AMD Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition Review: Battling For The Performance Crown
by Ryan Smith on June 22, 2012 12:01 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
- AMD
- GCN
- Radeon HD 7000
Portal 2
Portal 2 continues the long and proud tradition of Valve’s in-house Source engine. While Source continues to be a DX9 engine, Valve has continued to upgrade it over the years to improve its quality, and combined with their choice of style you’d have a hard time telling it’s over 7 years old at this point. Consequently Portal 2’s performance does get rather high on high-end cards, but we have ways of fixing that…
The great thing about having such powerful cards is that we can push image quality to the max on better performing games, and in no place is that better evident than Portal 2. Here we can get away with 4x Super Sample Anti-Aliasing even at 2560, providing smooth and beautiful gameplay.
Unfortunately for AMD, they just don’t do very well on this test and the 7970GE doesn’t do much to remedy that. Where the GTX 680 can surpass 60fps the 7970GE can only manage 55fps, giving the GTX 680 a commanding 25% lead (or causing the 7970GE to trail by 20%). The 7970GE is more than playable here, but it would be nice to see it pass 60fps to maximize how fluid the game is. The situation of course improves without SSAA, but at these performance levels it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense not to use it at single-monitor resolutions.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
110 Comments
View All Comments
behrouz - Friday, June 22, 2012 - link
nevermind i got itLepton87 - Friday, June 22, 2012 - link
I don't agree that 7970GHz isn't any faster than GTX680.http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970_GHz...
Just look at the performance summaries. At 2560x1600 it's clearly the faster card.
Homeles - Friday, June 22, 2012 - link
Keep in mind, every 680 boosts differently. Every site is going to have different opinions because of this.CeriseCogburn - Saturday, June 23, 2012 - link
That's why a collated average is so helpful."
Summary of results at a resolution of 2560x1600:
GeForce GTX680 is on average 32.36% more efficient than GeForce GTX580,
GeForce GTX680 is on average 6.39% more efficient than the Radeon 7970. "
http://translate.google.pl/translate?hl=pl&sl=...
The GTX 680 wins. It's clear beyond any amd fanboys illusions, wishes, and fantasies, most often stated every time, till the day they croak it.
It's "their opinion" though, so "it's not wrong"... (if that tracks as true for you check your forehead for 3 stamped letters.)
thebluephoenix - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
Efficiency? You know that 5870 was far more efficient than GTX480. 6970 also compared well to GTX 580.Before calling people fanboys be sure that you aren't one.
For me it's simple, 7970 has good compute performance, and GTX 680 has PhysX.
7970 GE = 7970 OC Edition, still a very good card.
CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, June 26, 2012 - link
It's the wording used by the collator, a foreigner no doubt, "efficiency" you fool, since you didn't check the link.It MEANS FRAME RATE.
Leave it to the retarded, once again, to jump, screech, and FAIL.
thebluephoenix - Thursday, June 28, 2012 - link
Efficiency usually means energy efficiency. Perf/Watt, (or rMAX/rPeak, on Top500 site).Except for google translated polish pages, obviously.
Frame rate is speed, so the card is faster, not more efficient.
Go now, be (nV)idiot somewhere else.
CeriseCogburn - Saturday, June 30, 2012 - link
It is ALSO more efficient. How clueless are you still ? Why do clueless Cluseau's respond ?Look, if you ever decide to click the link and take a gander for an hour or two ( my estimation about how long it would take for you to get a round opinion of the massive database of the most popular reviewers concerning these tow cards, don't get back to me.
A gigantic thank you would be nice but I'm not expecting it.
Maybe silverblue needs a friend too, then you can spew name calling together, and giggle, that is likely the extent of the mental capacities, so have at it.
silverblue - Friday, June 29, 2012 - link
Yet amusingly, you failed to point out the error of the author's ways before somebody here pulled you up on it... I doubt that efficiency is a word that can be mis-translated; the author just used the wrong term. The very fact that you quoted two lines with the same incorrect term proves that you were happy enough to treat it - as is so often in your case - as factual. If anything, the 680 is probably something in the region of 10-15% more efficient per frame than the 7970 based off the collated results on that article, notwithstanding the fact that drivers have been significantly revised for both architectures since then.You also stated that the article was '"their opinion" though, so "it's not wrong"' but you slate everybody else's conflicting opinions as wrong. Am I the only person seeing an issue with this approach?
I'm really confused as to why you even bother to visit here except to be a class-A troll, and I'm going to take some of my own advice and flat out ignore you from now on unless you actually say something of any use. Ordinarily, I wouldn't tell others what to do but on this occasion, I implore them to follow suit. We should put you in a room with Beenthere just for the hell of it.
CeriseCogburn - Saturday, June 30, 2012 - link
You're goners in the head dude.The article, which you still obviously never looked at (as it will crush your amd fan heart), collates reviews from around the web, including this sites.
It's not an opinion, it's FACTS, as best we can get them, in one BIG mathematically deduced pile, and the word is meant to be FRAME RATES, which of course is all you amd fan boys claim you care about, unless of course you were spewing about eyefinity without 3 monitors and no $100 adapter that took a year and a half to come down to $35 not available...
Just face the facts for once, like a man.