# Radeon HD 7770 Put Through 3DMark 11



## btarunr (Feb 14, 2012)

AMD's Radeon HD 7770 mid-range graphics card, which is slated for a little later this month, got its first public shot at 3DMark 11. The card was put through the Performance preset of the benchmark, where it scored P3535 points. The bench was driven by an Intel Core i7-3960X processor. The reviewer also took GPU-Z screenshots of this card, revealing low core temperature. Based on the 28 nm Cape Verde GPU, the HD 7700 is said to have 640 Graphics CoreNext stream processors, and 1 GB of memory over a 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface. It is designed for sub-$200 price points.



 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## btarunr (Feb 14, 2012)

Based on this score alone, HD 7770 is somewhere between HD 6850 and HD 6870. Mission accomplished for AMD.


----------



## damric (Feb 14, 2012)

Love the low power design. I wonder if either the 7770 or 7750 will be powered only by the bus?


----------



## ViperXTR (Feb 14, 2012)

performs similar to my oc'd GTX 460 SE while consuming less power.


----------



## btarunr (Feb 14, 2012)

damric said:


> Love the low power design. I wonder if either the 7770 or 7750 will be powered only by the bus?



HD 7750 might be bus-powered. There are pictures on the internet of the HD 7770 having a single 6-pin power input.


----------



## Over_Lord (Feb 14, 2012)

btarunr said:


> Based on this score alone, HD 7770 is somewhere between HD 6850 and HD 6870. Mission accomplished for AMD.



Exactly. All at a lower power envelope.

It's pretty awesome, the bandwidth nearly halved from the HD6850, even the shaders decreased.

People were wondering if it would perform as well as the HD5770 or just beat it. But here again, AMD proved it.

With a GPU smaller than HD5770, to the performance between HD6850/6870, at a slightly lower price point than them, AMD has indeed hit the spot.


----------



## loleafidas (Feb 14, 2012)

btarunr said:


> Based on this score alone, HD 7770 is somewhere between HD 6850 and HD 6870. Mission accomplished for AMD.



Mine 6850 got 37xx by Graphics Score, n that just a Ref. HIS, not Turbo or OC Ver. This 7770 just got 3147, n u said bettween 6850 - 6870? Have u ever benchmarked 6850 4 one time at least? $200? MISSION FAIL !


----------



## legends84 (Feb 14, 2012)

AMD proves it with verdetroll!!!


----------



## cloudwan (Feb 14, 2012)

Result are quite ok i guess.. this is still on stock with cpu also basically at stock i guess..
It does have some improvement compared to HD6770, maybe around HD6790 performance when stock i guess.. can't wait to see some official benchmarks..


----------



## btarunr (Feb 14, 2012)

That HD 6770 is overclocked from its 850/1250 MHz reference speed. With HD 7770, 1000/1125 MHz is the reference speed.



loleafidas said:


> Mine 6850 got 37xx by Graphics Score, n that just a Ref. HIS, not Turbo or OC Ver. This 7770 just got 3147, n u said bettween 6850 - 6870? Have u ever benchmarked 6850 4 one time at least? $200? MISSION FAIL !



Yes, I have benchmarked a HD 6850 4 one time at least. Nowhere does the article mention $200 as the price.


----------



## H82LUZ73 (Feb 14, 2012)

loleafidas said:


> Mine 6850 got 37xx by Graphics Score, n that just a Ref. HIS, not Turbo or OC Ver. This 7770 just got 3147, n u said bettween 6850 - 6870? Have u ever benchmarked 6850 4 one time at least? $200? MISSION FAIL !



P3535 not 3147......Oh i see what you mean by 3147 my bad,But look at GT4 test there ,The 6770 above got a score of 7.78 while the 7770 got a score of 10.01 and that is where the cards performance comes into the new design of it....


----------



## ViperXTR (Feb 14, 2012)

my results for GTX 460 SE oc'd
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/1847754?show_ads=true&page=/3dm11/1847754?key=2qjJBSd78tj42KvdEZsaaEJQQeREX7

except im only using an i3 2100 XD, physics test has a large gap.


