Test Setup And Benchmarks
| Test Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Processors | Intel Core i7-3960X (Sandy Bridge-E) 3.3 GHz at 4.2 GHz (42 * 100 MHz), LGA 2011, 15 MB Shared L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Power-savings enabled |
| Motherboard | Gigabyte X79-UD5 (LGA 2011) X79 Express Chipset, BIOS F8 |
| Memory | G.Skill 16 GB (4 x 4 GB) DDR3-1600, F3-12800CL9Q2-32GBZL @ 9-9-9-24 and 1.5 V |
| Hard Drive | Intel SSDSC2MH250A2 250 GB SATA 6Gb/s |
| Graphics | AMD Radeon HD 7950 3 GB |
| AMD Radeon HD 7970 3 GB | |
| AMD Radeon HD 6990 4 GB | |
| AMD Radeon HD 6970 2 GB | |
| AMD Radeon HD 6950 2 GB | |
| Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 3 GB | |
| Nvidia GeForce GTX 580 1.5 GB | |
| Nvidia GeForce GTX 570 1.25 GB | |
| Power Supply | Cooler Master UCP-1000 W |
| System Software And Drivers | |
| Operating System | Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit |
| DirectX | DirectX 11 |
| Graphics Driver | AMD 8.921.2 RC11 (For Radeon HD 7970 and 7950) |
| AMD 11.12 CAP3 (For CrossFire Configurations) | |
| AMD Catalyst 11.12 | |
| Nvidia GeForce Release 285.62 | |
We've transitioned our test platform for graphics to a Sandy Bridge-E-based Core i7-3960X overclocked to 4.2 GHz. You'll notice that, in some cases, that's still not enough processing power to let some of our more demanding two- and four-GPU configurations really stretch their legs. I also made the call to swap from an Asus motherboard to a Gigabyte platform after discovering, last year during a Z68 Express motherboard round-up, that certain settings in Asus' BIOS would alter Turbo Boost behavior in an undesirable way.
| Games | |
|---|---|
| Battlefield 3 | Ultra Quality Settings, No AA / 16x AF, 4x MSAA / 16x AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, DirectX 11, Going Hunting, 90-second playback, Fraps |
| Crysis 2 | DirectX 9 / DirectX 11, Ultra System Spec, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, No AA / No AF, Central Park, High-Resolution Textures: On |
| Metro 2033 | Very High Quality Settings, AAA / 4x AF, 4x MSAA / 16x AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, Built-in Benchmark, Depth of Field filter Disabled, Steam version |
| DiRT 3 | Ultra High Settings, No AA / No AF, 8x AA / No AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, Steam version, Built-In Benchmark Sequence, DX 11 |
| The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim | High Quality (8x AA / 8x AF) / Ultra Quality (8x AA, 16x AF) Settings, FXAA enabled, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, 25-second playback, Fraps |
| 3DMark 11 | Version 1.03, Extreme Preset |
| HAWX 2 | Highest Quality Settings, 8x AA, 1920x1200, Retail Version, Built-in Benchmark, Tessellation on/off |
| World of Warcraft: Cataclysm | Ultra Quality Settings, No AA / 16x AF, 8x AA / 16x AF, From Crushblow to The Krazzworks, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, Fraps, DirectX 11 Rendering |
| SiSoftware Sandra 2012 | Sandra Tech Support (Engineer) 2012.SP1c, GP Processing and GP Bandwidth Modules |
| CyberLink MediaEspresso 6.5 | 449 MB 1080i Video Sample to Apple iPad 2 Profile (1024x768) |
| LuxMark | 64-bit Binary, Version 1.0 |
| MotionDSP vReveal 3 | 1080i Video Sample Playback, Apply One-Click Fix |
156
Comments
Related Stories :
- Radeon HD 7950 3 GB: Six Cards, Benchmarked And Reviewed
- Sapphire's Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition Unleashed
- Mac Edition Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 Spotted
- Five Radeon HD 7970 3 GB Cards, Overclocked And Benchmarked
- AMD Updates Radeon HD 7950 to Counter GeForce GTX 660 Ti
- AMD Radeon HD 7950 Review: Up Against GeForce GTX 580
- Report: AMD to Launch Radeon HD 7950 on January 31
- AMD Radeon HD 7990 and 7950 Details Leaked
- AMD Radeon HD 7990 Benchmarks Leaked
- Gigabyte Radeon HD 7970 Super Overclock: Now With Windforce 5X
More good GPU news. Keep em coming!
Im not Paying $450 for barely better then GTX 580 performance a year after its released. They will have to knock that down to like $300, $250 for a 2gb version when Nvidia releases their next gen cards. Wait those money grubers out imo.
stm I was thinking the same thing. But then agian it is still cheaper, more efficient compared to the gtx 580. Still, I am waiting it out till kepler.
