[H] 1300mhz 7970 Versus GTX580

[SlowSpyder]

I don't see why some of you guys are getting so butt hurt about this. The GTX580 was the pervious gen fastest card, it is a good measuring stick to show how much faster the overclocked 7970 is than what used to be the best, how far the technology has advanced.

Hey! Look, the 8800GTX review! What's that they're testing it against? < gasp > I am so very offended that they would dare show it against a x1950xt. They're obviously on AMD's payroll.

OMG! 280GTX review... again against the previous gen fastest GPU! I'm outraged!

 

[blackened23]

I don't see why some of you guys are getting so butt hurt about this. The GTX580 was the pervious gen fastest card, it is a good measuring stick to show how much faster the overclocked 7970 is than what used to be the best, how far the technology has advanced.

Hey! Look, the 8800GTX review! What's that they're testing it against? < gasp > I am so very offended that they would dare show it against a x1950xt. They're obviously on AMD's payroll.

OMG! 280GTX review... again against the previous gen fastest GPU! I'm outraged!

Whatever happened to BFG? I got a lot of good use from my old GTX 285 back in the day 🙂

 

[Concillian]

You're obviously misreading what I'm saying.

But I think most people are, so either I'm doing something wrong... Or everyone is missing the entire point.

Either way it doesn't really matter, your reasoning on why [H] may or may not be in AMD's pocket is really poor though. Stating things that are blatantly obvious vs using misleading graphs are two different things. If [H] never did the i5-2500k vs 8150 SLI review would nobody have known how poorly bulldozer would have performed? No, of course not... It's common knowledge, just like AMD's poor driver support is. Stating something that is common knowledge isn't detracting from AMD at all, it's just making it easier for them to continue to make misleading graphs and doing awful stock vs max overclock reviews.

I can pull up some stock 7970 reviews @ 1080p and easily eclipse that performance by 70% or more who would that help though?

BF3 MSAA destroys performance in general... but it's pretty well known that it's worse on AMD cards.

[H] BF3 article shows it pretty clearly: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/02/battlefield_3_single_player_performance_iq_review/6

We found MSAA to have a greater-than-expected impact on performance in BF3.

[...]

Enabling 2X AA gave us a performance hit of 21.3% with the HD 6970. Going up to 4X AA knocked our frame rate down by another 17%. The total performance hit from no AA to 4X AA was therefore about 34.8% in Battlefield 3, with a Radeon HD 6970.

[...]

From no AA to 2X AA, we recorded a performance hit of 13.9% with the GeForce GTX 580. Going from 2X AA to 4X AA reduced performance by a further 9%. So from AA disabled to 4X AA, there is a performance cost of about 21.7%.

Overall, it seems GeForce GTX 580 is taking less of a hit with MSAA than the Radeon HD 6970 was. There is a much smaller hit enabling 2X AA with the GTX 580, whereas the Radeon HD 6970 takes a larger hit to performance.

It was all there in pretty agonizing detail. Anyone interested in BF3 already knows this.

This article isn't about 6970 vs. 580, it's about the 7970. I don't think I've ever seen [H] show a chart with more than 3 cards on it. It's probably a web design guideline they follow to keep those charts from getting too busy... since they're showing two 7970 lines, the only option is to split up the 580 and 6970 charts.

People looking for bias will find it anywhere, but when a review site shows different biases in different articles and is not consistent with it's bias... I tend to believe they aren't purposefully biased.

Take a look at their 6970 CFX vs. 580 SLI article, for example: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/22/battlefield_3_multiplayer_performance_iq_review/3

The AMD Radeon HD 6970 CFX did not feel as smooth as the data shows. We felt it had a significant drop in performance anytime we moved the mouse quickly. It also struggled more when buildings were blowing up and when debris was flying around. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 SLI did not have any of these issues. Each video card could handle Motion turned on, but we chose to disable it as it is a distracting 3D effect for Multiplayer gaming. It is also an easy way to gain a few FPS.

That was something that didn't show in the graphs, but they chose to mention it anyway... this is someone biased towards AMD? If you were trying to favor a particular brand, would you give a subjective opinion that isn't obvious from the hard data which paints that vendor in a poor light? Seems like they're not very good at being biased.

