AMD’s 1 GB Radeon HD 6950s are certainly cheaper than their 2 GB predecessors. But are they really a better value? In theory, the Cayman GPU runs out of steam before 2 GB is needed. So, we're comparing five custom 1 GB cards to the 2 GB part to find out.
Although we haven't seen too many examples of it recently, adding tons of memory to a lower-end GPU was once a common practice, if only as a relatively affordable way to beef up a card's spec sheet. It turned out that gamers who didn't understand what really made one board faster than another would buy an overpriced GeForce 2 MX, for example, because it had more memory than a standard GeForce 2 GTS, and then end up with a slower product that was cheaper to manufacture.
Of course, we all know that the Radeon HD 6950 is far from a low-end part. Instead, the most likely reason that AMD's Radeon HD 6950 originally came with a massive 2 GB of GDDR5 RAM was based in its origin as a Radeon HD 6970. The company specified a top-end memory configuration for its best card, and the easiest way to make its number-two part was to simply flash a separate firmware to disable shader cores and drop the clocks. Using the next-lower speed grade for RAM, the Radeon HD 6950 was born.

A lot has happened since that launch, however. To begin, the Radeon HD 6970 targeted triple-GPU configurations, where super-high resolutions and details could occasionally make use of that extra RAM. AMD's less expensive 6950 was marketed toward gamers looking to save a little money. Lower thermal ceilings allowed manufacturers to adopt more compact circuit boards for even greater cost savings and installation flexibility.
Three-way configurations and 2 GB Radeon HD 6950s are still available, but if you're running a single card, it's safe to say that, in most cases, you're going to run out of GPU muscle before you hit the limits of a 1 GB board. As a result, the Radeon HD 6950 1 GB appears to be this market’s sweet spot.
Five companies agreed with our assessment enough that they were willing to send their cards for evaluation.

| Single-Slot Graphics Comparison Specifications | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gigabyte 1GB GV-R695OC-1GD | HIS ICEQ X 1GB H695QN1G2M | MSI R6950 PE OC 912-V246-047 | Sapphire HD 6950 1GB GDDR5 PCIE | XFX 800M 1GB HD-695X-ZDFC | |
| GPU Clock | 870 MHz | 800 MHz | 850 MHz | 800 MHz | 800 MHz |
| DRAM Rate | GDDR5-5000 | GDDR5-5000 | GDDR5-5200 | GDDR5-5000 | GDDR5-5000 |
| DVI | 1 x Dual-Link 1 x Single-Link | 1 x Dual-Link 1 x Single-Link | 1 x Dual-Link 1 x Single-Link | 1 x Dual-Link 1 x Single-Link | 1 x Dual-Link 1 x Single-Link |
| HDMI | Full | Full | Full | Full | Full |
| DisplayPort | Full | Two Mini | Two Mini | Full | Two Mini |
| VGA | By Adapter | By Adapter | By Adapter | By Adapter | By Adapter |
| Output Adapters | None | DVI-I to VGA | DVI-I to VGA Full DisplayPort | DVI-I to VGA | None |
| Length | 11.0" | 9.7" | 10.8" | 10.3" | 9.6" |
| Height | 4.7" | 4.8" | 4.6" | 4.7" | 4.6" |
| Total Thickness | 1.5" | 1.6" | 1.6" | 1.5" | 1.5" |
| Cooler Thickness | 1.3" | 1.4" | 1.4" | 1.3" | 1.3" |
| Weight | 25 Ounces | 23 Ounces | 28 Ounces | 24 Ounces | 21 Ounces |
| PCB Version | Custom 1.0 | Custom | V246 2.0 | Custom | Custom |
| VRM | Eight Phases | Four Phases | Six Phases | Four Phases | Four Phases |
| Warranty | Three Years | Two Years | Three Years | Two Years | Lifetime w/reg |
| Added Value | DiRT3 Certificate | Dual BIOS | DiRT3 Certificate | ||
- Radeon HD 6950 1 GB: But It Has Less Memory!
- Gigabyte GV-R695OC-1GD
- HIS IceQ X HD 6950 1 GB
- MSI R6950 Twin Frozr III 1GD5 Power Edition/OC
- Sapphire HD 6950 1 GB GDDR5 PCIE
- XFX HD-695X-ZDFC
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: Aliens Vs. Predator
- Benchmark Results: F1 2010
- Benchmark Results: H.A.W.X. 2
- Benchmark Results: Just Cause 2
- Benchmark Results: Lost Planet 2
- Benchmark Results: Metro 2033
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11
- Average Performance Analysis
- Power, Heat, And Noise
- Efficiency And Performance Value
- Which Radeon HD 6950 1 GB Should You Buy?
my gtx 580 @ 1080p with these exact settings gets around 35 average fps.
the low fps are probably around 15.
Edit: oh ok. i play at ultra settings with advanced physx on. the test uses medium settings with no physx.
If only things were so simple. That's why I think (hope, really) that a large number of next-gen low and mid range cards will be mostly silent, and very efficient.
Yeah it cost twice as much to. I could CF both of these cards and it would kill your card in performance/price
and why ARE they on medium settings? wouldn't it show the benefit of 2gb on higher settings, hell even on my 6850 I play it on higher settings than that...
I have found that Metro 2033 requires a strong CPU as well as GPU. Your CPU might be the bottleneck. I've also found that Metro 2033 is one of the few games I've played that hyperthreading matters.
Unless prices have changed a lot, I don't see the 1GB 6950 as the sweet spot.There are probably a dozen of other professional reviews that show that the 2GB version DOES greatly improve performance at the highest settings. At the highest settings, the 6950 2GB card virtually ties the more expensive 570.
It would have been interesting to see which of the cards overclocks the best. I moved my settings up in ATI's Catalsyst Control but the card did not overclock when I moved the settings up for some reason. I tried researching it but XFX's info kind of sucks. Anyway, my card is so fast that I decided it wasn't important anyway and I don't game.
2.) Are any of the 1GB cards in this article able to unlock the extra shaders like I've read that some 2GB 6950's can (into basically a 6970)?
Be careful, this review while having a reference 2GB card,doesn't even begin to show the true performance of the 2GB cards and in that way it is misleading. I would strongly suggest that you read some other site's reviews because this one sucks in telling the whole story about the 2 GB card.
The Reader's Digest version is that there is little difference in performance between the 1 GB and the 2 GB card until you start getting into the highest game settings and higher resolution monitors. Then the 2 GB card starts to pull away.
This is a reference card and its performance is not anywhere near the improved versions of the card
Dude you need to get off of this site unless you are going to discuss the subject - you are way out of line and you are going to sale anything to anyone by flaming this site!
Gotta remember that you can brick a card by trying this. I think that this review rightfully did not bring this issue up. I do think they should have mentioned it though - so people would know. However there are several MSI Frozen versions and Gigabyte cards that cannot be unlocked to a 6970. These cards may not have the dual BIOS switch. And really, if you need a 6970, shouldn't you just buy a 6970? It really isn't that much faster than a good 6950 card.
No, they cannot. And not every version of the 2 GB MSI Frozr and 2 GB Gigabyte card can be flashed to a 6970