Theoreticals & Tessellation

From a rendering perspective one of the most interesting things AMD did with Tahiti was what they didn’t do: they didn’t add more ROPs, they didn’t add more geometry engines. And yet based on our game performance they’ve clearly improved on their performance in those situations by making more efficient use of the hardware they do have.

So we wanted to take a quick look at synthetic performance to see what these tools had to say about AMD’s changes. We’ve included the numbers for every other GPU in our lineup as a reference point, but we would strongly suggest against reading into them too much. AMD versus AMD is sometimes relevant to real world performance; AMD versus NVIDIA rarely is.

Theoretical: 3DMark Vantage Pixel Fill

We’ll start with 3DMark Vantage and its color fill test. This is basically a ROP test that attempts to have a GPU’s ROPs blend as many pixels as it can. Theoretically AMD can do 32 color operations per clock on Tahiti, which at 925MHz for 7970 means the theoretical limit is 29.6Gpix/sec; not that any architecture is ever that efficient. In practice 7970 hits 13.33Gpix/sec, which is still well short of the theoretical maximum, but pay close attention to 7970’s performance relative to 6970. Even with the same number of ROPs and a similar theoretical performance limit (29.6 vs 28.16), 7970 is pushing 51% more pixels than 6970 is.

In designing Tahiti AMD said that they didn’t need more ROPs they just needed more efficient ROPs, and it looks like they’ve delivered on this. It’s not clear whether this is the limit for efficiency or if AMD can squeeze more out of their ROPs in future designs, but this definitely helps to prove that there’s more to graphics rendering than a large number of functional units.

Theoretical: 3DMark Vantage Texture Fill

Our other 3DMark synthetic benchmark is the 3DMark Vantage Texture Blend test, which measures how quickly a GPU can blend multiple FP16 textures. This is more synthetic than most tests because FP16 textures aren’t widely used, but it’s a consistent benchmark.

The theoretical performance improvement from 6970 to 7970 is 40% - 33% more texture units operating at a 5% higher clockspeed. In practice the 7970 exceeds that improvement by increasing texture performance by 46%, meaning the 7970 has benefitted from more than the increase in texture units. Most likely the new cache architecture has further improved the efficiency of the texture units, although the 3DMark texture set is not particularly large.

Moving on, we also wanted to take a look at tessellation. AMD did not increase the theoretical geometry performance of Tahiti as compared to Cayman – both top out at 2 triangles per clock – but AMD has put a lot of effort into improving the efficiency of Tahiti’s geometry units as we’ve seen reflected in our game benchmarks.

Tessellation: DirectX11 Detail Tessellation Sample

Our first tessellation benchmark is the traditional Detail Tessellation sample program from the DirectX SDK. Here we’re looking at tessellation performance as a product of the framerate, testing at tessellation factors 7 (normal) and 15 (max). Traditionally this is a test that has been rather balanced at normal tessellation levels, while NVIDIA cards with their superior geometry throughput have been the top performers at maximum tessellation levels. So it’s all the more interesting when we’ve seen the tables turned; the 7970 is merely competitive with the GTX 580 at normal tessellation levels, but now it’s ahead of the GTX 580 by 24%. More significantly however the 7970 is ahead of the 6970 by 57%.

Tessellation: Unigine Heaven

Our second tessellation benchmark is Unigine Heaven, a benchmark that straddles the line between a synthetic benchmark and a real-world benchmark, as the engine is licensed but no notable DX11 games have been produced using it yet. In any case the Heaven benchmark is notable for its heavy use of tessellation, which means it’s largely a proxy test for tessellation performance.

As with the Detail Tessellation sample program, Heaven shows significant gains for the 7970 versus the 6970, with the 7970 leading by 56%. Meanwhile it leads the GTX 580 by 27%, which is actually slightly better than what we saw under the more “pure” Detail Tessellation sample. Between these two benchmarks it’s clear that AMD’s tessellation efficiency improvements are quite real, and that with Tahiti AMD can deliver much better tessellation performance than Cayman even at virtually the same theoretical triangle throughput rate.

Of course one has to wonder what NVIDIA will have in store for Kepler next year. Their current Fermi design seems to scale well with additional geometry units, but if Tahiti is anything to go by, there’s a great deal to be gained just by focusing on efficiency. NVIDIA has prided themselves on their geometry performance since before GF100 even shipped, so it will be interesting if they have anything in store to hold on to that distinction.

Compute: The Real Reason for GCN Power, Temperature, & Noise
Comments Locked

292 Comments

View All Comments

  • RussianSensation - Saturday, January 14, 2012 - link

    BF3 is not a 2012 game.......

    Also, most of us have been gaming on our older cards. Who in the world who has a previous high-end card is going to drop $600 for BF3 alone? No thanks.
  • SSIV - Saturday, February 18, 2012 - link

    Since there's a new driver out for there cards we can now regard these results with a grain of salt. Revise the benchmarks!
  • DaOGGuru - Thursday, March 1, 2012 - link

    I don't know why people keep forgeting about the 560ti 2win. Yes I said 2win = 2 560ti processors on one card. It still kills the 7970 numbers in BF3 by 20Fps. and is same price. It also beats the 580 and is cheaper. It's a single card with 50amp min. draw and it will smoke anything except 590 and the 6990...

    http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-geforce-gtx-560...
  • CeriseCogburn - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link