 

[notty22]

Whatever happened to BFG? I got a lot of good use from my old GTX 285 back in the day 🙂

What happened to Circuit City / Lechmere / Cyrix / Pontiac / Oldsmobile ? Business's adapt /evolve or die.

 

[blackened23]

Whoa, so can I overclock my next car?

 

[notty22]

Whoa, so can I overclock my next car?

Do you own one ? Or 2 ?


Oh, I meant gtx 285's😉

 

[tweakboy]

I feel a 690 GTX dual gpu soon after Kepler... gl

 

[KentState]

As a GTX 580 owner, I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised, upset or augmentative over this. I had my card for awhile now and have gotten a lot of use out of it. The only thing to be disappointed about is buying a 580 within the last month.

 

[lavaheadache]

I feel a 690 GTX dual gpu soon after Kepler... gl

What does gl stand for at the end of every post of yours? I can't for the life of me figure it out.


I'm asking right here in the thread instead of pm because I'm sure the rest of the community is curious too.

 

[Grooveriding]

What does gl stand for at the end of every post of yours? I can't for the life of me figure it out.


I'm asking right here in the thread instead of pm because I'm sure the rest of the community is curious too.

Good luck

Gg gl gb

 

[blackened23]

Geordi LaForge?

 

[Tempered81]

Hes good at visualizing the future. signing his name -GL

George Lucas

 

[nitromullet]

That is some serious pwnage right there.😛
Kepler faces a pretty big increase in performance over Fermi to bridge or beat it.:thumbsup:

Check these overclock numbers from Rage3D 😱

http://www.rage3d.com/reviews/video/amd_hd7950_launch_review/index.php?p=7

1200 on the gpu is a nice clock on a 7950, and definitely a solid performer for ~$475. I wonder if that's what most users will actually see, or if it will be more of a lottery like the 7970 where some are getting 1200+ and others are only getting in the 1000s.

This has been sort of an issue with this launch and HardOCP's OC review IMO... Reviewers clearly got cherry picked cards that all will go max CCC settings without a hitch when many actual customers have to tweak voltage and/or settle for lower clocks. Of course OCing is always YMMV, but it looks like great care was taken to ensure that reviewers all got excellent OCers so they could push their cards (and recommend them for their OC prowess). Hell, HardOCP's Gigabyte 7970 isn't even the same PCB that you get on a retail card. Looks like they gave HardOCP a cherry picked reference card, and Gigiabyte sells us a blue PCB. It might be the same thing, but who really knows?

We also need more aftermarket coolers. Users that are getting good OC's on their 7970s are doing so at 70-80% fan speed, which is literally dustbuster loud. I ended up having to RMA my 7970, and I don't miss that fan one bit. I might re-visit the 7-series after we get more cooling options.

Another "next gen card beats last gen card" thread?

This is like someone starting a "GTX 680 vs. HD6970" thread come april

Well, IMO you do have to give a nod to the card that launches first. It's not like there is anything else from NV to compare the 7-series to. ...let's hope we'll see GTX 680 benches against anything in April...

 

[Bobisuruncle54]

Well I'm not right very often, but that is how I feel about it

Give it a rest. The whole "the 7970 is no match for my heavily overclocked GTX 470s in SLI" is seriously old now. You done it multiple times in multiple threads.

1. Nobody cares
2. It does not matter when judging the 7970s performance
3. It also reads like you're begging for approval, such as "wow you made an excellent purchase decision right there!"

BORING.

 

[lavaheadache]

Good luck

Gg gl gb

It can't mean good luck. It makes no sense most of the time.

 

[Silverforce11]

The only thing i got from that is that Tahiti at 1.3ghz is faster than 6990 and gtx590. From other reviews, at ~1.25 ghz its around the same as the dual gpu from previous gen.

It scales excellent with clock speed, thus this architecture is a good one for AMD. Which leaves us to the other current thread/topic atm, will AMD do a refresh and call it 7970 XT/PE or leave it to their AIBs for OC variants? I wager the 2nd option, less cost on them (AMD), leave the AIBs to pay extra for binned chips as 28nm matures.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Is it faster than the 6990 and 590?

I have to wonder where the performance of the 6970 went...

