AMD Radeon HD 6970 and 6950 Video Card Review @ [H]

This review is the only one I've read showing the HD 6950 matching or beating the GTX 570. Most have shown the GTX 570 beating the HD 6950 by about 10% and matching the HD 6970. The GTX 580 is besting the HD 6970 by about 10%. Did Charlie Demerjian secretly edit this article?
 
TechBoy said:
I wonder how Nvidia is feeling right now?
Click to expand...

Probably pretty good. They still have the fastest single card, and they are right in the mix with the 570, even at its current price point, and a 560 sitting in the wings. They are probably pretty happy with the way this all turned out.
 
So glad that the rumors are over.


Looks like a good card. I am disappointed that AMD didn't beat out the GTX580 though. So many choices of video cards now. Looks like lots of competition between AMD and NVIDIA.

With the let down I'm also relieved about my decision on buying the GTX470 for around $160 from Newegg at their black friday sale. I had almost made up my mind on waiting for the HD6970. I wanted the best single GPU card and I thought the HD6970 would be it.

NVIDIA won this battle IMO.
 
I ordered a 6970 and was going to put the 5870s in my wifes machine but I cancelled it,I think i will upgrade to 1366 and a 950 first..If it wasn't for the stupid stuttering with xfire id be happy as pie..
 
Jeffredo said:
This review is the only one I've read showing the HD 6950 matching or beating the GTX 570. Most have shown the GTX 570 beating the HD 6950 by about 10% and matching the HD 6970. The GTX 580 is besting the HD 6970 by about 10%. Did Charlie Demerjian secretly edit this article?
Click to expand...

Check resolutions. 2560x1600 at [H] seems more or less consistent with other 25x16 results on other sites.
 
yeah lets see what the Eyefinity resolution performance is like, guessing games like GTA IV and other frame buffer limited titles will shine at super high rez.
 
Maybe the varied results stem from various driver versions being used.

Anandtech Catalyst 8.79.6.2 RC2
Benchmark Review Catalyst 10.11 (8.790.6.2000)
Computer Base Catalyst 8.79.6.2 RC2
Guru3D Catalyst Beta 8.97.6.101206a
Hardware Canucks Catalyst 10.12 Beta RC2
Hardware.Fr Catalyst 10.10e
Hardware Heaven Catalyst 10.12 ??
Hardware.Info Pre-released Cat 10.12 (no version number provided)
HardOCP Catalyst 8.79.6.2 RC2
Hot Hardware Catalyst 10.11b
PC In Life Catalyst 10.11 (8.790.6.2000)
Rage3D Catalyst 8.890 + CAP 10.12. Also reviews the performance difference between MSAA, MLAA and EQAA
TPU 6970 Catalyst 8.79.6.2 RC2
TPU 6950 Catalyst 8.79.6.2 RC2
Toms Hardware (including CF results) Catalyst 8.79.6.2 RC2
TweakTown Catalyst 10.10 beta
vrzone Catalyst 10.11 (8.790.6.2000)
IXBT Catalyst 10.11 (8.790.6.2000)

*snagged from eastcoasthandle on tpu
 
You won't find any net performance benefit ditching that i7 860 and moving to an i7 950, sidegrade at best. If you really want to ditch it then wait 4 weeks for sandybridge to hit.
 
I disagree with some that have said don't bother with a $360+ card if running at 1900x1200. Personally I like games like Metro 2033, Crysis, others/etc to get as near to or above 60 fps. mid 30s in fps for GTX 460/6850, etc suck. I want higher fps and max eye candy on the games that push hardware at 1900x1200 so yes, a GTX 570/6950/6970 are in my future.
If I was on 2560x1600 I'd want to SLI/x-fire them for the same reasons, [H] shows mid 30s at these frame rates with single cards... no thanks.
 
Well i got my GTX580 for $409 so a $50 difference for overall better performance is acceptable in my opinion. I would have been upset if the 6970 had trounced all over the 580 but this isn't the case. For those who paid the full price for your 580, i feel sorry for you!
 
