AMD Radeon HD 7950 Review Feat. Sapphire & XFX: Sewing Up The High-End Market
by Ryan Smith on January 31, 2012 9:02 AM ESTCrysis: Warhead
Kicking things off as always is Crysis: Warhead. It’s no longer the toughest game in our benchmark suite, but it’s still a technically complex game that has proven to be a very consistent benchmark. Thus even 4 years since the release of the original Crysis, “but can it run Crysis?” is still an important question, and the answer continues to be “no.” While we’re closer than ever, full Enthusiast settings at a 60fps is still beyond the grasp of a single-GPU card.
AMD’s first round of driver optimizations have given the 7900 a very solid footing in Crysis, putting the 7950 off to a great start. The 7950 is 19% ahead of the GTX 580 at 2560 and 14% ahead at 1920, putting the card in a comfortable position that for single-GPU cards is second only to the 7970. In spite of Crysis being shader-bound most of the time the 7950 is generally within 15% of the 7970, so it’s doing better than the theoretical performance gap between the two cards would predict. Meanwhile compared to AMD’s last generation offerings it’s not much of a contest: the 7950 is 20-25% ahead.
As for our factory overclocked Sapphire and XFX cards, they further close the gap between the 7950 and 7970. The 12.5% core overclock on these cards puts them between 7% and 10% faster than the stock clocked 7950, with the XFX card edging out the Sapphire due to its memory overclock. These cards do so well here than the reference 7970’s lead is reduced to just 5%.
The minimum framerates in Crysis are also looking good on the 7950, with the 7950 turning in a 10-22% better minimum framerate than the GTX 580 depending on whether we’re talking about 1920 or 2560. As like we saw with the 7970, the biggest lead is at the highest resolutions, which has typically been the case for AMD cards for some time now. The overclocked partner cards add to this, tacking on an extra 5-10% in performance.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
259 Comments
View All Comments
SlyNine - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
I think it's you that has been sleeping. You're comparing EBay prices for god sakes. We are talking about new releases.The 5870 released 2 1/2 years ago at 379$. It was 2x as fast as the 4870.
When the 4870 released it cost what, 300$ in mid 2008. It was over 2x as fast as the 3870.
How about the amazing 9700pro at around 400$, In some cases being 4X faster then the 4600TI.
This is perhaps a step up from the to the likes of the 2900XT or 5800ultra. But both of those had some rocking competition to deal with. Like the 8800GTX and the 9700pro.
If you think this 30% better performance is worth 580$ then you have no concept of value.
Phate- - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
It took you long enough to notice. Better to go and have this discussion in the comments of the HD6970 review.Galidou - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Because it's next gen, performs better for the same price and overclocks probably WAY better plus maybe a chance to mod it to 7970? Is that enough?SlyNine - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Its not better performance for the same price. This time the price has scaled with performance.Normally when a new GPU gen releases its much better performance at the same price as the previous kings release.
Look at the 9700pro, 8800GTX, 5870. Those were great cards for the time. The 7970 is just, Eh. Not bad enough to be considered a 2900XT or a 5800 Ultra. But at least those 2 cards had much better competition.
bhima - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Actually, AMD's prices for these cards are SO bad, most people will just wait or buy older tech. Hell at least Intel's Sandy Bridge i5-2500K came out at a reasonable $215 which really isn't that high for the performance you get from it... in fact, there is no other CPU at the same price that even comes close, nor was there a CPU last year for the same price that even comes close. Here, AMD is pricing themselves out of the market.mdlam - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Right, and their egregious pricing mistake is why all their cards are selling out since launch. Because all of AMD's business MBA's and experts are no match for your idea of "a good deal"Maybe you've noticed that things are usually more expensive at launch because of hype, and the fact that you have the fastest card makes pricing irrelevant. Well hell whatever, you didn't even notice that Sandy bridge 2500k opened up at $260-270 dollars at launch, what's the point in taking this further.
Dribble - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
I noticed that when the 5870 and 5850 came out they blew away the competition and were relatively cheap. What was the 5850 price when it came out - about half of the 7950? Yet the performance leap over previous gen for 5850 was much larger then for 7950. That's why everyone is a bit disappointed.gibsnium - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
The 2500k launched that the same price it is today; bought one from newegg at 219$ at launch.
Master_shake_ - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
doesn't anyone else remember when the 8800 ultra was released and Nvidia threw a thousand dollar price tag on it???how short are your memories??
mdlam - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
I remember it can barely run crysis