Radeon HD 8970 & Intel Core i7-3770K @ 4.2 GHz

I have an Intel Core i7-3770K @ 4.2 GHz CPU and am willing to buy a Radeon HD 8970 when it comes out. I currently have 16 GB DDR3 1600 MHz, ASUS P8Z77-M PRO, 1920x1200 monitor and a 3 TB Western Digital Caviar Green (7200 RPM, 64 MB Buffer Size, SATA 6 GB/s) Hard Drive. I'm going to buy a 1000 / 1000+ Watt PSU, because I might go CrossfireX after a couple of years, and of course a large box which is going to fit a bunch of HD 8970s, but for now, I'm going to get only one 8970, when they are released.. I think that it's going to be a great system overall, and that the performance of the components is going to be similar so no throttling or bottle-necking occurs. How long do you think that this system is going to last in the future? Do you think that it's going to perform at its best with the components given above? Do you think that it'll perform extremely well on Crysis 3, Far Cry 3 and Battlefield 4 fully maxed out at 1920x1200? When is it going to become obsolete for the latest games (by obsolete I mean that the system has an average frame rate below 24 FPS on the lowest settings possible at 800x600). What price points should I expect for the Radeon HD 8970 graphics adapter, I think that it's going to cost around 400 euro, tell me if you have any other information. And I'd like to find out if you know something connected with the release date of Radeon HD 8970, I think that it's going to be released in Q2'13. Thanks for the answers, I'll really appreciate it if you take a few minutes from your time to read this. Have a good day!
37 answers Last reply
More about radeon 8970 intel core 3770k
  1. Short answer is, nobody knows. The card isn't even close to being out so pricing would be a guess, and how long it will last is impossible to tell because games and hardware change all the time. Might last 4 years might last a month.
  2. That's true! In 2005 I bought an ASUS server system with Intel Pentium 4 x64 HT @ 2.8 GHz, 1 GB RAM, 2 x 160 GB RAID 7200 RPM Hitachi HDDs, ASUS P5GDC Deluxe server motherboard, 400 Watt PSU, GeForce 6200 TurboCache 256 MB, one of the most expensive and high quality ASUS CPU fans and a video monitoring motherboard as well. It was one of the best computers you could afford and just after 2 years, when Crysis 1 came out, you couldn't play it properly on low.. Let's hope that my current system doesn't face the same fate. Thanks for the reply. Have a good day.
  3. Well the 8970 will be based on AMD's GCN 2.0 other than that......
  4. Let's hope that the Radeon HD 8970 is going to have a 20 ~ 30% performance improvement compared to the Radeon HD 7970!
  5. jnjnilson6 said:
    That's true! In 2005 I bought an ASUS server system with Intel Pentium 4 x64 HT @ 2.8 GHz, 1 GB RAM, 2 x 160 GB RAID 7200 RPM Hitachi HDDs, ASUS P5GDC Deluxe server motherboard, 400 Watt PSU, GeForce 6200 TurboCache 256 MB, one of the most expensive and high quality ASUS CPU fans and a video monitoring motherboard as well. It was one of the best computers you could afford and just after 2 years, when Crysis 1 came out, you couldn't play it properly on low.. Let's hope that my current system doesn't face the same fate. Thanks for the reply. Have a good day.

    The same thing is happening again with Crysis 3. It's almost impossible to play the game smoothly with all of the settings completely maxed out even on the most high end GPU's.
  6. That's absolutely true! The graphics aren't something much different compared to Crysis 2, they are better, but it's not a huge improvement.. The sad thing is that the frame rates are almost 3 times lower! While a 6850 and a weak i5 could max-out Crysis 2 without any problems, you sure need an i5-3570K / FX-8350 / HD 6990 / HD 7990 or a GTX 590 / GTX 690 to get good performance while playing Crysis 3 maxed out at decent resolutions.
  7. jnjnilson6 said:
    That's absolutely true! The graphics aren't something much different compared to Crysis 2, they are better, but it's not a huge improvement.. The sad thing is that the frame rates are almost 3 times lower! While a 6850 and a weak i5 could max-out Crysis 2 without any problems, you sure need an i5-3570K / FX-8350 / HD 6990 / HD 7990 or a GTX 590 / GTX 690 to get good performance while playing Crysis 3 maxed out at decent resolutions.