Time to Watch Nvidia react to the Amazing pricing of AMD.
All in all great time to be a GPU purchaser. Amazingly low prices from ATI/AMD and such fierce competition with performance that Nvidia knows it has to react with adjustments.
Anyone who is trying to call this a bad product, price, or performance is most likely just trying to fanboy spoil a great product.
 
This is the same situation as the past couple gens since 3870: ATI has a slightly slower top-end card at a much better price. All in all, a hell of a lot of GPU for $310 and $370 which will likely edge down the price of the 570 a bit. 580 will likely stay at the same prices until 6990 is out considering it's alone at the top for the time being..

It's a sad state, however, that these cards and anything in the same class are wholly not worthwhile unless you're playing with multi-monitors.F-ing consoles...

On a side note, here's to wishing the internet had some sort of scarlet letter for all those posters and reviewers who were claiming they "knew" the 6970 was going to blow the doors off the 580. We should really start a list somewhere.
 
Question! :)

Why are the full load power numbers soo low?

If idle is 190W without a video card and full load is 428W including the 6970, that's a 238W difference... but what about the CPU power consumption? The spirit of the question is: is the video card consuming 190W and the CPU just 48W more at load? (that seems very very low)

Also, what happened to power consumption between 6970 and 580? An 88 watt difference is huge, but is it just controlled for the CPU consumption above? In other words, is the 580 really consuming 88 more watts?

That's a huge number, 6970 draws 32% less power than 580, or 580 draws 46% more power than 6970, based on 190W for 6970 and 278W for 580. The performance is arguably between 5-10% less.
 
Last edited:
DarkLegacy said:
Well people are ignoring the fact that the [H] review is using Physx where applicable in there test which everyone knows delivers a performance hit on the Nvidia parts. So the numbers look a lot closer for some of the test than it would really be if the Physx was disabled. For a more apples to apples comparison to the AMD parts that can't use Physx. There could be some confusion there.
Click to expand...

more eyecandy = less performance so that is the trade off and for those of you that thought physx was free lol you got another thing coming......
 
Nightbird said:
Question! :)

Why are the full load power numbers soo low?
Click to expand...

Hmmm, checked Anandtech, the other site I respect for reviews. It appears that their load power difference in Crysis is 49W, which is far more reasonable. Is something off with Mafia II per chance that is not utilizing 6970's potential and hence lower power consumption?

Load difference in furmark is 129W though :p due to Powertune ofc
 
At first, I was kinda disappointed, but, now that I look at, these cards aren't bad. Nothing incredible though.
 
Very interesting. But, I must still apologize to AMD... Like I said at the 58x0 launch... still not fast enough for me to shell out 300$ at this moment.
 
ihira said:
I'm not being skeptical but I'm sure Im not the only one wondering why [H]s results differ so much from other sites.
Click to expand...

Exactly, everyone else is saying these cards arent all that great and definitely dont match the 580....
 
Heebs said:
Exactly, everyone else is saying these cards arent all that great and definitely dont match the 580....
Click to expand...

I'm not sure either.

I took some time this morning, just out of curiousity, and cruised around to many of the other sites, the equal, in most reviews minds, is the GTX 570 to the 6970.

However, just like any new card release, I'd do my due diligence before buying. I ponied up for GTX 570 SLI , and based on everything I've been reading, it was a good call.

Also, not to put a fly in the ointment, but Dan's purchase of dual 580s seems to have been a really great "educated" guess. ;)
 
UtopiA said:
This is a strange community.
I'm reading other forums, and it seems like a total exodus from ATI. People cancelling 6970's, it's pretty much a trophy being handed to the 570.

But...
Here on [H] it's like the exact opposite. People praising the 6950 and 6970, etc. I feel like I have no idea what's going on.

I'm literally seeing two COMPLETELY opposite reactions on different websites.
Click to expand...

Please show me the website where they used REAL GAMEPLAY and got completely opposite results.

