth and capacity disadvantage are enough for me to pretty much dismiss it overall, although I won't deny that it's still one of the fastest cards for most games in most reasonable situations.

With some of the good 7950s reaching towards $350 and a little lower, the 670 can't recoup that price difference nor even come very close at all, so I wouldn't recommend it over such 7950s. It simply doesn't seem faster overall like it could have been be if you didn't use the Catalyst 12.7 driver. Even without the new driver, it's huge overclocking potential was still a good argument for it with it's previous prices, let alone with the driver and lower prices of today.

If Nvidia's proprietary technologies that rely on a Nvidia card are important to you, then the 670 is still a great option, but if they're not, then I'd get a 7950 if I was you.
 
Overall, whats the difference between 100fps and 150 fps, and can a human tell the difference between them? I wonder if Tom's has done an article on such a topic. I haven't seen any as of late. If It was a difference between 30fps and 60 fps, then yes, it's obvious enough. But after you go beyond around 80, it becomes harder and harder afterwards IMO, to know who is running what fps at a time, does it not?

The whole argument I've seen here, as high jacked by Nvidia fanboy (usually the same Intel Fanboys circling around to make AMD fan boy's life miserable...) about the 670 being better than the 7950, just IMO, it varies from person to person in what is seen and unseen, as much as what company did a superb job in improving on the reference card and who did a complete hack job all the same. It's nearly an Apples to Oranges comparison in my view, Nvidia does things that ATI doesn't do and vice versa. Some cards perform better than others, but comparing cards of different types, like the 7950 and the 670, it's akin to chasing a Rabbit or a Hare. There is a difference, you may not see it immediately, but it's there. What really matters is what YOU see and if you're satisfied with the product or not.
 
His IceQ Turbo now available in the U.S. for $380 at Newegg. I wonder in the current price range if they feel some of these 7950s have a better value?
 
Could someone help me? Is THIS: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-065-HS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat= , the HIS turbo model that toms hardware reccomend?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom