Radeon HD 7000:  HD 7790 |  HD 7850 |  HD 7870 |  HD 7870 XT |  HD 7950 |  HD 7970 |  HD 7990 |  Radeon HD 8000:  HD 8750 |  HD 8770 |  HD 8850 |  HD 8870 |  HD 8950 |  HD 8970 |  HD 8990 
GeForce 600:  GTX 650 Ti Boost  |  GTX 660  |  GTX 660 Ti  |  GTX 670  |  GTX 680 |  GTX 690 |  Titan: GTX TITAN |  GeForce 700:  GTX 760  |  GTX 760 Ti  |  GTX 770  |  GTX 780 |  GTX 790 

June 23rd, 2012

AMD Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition Overclocking Roundup

AMD Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition Overclocking Roundup radeon 7970 ghz
Yesterday, a GPU industry has warmly welcomed a refreshed Tahiti XT2 chip with Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition launch. Supposedly, card was to offer better overclocking potential, through better stability at higher voltages and therefore, allowing to set increased clocks. So did the company managed to fill the gap to GTX 680′s performance?

Most of the reviews are very positive about this card. The GHz Edition is offering similar performance to GeForce GTX 680, only with slightly higher power consumption. AMD has also implemented a new feature called Boost, which is basically the auto-scaled GPU clock. It’s worth mentioning that it’s not very useful feature, for instance, at a default clock set to 1200 MHz, Boost remains at 1050 MHz. So there is not much room for Boost to be manually manipulated (while it depends on TDP and GPU usage).

Before I present to you how did Radeon HD 7970 GHz perform in comparison to half-year old original Radeon HD 7970, take a look at the specs.

Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition Specification

 

AMD Radeon HD 7970AMD Radeon HD 7970 “GHz Edition”nVidia GeForce GTX 680
GPU28nm Tahiti XT228 Tahiti XT28 Kepler GK104
Transistors Count4.3 billion4.3 billion3.54 billion
Die Size365mm²365mm²294mm²
Stream (CUDA) Processors204820481536
Texture Mapping Units128128128
Raster Operating Units323232
Core Clock925 MHz1000 MHz1006 MHz
Boost ClockNA1050 MHz1058 MHz
Memory Clock1375 MHz1500 MHz1508 MHz
Memory Type3072 MB GDDR53072 MB GDDR52048 MB GDDR5
Memory Interface384-bit384-bit256-bit
PCI Express1.x/2.0/3.01.x/2.0/3.01.x/2.0/3.0
Length281mm281mm26cm
Power Connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin2x 6-pin
TDP250W250W195W
Idle Power Consumption14W13W14W
Gaming Power Consumption211W254W180W
MSRB Price429$499$499$

Source: 3DCenter.org

Power Consumption

IdleMulti DisplayGamingFurMarkTDP
Radeon HD 6950 2GB22W58W163W206W200W
Radeon HD 697022W66W205W267W250W
Radeon HD 7850~12W~30W~110W~135W?
Radeon HD 787013W31W127W159W?
Radeon HD 795016W52W154W208W200W
Radeon HD 797014W49W211W296W250W
Radeon HD 7970 “GHz Edition”13W49W254W351W250W
GeForce GTX 560 Ti16W57W153W193W170W
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 Core25W74W197W243W210W
GeForce GTX 57024W70W199W247W219W
GeForce GTX 58031W92W238W318W244W
GeForce GTX 67014W17W170W184W170W
GeForce GTX 68014W23W180W194W195W

Source: 3DCenter.org

Overclocking Roundup

 

Overclocking RoundupAMD Radeon HD 7970 GHz EditionAMD Radeon HD 7970
Core ClockMemory ClockCore ClockMemory Clock
Anandtech1150 MHz1600 MHz1100 MHz1575 MHz
TechPowerUP1185 MHz1635 MHz1075 MHz1715 MHz
Hexus1150 MHz1650 MHz1075 MHz1525 MHz
PC Perspective1150 MHz-1025 MHz1375 MHz
Guru3D1200 MHz1625 MHz1052 MHz1450 MHz
Tom’s Hardware1175 MHz-1125 MHz1575 MHz
HardOCP1180 MHz1600 MHz--
HotHardware1195 MHz1550 MHz--
Hardware Heaven1256 MHz1648 MHz1110 MHz1505 MHz
Hardware Canucks1156 MHz1561 MHz1078 MHz1554 MHz
SweClockers1150 MHz1600 MHz1180 MHz1600 MHz
Benchmark1150 MHz1580 MHz1125 MHz1575 MHz
PC Games Hardware1150 MHz1750 MHz--
HT4U1150 MHz1700 MHz1070 MHz1500 MHz
Pclab1190 MHz1610 MHz1125 MHz1575 MHz
Average Clock1172 MHz1624 MHz1095 MHz1544 MHz

Conclusion

AMD did a great job at preparing their refreshed Radeon HD 7970. The new Tahiti XT2 GPU can now be overclocked to an average 1175 MHz, which 7% higher than its original version. Also memory seems to be handling new clock speeds quite well, with the average 1624 MHz (5% better). So yes, card is a very good solution for high-end setups, but it’s up to you to decide whether you need highly overclockable card (Radeon HD 7970 is on the top positions in almost every benchmark record), or just the GeForce GTX 680, which is not that power hungry as AMD’s card.

Both cards are now offered at similar price. The only problem is the availability of the GTX 680, but NVIDIA has still few weeks before GHz Edition officially launches in stores.

  • Aryan Eimermacher

    In fururemark the GHz edition goes more then 100W above it’s TDP and uses almost twice as much as a 680, I know with what team I’m going to stick this generation.