As for our review method, we spend a lot of time and money to use real gameplay because it down in fact give us different results than canned benchmarks, otherwise we would just use the same crap everyone else does,

As for opposite reactions, you might fully read our conclusion page as we have addressed this issue already in our own review. But of course you would have to RTFA to get that angle.
 
exlink said:
Can't decide if I should upgrade from my 5870 1GB to a 6970 2GB for 4320x900 eyefinity...
Click to expand...

I think you would be better off adding another 5870 for crossfire from a raw fps standpoint. The 2GB frame buffer might be nice if you are trying to crank up the AA, but with modern titles that really takes a backseat to attaining playable framerates in eyefinity resolutions.
 
I have a BFG 285 GTX OC in my Intel quad core system running Vista. I want to get into multi-display gaming. I assume that I can still use AMD cards with Vista for Eyefinity, educate me if I am wrong. Also I know that I have to have Nvidia cards in SLI to have surround gaming and have to change my OS from Vista to Win 7. I would like to upgrade my system rather than build a new one at this time and spend the money on some monitors. Honestly I have no problem with Vista and do not want to spend the money on another OS. Do you think it would be worth it to sell my 285 and get a HD 6970?
 
I was all hell-bent on getting a GTX 570/580 with my holiday bonus, but am now really questioning if a 6970 would be a better deal for the money. Oh, decisions....
 
Very nice article.

Overall, it seems that all these two cards have going for them is their price; which is very nice, but that's about it. Of course we haven't seen CrossfireX performance or EyeFinity performance, either.

In other reviews I've read there are more severe performance differences and some real inconsistancies that are hard to explain.

If these GPUs were priced along the same lines as the 5870 (which I recall was over $400, if you look at the E6/2GB models close to $500) they would be getting railed out of town.

I just can't warm up to these given the solid performance of the 570/580 and the hit and miss driver releases of the AMD side.

Like I said, very well positioned price-wise, but honestly that's about it.
 
I cant seem to want to get these cards, I'm more interested to see if nVidia is going to drop prices on their current cards to really stick it to AMD. So I may continue holding off for a bit on picking up a new card.

As another reviewer said, "It appears that AMD positioned these cards against the 400 series not fully realizing what the 500 series were going to bring to the table."

Not a single other review that I have read so far has said that the 6970 blows the 570 out of the water, at best its slightly faster, more realistically its neck and neck. This is coming from BOTH benchmarks and gameplay benchmarks.
 
Wow there are a bunch of big ass babies on here. If your going to spend 700-1k on video cards to play on a monitor you got for 150 at walmart somthing is wrong with your thought process. Your monitor is one of your most import things. You stair at it for how ever many hours your gaming. Its not somthing you replace often so spend some money on it damn it. I got my 30 from dell for 700 shipped. Like some one else said you can run tripple monitors for $300-600 easy. I'll be getting 2x6970's, dont see spending 300 more for 580 gtxs when at my res there almost even. So stop bitching about the amd cards running slow on your grandmas 1960s crt :)
 
Heebs said:
Exactly, everyone else is saying these cards arent all that great and definitely dont match the 580....
Click to expand...

read the articles and look at the resolutions used. I haven't seen drastic scores differing from one site to another at high resolutions. I've seen a few at 1280 x 1024 and 1680x1050 where it equals the 570, but if your buying this card to game at those resolutions then pardon me, but your stupid.

Take that money, but yourself a new monitor, get a 460 or 6850 with the leftover money and wait til next generation.

Almost every single article has the 580 and 6870 within 5-10% of each other at high resolutions and the crossfire scaling on them are fantastic. At the price point they've launched at they look to be a fantastic buy.
 
Terrific review. Your real world benchmarks again show another side of the story.

Ideally, I'd like to see best possible settings at two given resolutions based on the tier of the card, such as 2560x1200 and 1920x1080 for top tier cards, lower for lesser cards. Just an idea . . . I suspect that it wouldn't be feasible with the amount of work involved and the time frames you're given.

