AMD Radeon HD 7950 Clock Speeds Revealed

[Crap Daddy]

Will probably perform like an overclocked 580 at 50$ MSRP less. Not interesting for the large part of the consumers but for high-end users better bang/buck that the 7970. The 580 already has no appeal and should be priced at around 400-450$ to worth something.

 

[magibeg]

Yeah that's the common interpretation, which I usually agree with, but it doesn't really explain why the HD6950 has sold more than other AMD cards that cost half as much and are not much slower. I can see an scenario where even if not directly, unlockability has helped in sales. For example, the masses might not unlock or OC, or they might not even know about it, but they do hear about such cards more than others from "people who do know".

I only see one chance for an experiment to work. We need to convince everyone on TPU to recommend S3 video cards... say this one:

http://www.s3graphics.com/en/products/class3.aspx?productId=19

Then check to see if there is a spike in the Chrome 540 GTX

 

[redeye]

off topic but..

(sorry for the ad but...)@magibeg... ditch rogers, and go teksavvy... (far cheaper) and better, the up and download speeds and bandwidth cap are better.

 

[Casecutter]

Sorry to say in all probability 580's are already EoL; once the 7950 hits Nvidia will just let appropriate rebates shrink most of the quality AIB's to dwindle stock off at say $430. Those less desired AIB’s will clearance their stocks swiftly in the next weeks at $420; although attached with steep rebates. While a final sell off of any remaining chips happens well after no longer relevant in the market (like 480 did a while back).

The 7950 will be again dual BIOS, but for "unlock-able" I wouldn’t count on it. When AMD re-spun Barts the processes and TSMC was dial-in, and AMD used it to keep the buzz up over the month and half (Christmas money time) before the 560ti came into play. While the same timing/market factors are kind of there, I just don’t think TSMC can/has chips in any volume on this first go around to play that.

 

[Isenstaedt]

According to W1zz its only around 30% faster at all resolutions ...

http://img.techpowerup.org/120120/perfrel.gif

The 6950 is 30% slower than the 7970 at all resolutions.

The 7970 is 39% faster than the 6970 at 2560x1600.

 

[perryra1968]

I'll stick with my $300.00 AMD 5970.

 

[Thassodar]

Noob question: If I were to purchase a 7950 with, for instance, my tax refund and ran it CrossfireX with my 6950 2GB, wouldn't the 7950 run at the lower clocks of the 6950?

I don't remember where I read that at. Second noob question: I'm assuming I'd probably need a PSU bigger than 650W for the both of them? I doubt my current one has four 8 pin connectors anyways.

 

[radrok]

You can't CFX two different chips, you must have a Tahiti chip to crossfire with another Tahiti, the same goes for Cayman, you need the card to be based on the same chip.
To make it easier, 6950 will CFX with ANY of the 69xx series, but not with the 68xx/78xx/79xx because they are based on different chips.
Unless you want to use a Virtu chip, which isn't optimized and will probably make you loose FPS.

 

[Steevo]

Yeah that's the common interpretation, which I usually agree with, but it doesn't really explain why the HD6950 has sold more than other AMD cards that cost half as much and are not much slower. I can see an scenario where even if not directly, unlockability has helped in sales. For example, the masses might not unlock or OC, or they might not even know about it, but they do hear about such cards more than others from "people who do know".

Price point, perceived value with the unlock, Its a really good card.

 

[Benetanegia]

Price point, perceived value with the unlock, Its a really good card.

HD6870 - Even better price point and it's a good card too, not much slower either. No unlock. Less sales? Because of no unlock? Or something else? That's what I mean.

 

[ramraze]

7970´s success shouldn´t be overlooked

While we discuss the relative gains of the new Tahiti series cards in percentages, we shouldn´t forget the key areas in which it excels. Namely, 7970 will be much more efficient with more raw power. Which means it will enable us to have more power at less clock rates while consuming less power and also, the other way around, to be more effective and bring more performance gain at higher clock rates. Those people that only stick to stock performance in their comparisons with the current Nvidia cards are cutting themselves short.

The 7970 is about 15-20% faster than the gtx 580, the nvidia flagship, in most relevant benchmarks. As the new AMD´s 28 nm technology is much more efficient it will mean that the 7970 will bring huge overclocking value. Why ? Because with most cards you can always theoretically push the numbers up to the max. After a certain point, there is no absolute value anymore, as the marginal performance boosts don´t weigh up the heat and power output, let alone crashes and instability that occurs. The 7970 OC in practice means, given it´s extremely high clock rates and the large amount of transistors and shaders, that you can push it to its limits without breaking a sweat and all the while gaining sweet fps, not at the expense of heat and power consumption(in relative terms).

