Final Words

The launch of the Radeon HD 7970 has presented us with a great deal of data and even more subjects to consider, so it’s difficult in the best of times to try to whittle this down to a single conclusion. Nevertheless, based on our testing I believe there are two distinct conclusions to be drawn: the case for gaming, and the case for computing.

Gaming

At the end of the day the 7970 is specifically targeted as a gaming workhorse. Regardless of any architecture changes, what’s important is how fast the card is, how much it costs, whether it works correctly, and what its physical attributes are like. With respect to all of these aspects AMD has made an acceptable card, but this is not a groundbreaking product like we’ve seen in the past.

The fact of the matter is that since 2008 we’ve become spoiled by AMD’s aggressive pricing. More than anything else the low prices of the Radeon HD 4870 and Radeon HD 5870 made those products superstars thanks to their performance for the price and their undercutting of NVIDIA’s competing cards. The Radeon HD 5870 was definitely fast, but at $379 it was a steal, which is part of the reason prices for it never stabilized at that low a level.

At the same time the 7970 is not the 5870. The 5870 relative to both NVIDIA and AMD’s previous generation video cards was faster on a percentage basis. It was more clearly a next-generation card, and DX11 only helped to seal the deal. Meanwhile if you look at straight averages the 7970 is only around 15-25% faster than the GTX 580 in our tests, with its advantage being highly game dependent. It always wins at 2560 and 1920, but there are some cases where it’s not much of a win. The 7970’s domination of the 6970 is more absolute, but then again the 6970 is a good $200 cheaper at this point in time.

Meanwhile the presence of previous generation dual-GPU cards will continue to muddle the picture a bit further. We remain as sheepish as ever on multi-GPU cards and believe a high performance single GPU card is still a better investment in most situations, but there’s no denying that the GTX 590 and Radeon HD 6990 are quite capable cards today if you can put up with the noise and the inherent issues with alternate frame rendering.

Ultimately the past few years have seen AMD make great technical progress, but on the business side of things it’s NVIDIA that has made all the money. GCN will help AMD here by improving their professional product line, but the other part of that equation is for AMD to stop selling their cards for so little when they don’t have to. And this is what we’re seeing with the Radeon HD 7970. AMD has chosen to price the 7970 like a current generation card – it’s priced relative to a 3GB GTX 580 – and that’s a fair metric. What it isn’t is groundbreaking in any sense.

So at the end of the day AMD has once again retaken the performance crown for single-GPU cards, bringing them back to a position they last held nearly 2 years ago with the 5870. To that AMD deserves kudos, and if you’re in the market for a $500+ video card the 7970 is clearly the card to get – it’s a bit more expensive than the GTX 580, but it’s reasonably faster and cooler all at once. However if you’ve been waiting for 28nm GPUs to bring about another rapid decrease in video card prices as we saw with the 5870, you’re going to be waiting a bit longer.

Compute

The Radeon HD 7970 may be a gaming product, but today was just as much a launch for AMD’s Graphics Core Next architecture as it was for their new single-GPU king. GCN is the biggest architecture overhaul for AMD since R600 in 2007, and it shows. AMD has laid out a clear plan to seriously break into the GPU computing market and GCN is the architecture that will take them there. This is their Fermi moment.

At this point I’m not comfortable speaking about the compute performance of GCN in absolutes, but based on our limited testing with the 7970 it’s clear the potential is there. At times it’s competitive with the Fermi-based GTX 580 and at other times it’s quite a bit faster. In the hands of experienced developers and given enough time to learn the quirks of GCN, I believe GCN will prove itself. It’s much too early to tell if it will be able to withstand the eventual arrival of NVIDIA’s Kepler, but certainly this is the best shot AMD has ever had.

Performance aside, it’s clear that AMD’s SIMD architecture will make GPU compute development for GCN much easier; of that there is no question. This is important as GCN isn’t just about HPC computing, it’s about fully embracing Fusion. AMD’s CPU plans are built upon GCN just as much as they’re built upon Bulldozer, and for GCN to deliver on its half of the heterogeneous computing aspect of Fusion it will need to be easy to program and it will need to perform well. It would appear AMD has the hardware to make the former happen, now time will tell if GCN Fusion can deliver on the latter.