I have a 30" HP, so this review was especially informative to me. In fact, it just saved me $140. Please, keep up the great work.
 
this is pretty interesting, the GTX 580 is about 530-600 bucks here in canada on a few different sites. the 6970 is $369 and offers pretty damn close performance to the 580. i am a little let down though. i thought that with the 2gb cards, that running BC2 @ 2560x1600 would have scored some better frame rates. CFX 6950's might be the best way to go. they are $299, and will most likely scale 100% like the 6800 series meaning it will out perform the 580 for about the same price
 
This really makes my decision of what to put in my next build more difficult. I can't wait to see the 69XX CF review from [H]. The other sites show impressive scaling but I won't make any decisions without [H]ardOCP's results. As it stands though 2x 6950 is looking really good, especially if the 580 does not drop in price a bit. It's a shame that the reference cooler on these cards does not leave the same "breathing gap" Nvidia's cards do for SLI. On the other hand, I always prefer a single card solution where possible - less headaches overall.
 
Last edited:
It's amusing that the 6970 is running hotter than either the 570 or 580. After the 400 series that is a serious LOL.
 
Nice job [H] and thanks AMD the prices and performance are awesome, and will cause NV to drop its prices to compete.
 
cocheese256 said:
I have a BFG 285 GTX OC in my Intel quad core system running Vista. I want to get into multi-display gaming. I assume that I can still use AMD cards with Vista for Eyefinity, educate me if I am wrong. Also I know that I have to have Nvidia cards in SLI to have surround gaming and have to change my OS from Vista to Win 7. I would like to upgrade my system rather than build a new one at this time and spend the money on some monitors. Honestly I have no problem with Vista and do not want to spend the money on another OS. Do you think it would be worth it to sell my 285 and get a HD 6970?
Click to expand...

I had EyeFinity with Crossfired 5870 E6 models.
I ran W7 x64, I have no experience with Vista.
EF is a great technology, but I was a bit frustrated with the constant search for hacks to make the tech work (games that were not natively supported) and AMDs inconsistant scaling in Crossfire.

I have run nvidia surround with GTX 260s and now GTX 580s.

You have a dilemma...........you could buy another GTX 285 used for pretty cheap and spend between 75 and 100 dollars on an upgrade disc to W7 (providing you can SLi with your current MB).......or you can buy the new 6970 and use EF......I think you'd break pretty much even.

Look, I can run any current game on my GTX 260 surround system fully loaded except for AA, excellently. I ran COD: BOps full out and averaged 40 FPS, very playable, you'd get more with the 285s.

If you choose the 6970 you have the advantage of new tech, and a single card, but you may not have the horsepower to drive three 24" monitors, plus at least one monitor has to have a Display Port native connection.

With nvidia you WILL have two card horsepower and no need to use DP.(you still have to hunt for hacks in non-native supported games, that is not an AMD exclusive.....widescreengamingforum is always the best source.)

Tough choice. either way, three monitor gaming is the schizzle.:D
 
It would be interesting to see [H] do some comparison runs at LOWER resolutions as thats where most gamers play.

I think I'll have to bite my tongue and look at the [H] review again as I plan on picking up a new monitor shortly.
 
6950 is exactly what I was hoping it would be.

i get to go dual monitors and have money left over for a new netbook.

Thanks for the review
 
Heebs said:
It would be interesting to see [H] do some comparison runs at LOWER resolutions as thats where most gamers play.

I think I'll have to bite my tongue and look at the [H] review again as I plan on picking up a new monitor shortly.
Click to expand...

I'd say that would be kind of a waste of resources. You can pick-up a 19x10 monitor for $150 now a days. If you look at the performance or 1920x1080 you can kinda guesstimate or assume that you'll get equal or better performance @ 16x10 and below. Though you start getting more CPU bound the lower you go. If it can spit out good frames @ 19x10 and up it's a safe bet that you'll get the performance you're looking for @ 16x10 and below.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top