bit-tech.net

AMD Radeon 7970 3GB GHz Edition Review

Comments 26 to 50 of 57

Reply
Harlequin 22nd June 2012, 16:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valinor
Although by CPC's testing, it wasn't significantly faster; it was dependent on which game you were playing as to whether the 480 was faster or slower than the 5870. Same thing with the bit-tech review; sometimes faster, sometimes slower.

i`ve actually owned both cards and IMO the gtx 480 simply feels faster , i think its more to do with the `lows` not being as `low` as the 5870
jrs77 22nd June 2012, 16:29 Quote
Still waiting for the nVidia GTX 660 to be released, allthough I'm a little bit afraid of it's pricetag.

The high-end cards are sure the thing to look at when you want to know about who makes the absolute best cards, but I'm simply not willing to spend so much money on hardware. For a complete system (mobo, CPU, GPU, RAM) I'm not paying more then some €600 every two years.

Keep the reviews coming tho, it's nevertheless interesting to see what's possible atm.

I'm more happy with nVidia-cards since the 460 was released and especially games seem to favour nVidia-cards, but this is simply due to better drivers and optimization. Still it's allways the reason why AMD looses the race.
If we look at tests like SmallLuxGPU or other OpenCL stuff then AMD beats nVidia by a mile tho.
andrew8200m 22nd June 2012, 16:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Still waiting for the nVidia GTX 660 to be released, allthough I'm a little bit afraid of it's pricetag.

The high-end cards are sure the thing to look at when you want to know about who makes the absolute best cards, but I'm simply not willing to spend so much money on hardware. For a complete system (mobo, CPU, GPU, RAM) I'm not paying more then some €600 every two years.

Keep the reviews coming tho, it's nevertheless interesting to see what's possible atm.

I'm more happy with nVidia-cards since the 460 was released and especially games seem to favour nVidia-cards, but this is simply due to better drivers and optimization. Still it's allways the reason why AMD looses the race.
If we look at tests like SmallLuxGPU or other OpenCL stuff then AMD beats nVidia by a mile tho.

GTX660 months off mate
Harlequin 22nd June 2012, 17:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrew8200m

Pointless. Overpriced. Performance crown seeking con artists.


and welcome to the GAME - AMD can now say after 6 years they have the fastest single core card again.... it also means yields are good enough for 1ghz cards from them , and possibly up to 1.2ghz from partners.
teppic 22nd June 2012, 17:08 Quote
It's also because a lot of reviews compare new cards against reference models, even if few people actually buy those. The 7970 at 925MHz doesn't look very appealing in benchmarks, even though they pretty much all go above 1.1GHz at stock voltage, taking them usually to the top.
Skulldragon 22nd June 2012, 17:13 Quote
In response to Baz's reply to my earlier comment, fair enough about the old cards and also, you were right about the 5770 not benefiting much :(. What about the HD 7770/7750, though. These new drivers could boost their performance to the point where they're worth buying.

Also, are we going to see a review of that 900MHz version of the 7750, or is it too insignificant a change to be worth the time?
MjFrosty 22nd June 2012, 17:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valinor
Quote:
Originally Posted by MjFrosty
Also worth remembering the 480 although a bit of a miniature sun, was significantly faster than AMD's card at the time.

Although by CPC's testing, it wasn't significantly faster; it was dependent on which game you were playing as to whether the 480 was faster or slower than the 5870. Same thing with the bit-tech review; sometimes faster, sometimes slower.