    I run crysis 3 on a 7950 and it works great on high settings, but as soon as I turn on the anti-aliasing, things slow down a lot. The anti-aliasing doesn't make things look that much better either.
  8. Crysis 3 is smooth for me @1920x1200 Highest settings and 4X MSAA @ 2560x1440p well that's another story!
  9. Hopefully the Radeon HD 8970 is not going to have any problems fully maxing it out at 1920x1200, since I have a very powerful CPU as well!
  10. That's one of the main reasons why I've decided not to buy a Radeon HD 7950 / 7970 and to wait for HD 8970!
  11. What temperatures are you getting? 5.0 GHz is quite a lot even for a Sandy Bridge CPU, although you are using water cooling! Such clocks are surely going to decrease the lifespan of your 2500K by a long shot, maybe you should try lowering the speeds to 4.5 or 4.6 GHz and see if there's throttling.
  12. AMD confirmed well over a month ago they are sticking with the HD7xxx series for desktop for 2013. There will be no 8970 for over a year. It will not be Q2 2013. Your wasting your time. The 79XXs will be the top AMD cards until at least the end of 2013. No GCN2.0 this year.

    www.anandtech.com/show/6751/amd-reiterates-2013-gpu-plans-sea-islands-beyond
  13. Crysis 3 isn't as bad as Crysis was. At least it can be maxed out on current hardware. IIRC, the original Crysis couldn't be maxed out until several years after it came out and it's still considerably punishing today.
  14. I know from almost a 100% positive source that HD 8XXXM are going to be released in Q2'13, meaning that HD 8XXX are going to be released in Q2'13 as well. You do know that AMD are going to bury themselves in a grave if they don't release HD 8XXX till the end of 2013!
  15. unksol said:
    AMD confirmed well over a month ago they are sticking with the HD7xxx series for desktop for 2013. There will be no 8970 for over a year. It will not be Q2 2013. Your wasting your time. The 79XXs will be the top AMD cards until at least the end of 2013. No GCN2.0 this year.

    www.anandtech.com/show/6751/amd-reiterates-2013-gpu-plans-sea-islands-beyond


    We're supposedly getting a Radeon 7790 with a GPU based on GCN's update and some mobile cards with it too. Even if AMD sticks with the Radeon 7000 series name, there may be some other new cards in six to nine months.
  16. jnjnilson6 said:
    I know from almost a 100% positive source that HD 8XXXM are going to be released in Q2'13, meaning that HD 8XXX are going to be released in Q2'13 as well. You do know that AMD are going to bury themselves in a grave if they don't release HD 8XXX till the end of 2013!


    Mobile cards have nothing to do with the top-end GPU, Tahiti's replacement, so it's entirely possible that they'll arrive six months to a year sooner than the replacement for the high-end desktop cards. It's also possible that this isn't true, but AMD is saying that Radeon 7000 will continue on until at least late 2013 if not early 2014. Whether or not AMD will make some card updates with the Radeon 7000 series name is inconclusive at best, but that there won't be Radeon 8xxx desktop cards for at least six to nine months may as well be set in stone according to what AMD has said.

    Also, I disagree with you saying that AMD would be urying themslves in a grave over this. There isn't much reason to update the desktop cards any time soon since most people who would care to buy them are not yet unhappy with what they currently have and there aren't any games at all that can't run extremely well on current hardware. We probably won't have the new consoles out until almost next year and they're huge incentive to make pc games more intensive, so it stands to reason that we won't see new top-end graphics cards until around their launch or after their launch.

    It's not like we could really use them right now anyway and waiting to make sure that they all work properly (AMD took until about six months after the launch of the 7970 to get excellent driver support for the GCN cards with Catalyst 12.7 and up) is not a bad change of pace.
  17. That's right! The main reason Crysis 1 is so demanding is because the engine is full of bugs, making the game itself buggy, and this is one of the main reasons contributing to its powerful hardware requirements. Most people had P4s and the Intel Core 2 CPUs were owned by the biggest enthusiasts back when Crysis 1 came out. Both Pentiums and Core 2 Duos struggled, only the 2 Quads and Extremes could do the job, but yet again, the 8800 Ultra which was the best GPU back then, wasn't powerful enough to pull good frame rates at anything above 1024x768 (very high, 8 x AA).. There were people who couldn't technically play on Very High, because Vista was almost brand new and most of them had Windows XP. Adding the fact that Vista had major problems and bad drivers, made the situation even worse.
  18. jnjnilson6 said:
    I know from almost a 100% positive source that HD 8XXXM are going to be released in Q2'13, meaning that HD 8XXX are going to be released in Q2'13 as well. You do know that AMD are going to bury themselves in a grave if they don't release HD 8XXX till the end of 2013!


    Read. The. Article.

    Mobile does not release.at the same time as desktop normally.