The gtx 570 and gtx 580 had its´ 30 seconds of glory but really, they are already rather redundant given what Tahiti can do. Also, a 10-15 % advance over NVidia is not trivial in this fps point. Maxing out most new titles will keep the fps nicely above 60-70, like BF3 and others, while the older cards wouldn´t actually be able to handle the standard of 60 fps with 60 hz monitors. In most games, as I´ve mentioned, higher clock rates and more efficient architecture will ensure higher consistent fps rate in pretty much any resolution, especially on the low end of the spectrum. The gtx 580 is still a good performer but has noticeably less lowest fps in games.

Let´s see what Kepler says Whenever it releases, I´m sure AMD will drop their prices competitively, so the 79xx will be of more value in any case.

 

[xtremesv]

It's good to see the evolution of gfx power on PCs. However, what I'm still waiting is the evolution of PC games.

Every year we are delivered the next "great" GPU by either AMD or Nvidia only to get 15 more fps on a specific game made for PC when the rest are just console ports (some pathetically ported btw).

I don't know, maybe, I'm just down today

 

[Benetanegia]

The gtx 570 and gtx 580 had its´ 30 seconds of glory but really

Not wanting to fight over anything, but I just found that funny. You are aware that they have been on the market for over 14 months, right? They had their 30 seconds of glory and what now, Tahiti rules? But for how long, 3 seconds?

I'm laughing at the way you made your point. HD7970 is the fastest card right now, but to claim GTX cards had their 30 seconds of glory as if Tahiti would reing supreme for the next 20 years... oh man. If Kepler rumours turn out to be true, Tahiti is starting to look like those Roman imperators that came and went (died) without much notice from future generations. I hope that Kepler is good enough so as we get the improvement we deserve over previous gen, and we can get better cards overall, but slow enough so that competition is not hurt. Let's hope for the best.

 

[redgoblin]

According to W1zz its only around 30% faster at all resolutions ...

So given that the 7970 has 33% more shaders than 6970 and is only 30% faster than the 6970...
I assumed, with less shaders and less clock speeds, that it'll be only 10-15% faster ... I might be wrong here tho ... just assuming with the help of whats available ...

http://img.techpowerup.org/120120/perfrel.gif

there's no point comparing 7970 in mid resolution like your all day fullHD res .i think we all should try eyefinity or 3D to realize how much distant 7970 with 580 and 6970...as for this solid performance i should say we officially entering the era of multi monitor setup AND not to mention the "TRUE" tesselation performance in the red camp...we also should rolling out the red carpet for this

and to add it up, try to OC your 6970 and see how far it can competing with 7970...while your 6970 stuck at 10ish % OC the 7970 will comfortly sits in 20%+ OC and hey..that's another extra 10%

to those who put their faith in kepler and willing to wait for it, i can only say that the red camp will also have something in their hand just few months after kepler get released..it's like tick tock scheme while this 7970 is a tick then just wait for a while and it should be followed by tock. the same thing also works in the green camp so there's no point comparing CURRENTLY AVAILABLE card with something that not even taped out yet.

this is my first post anyway..finally made techpowerup forum

 

[OneCool]

but with a few components disabled

Shouldnt it be the same in all aspects just slower clocked?

 

[radrok]

Nope, it has less shaders enabled AND lower clocks, otherwise people would just be able to increase Core/Memory frequency and get the high end product by paying less (like it was with the 6950/70)

this is my first post anyway..finally made techpowerup forum

Welcome to TPU

 

[eidairaman1]

I'll stick with my $300.00 AMD 5970.

Considering you can probably grab another n be satisfied with the performance for sometime anyway.

Sorry Paying 500+ for a video card is ridiculous, Ill keep it in the 200-300 dollar range...

Nope, it has less shaders enabled AND lower clocks, otherwise people would just be able to increase Core/Memory frequency and get the high end product by paying less (like it was with the 6950/70)



Welcome to TPU

You Could do it on R9500 Pro (R300)

 

[Noci]

Questio from a newbee,
Is it likely that AMD has a '7990' up it's sleeve to counterstrike NVidia's next move?

Common sense is not so common!

 

[gorg_graggel]

it is pretty likely that amd is gonna release a "7990", but this should be a dual gpu card...

there have been speculations though, that amd might release a "7980", which takes advantage of the reserves left in the 7970's chip...