***AMD Radeon HD7970 GHZ Edition - Official Reviews Thread***

[exar333]

You aren't reading the chart right.

Edit: Neither is Don. It's 112 watts difference.

Pretty sure 485 is > 473. Math issues on your end?

 

[sontin]

I couldn't agree with Ryan more -- again:

I don't see what's so fantastic about this situation. AMD's high-end needs the same power like the gtx480. There is no room left for more performance. And yet they can't really beat nVidia's GK104 card which is their second best card at the end of the year.

And if this would not be bad enough they can't build a proper x2 card because Tahiti is to big and to power hungry.

AMD got fooled by nVidia.

 

[Riek]

I don't see what's so fantastic about this situation. AMD's high-end needs the same power like the gtx480. There is no room left for more performance. And yet they can't really beat nVidia's GK104 card which is their second best card at the end of the year.

And if this would not be bad enough they can't build a proper x2 card because Tahiti is to big and to power hungry.

AMD got fooled by nVidia.

480 went above 300W
7970 GHz goes to 220-230W...

GK104 is Nvidia BEST card... and yes it does beat it by close to 10% on high resolutions. (by the end of the year you MIGHT see another videocard of Nvidia on the PROFESSIONAL MARKET)

Tahiti is small... its about the same size as 6970...
The power consumption is in line with the 6970.

Not sure why they don't release a 7990... but beside that all your points are false.

 

[SirPauly]

I don't see what's so fantastic about this situation. AMD's high-end needs the same power like the gtx480. There is no room left for more performance. And yet they can't really beat nVidia's GK104 card which is their second best card at the end of the year.

And if this would not be bad enough they can't build a proper x2 card because Tahiti is to big and to power hungry.

AMD got fooled by nVidia.

This is fantastic:

we’re finally seeing something that we haven’t seen for a very long time: bona fide, cut throat, brutal competition in the high-end video card segment for the fastest single-GPU video card. To call it refreshing is an understatement; it’s nothing short of fantastic. For the first time in 6 years AMD is truly performance competitive with NVIDIA at the high-end and we couldn't be happier.

What kind of consumer doesn't desire more choice to consider?

 

[Olikan]

I don't see what's so fantastic about this situation. AMD's high-end needs the same power like the gtx480. There is no room left for more performance. And yet they can't really beat nVidia's GK104 card which is their second best card at the end of the year.

And if this would not be bad enough they can't build a proper x2 card because Tahiti is to big and to power hungry.

AMD got fooled by nVidia.

more like HD 5970 or gtx 580

 

[Pandora's Box]

Because high end gamers really care about how much power their video card(s) use...

 

[tviceman]

The standard 7970 does a better job as power use is very close between it and the 680 and performence is about 10% in favour of the 680. So I guess it doesn't matter in that case? The 480 used nearly double the power of the 5870 and used more power than the 5970.

I don't think power use is this cards biggest enemy, although I think the GPU boost feature adding voltage is what puts it so far ahead of the standard 7970 in power use. I wonder if you can disable the GPU boost. The biggest problem I have is the reference cooler. WTF? They had 6 months to produce a better one. Well maybe we won't see any referece 7970GE's but still.

Another thing is it looks like the GPU boost on the 7970 is more sophisticated than on the 680 and faster. Them switching from a monthly driver schedule also seems to have helped. I'd like to see what they can do with GPU boost with a GPU built around it.

Is AMD's boost more sophisticated? Nvidia's boosts as high as the gpu can go without exceeding it. s maximum tdp and a given heat limit, whereas AMD's boosts 50mhz flat regardless of GDP. That to me sounds like nvidia's boost is more complex.

 

[Silverforce11]

And yet they can't really beat nVidia's GK104 card which is their second best card at the end of the year.

I don't know if you are being ignorant on purpose..

but it does beat the gtx680 in performance, just not in power use efficiency.

Also, "which is their second best card at the end of the year."