7950/7970 should be priced ~$50+ of 6950/6970 prices. So as it is now, if nvidia's gtx680 will be better than 7970 they will price it at >$600? That's a load of crock.
great value compared to the 7970 because you can OC it to be faster than it on stock voltage and even further with voltage tweaking
I'd love to have one once kepler comes and these drop in price. Im gonna start saving.
It beats the GTX580 one on one in most benchies and that's not taking into account the overclocking headroom these things have, they're also power friendlier and with XFX, cooler, quieter and expected to be cheaper so what's the problem? Me thinks me smell's NV fanboys!!
According to W1zzard's review, this card tops the Performance / Watt chart.
Are the Skyrim benchmarks on the v1.4 beta patch?
7950/7970 should be priced ~$50+ of 6950/6970 prices. So as it is now, if nvidia's gtx680 will be better than 7970 they will price it at >$600? That's a load of crock.
Every rumor and leak I've seen so far on gk104 pricing seems to indicate otherwise...
http://www.guru3d.com/news/nvidia- [...] -299-230-/
According to Nvidia's AIB partners the initial price set for the first gk104 based graphics card is $300. Of course this can go up or down based on the competition. Unfortunately, I have the feeling it'll be going up.
This is all good news for the GPU market and for fans of ATI. Waiting on keplar from Nvidia, i buy into the marketing of "The way its meant to be played" =D hahahah. But great news, i love seeing my card get rocked. Competition is always great for pricing =D
It beats the GTX580 one on one in most benchies and that's not taking into account the overclocking headroom these things have, they're also power friendlier and with XFX, cooler, quieter and expected to be cheaper so what's the problem? Me thinks me smell's NV fanboys!!
Congratulations. The 7950 narrowly beats a year old card and costs the exact same. No thanks, I'll wait on Kepler and then decide what to get once AMD puts down the pipe and has to get real on their prices. And I'm a proud owner of a 4870.
It beats the GTX580 one on one in most benchies and that's not taking into account the overclocking headroom these things have, they're also power friendlier and with XFX, cooler, quieter and expected to be cheaper so what's the problem? Me thinks me smell's NV fanboys!!
It does beat it, i can say it does.. My SC GTX580 was pulling around the same bandwidth as one they have here, i overclocked it and was getting almost 200GB's of bandwidth and was quite surprised i was able to push it and keep it like that with no trouble at all in any game i play and pretty much passed each stress test without any artifacts that i ran for hours. Headroom to OC differentiates from card to card, and nothing is guaranteed. But of course with 7950 im impressed it does very well even though the spec's on it look like it can run a marathon around the 580 with no trouble at all, but it does keep up with it and battle it out. I hope nvidia see's this as a threat and drops there price on the 580 so i can pick up another for around $400 =D Would make me very happy.
nice.
7950's power consumption in single and cfx mode are quite impressive.
i'll compare them to kepler when they come out and get tested.. right now, gcn high end looks much better than fermi high end (gpu compute, power efficiency etc).
amd's driver support seems inconsistent as usual... hopefully more mature drivers will bring out even more performance out of the gcn cards.
That's strange, in other sites says that card is "...relatively inaudible...". Example:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/his- [...] -review/25
As always good job Chris.
That's strange, in other sites says that card is "...relatively inaudible...". Example:http://www.guru3d.com/article/his- [...] -review/25As always good job Chris.
The editors at Guru3D perform their noise tests differently than most other sites. The cards are placed in a closed case and measurements are taken from a few feet back. These editors are also either partially deaf, or they just don't give a damn about excessive system noise. Honestly, I don't think they've ever knocked a card for being too loud, even the HD6990.
Bring on the mid range!
Congratulations. The 7950 narrowly beats a year old card and costs the exact same. No thanks, I'll wait on Kepler and then decide what to get once AMD puts down the pipe and has to get real on their prices. And I'm a proud owner of a 4870.
You are aware that the 7950 is not supposed to directly compete with the 580, right? The 7970 is supposed to beat the 580 and the 7950 is supposed to beat the 570. Just like how the 6970 is supposed to compete with the 580 and the 6950 is supposed to compete with the 570. The shear fact that the non flagship GPU beats the flagship GPU of your competitor is pretty awesome.
The shear fact that the non flagship GPU beats the flagship GPU of your competitor is pretty awesome.
AMD has had plenty of time to play catch-up. It's not "pretty awesome" they leap-frogged Nvidia once again. It's a calculated move on AMD's part, for certain. A good one, but "pretty awesome" is very far from "standard dual-monopoly leap-frogging that's gone on since both companies started". Relax.
That said, I DO celebrate and find it ironic that AMDs 7950 is as flag-shippy whoop-ass as Nvidia's 7950 was in its day! I'm looking at my dead beast here right now. Miss you, 7950GT. I... I loved you. I can say that, now.