    AMD had a call with multiple tech news sites over a month ago staying they were sticking with the 7XXX series on desktop for ALL of 2013. Do you understand? AMD directly called reporters and announced NO 8XXX series for desktop in 2013. This has been widely reported. There will be new 7XXX cards still based on GCN 1 to fill holes. The 79XX.series will remain the top cards.

    It was.also announced.well over a month ago from AMD the the 8xxxM gpus would be out Q2 2013. You don't need a source for that. IT WAS ANNOUNCED.

    Mobile does not equal desktop. You asked for release. I am telling you what AMD said. not the end of 2013. Not in 2013 at all. 2014.

    Why would AMD.get buried? They.have better cards, better prices, free games, and nvidia announced they aren't releasing either and keep having driver issues.
  19. AMD say that they want to focus mainly on the drivers and that's probably why they might not release the 8XXX soon, but enthusiasts who play on 4 monitors and want insane frame rates are going to start grabbing GeForce 7XX GPUs like hot bread. I am sorry to say, but the HD 6990 demolishes the HD 7970 and it would be very hard for a 7970 to pull astonishing FPS on a couple of monitors at insanely high resolutions while running Crysis 3 fully maxed out. And besides, CrossfireX has problems, and it's always better to buy one card, so that's another reason why AMD need something better for gamers.
  20. I think that 7XX are going to be released in the end of 2013!
  21. jnjnilson6 said:
    AMD say that they want to focus mainly on the drivers and that's probably why they might not release the 8XXX soon, but enthusiasts who play on 4 monitors and want insane frame rates are going to start grabbing GeForce 7XX GPUs like hot bread. I am sorry to say, but the HD 6990 demolishes the HD 7970 and it would be very hard for a 7970 to pull astonishing FPS on a couple of monitors at insanely high resolutions while running Crysis 3 fully maxed out. And besides, CrossfireX has problems, and it's always better to buy one card, so that's another reason why AMD need something better for gamers.


    Nvidia's reports aren't any earlier for a graphics card generation refresh than AMD's and the Radeon 6990 doesn't beat the Radeon 7970, at least not the GHz Edition, especially in Crossfire where the two powerful Tahiti XT GPUs of the 7970 cards will scale much better than the four slower Cayman XT GPUs of the 6990 cards.

    Furthermore, most of CrossfireX's "problems" are almost always far overstated. CrossfireX is with three or four cards, not two (two is just Crossfire, not CrossfireX) and even if we were just talking about Crossfire, a mere architectural update to GCN almost certainly won't be enough for one GCN "2.0" GPU-based card to best two 7970s in almost any situation. Even Titan can't touch two 7970s and it's GK110 is something like 50% bigger than Tahiti with a similar fab technology.
  22. jnjnilson6 said:
    I have an Intel Core i7-3770K @ 4.2 GHz CPU and am willing to buy a Radeon HD 8970 when it comes out. I currently have 16 GB DDR3 1600 MHz, ASUS P8Z77-M PRO, 1920x1200 monitor and a 3 TB Western Digital Caviar Green (7200 RPM, 64 MB Buffer Size, SATA 6 GB/s) Hard Drive. I'm going to buy a 1000 / 1000+ Watt PSU, because I might go CrossfireX after a couple of years, and of course a large box which is going to fit a bunch of HD 8970s, but for now, I'm going to get only one 8970, when they are released.. I think that it's going to be a great system overall, and that the performance of the components is going to be similar so no throttling or bottle-necking occurs. How long do you think that this system is going to last in the future? Do you think that it's going to perform at its best with the components given above? Do you think that it'll perform extremely well on Crysis 3, Far Cry 3 and Battlefield 4 fully maxed out at 1920x1200? When is it going to become obsolete for the latest games (by obsolete I mean that the system has an average frame rate below 24 FPS on the lowest settings possible at 800x600). What price points should I expect for the Radeon HD 8970 graphics adapter, I think that it's going to cost around 400 euro, tell me if you have any other information. And I'd like to find out if you know something connected with the release date of Radeon HD 8970, I think that it's going to be released in Q2'13. Thanks for the answers, I'll really appreciate it if you take a few minutes from your time to read this. Have a good day!

