PowerColor Radeon RX 7900 GRE Hellhound

[Zubasa]

What @Pumper said, it's kinda pointless, but now I'm realizing that there's the point that people might not be aware that it's pointless, so it's been added to the summary graphs and I'll include it in the future, too

While you are at it, can you add the GRE to the Horizon FW benchmark as well?

 

[Btzen]

I'd like to see the GRE added to the Horizon benchmark as well

I guess you're right. But still think the GRE should be able to achieve at least the same levels as XT and XTX when it comes to media playback power consumption, which currently isn't the case (I have the 24.3.1 WHQL drivers as of this writing).

Am I missing something regarding this (re-reading through the thread, sorry for the late quote/question). The Hellhound review shows it is almost as good as the 7900xt at 37w for video playback compared to the "base" gre at 64w. Is this a misleading metric somehow, or were you just talking generally and not about this particular model?

It is strange that the Hellhound's power draw is so reduced with media compared to all the other models, but the same goes for its extra power draw during v-sync 60 test which I mentioned earlier. Odd card to my inexperienced eye

 

[star-affinity]

It is strange that the Hellhound's power draw is so reduced with media compared to all the other models, but the same goes for its extra power draw during v-sync 60 test which I mentioned earlier. Odd card to my inexperienced eye

That's a good point!
So Hellhound has quite a lot lower power consumption for media playback compared to the reference GRE card while having quite a lot higher power consumption when gaming with v-sync.

Even compared to the Sapphire Radeon RX 7900 GRE Pulse there's quite a difference when it comes to this and quite a lot higher power consumption for other thigs as well. But not when it comes to media playback. Hmm… **scratches head**

Pulse:

Hellhound:

 

[Imouto]

That's a good point!
So Hellhound has quite a lot lower power consumption for media playback compared to the reference GRE card while having quite a lot higher power consumption when gaming with v-sync.

Even compared to the Sapphire Radeon RX 7900 GRE Pulse there's quite a difference when it comes to this and quite a lot higher power consumption for other thigs as well. But not when it comes to media playback. Hmm… **scratches head**

My understanding is that he didn't retest the "base" GRE for this review. It's supposed to be a driver fix, not a vendor fix.

 

[star-affinity]

My understanding is that he didn't retest the "base" GRE for this review. It's supposed to be a driver fix, not a vendor fix.

Aha.
Was thinking it was the base GRE is there at the bottom of this chart – what does that represent then?

 

[W1zzard]

Was thinking it was the base GRE is there at the bottom of this chart – what does that represent then?

That's the Sapphire Pulse, because it's very close to reference (which I cannot buy anywhere)

ASUS TUF is 39 W in media playback with newest drivers, so looks like they made some improvements

 

[Btzen]

That's the Sapphire Pulse, because it's very close to reference (which I cannot buy anywhere)

ASUS TUF is 39 W in media playback with newest drivers, so looks like they made some improvements

If that's the case then your conclusion on this Hellhound review is inaccurate, as it still mentions that video playback power draw is higher on the GRE than the two other 7900 models which it's not.
Or have they also been retested and shown improvements, further improvements since their initial reviews at least, not reflected in the chart linked above?

I'd be curious if the TUF is also showing that very high v-sync draw and if that also points towards a driver issue instead of something in the card design

 

[Garrus]

It's fair to point out that the GRE uses more power for video playback than the 4070 Super. Also fair to point out that it is still very low and not a problem unless in a laptop.

Here's another way to look at it. The 3090 Ti launched for $2000 2 years earlier. 2 years later we get the same performance while using dramatically less power, for almost 1/4 the price. Even for video playback, the 7900 GRE uses less power for video than the 3090 Ti did.

Pretty great progress in 2 years. I wonder how RDNA4 will top this. Same performance for $450? Would be crazy.

 

[AleXXX666]

so beautiful card

 

[Garrus]

so beautiful card

also ridiculously well made compared to the Gigabyte one

 

[Reegar]

also ridiculously well made compared to the Gigabyte one

I am currently wondering whether to buy the Gigabyte Gaming OC or the PowerColor Hellhound. I have not found a direct comparison between those two, but based on several reviews Gigabyte seems to be slighlty worse in terms of noise and sligthly better in terms of temparatures compared to Sapphire models, so the difference between Gigabyte Gaming and Hellhound should be similar to Sapphire vs PowerColor shown in this review.

In my country Sapphire models are a little more expensive than theirs PowerColor counterparts (Pulse vs Fighter, Nitro+ vs Hellhound), so I chose PowerColor and decided to take higher model Hellhound for about 45$ more. But then I spotted Gigabyte which is roughly the same price as entry models (Pulse and Fighter) from AiBs, while Gaming is a higher model in the Gigabyte portofolio (safe to say the same level as Nitro+ and Hellhound?).

Thus, I'm wondering whether it's worth to pay those extra 45$ to get PowerColor Hellhound over Gigabyte Gaming?

 

[cox]

Thus, I'm wondering whether it's worth to pay those extra 45$ to get PowerColor Hellhound over Gigabyte Gaming?

Yes, its worth it. I own the 7800XT Hellhound and its a banger.

 

[Knight47]

Hey. I heard that all new cards from powercolor use ptm. Can anyone confirm?

 

[Garrus]

I am currently wondering whether to buy the Gigabyte Gaming OC or the PowerColor Hellhound. I have not found a direct comparison between those two, but based on several reviews Gigabyte seems to be slighlty worse in terms of noise and sligthly better in terms of temparatures compared to Sapphire models, so the difference between Gigabyte Gaming and Hellhound should be similar to Sapphire vs PowerColor shown in this review.

In my country Sapphire models are a little more expensive than theirs PowerColor counterparts (Pulse vs Fighter, Nitro+ vs Hellhound), so I chose PowerColor and decided to take higher model Hellhound for about 45$ more. But then I spotted Gigabyte which is roughly the same price as entry models (Pulse and Fighter) from AiBs, while Gaming is a higher model in the Gigabyte portofolio (safe to say the same level as Nitro+ and Hellhound?).

Thus, I'm wondering whether it's worth to pay those extra 45$ to get PowerColor Hellhound over Gigabyte Gaming?

The Hellhound just dropped in price massively in Canada and now is almost the same price as the Gigabyte one.

 

[L0rd]

hi guys, got this card for my gf - thing is - it doesnt do even 2400mhz memory. well it does in games. but random light windows loads blackscreen reboots her pc. turning on fast timings on no other oc instantly black screen reboots.
error reporting only gives WHEA 18 error / cache hierachy errors
not sure if its the card or something else, besides that this problem is new since the changing of the gpu

 

[DBGT]

hi guys, got this card for my gf - thing is - it doesnt do even 2400mhz memory. well it does in games. but random light windows loads blackscreen reboots her pc. turning on fast timings on no other oc instantly black screen reboots.
error reporting only gives WHEA 18 error / cache hierachy errors
not sure if its the card or something else, besides that this problem is new since the changing of the gpu

Contact PowerColor

 

[Ravenas]

From the data I have reviewed, this card is on average 10-15 FPS slower than the 6950 XT across all resolutions. W1z I’m sure you didn’t have time or had a reference card, however, it is interesting that the stated specifications of the 7900 GRE do not outperform the 6950XT, and the only thing I can attribute this to is the infinity cache?