Seriously, do you KNOW for a fact gk110 is coming out for consumer cards this year?? Also the blatantly obvious.. now does not equate to end of the year. Do you know for certain AMD is not planning any release later?

It's such a rediculous that statement: It's like AMD saying "pfft Intel's IvB is a fail because it won't even beat XYZ from us next year". GPUs have a faster cycle if you haven't noticed, 6-9 months is a huge timeframe.

 

[sontin]

Heaven is not a good benchmark for power consumption. Pre-SI-cards are limited in their performance because of the front-end. Kepler shows the same behaviour in Metro2033: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6025/radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition-review-catching-up-to-gtx-680/16

480 went above 300W
7970 GHz goes to 220-230W...

No. GTX480 used around 240-260 Watt while gaming. It's in the near of the 7970-GHz:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,7...sere-Geforce-GTX-480/Grafikkarte/Test/?page=2
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,907095/Test-der-Radeon-HD-7970-GHz-Edition/Grafikkarte/Test/

GK104 is Nvidia BEST card... and yes it does beat it by close to 10% on high resolutions. (by the end of the year you MIGHT see another videocard of Nvidia on the PROFESSIONAL MARKET)

Yes, it's their best card. But in the end it's their mid-range card, look at g92. The bigger version is coming and it will be ~50% faster while using the same power as their old high-end and AMD's 7970-GHz.

Tahiti is small... its about the same size as 6970...
The power consumption is in line with the 6970.

The 6990 was delayed. The 7990 is delayed. Do you not see a pattern?
The 6990 has a TDP of 350 Watt. That's nearly 80 Watt over the GTX690. I don't see how anybody can think this situation is fantastic for AMD...

 

[Silverforce11]

Yes, it's their best card. But in the end it's their mid-range card, look at g92. The bigger version is coming and it will be ~50% faster while using the same power as their old high-end and AMD's 7970-GHz.

You know this for a FACT??

 

[SlowSpyder]

Nice performance, uses too much power though. Pretty much what I think any sane person would expect from a small clock bump and small voltage bump on an otherwise identical part as the original 7970.

 

[Vesku]

Did they edit the article, last paragraph for me is:

"For now, we at least have a fresh reminder of how close the battle for GPU supremacy is in this generation of chips. You can't go wrong with either team this time around, although the mojo is liable to change hands again at any moment. "

Quote the last paragraph of that same article, same page troll.

EDIT: I'll do it for you, since I know you won't.

AMD's HD 7970 GHz edition is priced at $499, the same as NVIDIA's GTX 680. While this might seem enticing at first glance, since the GHz Edition is faster, NVIDIA's card wins at power-draw, noise, and manual overclocking, with the better card overall. I find $499 is just too high to really draw away much attention from the GTX 680, if the HD 7970 GHz Edition was $450 I'd definitely consider it, until that happens I'll happily take a GTX 680, or even GTX 670, which offers better price/performance at not much lower performance.

 

[Don Karnage]

Because high end gamers really care about how much power their video card(s) use...

Ever run 3 way SLI or crossfire? No. Then you're not a high end gamer

 

[Will Robinson]

Uh Oh

 

[The_Golden_Man]

Custom cooled GTX 670's, like ASUS DC II and Gigabyte Windforce 3x are the clear winners in my opinion. I find no other high-end graphics card to be interesting. Except maybe a GTX 690 instead of 2x GTX 670 in SLI. GTX 680 is pointless when compared to GTX 670 the way I see it.

And this AMD/ATI cards looks like trash compared to Nvidia's offerings. I cannot find one good reason to buy a 7970 over a GTX 670 or GTX 680.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

I still can't get over how this card eats 168 more watts then a 670

That's for the overclocked card. Also when using examples of power draw of the entire system there are more variables in play.

Because of chip-to-chip variation, the load voltage of 7970 cards varies with the chip and how leaky it is. Short of a large sample size there’s no way to tell what the voltage of an average 7970 or 7970GE is, so we can only look at what we have.