The first thing we wanted to do was to make sure that the CrossFireX options are actually working. For this, we used Battlefield 3. All tests for the first three graphs on the page were performed at 2560x1600 with FXAA High, 16X AF, and "Ultra" in-game settings selected.

I'm sure there is a reasonable explanation, however I have to wonder where did 21 fps go?

Settings seem to be the same, unless Ultra doesn't include AO and/or motion blur.

 

[Tempered81]

two different cpus, two different maps? lol

 

[GaiaHunter]

Is it faster than the 6990 and 590?

I have to wonder where the performance of the 6970 went...



I'm sure there is a reasonable explanation, however I have to wonder where did 21 fps go?

Settings seem to be the same, unless Ultra doesn't include AO and/or motion blur.

Different locations tested.

 

[GaiaHunter]

1200 on the gpu is a nice clock on a 7950, and definitely a solid performer for ~$475. I wonder if that's what most users will actually see, or if it will be more of a lottery like the 7970 where some are getting 1200+ and others are only getting in the 1000s.

This has been sort of an issue with this launch and HardOCP's OC review IMO... Reviewers clearly got cherry picked cards that all will go max CCC settings without a hitch when many actual customers have to tweak voltage and/or settle for lower clocks. Of course OCing is always YMMV, but it looks like great care was taken to ensure that reviewers all got excellent OCers so they could push their cards (and recommend them for their OC prowess). Hell, HardOCP's Gigabyte 7970 isn't even the same PCB that you get on a retail card. Looks like they gave HardOCP a cherry picked reference card, and Gigiabyte sells us a blue PCB. It might be the same thing, but who really knows?

It is a custom card, different coolers, different PCBs. But all the people buying that model will get that same PCB.

They aren't concluding all the cards will hit 1300 MHz, not thateven all those custom 7970 will.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Different locations tested.

😵 missed it! I figured there was an easy enough explanation 😀

On operation swordbreaker with everything maxed out and 4xAA (1080p) I get 60 fps avg at stock, and 91 avg at 940 core 2200 memory, which is a 50% performance increase over stock in SLI from a 55% core overclock.

It's good to see a card from AMD with good OC potential, it adds value to cards. If 1300MHz was typical I could almost see myself justify the purchase for $600~. My problem isn't so much comparing it to the 580, it has more to do with the conclusions people come to after seeing such reviews.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I don't see why some of you guys are getting so butt hurt about this. The GTX580 was the pervious gen fastest card, it is a good measuring stick to show how much faster the overclocked 7970 is than what used to be the best, how far the technology has advanced.

Hey! Look, the 8800GTX review! What's that they're testing it against? < gasp > I am so very offended that they would dare show it against a x1950xt. They're obviously on AMD's payroll.

OMG! 280GTX review... again against the previous gen fastest GPU! I'm outraged!

Good point, wonder why this post got no feedback from the usuall trolls
Anyway, HEXUS is now saying that Sapphire might be contemplating in lauching a 1300mhz variant soon
http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/34933-sapphire-plotting-hd-7970-domination-card-pictured/

 

[badb0y]

I hit 1200 core on my 7970 easily. This anecdotal evidence but these cards really seem to overclock well.

 

[Lonyo]

😵 missed it! I figured there was an easy enough explanation 😀

On operation swordbreaker with everything maxed out and 4xAA (1080p) I get 60 fps avg at stock, and 91 avg at 940 core 2200 memory, which is a 50% performance increase over stock in SLI from a 55% core overclock.

It's good to see a card from AMD with good OC potential, it adds value to cards. If 1300MHz was typical I could almost see myself justify the purchase for $600~. My problem isn't so much comparing it to the 580, it has more to do with the conclusions people come to after seeing such reviews.

Slightly off topic, but how do you benchmark BF3? Or are you just reporting fps from playing through.
I assume there is some benchmark function but Google didn't help me when I looked.

 

[railven]

Well, I've pretty much decided this is the card for me. Unfortunately, it doesn't have enough outputs for my needs, but I guess I can over come that with some tweaking.

I will be moving up to 3x1080p for my main desk (mostly for MMOs and work related nonsense.)

Does anyone recall if it is DP1.2 that can drive 2 monitors from one port? I recall reading that some where and wonder if it was DP1.2...I should look into it.

Now to hold off for IVB or just buy SB...damn you Intel!