Power, Temperature, & Noise
Comments Locked

292 Comments

View All Comments

  • Zingam - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    I think this card is a kinda fail. Well, maybe it is a driver issue and they'll up the performance 20-25% in the future but it is still not fast enough for such huge jump - 2 nodes down!!!
    It smell like a graphics Bulldozer for AMD. Good ideas on paper but in practice something doesn't work quite right. Raw performance is all that counts (of course raw performance/$).
    If NVIDIA does better than usual this time. AMD might be in trouble. Well, will wait and see.
    Hopefully they'll be able to release improved CPUs and GPUs soon because this generation does not seem to be very impressive.

    I've expected at least triple performance over the previous generation. Maybe the drivers are not that well optimized yet. After all it is a huge architecture change.

    I don't really care that much about that GPU generation but I'm worried that they won't be able to put something impressively new in the next generation of consoles. I really hope that we are not stuck with obsolete CPU/GPU combination for the next 7-8 years again.

    Anyway: massively parallel computing sounds tasty!
  • B3an - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    You dont seem to understand that all them extra transistors are mostly there for computing. Thats mostly what this was designed for. Not specifically for gaming performance. Computing is where this card will offer massive increases over the previous AMD generation.
    Look at Nvidia's Fermi, that had way more transistors than the previous generation but wasn't that much faster than AMD's cards at the time. Because again all the extra transistors were mainly for computing.

    And come on LOL, expecting over triple the performance?? That has never happened once with any GPU release.
  • SlyNine - Friday, December 23, 2011 - link

    The 9700pro was up to 4x faster then the 4600 in certian situations. So yes it has happened.
  • tzhu07 - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    LOL, triple the performance?

    Do you also have a standard of dating only Victoria's Secret models?
  • eanazag - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    I have a 3870 which I got in early 2007. It still does well for the main games I play: Dawn of War 2 and Starcraft 2 (25 fps has been fine for me here with settings mostly maxed). I have eyeing a new card. I like the power usage and thermals here. I am not spending $500+ though. I am thinking they are using that price to compensate for the mediocre yields they getting on 28nm, but either way the numbers look justified. I will be look for the best card between $150-$250, maybe $300. I am counting on this cards price coming down, but I doubt it will hit under $400-350 next year.

    No matter what this looks like a successful soft launch of a video card. For me, anything smokes what I have in performance but not so much on power usage. I'd really not mind the extra noise as the heat is better than my 3870.

    I'm in the single card strategy camp.

    Monitor is a single 42" 1920x1200 60 Hz.
    Intel Core i5 760 at stock clocks. My first Intel since the P3 days.

    Great article.
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    Can someone explain the different heights in the die-size comparison picture? Does that reflect processing-changes? I'm lost. :D Otherwise, good review. I don't see the HD7970 in Bench, am I blind or is it just missing.
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    The Y axis is the die size. The higher a GPU the bigger it is (relative to the other GPUs from that company).
  • Death666Angel - Friday, December 23, 2011 - link

    Thanks! I thought the actual sizes were the sizes and the y-axis meant something else. Makes sense though how you did it! :-)
  • MonkeyPaw - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    As a former owner of the 3870, mine had the short-lived GDDR4. That old card has a place in my nerd heart, as it played Bioshock wonderfully.
  • Peichen - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    The improvement is simply not as impressive as I was led to believed. Rumor has it that a single 7970 would have the power of a 6990. In fact, if you crunch the numbers, it would be at least 50% faster than 6970 which should put it close to 6990. (63.25% increase in transistors, 40.37% in TFLOP and 50% increase in memory bandwidth.)

    What we got is a Fermi 1st gen with the price to match. Remember, this is not a half-node improvement in manufacturing process, it is a full-node and we waited two years for this.

    In any case, I am just ranting because I am waiting for something to replace my current card before GTA 5 came out. Nvidia's GK104 in Q1 2012 should be interesting. Rumored to be slightly faster than GTX 580 (slower than 7970) but much cheaper. We'll see.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now