Yeah it's the same every time round in fairness. The 480 was a glorified tessellation showcase. Massively more power hungry than the 5xxxx though, so I can see why Bit-tech haven't emphasised on it quite so much this time round, it's not nearly as much difference. Note worthy though that I had both too, and found the 480 to be the better card, although it's been a while so couldn't tell you why lol
Harlequin 22nd June 2012, 17:49 Quote
its the same power as a 100w lightbulb

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2010/03/27/nvidia-geforce-gtx-480-1-5gb-review/10

so to compensate i turn 2 lights off at night and voila im using less power ;)
The_Crapman 22nd June 2012, 17:52 Quote
posted this is the new article thread by mistake:

Couple of interesting 7970 vs 680 reviews:

overclock 680 vs overclocked 7970 (lightning)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/463...ew/index1.html

7970ghz review, with results for 7950, 7970, 670, 680, jetstream 680 4gb, phantom 680 2gb.
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/478...ew/index1.html

of the latter, the most interesting result is that the 2gb phantom out performs the 4gb jetstream!
rollo 22nd June 2012, 17:54 Quote
100 watt lightbulbs even still exist thought max was 60

Isnt the energy effeicient ones like 18 to 23 watts
rollo 22nd June 2012, 17:55 Quote
2gb phantom is overclocked by default the 4gb version is not
Harlequin 22nd June 2012, 18:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
100 watt lightbulbs even still exist thought max was 60

Isnt the energy effeicient ones like 18 to 23 watts

they do - bought 1 earlier ;) - but even so , turn off 3 lights then to save power if your worried about 100watts.....
fdbh96 22nd June 2012, 18:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrew8200m
so.. 1GHz edition performs the same as 1GHz clocked 7970...

Pointless. Overpriced. Performance crown seeking con artists.

I actually hope nVidia release a 1100MHz edition GTX680 just so they can flip the bird whilst paddling in the river of tears AMD will no doubt shed.

Don't know this for sure but I guess that the GHz editions are cherry picked 7970's, so may be able to OC higher.
andrew8200m 22nd June 2012, 18:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdbh96
Don't know this for sure but I guess that the GHz editions are cherry picked 7970's, so may be able to OC higher.

From reviews I would say no.. not really.. 50MHz if your lucky.
Harlequin 22nd June 2012, 18:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrew8200m
From reviews I would say no.. not really.. 50MHz if your lucky.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970_GHz_Edition/31.html

1185 core

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6025/radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition-review-catching-up-to-gtx-680/17

1150/1200 core

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/41329-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/?page=12

1150 core

so at the least 150 mhz overcloking on the core.... a bit more than ` 50mhz if your lucky`
The_Crapman 22nd June 2012, 19:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
2gb phantom is overclocked by default the 4gb version is not
Ah. I thought the jetstream was also overclock. Silly me!
xxxsonic1971 22nd June 2012, 19:21 Quote
nice1 AMD!!!! maybe see some bargain basement 680's soon?
MjFrosty 22nd June 2012, 20:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxxsonic1971
nice1 AMD!!!! maybe see some bargain basement 680's soon?


:(
ssj12 22nd June 2012, 21:55 Quote
the entire issue with the GTX680 ia 2GBs of ram. If it has 3GBs those numbers would be different.
Elton 22nd June 2012, 22:29 Quote
Sadly they could not make a HD7990 (like the 4890) and have it be clocked much higher. The limits of silicon approaches.
Spreadie 22nd June 2012, 22:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssj12
the entire issue with the GTX680 ia 2GBs of ram. If it has 3GBs those numbers would be different.
How do you figure that?

CPC tested a 2Gb 680 alongside a 4Gb model and saw no appreciable difference between the two.
Elton 22nd June 2012, 23:33 Quote
Multi monitor gaming I believe.
Valinor 23rd June 2012, 09:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elton
Multi monitor gaming I believe.

I think it was more the limited bandwidth than the actual amount of memory.
Elton 23rd June 2012, 09:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valinor
I think it was more the limited bandwidth than the actual amount of memory.

Increasing RAM size would do nothing, it would either take a wider bus or faster RAM.

An increase in RAM size then would only be effective if the games tested used a higher resolution. Hence my multi-monitor gaming remark.
rollo 23rd June 2012, 12:17 Quote
680 2gb is not memory restricted outside of multi moniter resolutions. been proven on this forum by alot of different people

7970 uses more memory cause its there to use but games dont require it.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums