Official 7950 Benchmarks Thread

[ALXAndy]

This card is not for GTX580 owners.

When Nvidia introduces some competition we will see prices fall so don't buy anything yet if you can wait.

I thought that would be obvious.

No one said it was. Infact if anything all this card (and the 7970) has done is **** Nvidia owners off.

They spent all that money (too much) on something that was the fastest, and now it's not. And to get back their title and status they now have to find £439 which they can't (and rightly so) justify.

But that doesn't stop them from being ****ed off about it. So in order to feel better they must pee on AMD's parade.

 

[ALXAndy]

Reviews have confirmed that same as the 69xx cards, the 79xx loses huge chunk of frame rate when MSAA is applied in BF3 (the Frostbite2 engine to be precise).


The problem is that EA is set to push the use Frostbite2 engine onto large number of their new titles in the near future, so it is not lame at all to use BF3 as representation. What it could potentially mean is that in any titles that uses the Frostbite2 engine, the 7950 can be slower than the GTX580 when MSAA is applied (on 1920 res).

So the fact that the 7950 is 2FPS slower than a 580 (both of which are more than enough to tear the game a new one) is a problem?

Sort it out man. The main problem in the future (as FBII displays) will be vram shortage.

Why do you think Nvidia have designed Kepler to be able to (for the first time it seems !" cache actual physical memory and not your hard drive?

IF what I read is true then well done Nvidia. You have solved an age old problem, and Kepler will be a very long lasting choice in GPU.

 

[KelDG]

Utter rubbish. A stock I7 950 isn't far from a 2500k. Infact, I clearly remember when Tom Logan was reviewing his samples saying to me over MSN...

Yeah but even a month after Sandy was released, the I7 950 was still £200 and the 2500K was £161 (go check the way back machine)

Not to mention the extra cost for triple channel memory and more expensive motherboards.

So even though it was close in power at stock the 2500k. The 2500k was faster and it was a damn sight cheaper to build a 2500k system.

So yeah, it was faster and cheaper. Something that the new GPU line up is not showing me to a decent degree.

I get the feeling you are quite passionate about this matter. Do you not think the fact you worked at Alienware, frequent enthusiast forums and quote enthusiast websites skews your point of view that the enthusiast market is bigger than it actually is?

 

[ALXAndy]

What's the idle power difference between the 7900 series and Fermi? Would that make a difference in the medium term?

Let's face it. It doesn't matter.

570 and 580 were capable of devouring the same amount of power as the 470 and 480. They (the 570 and 580) used marginally better components (low leakage) and a better cooler, and were fitted with a TDP throttle.

Yet, they were hailed a complete success, and 470 and 480 a complete epic failure.

The bottom line is no one really and truly cares about how much power their rig consumes so long as it is fast, or the fastest.

If they did then they wouldn't dream of overclocking a 7970. The 7970 does use less power than any other high end GPU. However, people are flying in the face of it and overclocking it, making it use lots of power.

No one cares man, seriously. It's just another reason for some people to like a card.

 

[Meaker]

That was due to artificial separation from intel.

When sandy bridge launched, X58 = highend, P67 = mainstream.

 

[ALXAndy]

Yeah but even a month after Sandy was released, the I7 950 was still £200 and the 2500K was £161 (go check the way back machine)

And the Sandybridge chipsets were broken. Meaning, it was nearly six months before they were conclusively worth having.

Did it hurt Intel? well yes, it did. However, most didn't care. By the time their SATA controller would have degraded their rig would have been a distant memory.

Just like no one cares about new hardware being buggy. It's all about it being the fastest.

 

[ALXAndy]

I get the feeling you are quite passionate about this matter. Do you not think the fact you worked at Alienware, frequent enthusiast forums and quote enthusiast websites skews your point of view that the enthusiast market is bigger than it actually is?

I know just how tiny the enthusiast market is. Mostly from working for Alienware, as well as running a computer shop for four years in London.

"Man, please god let some one who I have things in common with walk through that door and speak to me in my language...."

"Can I have a spindle of blank CDs and a compatible ink cartridge for an Epson, please?"