----------



## dieterd (Feb 14, 2012)

so, AMD, will me offer a 6870 preformance (or little less) for 6870 price ("It is designed for sub-$200 price points")! yee haaa - new generation is arrived!


----------



## EpicShweetness (Feb 14, 2012)

Thank you Cloudwan, your screenshot tells me something amazing.
Cape Verde is smaller then Juniper, despite this it has 400+ million more transistors. More so despite being a factory overclocked 6770, and then further overclocked as well it lost to the Cape Verde chip, amazing!
Anyone know if the 7870 will bring to the fire fight? It could very well be twice the chip this one is hmmm . . .


----------



## btarunr (Feb 14, 2012)

EpicShweetness said:


> Anyone know if the 7870 will bring to the fire fight? It could very well be twice the chip this one is hmmm . . .



Yes, the most plausible specs of Pitcairn are 1280 GCN cores, 80 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 256-bit GDDR5, "GHz Edition" (≥1000 MHz) core clocks, etc.


----------



## radarblade (Feb 14, 2012)

Initially I thought these were scores of the Ivy IGP on the i7 37XXK variant. Still even for the 7770, this is a pretty huge score.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 14, 2012)

I AM NOT DISSAPOINT.

Looking forward to 7850/70, more so than I was looking forward to 7970...


----------



## Mathragh (Feb 14, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> I AM NOT DISSAPOINT.
> 
> Looking forward to 7850/70, more so than I was looking forward to 7970...



Haha same here.
Looking at buying a 7870 at the end of the spring this year when prices(hopefully) drop a bit after the release of some competition by the other camp.


----------



## Jiraiya (Feb 14, 2012)

XFX 7770 Black ED 











http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ar&tl=en&u= http://www.arabpcworld.com/?p=3851


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Feb 14, 2012)

btarunr said:


> Based on this score alone, HD 7770 is somewhere between HD 6850 and HD 6870. Mission accomplished for AMD.



And it'll be priced between them too. They keep raising the price tier on successive parts because they're terrified of the idea of people realizing a proper 7670 is all the performance most gamers would ever need. At least until new consoles are released.


----------



## jpierce55 (Feb 14, 2012)

dieterd said:


> so, AMD, will me offer a 6870 preformance (or little less) for 6870 price ("It is designed for sub-$200 price points")! yee haaa - new generation is arrived!



If it came out at 6770 price or 5770 price ($130-$160) I would have been impressed. If it really comes out nearer the $200 mark I will not be. What you end up with is a revised lower power consumption 6850, that is nice, but disappointing. Price point, IMO, is more what relates to performance comparison to the last generation. So, I am guessing the 7750 is probably more or less what will take the 6770's place.


----------



## vega22 (Feb 14, 2012)

well done amd, you released a mainstream product thats on par with the 2 year old 460 which you can pick up for £50...


----------



## DarkOCean (Feb 14, 2012)

This thing is juds as fast as 6790 /5830 and everybody says its ok.. wtf people ?!


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (Feb 14, 2012)

marsey99 said:


> well done amd, you released a mainstream product thats on par with the 2 year old 460 which you can pick up for £50...



Where can I get a new GTX460 for £50 from?? Got any links as I can tell a few people I know. I am serious as that would be awesome value for money - GTX460 1GB SLI for £100 would be epic value for money!

Edit!!

I had a quick look on HUKD and I don't find any mention of a £50 GTX460. Has it ended??


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 14, 2012)

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:


> Where can I get a new GTX460 for £50 from?? Got any links as I can tell a few people I know. I am serious as that would be awesome value for money - GTX460 1GB SLI for £100 would be epic value for money!
> 
> Edit!!
> 
> I had a quick look on HUKD and I don't find any mention of a £50 GTX460. Has it ended??



There's no way you can pick up a 460 for £50, perhaps £70-£80 used, £50 not in a month of sundays.


