Metro 2033

Paired with Crysis as our second behemoth FPS is Metro: 2033. Metro gives up Crysis’ lush tropics and frozen wastelands for an underground experience, but even underground it can be quite brutal on GPUs, which is why it’s also our new benchmark of choice for looking at power/temperature/noise during a game. If its sequel due this year is anywhere near as GPU intensive then a single GPU may not be enough to run the game with every quality feature turned up.

Metro ends up being an even better test for the 7800 series than Crysis was. At 1920 the 7870 ties the GTX 580 while taking a 17% lead over the GTX 570 and a much smaller lead over the 6970. The 7850 on the other hand is slightly behind the 6950, but is itself tied with the GTX 570 and well ahead of the GTX 560 Ti.

Interestingly, in spite of being built from the same architecture the 7950’s lead decreases some here. At 1920 it’s now only 13% ahead of the 7870, though in all likelihood it’s just enough of a difference that the 7870 isn’t going to be fully playable at these settings. As it turns out the gap between the 7870 and 7850 ends up being larger, with the 7870 enjoying a 17% advantage.

Crysis: Warhead DiRT 3
POST A COMMENT

173 Comments

View All Comments

  • DeViLzzz - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    It is not the dumbest statement ever. Have you looked at multiple sites benchmarks ? Clearly a 2 GB 6950 Power Color flashed to a 6970 or a 6970 is worth keeping. Hardly an improvement over those situations for the price you would be paying for a 7870 and 7850. Reply
  • ExarKun333 - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    Then you don't follow the graphic card industry very well at all. Reply
  • MadAd - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    did i just read a different review? looking at this i did - Im on the 6950 and no theres not enough performance difference.

    also, comparing apples to oranges and saying theres a gain isnt going to work - if someones going to OC a 7*** then im sure they have also OC their 6***, so comparing a straight 6*** to the 7*** OC results and calling it a difference is smoke and mirrors.
    Reply
  • cactusdog - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    You guys dont get it. Why are you comparing the 7870 to a 6950? Should be the 6870 but even then The 7870 smashes the 6950 when overclocked. the 7870 performs like a stock 7970 when overclocked. You cant compare overclocking on the 6 series to the 7 series. The 7 series is the sandy bridge of GPUs.

    Why compare last gens high end to this gens mid range? If you have a 6950/6970 you should be looking at a 7950/7970. A 7950/7970 will give you 70% increase in performance when overclocked. AMD left heaps of overclocking headroom for easy overclocking.

    Sure, the price is a little high now, but just wait a few weeks until Nvidia cards arrive and prices will come down. New tech is always a little expensive when it first comes out but no one is forcing you to buy now. Just wait a couple of weeks
    Reply
  • Kiste - Tuesday, March 06, 2012 - link

    "Why compare last gens high end to this gens mid range?"

    Because were introduced at the same price point. Video card names/numbers are completely arbitrary, you have to compare cards at a given price point.
    Reply
  • xrror - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    So I have one the the early 6950 2GB cards unlocked to 1536 shaders, and a 935/1275 overclock.

    Running at 1920x1200 in skyrim with the high resolution texture packs from Bethesda starts to lag.

    Yes I'm being petty, but as a PC gaming smoe, I'm looking for a card that's under $300 that will dominate what I have.

    I can't find a confident vote for a strong successor in the sub $300 range to replace my current card.

    This makes me sad. Also with all the growing pains 69xx series had - and AMD's dumping of VLIW4 makes me pretty sure 69xx is a dead end for any future driver improvements.

    Maybe I can sell my 6950 for $100 to subsidize a 79xx or a Kepler?
    Reply
  • Zoomer - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    I'll take it. Reply
  • mpschan - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    I'd tend to agree with your assessment. Only those looking for bleeding edge performance should consider the upgrade to the 7900 series.

    The price/performance curve is a little disappointing, but not unexpected. This is what happens when you:

    a) Move to a new process
    b) Implement a new architecture
    c) (Most importantly) Have no competition

    They need to make their money back on the first two, and having no competition allows them to do that and then some.

    But look at the thermals and power draw. Decreased power usage with a small gain in performance? Where have I seen that before ... oh I know, Intel!

    Welcome to tick-tock folks. They took their process shrink and used it to allow them to draw less power, not tear up the performance charts.

    This means the next generation on 28nm has room to expand. 1280 SP for the 7870 can be 1600 for the 8870. A 212mm2 die can be 300mm2. 190w can be 220w.

    Ultimately the performance of these cards will come down to power drawn. The huge jumps in performance that we used to see existed because of drastically improving fabrication technologies combined with better ways of rendering screens. I think those days will be few and far between now.
    Reply
  • arjuna1 - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    You have a point, this generation is not worth spending the $$$ to "sidegrade". I don't kepler doing anything to change that other than forcing AMD to have decent prices. Reply
  • cactusdog - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    How is a 7950/7970 a "sidegrade"?? To a 6950/6970? Its a massive performance increase. If you have a highend 6 series GPU you should be looking at highend 7 series. Not midrange. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now