    What's with the power supply overkill? You'll be limited to two graphics cards on that motherboard, realistically, and that won't require a 1000W PSU. With a pair of 7970s you could do with 750-800W, and I doubt 8970s will be much different.

    unksol said:
    AMD confirmed well over a month ago they are sticking with the HD7xxx series for desktop for 2013. There will be no 8970 for over a year. It will not be Q2 2013. Your wasting your time. The 79XXs will be the top AMD cards until at least the end of 2013. No GCN2.0 this year.

    www.anandtech.com/show/6751/amd-reiterates-2013-gpu-plans-sea-islands-beyond

    Well, no GCN2.0 for at least MOST of this year. It's not unambiguously ruled out for a release near Christmas.
  23. Crossfire only gets you so far.. You get 50% higher performance the most in some games if the drivers are made by god himself and there are games in which it doesn't matter. It's a good idea if your card is cheap and old, and you don't have money to buy a good new one, but I wouldn't bother otherwise. And besides, it's just beating the dead horse.. Unless you are some maniac who has his wall covered in monitors and wants to have insanely high frame rates, those people buy a bunch of brand new cards.
  24. My motherboard supports up to 4 GPUs: http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P8Z77M_PRO/ !
  25. jnjnilson6 said:
    Crossfire only gets you so far.. You get 50% higher performance the most in some games if the drivers are made by god himself and there are games in which it doesn't matter. It's a good idea if your card is cheap and old, and you don't have money to buy a good new one, but I wouldn't bother otherwise. And besides, it's just beating the dead horse.. Unless you are some maniac who has his wall covered in monitors and wants to have insanely high frame rates, those people buy a bunch of brand new cards.


    LOL, Crossfire is almost always between 75% and 100% faster with the current cards and drivers so long as there aren't other bottle-necks such as a CPU that can't keep up or a memory capacity or bandwidth bottle-neck. Crossfire works best on the newer, higher end cards and it is a proven fact that cheap, old cards are in fact usually the worst for it. What you say is completely contradictory to what the experts say and my own considerable experience from building hundreds of systems for clients.
  26. jnjnilson6 said:
    My motherboard supports up to 4 GPUs: http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P8Z77M_PRO/ !


    Any motherboard with at least two PCIe x16 slots (even if one or both of them are electrically only PCIe x4 slots) can support up to four GPUs, depending on the cards in use. Regardless, quad-GPU arrays are known for their generally poor scaling, so I don't think that it's particularly important.
  27. I do know some people considered "experts" who know nothing about hardware. For example "an expert" built a PC for my friend in 2010 with HD 5850, 4 GB RAM, AMD 1090T for 3000 euro.. Seriously? The specifications are good, but they are complete junk for 3000 euro, he could have given my friend a HD 5970, 16 GB RAM and an i7 980X, and there would've still been spare money!
  28. jnjnilson6 said:
    I do know some people considered "experts" who know nothing about hardware. For example "an expert" built a PC for my friend in 2010 with HD 5850, 4 GB RAM, AMD 1090T for 3000 euro.. Seriously? The specifications are good, but they are complete junk for 3000 euro, he could have given my friend a HD 5970, 16 GB RAM and an i7 980X, and there would've still been spare money!


    I consider the experts running Tom's hardware articles, Anand, Tech Report, and several other such sites to be quite credible for this and worthy of being called experts.
  29. blazorthon said:
    I consider the experts running Tom's hardware articles, Anand, Tech Report, and several other such sites to be quite credible for this and worthy of being called experts.



    Agreed mostly though I would not place Tomshardware up there with Anandtech, Tech Report or Guru3d
  30. redeemer said:
    Agreed mostly though I would not place Tomshardware up there with Anandtech, Tech Report or Guru3d


    Tom's might not be as good as Techreport and Anand, but Techreport has other issues (such as very small test selection sizes for gaming) and I definitely wouldn't put Guru3D anywhere near even Tom's due to their recurring Nvidia bias with drivers (Guru3D seems to like testing current Nvidia drivers against old AMD drivers in "fair" comparisons for current cards instead of testing new drivers for both companies' cards). Tom's is still pretty decent most of the time anyway. They were among the few sites to give non-biased comparisons of Nvidia's GT/GTX 600 series to AMD's Radeon 7000 series as each card came out, granted some of their article titles were misleading and several of their reviews were a few days late.
  31. blazorthon said:
    Tom's might not be as good as Techreport and Anand, but Techreport has other issues (such as very small test selection sizes for gaming) and I definitely wouldn't put Guru3D anywhere near even Tom's due to their recurring Nvidia bias with drivers (Guru3D seems to like testing current Nvidia drivers against old AMD drivers in "fair" comparisons for current cards instead of testing new drivers for both companies' cards). Tom's is still pretty decent most of the time anyway. They were among the few sites to give non-biased comparisons of Nvidia's GT/GTX 600 series to AMD's Radeon 7000 series as each card came out, granted some of their article titles were misleading and several of their reviews were a few days late.