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (Feb 14, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> There's no way you can pick up a 460 for £50, perhaps £70-£80 used, £50 not in a month of sundays.



So the cake was a lie??


----------



## insane 360 (Feb 14, 2012)

why is it everyone is always disappointed in the performance of any card...i mean i know i want a 50 dollar card that out performs a quad 7970 setup and only uses 5 watts of power but come on, its just a mid-range card...


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 14, 2012)

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:


> So the cake was a lie??



Nah just some people being drama queens and exaggerating  

Thing is it might be on par with a 460, it's newer tech and as such is lower powered will probably demolish a 460 when overclocked if it's bigger brothers are anything to go by and has DX 11.1 as long as it's priced right it then it should sell well.


----------



## jpierce55 (Feb 14, 2012)

insane 360 said:


> why is it everyone is always disappointed in the performance of any card...i mean i know i want a 50 dollar card that out performs a quad 7970 setup and only uses 5 watts of power but come on, its just a mid-range card...



In this case it is not the performance people are disappointed in, it is the speculated price/performance range..... not that anybody knows that price range is correct.


----------



## Xaser04 (Feb 14, 2012)

DarkOCean said:


> This thing is juds as fast as 6790 /5830 and everybody says its ok.. wtf people ?!



I think the point is that it can manage that whilst consuming the same level of power as a HD6670. 

Essentially you can look at it as either improving performance in a given power envelope (TDP envelope) or providing similar performance at a much improved power envelope*. 

I would have preffered to see something a little more potent though for a x7xx model. Considering the HD78xx are predicted to have 1280 GCN units I would have expected along the lines of 960 or so for the HD7770.

For mid range gaming that would be perfect. 

*Considering the HD6850 hardly sucks down power how much of an improvement will we see in the real world?


----------



## Crap Daddy (Feb 14, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> There's no way you can pick up a 460 for £50, perhaps £70-£80 used, £50 not in a month of sundays.



OK, he overreacted but certainly you can get a 6870 for as low as 150$ for an estimated 20% better performance than this card priced at what it seems to be 180$.

Furthermore under 180$ you can buy GTX560, 460 even a similar performing card (6850) as low as 130$ and a bunch of second hand better performing cards.

I really don't see anything to be happy about. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to pay the same price for the same performance for a new generation card (although the naming scheme is different)


----------



## loleafidas (Feb 14, 2012)

I'm w8in' 4 7870, hope that p/p better than 6950 with cheaper tag


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (Feb 14, 2012)

Crap Daddy said:


> OK, he overreacted but certainly you can get a 6870 for as low as 150$ for an estimated 20% better performance than this card priced at what it seems to be 180$.
> 
> Furthermore under 180$ you can buy GTX560, 460 even a similar performing card (6850) as low as 130$ and a bunch of second hand better performing cards.
> 
> I really don't see anything to be happy about. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to pay the same price for the same performance for a new generation card (although the naming scheme is different)



In the UK the HD6870 is between £125 to £140 for the cheaper models and the HD6850 and GTX460 are around £90 to £110. The HD7770 is meant to be around HD6870 price at launch according to one well known UK retailer.


----------



## btarunr (Feb 14, 2012)

Our VR-Zone pals told us the person behind this test was using a Core i7-3960X and not a Core i5-2500. Fixed the post. This slightly changes my opinion about this card now. It should perform very close to HD 6850.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Feb 14, 2012)

btarunr said:


> AMD's Radeon HD 7770 mid-range graphics card, which is slated for a little later this month, got its first public shot at 3DMark 11. The card was put through the Performance preset of the benchmark, where it scored P3535 points.* The bench was probably driven by an Intel Core i5-2500 processor. *The reviewer also took GPU-Z screenshots of this card, revealing low core temperature. Based on the 28 nm Cape Verde GPU, the HD 7700 is said to have 640 Graphics CoreNext stream processors, and 1 GB of memory over a 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface. It is designed for sub-$200 price points.
> 
> [url]http://www.techpowerup.com/img/12-02-14/92a_thm.jpg[/URL] [url]http://www.techpowerup.com/img/12-02-14/92b_thm.jpg[/URL]
> 
> Source: VR-Zone



um no, that physics score is twice that of an i2500k, even an overclocked i7 2600k would struggle to hit that score. This was likely driven by an SB-E 6 core. 







on an i2500k at stock look for the overall score to be 200-400pts lower.


