Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Sapphire 7950 Vapor-X or Dual-X?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 30, 2013 10:24:17 AM

Hi all, im just thinking about purchasing the Sapphire 7950 Vapor-X, but im unsure if i will suffer the problems some others have been having with the VRM temps? I don't know much about overclocking, so i probably won't be doing that to begin with.
The games im planning to play are Skyrim (with hd graphic mods), COH 2, The witcher 2, Battlefield 3 and 4, dragon age 2 and 3, with the best graphics settings the card will do and still be playable. If i ran the Vapor-X on the 2nd bios of 950mhz all the time will that be ok, or will it overheat?
Both the Vapor-X and Dual-X cards on amazon uk are within £10 of each other at the min, so price isn't an issue between them, im just unsure about which one to get? Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
Ian

a b K Overclocking
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
May 30, 2013 11:07:12 AM

I've heard from many that the Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 Vapor-X is voltage locked. So if you're planning to overclock, get the Dual-X version. I would think Sapphire has released a batch of voltage unlocked HD 7950 but I've yet to find proof of that.
m
0
l
May 30, 2013 11:26:22 AM

Would the voltage lock be a problem if i only wanted to run the card on 950mhz, or maybe 1000mhz max after I've had it a while? Its the vrm temps that's got me worried?
ian
m
0
l
Related resources
May 30, 2013 11:29:57 AM

Forgot to add, my resolution is 1080p, if that makes a difference?
ian
m
0
l

Best solution

a b K Overclocking
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
May 30, 2013 12:14:31 PM

Go with the Dual-X. Just the better option. Even if you don't plan to OC it much, the capability of being able to is better in case you want to OC higher in the future.

Both cards have great cooling. Neither is significantly superior. The Vapor-X has better cooling and runs slightly quieter, but if it is voltage locked, then the better cooling doesn't apply.
Share
May 30, 2013 12:59:46 PM

Thanks :-)
Ian
m
0
l
!