I know how it all works. I know that enthusiasts are a tiny tiny minority. I also know that stupid products make even tinier minorities. SLI, Crossfire, 3D, and so on. Which is why we don't get the support.

 

[Secret_Window]

No one said it was. Infact if anything all this card (and the 7970) has done is **** Nvidia owners off.

They spent all that money (too much) on something that was the fastest, and now it's not. And to get back their title and status they now have to find £439 which they can't (and rightly so) justify.

But that doesn't stop them from being ****ed off about it. So in order to feel better they must pee on AMD's parade.

Ok, I am not a 580 owner but I own a 570 so I am a Nvidia GPU owner, but I have no problem whatsoever with AMD being faster. Actually what is more important and what grinds my gears personally is AMD's pricing. I got a bargain for my card which was £280 and does 580 performance. I will not be alone in that type of 'bargain'. People with 6950's that unlock to 6970's and 560Ti's that push to 570 speeds will be thinking the same. There is little gain to be made with AMD's latest gen if you have these cards - it has NOTHING to do with being annoyed about AMD being slightly faster than higher priced Nvidia cards. We got excellent value for our money and going to a 79xx card right now will definitely not be.

It's nothing personal with AMD, please stop assuming it is.

 

[KelDG]

And the Sandybridge chipsets were broken. Meaning, it was nearly six months before they were conclusively worth having.

Don't talk rubbish, a minor error that was replaced free of charge AND nothing to do with what I was saying.

The bottom line is no one really and truly cares about how much power their rig consumes so long as it is fast, or the fastest.

I care, good for you for having enough money that you don't have to. Every little helps

You are trolling aren't you. You can't be that blinkered.

 

[ALXAndy]

Don't talk rubbish, a minor error that was replaced free of charge AND nothing to do with what I was saying.

Busted. An enthusiast speaks.

On planet earth people were faced with removing the motherboard from their PC at their time and inconvenience and then being without a PC whilst it was away to be replaced.

Which clearly demonstrates just how much crap a PC enthusiast is prepared to put up with. Long, cold nights trying to hack an INI to make a game work, dodgy drivers, ETC ETC.

Which would be why the console gamers are the majority.

I care, good for you for having enough money that you don't have to. Every little helps

You are trolling aren't you. You can't be that blinkered.

Your only mistake is going to the T word. I just talk common sense is all.

 

[ALXAndy]

Ok, I am not a 580 owner but I own a 570 so I am a Nvidia GPU owner, but I have no problem whatsoever with AMD being faster. Actually what is more important and what grinds my gears personally is AMD's pricing. I got a bargain for my card which was £280 and does 580 performance. I will not be alone in that type of 'bargain'. People with 6950's that unlock to 6970's and 560Ti's that push to 570 speeds will be thinking the same. There is little gain to be made with AMD's latest gen if you have these cards - it has NOTHING to do with being annoyed about AMD being slightly faster than higher priced Nvidia cards. We got excellent value for our money and going to a 79xx card right now will definitely not be.

It's nothing personal with AMD, please stop assuming it is.

If you're happy why complain about it?

Human nature again really. People only open their mouthes when they want to complain.

Yet you have one guy here who is quite happy with the prices and performance as he understands how business works, and he's a troll and so on.

I'm perfectly happy with paying £439 for my graphics card. Yeah, it was a bit stupid and it's bound to drop like the proverbial lead balloon but oh well. It's not like I'm stupid enough to think AMD give a crap about me.

I can also see it as supporting AMD. Which, even for Nvidia owners, is a good thing to do no? if it wasn't for AMD you'd still be using your cards in six years time and still paying what you are for them.

 

[KelDG]

Busted. An enthusiast speaks.

On planet earth people were faced with removing the motherboard from their PC at their time and inconvenience and then being without a PC whilst it was away to be replaced.

Which clearly demonstrates just how much crap a PC enthusiast is prepared to put up with. Long, cold nights trying to hack an INI to make a game work, dodgy drivers, ETC ETC.

Which would be why the console gamers are the majority.




Your only mistake is going to the T word. I just talk common sense is all.