----------



## btarunr (Feb 14, 2012)

Read the post just above yours.


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (Feb 14, 2012)

The graphics score(not the total score) seems slightly above that of an HD6850 1GB running at stock clockspeeds:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1558/11/


----------



## yogurt_21 (Feb 14, 2012)

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:


> The graphics score(not the total score) seems slightly above that of an HD6850 1GB running at stock clockspeeds:
> 
> http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1558/11/





> Processor: AMD Phenom 2 965 3.4 GHz



um no, the SB-E cpu will greatly improve the results compared with a Phenom 2. 

The graphics test still has to use the cpu.

So yeah this is likely slightly worse than a 6850.


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (Feb 14, 2012)

yogurt_21 said:


> um no, the SB-E cpu will greatly improve the results compared with a Phenom 2.
> 
> The graphics test still has to use the cpu.
> 
> So yeah this is likely slightly worse than a 6850.



Then it would be a pointless graphics test then if it so CPU dependent. The only way the graphics tests would run much faster on the SB-E six core CPUs is if the engine used is highly threaded.
The combined test is meant to tax both the CPU and GPU and the Physics test is meant to tax the CPU.

However,we will soon find out how good or how bad the card performs tomorrow.

TBH,it would be a shame if the HD7770 cannot at least match an HD6850 1GB.


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (Feb 14, 2012)

There was another HD7770 leak on TPU last year too:

http://www.techpowerup.com/157715/More-HD-7770-Leaks-Pictures-Plus-3DMark-Benchmarks.html

It used a Core i5-3550 supposedly.






The graphics score looks very similar to the newest leak. The physics score only seems slightly higher than a Core i5 2500K.






It seems the combined scores are similar and the latest leaked is only skewed by the greatly increased physics score.


----------



## btarunr (Feb 14, 2012)

The latest leak's physics scores are high because it's a six-core CPU (i7-3960X), the older leakbench ran a quad-core one.


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (Feb 14, 2012)

btarunr said:


> The latest leak's physics scores are high because it's a six-core CPU (i7-3960X), the older leakbench ran a quad-core one.



I was aware of that especially looking at the 3DMark11 Physics scores in post 35. The graphic scores seem quite similar though,and the Core i5 3550 is probably not that much quicker than a Core i5 2500K.

However,it would be nice to see the graphics score for an HD6850 1GB with a Core i5 2500 running at stock clockspeeds.


----------



## alwayssts (Feb 14, 2012)

This falls right where you'd think it should.  The expectation for 7870 is pretty much to slightly beat gtx570, if we go down the cascade from the 7900 series:

7970 - new level
7950 - 580
7870 - 570
7850 - 560ti
7770 - 550

Everything we've seen coincides with this thinking.  You can see why Pitcairn is important.
*THE 7000 SERIES PURPOSE IS TO COMPETE WITH THE 500 SERIES AT A SIMILAR PRICE AND PERFORMANCE BECAUSE THEY KNEW THEY WOULD BE FIRST.*

They will adjust prices as necessary compared to absolute performance of kepler designs as they arrive. I imagine Sea Islands will have some-what similar designs to Kepler as 28nm will be mature and in super mass (fab 15) production by then.  I digress.

I would feel a very large sad if 7870 is 20 @ 1ghz instead of 22 @ 950.  

Not only would they continue the trend of way too much bandwidth for a design, it would seem to me 22 CU is a down-right perfect match for 24 ROPs...more perfect than any other possible design from either camp's arch...why blow that opportunity with anything less in this highly-contentious space? 