    Oh, right, well this isn't an nvidia card review, so we won't hear from 50 posts about how some CF (would be SLI of course in this case) combo will whip the crap out of it in performance and price...
    You know ?
    That's how it goes...
    Usually the articel itself rages on about how some amd CF combo is really so much good and better and blah blah blah.... then the rpice perf, then the results - on and on and on ....
    ---
    The angry ankle biters are swarmed up on the under red dog radeon side...
    --
    So you made a very good point, I'm just sorry it took 29 pages of reading to get to it, in it's glorious singularity.... you shouldn't strike out in independent thought like that it's dangerous.... not allowed unless the card being reviewed is an nvidia !!!!
  • DaOGGuru - Thursday, March 1, 2012 - link

    oops... forgot to say look at previous post links BF3 rating for the 560ti 2win and compare to this charts 7970 fps. The 2win is pumping out @20 more FPS and is $50.00 - $100.00 cheaper than the 7970... lame.. ATi is still behind Nvidia but proud of it! lol They are just now catching up to Nvidia's tessellations and oh and AFTER they changed to a "cuda core copy" architecture and posting it as big news... Evga's older 560ti 2win still dusts it by 20FPS.. lame.
  • DaOGGuru - Thursday, March 1, 2012 - link

    sorry 10FPS not 20.. it's late.
  • DaOGGuru - Thursday, March 1, 2012 - link

    I don't get what's the hub-bub about the 7970.. sure it's the fastest single cpu;BUT, for $50.00-$100.00 less you can get the 560Ti 2win (dual cpu) that smokes the 7970 and the 2win PCB does have an SLI bridge and is cabapable of doing SLI to a second card but it's currently locked by Nvidia (see paragraph 3).

    Also, the 2win draws a min of only 50amps (way less than most sli configurations) 1. has a considerably lower noise dba, 2. runs cooler and with less power than almost all the high end cards and 3. will run 3 montiors in Nvidia 2D and 3D surround off a single card! 4.Will kill the GTX 580 by @33-23% (depending on review) 5. Will beat the 590 in some sample testing for TDP. And finally 6. will kill the 7970 by 10-20FPS in BF3 including by 10FPS in 1920x1200 4AA-16AF Ultra high mode. So, why have people forgotten the 2win? It's a singlecard, multi-GPU, full 3D/2D surround without a second card in SLI, $500.00USD beast !

    OH and for those that say you can't SLI with a second 2win.... http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-geforce-gtx-560... (this review states on conclusion page) > quote " you will have noticed there is a SLI connector on the PCB. Unfortunately you can not add a second card to go for quad-SLI mode. It's not a hardware limitation, yet a limitation set by NVIDIA, the GTX 560 Ti series is only allowed in 2-way SLI mode, which this card already is."

    ... So actually, the card is cabale 2card SLI but Nvidia for some (gosh aweful reason) won't let the dog off the chain. Probably because it will absolutely kill the need for a GTX580, 570, 560 Ti SLI configuration for ever!

    Resources: (pay attention to BF3 FPS and compare to 7970 FPS in this article.)
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5048/evgas-geforce-g...
    http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-geforce-gtx-560...
    Peace...
  • DaOGGuru - Thursday, March 1, 2012 - link

    I don't get what's the hub-bub about the 7970.. sure it's the fastest single CPU; BUT, for $50.00-$100.00 less you can get the 560Ti 2win (dualCPU) that smokes the 7970 and the 2win PCB does have an SLI bridge and is capable of doing SLI to a second card but it's currently locked by Nvidia (see paragraph 3).

    Also, the 2win draws a min of only 50amps (way less than most sli configurations) 1. Has a considerably lower noise DBA, 2. runs cooler and with less power than almost all the high end cards and 3. Will run 3 monitors in Nvidia 2D and 3D surround off a single card! 4.Will kill the GTX 580 by @33-23% (depending on review) 5. Will beat the 590 in some sample testing for TDP. And finally 6. will kill the 7970 by 10-20FPS in BF3 including by 10FPS in 1920x1200 4AA-16AF Ultra high mode. So, why have people forgotten the 2win? It's a single card, multi-GPU, full 3D/2D surround without a second card in SLI, $500.00USD beast !

    OH and for those that say you can't SLI with a second 2win.... http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-geforce-gtx-560... (this review states on conclusion page) > quote " you will have noticed there is a SLI connector on the PCB. Unfortunately you cannot add a second card to go for quad-SLI mode. It's not a hardware limitation, yet a limitation set by NVIDIA, the GTX 560 Ti series is only allowed in 2-way SLI mode, which this card already is."

    ... So actually, the card is capable 2card SLI but Nvidia for some (gosh awful reason) won't let the dog off the chain. Probably because it will absolutely kill the need for a GTX580, 570, 560 Ti SLI configuration forever!

    Resources: (pay attention to BF3 FPS and compare to 7970 FPS in this article.)
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5048/evgas-geforce-g...
    http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-geforce-gtx-560...
    Peace...
  • CeriseCogburn - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link

    Ummm.... I read you, I see your frustration with all the posts - just refer to my one above there - you really should not be dissing the new amd like that - they like are 1st and uhh... nvidia is evil... so no comparisons like that are allowed when the fanboy side content is like 100 to 1....
    Now next nvidia card review you will notice a hundred posts on how this or that CF beats the nvidia in price perf and overall perf, etc, and it will be memorized and screamed far and wide...
    Just like... your point "doesn't count", okay ?
    It's best to ignore you GREEN fanboy types... ( yes even if you point out gigantic savings, or rather especially when you do...)
    Thanks for waiting till page 30 - a wise choice.
  • CeriseCogburn - Sunday, March 11, 2012 - link

    Southern Islands is a whole generation late. AMD promised us this SI in the last generation 6000 series. Then right before that prior release, they told us they had changed everything and 6000 was not Southern Islands anymore. LOL
    Talk about late - it's what two years late ?
    Maybe it's three years....
    In every case here, Nvidia beat them to the core architecture by two years. Now amd is merely late to the party crashing copycats....
    That's late son, that's not original, that's not innovative, that's not superior, it's tag a long tu loo little sister style.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now