    Really well from the impression I perceive the opposite actually Toms is very much Intel/Nvidia biased, this is the general consensus.
  32. redeemer said:
    Really well from the impression I perceive the opposite actually Toms is very much Intel/Nvidia biased, this is the general consensus.


    Almost every recommended card by Tom's is an AMD card and almost every graphics card in their SBMs is an AMD card. They do prefer Intel CPUs over AMD, but that is not without reason. Intel's i5s are undisputed as ideal gaming CPUs for budgets that allow for them and although Intel is usually chosen for their cheaper CPUs in the lower budgets too, AMD is still given recognition with several CPU recommendations and occasional use in SBMs.

    Tom's recently changed several CPU recommendations to AMD in light of modern games getting progressively better at scaling across four to eight threads and AMD irrefutably holding the highly threaded performance for the money crown at almost every price point. Tom's even listed the Radeon 7970 GHz Edition as the fastest single GPU graphics card until Titan and it's still the fastest single GPU graphics ard with a value recommendation.

    Tom's, unlike many other sites, also doesn't give either graphics company a driver advantage, has a fairly diverse testing suite, and although often late, tests almost everything that they can.

    I don't see why people accuse Tom's of being biased against AMD. The only valid point that I can think of in such an argument against Tom's would be their insistence on reference cooler performance and noise being very important for enthusiasts, a crowd that generally uses non-reference cards.
  33. blazorthon said:
    Almost every recommended card by Tom's is an AMD card and almost every graphics card in their SBMs is an AMD card. They do prefer Intel CPUs over AMD, but that is not without reason. Intel's i5s are undisputed as ideal gaming CPUs for budgets that allow for them and although Intel is usually chosen for their cheaper CPUs in the lower budgets too, AMD is still given recognition with several CPU recommendations and occasional use in SBMs.

    Tom's recently changed several CPU recommendations to AMD in light of modern games getting progressively better at scaling across four to eight threads and AMD irrefutably holding the highly threaded performance for the money crown at almost every price point. Tom's even listed the Radeon 7970 GHz Edition as the fastest single GPU graphics card until Titan and it's still the fastest single GPU graphics ard with a value recommendation.

    Tom's, unlike many other sites, also doesn't give either graphics company a driver advantage, has a fairly diverse testing suite, and although often late, tests almost everything that they can.

    I don't see why people accuse Tom's of being biased against AMD. The only valid point that I can think of in such an argument against Tom's would be their insistence on reference cooler performance and noise being very important for enthusiasts, a crowd that generally uses non-reference cards.



    Agreed but lets be honest most sites have some sorts of bias. I do not know how long you have been cruising Toms Hardware for but this interpretation was not built over night instead realized over the years.

    The thing about Toms is the inconsistency of it news publishing when compared to other websites in regards to Nvidia and AMD.
  34. redeemer said:
    Agreed but lets be honest most sites have some sorts of bias. I do not know how long you have been cruising Toms Hardware for but this interpretation was not built over night instead realized over the years.

    The thing about Toms is the inconsistency of it news publishing when compared to other websites in regards to Nvidia and AMD.


    For all it matters, I've been a member at Tom's for around two and a half years and an active member for more than half as long.

    What inconsistency? It lines up quite well with what Anand posts and Anand is among the most relied on so long as you avoid their crappy comparison tools and instead read their newer articles.

    EDIT: Now that I think about it, this sort of thing might be better discussed in a different thread instead of me hijacking this one :lol:
  35. jnjnilson6 said:
    My motherboard supports up to 4 GPUs: http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P8Z77M_PRO/ !

    Two HD 7990s on a mATX motherboard? :heink:
  36. Just wanted to put this out there: http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/AMD_Radeon_HD_8970_Feature_Summary.pdf
    Dpesn't look much different to the 7970, just faster clock speeds. Nothing an overclock can't do
  37. ghettotank said:
    Just wanted to put this out there: http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/AMD_Radeon_HD_8970_Feature_Summary.pdf
    Dpesn't look much different to the 7970, just faster clock speeds. Nothing an overclock can't do

    Those are the exact same clocks speeds as the 7970 GHz edition. That's the change they made from the original 7970 to the GHz edition. This is just a straight rebrand; the only difference between a 7970 GHz and an OEM 8970 is the sticker.

    The 8000 series is currently just an OEM rebrand. It's not the successor to the 7000 series. Eventually there'll be a retail 8000 series, or who knows, maybe they'll call it the 9000 series.
Ask a new question

Read More

Radeon Intel i7 HD Graphics