On top of it all, one can assume 660 (salvage gk104) may be 14 SMs.  If that were the case it would be VERY close to the same PPC as 22 CUs (a small amount faster...think 7950 to 7970; a few percent).  I would hope they don't balk that market to nVIDIA when the full gk104 is already probably going to push prices down in that segment.

I really want to see 7870 make a mockery of 660's die size and the inefficiency of fermi/kepler because of the simple reality that it is not a very precise modular design and 660 will show why that sucks, especially since it would be running slower clockspeeds as a salvage part; the same medicine 660ti looks to use on 7950 (the later being a 90% salvage part on a similar size die with still greater ppc but the former running 1/6th greater clock) just to break even.  

If AMD doesn't give me that I will have a disappoint.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Feb 14, 2012)

alwayssts said:


> HE 7000 SERIES PURPOSE IS TO COMPETE WITH THE 500 SERIES AT A SIMILAR PRICE AND PERFORMANCE BECAUSE THEY KNEW THEY WOULD BE FIRST.



You know that AMD already has similar price and performance parts regarding the 500 series? It's called Radeon 6000 series. Can you please explain why do we need another Radeon series called the 7000 to offer similar performance for similar price over what we already have?


----------



## N3M3515 (Feb 14, 2012)

dieterd said:


> so, AMD, will me offer a 6870 preformance (or little less) for 6870 price ("It is designed for sub-$200 price points")! yee haaa - new generation is arrived!



LOOOL
That's right bro............long gone are those generations where you could see a 50 - 80% increase.

HD7770, sorry, you're not the one.


----------



## Casecutter (Feb 14, 2012)

For a stock 1Ghz this is... We know AMD is letting AIB's build customs (like that XFX shown) so more first run offerings will be OC'd. While again is this just smoke and AMD sand-bagging on Nvidia, if  "for a little later this month" but it a little late if the release is tomarrow or is it?  Nvidia had been trying to find what Cape Verde is capable of so they can finalize what spec’s AIB's should start building GK104’s.  Nvidia has to be in production now to have product for end of March (6 weeks).  Nvidia knows what Tahiti can do, and if they got a good feel for what Cape Verde is capable of they've a pretty good idea what Pitcairn will accomplish using the new Graphics CoreNext architecture.

I think MSRP for reference 7770 cards will be $180 and those will perform right above a 6850, while OC's will approach 6870’s and there's nothing wrong with that.  I've been saying based on the TSMC 28Nm price bump mostly, and against past MSRP of 5770 and 6850/6870 it will all be what it is.  There's no use crying especially given Nvidia will also be passing along the TSMC pricing when they show.

While we have no idea what GK106 parts have in store; figure by end of summer nicely appointed OC'd 7770 could be $140 –AR, and that’s the way it goes...


----------



## yogurt_21 (Feb 14, 2012)

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:


> Then it would be a pointless graphics test then if it so CPU dependent. The only way the graphics tests would run much faster on the SB-E six core CPUs is if the engine used is highly threaded.
> The combined test is meant to tax both the CPU and GPU and the Physics test is meant to tax the CPU.
> 
> However,we will soon find out how good or how bad the card performs tomorrow.
> ...



everthing processed by the graphics card has to pass through the cpu and amount of cores aside a phenom 2 core is nowhere near as fast clock for clock as a SB-E core. then you have to factor in turbo core speed and there is quite a bit of difference. 

had the 6850 been benched with the SB-E, the score would be higher. No matter how much you try to focus a benchmark for a particular component, the others will affect the result.

you don't have to take my word for it. Run 3dmark 11 yourself, then underclock your cpu by 500MHZ and run it again. The graphics scores will drop.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 14, 2012)

Note that score is a bit inflated due to the CPU used. That CPU will not translate to the same performance increases in game. Drop a stock 2600k instead of a 3930k/3960X in it and that overall score comes down just a bit. 

Solid card at the sub $200 price point.