Now not all of this is due to the GPU – a certain percentage is the CPU getting to sleep less often because it needs to prepare more frames for the faster GPU – but in practice most of the difference is consumed (and exhausted) by the GPU.

To add to Ryan's statements, the efficiency curve of the power supply in use will have an impact on the readings taken at the wall.

Also:

We like to test power draw under load by running a real game rather than a synthetic worst-case, power-hog application. This time around, we chose Arkham City to generate that load. Turns out that game induces higher power draw than Skyrim, which we've used in the past, or Max Payne 3.

Interesting. These results are pretty different from what we saw when we used Skyrim to generate the load. Really didn't expect to see the stock 7970 drawing less power than the GeForce GTX 680. We may have to use multiple games next time around, if time permits.

Different games will consume differently just as they perform differently, and different games will use different amounts of the CPU. Which is why if you want to just look at the power consumption of the card when looking at graphs of entire system draw you are not seeing the exact differences. This is I like techpowerup's graphs since they isolate the GPU plus they give the average power over time, which will tell us how much energy the card is going to use. Peak power draw at on specific point in time is mostly useful for determining how big of a power supply you're going to need.

 

[exar333]

Custom cooled GTX 670's, like ASUS DC II and Gigabyte Windforce 3x are the clear winners in my opinion. I find no other high-end graphics card to be interesting. Except maybe a GTX 690 instead of 2x GTX 670 in SLI. GTX 680 is pointless when compared to GTX 670 the way I see it.

And this AMD/ATI cards looks like trash compared to Nvidia's offerings. I cannot find one good reason to buy a 7970 over a GTX 670 or GTX 680.

The custom-cooled 7970s are a good buy too, and cheaper (MUCH more quiet too) vs. the almost dust buster 7970GE ref card. Who would buy this loud reference card for more $$$?

 

[The_Golden_Man]

My guess to why Techreport found that GTX 680 used more power in Batman VS Radeon 7970 must be because of the Nvidia card using PhysX, and the AMD/ATI card not using it.

 

[Olikan]

nvidia turn to drop prices :biggrin:

 

[SirPauly]

The custom-cooled 7970s are a good buy too, and cheaper (MUCH more quiet too) vs. the almost dust buster 7970GE ref card. Who would buy this loud reference card for more $$$?

One may expect to see AIB differentiation on 7970 Ghz editions as well.

 

[SirPauly]

Yes, it's their best card. But in the end it's their mid-range card, look at g92. The bigger version is coming and it will be ~50% faster while using the same power as their old high-end and AMD's 7970-GHz.

Sure, would be exciting to see a GK-110 choice for GeForce!

 

[exar333]

One may expect to see AIB differentiation on 7970 Ghz editions as well.

So you can buy the same exact card you get now, but for more $$$? Show me that the new models get more headroom, run cooler, or some other advantage before this makes sense. I still say get an existing custom PCB, overclock, and be done with it. There is no other AMD card over $300 that makes sense to buy other than a custom 7970. Period.

 

[Grooveriding]

Yes, it's their best card. But in the end it's their mid-range card, look at g92. The bigger version is coming and it will be ~50% faster while using the same power as their old high-end and AMD's 7970-GHz.

You were all over this forum pounding away that GTX 680 would be 60% faster than a GTX 580. Certain of it. Turned out it was half that and even less when you got into high levels of AA, more like 20%.

Using your powers of prediction the accurate place for GK110 is likely going to be 25% faster than a GTX 680 then. :biggrin:

 

[SirPauly]

Edit: double post of sorts, sorry.

 

[SirPauly]

So you can buy the same exact card you get now, but for more $$$? Show me that the new models get more headroom, run cooler, or some other advantage before this makes sense. I still say get an existing custom PCB, overclock, and be done with it. There is no other AMD card over $300 that makes sense to buy other than a custom 7970. Period.

That's why I investigated if reviewers did test some efficiency gains:

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/12/

I'm all for AIB differentiation choice for gamers that may demand more than the vanilla/default offerings.