  • Jerome

    Yeah thats great so your telling me that you have been with AMD than for all previous generation then?

  • BestJinjo

    All previous generations? I wouldn’t go that far. It was only since HD4800/5800 that AMD was a lot more power efficient. X800XT/X850XT PE/X1800XT/X1950XTX all consumed more power than NV cards. 2900XT was hot and power hungry and slow and HD3800 series was beaten by a mid-range 8800GT. HD6970 consumed about the same power as a GTX570 and just 40W less than the 580:
    http://www.techspot.com/review/546-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/page11.html

    I agree though that 70W difference isn’t a lot for $500 GPUs Oced vs. Oced as long as the cooler is a good one.
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/asus-geforce-gtx-680-msi-radeon-hd7970_10.html#sect0

    However, what about comparing GTX670 vs. HD7970 Ghz edition? A lot of gamers will save $100 and reuse it to upgrade for next generation. AMD needs to somehow combat the 670 because the market for $500 GPUs is extremely small. However, a lot more people will step up from $340-350 HD7950 to $400 GTX670.

    The reference 7970 cooler is pushed to the limits, making it sound like a hair dryer for real world gaming.
    http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/8/

    For 7970 Ghz edition, after market versions are a must (Direct CUii, MSI Lighting Rev2, Sapphire Vapor-X editions).

  • BestJinjo

    When the original HD7970 was launched, the GPU sliders in CCC were limited and MSI afterburner didn’t support voltage control. If you overclock the vanilla HD7970 today, it shouldn’t overclock much worse than the new Ghz edition. OTOH, almost all reviews of HD7970 GE edition overclocking include voltage adjustment, not to mention the new card automatically adjusts voltage >1.2V when 50mhz GPU Boost kicks. Thus, I don’t think that we can accurately conclude that the new XT2 revision overclocks much better. The average overclocks on HWbot for 7970 are also higher than 1095mhz.

    Perhaps once after market 7970s are released, some may hit 1300mhz, but then vanilla HD7970 hit 1150 at stock voltages and 1280mhz at 1.3V in some reviews:
    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/10/sapphire_hd_7970_oc_edition_video_card_review/3

    I doubt this edition can overclock beyond 1300mhz. I think I’d rather save $50!

  • Jerome

    The GTX 680 reference cooler isnt any better, I have two evga 680 and when the fans kick up they are quite loud. Again Kepler is a pretty hot chip, but it draws less power as a pros. The 670 is still slower than the 7970, but yes it is cheaper but I am not sure that enthusiast who buy these types of cards care about saving that much $$. Two 7970 in X-Fire is still the wet dream at this highend segment.

  • Aryan Eimermacher

    ATM, I have a 680 with the reference cooler and it really doesn’t make that much noise compared to a 7970 under full load.
    A chip that consumes more power will get hotter then one that uses less power, what goes in most go out, one way or another.

  • Aryan Eimermacher

    What my point was, AMD says that it the TDP 250W is but it uses 350W, than there is something that doesn’t add up, unless you were overclocking, but I think those results were at stock clock.

  • Cleo

    Underload the GTX 680 is hotter than the 7970, my GTX 680 reaches 80 degrees stock with no modified fan curve. My 7970 is my other rig runs at 72 under full load!

  • BestJinjo

    I honestly think for people who can afford these cards, it comes down to what apps and programs/games they run. For example, if you play Arma series, Crysis/Warhead, Metro 2033, Alan Wake, Dirt Showdown, HD7970 is faster or say if you like to use a lot of mods (SKYRIM), then 3GB of VRAM comes into play. If you play Trackmania, Old Republic, Blizzard games, Hard Reset, Battlefield 3, use 3D glasses for gaming, GTX680 is preferable.

    This generation it’s difficult to call a clear winner at the $500 level mark. There are other issues with HD7970 cards such as greater prevalence of coil wine, problems with coming out of sleep (when monitor is turned off). OTOH, the ability to turn off all the slave cards in CF when you aren’t using them is brilliant. So I mean, I don’t think it’s clear cut. I’d say a wet dream is Quad-SLI 690 over HD7970 CF :)-

  • BestJinjo

    350W is in Furmark, an unrealistic heat virus. I don’t think it’s at all representative of the types of real life workloads that a GPU is exposed to. For example, think about the fact that games will bottlenecked by either pixel, shader, tessellation, memory bandwidth, VRAM or a combination of these factors. You aren’t going to have all of the elements inside the GPU core utilized to the 99-100%. Furmark virus loads the VRMs and internal parts of the GPU to the maximum. Not even distributed computing, GPGPU compute tasks can generate that type of workload. For all intents and purposes it is actually very impressive that the reference PCB and its components are able to handle 350W of power!!! Talk about a very well built design.

    The more realistic power consumption under load is a 250W or so, which is more than GTX680, but not as dramatic of a difference as there was between GTX480 and the HD5870.

  • Aryan Eimermacher

    But the 7970 is a lot louder under load, if you set a custom fan curve to match the 7970 sound levels, you get a lot better temps.
    Also, you have to get lucky with the chips, might be that some people have chips that get hotter under the same load.

  • Yourboy

    In that case of the chip lottery than it is pointless to debate this.

  • JM

    This chart is missing some data. For example, HardOCP hit 1260 MHz on a reference 7970.

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/01/09/amd_radeon_hd_7970_overclocking_performance_review/

  • http://videocardz.com/ VideoCardz.com

    It looks like a voltage of 1.3 can only be found in this review, so this data is not representative.

  • ight

    Because N shuts their card down in furmark… read about it