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Feb 14, 2012)

cloudwan said:


> Result are quite ok i guess.. this is still on stock with cpu also basically at stock i guess..
> It does have some improvement compared to HD6770, maybe around HD6790 performance when stock i guess.. can't wait to see some official benchmarks..
> 
> http://hwbot.org/image/693981.jpg



5770 results incoming


----------



## D4S4 (Feb 14, 2012)

i might actually buy this and give some new life to my trusty old rig...


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Feb 14, 2012)

Two of these with 2GB vram would be interesting. At 1920x1200 my two 6850s generally do me just great but need more video memory.


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Feb 14, 2012)

Stock 5770 on performance


----------



## yogurt_21 (Feb 14, 2012)

Kevinheraiz said:


> http://i.imgur.com/aI3cd.png
> 
> Stock 5770 on performance



ok now run it at 1GHZ core


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Feb 14, 2012)

yogurt_21 said:


> ok now run it at 1GHZ core



Can't get it that high  Max i can get on this is 926mhz


----------



## DarkOCean (Feb 14, 2012)

yogurt_21 said:


> ok now run it at 1GHZ core


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (Feb 15, 2012)

yogurt_21 said:


> everthing processed by the graphics card has to pass through the cpu and amount of cores aside a phenom 2 core is nowhere near as fast clock for clock as a SB-E core. then you have to factor in turbo core speed and there is quite a bit of difference.
> 
> had the 6850 been benched with the SB-E, the score would be higher. No matter how much you try to focus a benchmark for a particular component, the others will affect the result.
> 
> you don't have to take my word for it. Run 3dmark 11 yourself, then underclock your cpu by 500MHZ and run it again. The graphics scores will drop.



In post 40 the December leak had a Core i5 3550 and the scores are virtually the same for graphics test at least with the HD7770. I have not found a Core i5 2500 and HD6850 1GB score yet,so I will take your word for it with regards to relative performance.



EarthDog said:


> Note that score is a bit inflated due to the CPU used. That CPU will not translate to the same performance increases in game. Drop a stock 2600k instead of a 3930k/3960X in it and that overall score comes down just a bit.
> 
> Solid card at the sub $200 price point.



Not necessarily - look at post 40 again. The graphics score is virtually the same and that is with a Core i5 3550 quad core which has no HT.

Anyway,the reviews are out today and it would be a shame if the card cannot match an HD6850 1GB. Since the card is not bus powered,they should at least try to match the HD6850 1GB.


----------



## Platibus (Feb 15, 2012)

I hope nVidia releases a card around the 6850 performance with only a 6pin conncector. It sucks that the best I can do is a 550ti.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Feb 15, 2012)

D4S4 said:


> i might actually buy this and give some new life to my trusty old rig...



this is COMPLETELY off topic but what cpu cooler do you use for your 3.9ghz C2D overclock? Don't tell me its stock...

I got a friend with that chip and I'm just wondering how well they overclock on stock cooling.


----------



## D4S4 (Feb 15, 2012)

i am using this with a single 1000rpm 120mm fan in the middle.





stock is on the chipset lol - http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2219686&postcount=98

btw if your friend is lucky, he should be able to hit 4 ghz with stock cooling, i have a sucky chip here that won't go higher without more volts and i should be hitting somewhere around 4.5 @1.4v... anyway, those chips are good overclockers in general.


EDIT: the most realistic clock for stock cooler is 3.6ghz, but i've seen a few that went to 4 without raising the voltage.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 15, 2012)

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:


> In post 40 the December leak had a Core i5 3550 and the scores are virtually the same for graphics test at least with the HD7770. I have not found a Core i5 2500 and HD6850 1GB score yet,so I will take your word for it with regards to relative performance.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You do not understand how the FINAL score is calculated. More core/threads = higher Physics score, = higher combined score, = higher total score. You are spot on in regards to the graphics score though. Notice how I specifically mentioned "Overall" score...which was also the context of the post I was replying to.


----------

