• What
    is this?
    You've landed on the AMD Portal on AnandTech. This section is sponsored by AMD. It features a collection of all of our independent AMD content, as well as Tweets & News from AMD directly. AMD will also be running a couple of huge giveaways here so check back for those.
    PRESENTED BY

Overclocking: Gaming & Compute Performance

As always we’ll keep the commentary thin here, but overall the overclocked performance of the 7800s looks very good, which is what you’d expect with a 15%+ core overclock and a 12% memory overclock. With the exception of Skyrim performance at 19x12, the overclocking performance increase for both cards is roughly split between the core and memory overclocks, meaning we’re seeing a 13.5% average performance increase for the 7870 and a 17% average performance increase for the 7850. As the 7800 series has the same number of ROPS as the 7900 series, it looks like we’re running headlong into the memory bandwidth bottleneck that makes the 384-bit memory bus on the 7900 series sing.

All things considered among our tests we have everything from even the 7850OC beating the GTX 580, to the GTX 580 still holding onto its lead versus the 7870OC. But even if you can’t beat a GTX 580 with a 7870OC you can get very close on a card that costs a good bit less.

Meanwhile for compute performance the gains are similar: 12.5% on the 7870, and 19.5% on the 7850.

Overclocking: Power, Temp, & Noise Final Words
POST A COMMENT

173 Comments

View All Comments

  • CeriseCogburn - Thursday, March 08, 2012 - link

    Yet if one is not running gigantic resolutions, they look at the usual, 1920 and 1650 p resolutions, and likely want to crank all the eye candy to the limit, which is still IMPOSSIBLE at those common resolutions with 60+ frames in so many of the popular games.
    So the real problem is you go from "can't do it all" to "still can't do it all" but at least you've got 40 frames going to 55 on your one screen... with maybe one more setting of 7 at ultra...
    ---
    For others with 3x 2560 most of us really don't give a crap if they claim they get 2x frames - because if they don't have 2 or 3 or 4 of them running, they are stuck in turn down the eye candy crapsville TOO.
    --
    We almost always hear that we are stuck with console ports, the exact opposite of the real truth in the real problem.
    A 570 is NOT ENOUGH, a 7870 is not either, nor is a 7970 for 1900x1200.
    IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
    Reply
  • SlyNine - Thursday, March 08, 2012 - link

    75% was wrong, but so is 70-110% faster.

    Crysis 2560x1600 at the MAX settings its 20 vx 33, which is just over 60%

    Drop down to 1920x1200 at the advantage drops to 50%.

    Metro its 60% at max res/settings (36vs22.5)

    Drop that down to 1920X1200 and its just over 50%

    Dirt 3 its just over 50% at max res/settings Drop that down to 1920x1200 and its remains just above 50% ( 104 vs 68.4)

    Battlefield 3 its 50% (49.7 vs 32.6) at max settings/res.

    So where the heck are you getting 70% to 110% ??

    2 1/2 years ago I payed around 66% of your price, and I'm getting 66% of your performence, ALMOST 3 YEARS. THIS IS NOT MOVING THINGS FORWARD
    Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Thursday, March 08, 2012 - link

    Get back to us krummer when the 7870 is "released" and has "stable drivers" that "work most of the time" in "most of the games" and the IQ cheats of 10% driver default plus ever more now with this new blur job called MLAA and the lack of LOD bias up high enough that "in the case of SSAA" it's another low detail IQ cut down, not to mention other things like PhysX and tessellation above 10 all the way to 32...the other "unneeded" "eye candy" that "sucks" because amd sucks at doing it.
    *
    9% , minus 10% standardized cheat, minus SSAA LOD bias cheat, minus MLAA blur cheat, minus PhysX, minus 8 other things I won't take time to mention doesn't sound like "faster" to me.
    I mean come on, if the arch is so superior, why all the hack and cheats and crappy blurring and lack of features ?
    Are the drivers going to be another ongoing nightmare for 47% of all ibm pc implementations ?
    Reply
  • chizow - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    @ Kiste: Agreed.

    The "competition is necessary" meme needs to die in the tech sector because it isn't necessary.

    Most of this stuff doesn't expire or die on its own, not before it becomes obsolete anyways and in order for it to become obsolete there needs to be innovation and performance increases.

    That's what drives innovation with technology and it certainly exists without competition.
    Reply
  • medi01 - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    What are you talking about, considering AMD 7850 is faster in most tests than nVidia's 80$ more expensive 570, at the same time consuming 25% less energy. Reply
  • Malih - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    I think this is the decision of the new management, they decide to price something that performs better to price higher.

    Probably will drop the price in the future, but it would require a new release from nVidia with agressive pricing. It is rumored nVidia will release new cards near the end of March.
    Reply
  • biassj - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    Shitty pricing again, if the pricing was 50 bucks cheaper I would probably consider buying 7870 or 7950 at this moment. These high prices will just have me wait to see what Nvidia has to offer. Reply
  • piroroadkill - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    Huh, I thought it was GTX 570 class for less.

    Seems solid enough.
    Reply
  • piroroadkill - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    For the 7850, I mean. Reply
  • chizow - Monday, March 05, 2012 - link

    This pricing isn't nearly as bad as the 7770 or 7950/7970, but its still pretty poor overall given it once again, slides right in to existing price structures offering very little incentive to upgrade and very little price performance value compared to what has been available for 14+ months. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now