Can you go any more off topic for us please? Also your common sense is flawed, i upgraded to the ATI 5xxx series for more GPU power but also so when I was not gaming it dropped to a fraction of the Watts used instead of constantly burning +100W even when idle.

You have to remember mate, people have different opinions on what is important, you say enthusiasts like they are all power overclockers, are you discrediting the enthusiasts that aim to have the lowest power PC possible, just because they don't want the FASTEST PC EVA!

Your opinion as much as you seem to like to think so, is not the truth or fact of the matter. It is just YOUR opinion. Coming from the same industry you do I have dealt with quite a lot of people with your mindset, so I know it is pointless having a debate with you, as you are always going to be "right".

Have fun fella.

 

[Locky]

The 7950 has enough overclocking headroom in reserve to match and beat 570sli. Massive leap in technology.

err no.

Lets say my 480sli system isn't far off a 570 sli system, I bet you if I ran a 7950OC in my system and compared it to my 480 sli, the sli would be much quicker, end of.

 

[ALXAndy]

err no.

Lets say my 480sli system isn't far off a 570 sli system, I bet you if I ran a 7950OC in my system and compared it to my 480 sli, the sli would be much quicker, end of.

Really?

Now of course that's only one benchmark. But, it does show that the 7950 can do it, even if it's only in one game.

The 7970 can beat a 6990 in some things also. Yet according to most that's not very impressive at all.

I mean seriously. If the 7970 said "Nvidia" on it and was able to beat a £630 card (the 590) people would be getting out their Epeen and pulling themselves to pieces.

 

[Secret_Window]

err no.

Lets say my 480sli system isn't far off a 570 sli system, I bet you if I ran a 7950OC in my system and compared it to my 480 sli, the sli would be much quicker, end of.

Yes, true. There's no incentive for most owners to buy a 7950/7970 over adding an additional card and doing SLI. If Nvidia reduce their prices, you can be sure lots of people will do this than go to AMD's next gen if AMD keep their prices where they currently are.

 

[Locky]

Really?

Now of course that's only one benchmark. But, it does show that the 7950 can do it, even if it's only in one game.

The 7970 can beat a 6990 in some things also. Yet according to most that's not very impressive at all.

I mean seriously. If the 7970 said "Nvidia" on it and was able to beat a £630 card (the 590) people would be getting out their Epeen and pulling themselves to pieces.

what complete crap you posted, I may just buy a 7950 and see what it can do in my system, and run every single bench mark out, if it consistently beats my 480 sli you can have it for free,if it doesn't you pay me for the card. Lets see whos right.

wow you posted a dx9 benchmark, have a team point.

 

[xsistor]

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7950/27.html

So it looks like the 7950 is about 1% faster than the 580 at 1200p and 1% slower at 1050p. And that's against a 1.5GB. I would like to see it vs 3GB benchmarks. Yeah, yeah, it overclocks better. But I have to wonder, with such low clocks, perhaps this first batch of silicon overclocks better than the other batches they have so had to downclock on a lowest common denominator basis.



7000 series an year ago, at these prices, would have been great. But on a 28nm process and today, I think it fails to impress.

 

[xsistor]

what complete crap you posted, I may just buy a 7950 and see what it can do in my system, and run every single bench mark out, if it consistently beats my 480 sli you can have it for free,if it doesn't you pay me for the card. Lets see whos right.

wow you posted a dx9 benchmark, have a team point.

To top it off he posted a benchmark where SLI on the 590 is not even working. The 590 = 580 performance there and is 5 fps faster than the 580. I can't see how that helps his argument at all.

 

[Secret_Window]

7000 series an year ago, at these prices, would have been great. But on a 28nm process and today, I think it fails to impress.

Totally agree.

 

[Sasahara]

That won't happen. Be realistic. The 7970 will be overclocked, it's as simple as that.

Meaning you save about 40w over your TDP, bringing it in at the figures I came up with.

But yes, even if you did save a tenner a year it would take about five years just to say there was any value in buying a £439 card to save money on power.

Making that whole "It uses less power !" argument completely null and indeed very void.

That was my point.