[Computerbase]Radeon HD 5870, 6970, 7970, 290X and Fury X in comparison

P

PontiacGTX

Gawd
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
808
Test system and test results

For all benchmarks the graphics card test system with an updated Windows 10 was used. Since AMD supports the graphics card from the architecture GCN (Radeon HD 77xx) with the current driver, the Crimson ReLive 16.12.2 comes only from the Radeon HD 7970 onwards. The Radeon HD 5870 as well as the Radeon HD 6970 based on the VLIW5 or VLIW4 architecture have to deal with the legacy driver Crimson 16.2.1, which is not quite a year old.

Old and new games as a benchmark

14 different games are used for the article, which like the graphics cards are different old. So the oldest games come from the year 2011, while with Battlefield 1 there are also very current titles in the test parcours.

Settings optimized for graphics cards with 2 GB of memory

In all benchmarks, the highest graphic details are used in the resolution of 2.560 × 1.440, while in the mid-range models, the games ran in Full HD. This is a tribute to the performance class of the graphics cards. Only in the current games were partly the details reduced, since otherwise also the current generation does not reach sufficient Frameraten. In addition, the texture details have been reduced in some games, so graphics cards with at least 2,048 MB of memory have to contend with only minor losses. Supports a game DirectX 12, decides the highest Framerate, which result is used.

Benchmarks from Skyrim to Battlefield 1

In addition to the Radeon HD 7970, the Radeon R9 290X also makes a clear difference. On average, the speed increases by 50 percent compared to the predecessor. This is due to the higher raw material output and the fine art of architecture. The Radeon R9 290X can also increase the performance quite consistently through all games. Slips are few.

The Radeon R9 Fury X has problems with the utilization

The Radeon R9 Fury X and thus the last high-end graphics card from AMD, on the other hand, has some misfires. Therefore, the average performance is just 24 percent. The reason is in some games where the Radeon R9 Fury X can not use their raw power. An example of this is Call of Duty: Black Ops III, which is only eight percent faster than on the Radeon R9 290X. Others are Alan Wake and Company of Heroes 2, also they scale with Fiji badly. But there is also a brake in other titles: considering the naked specifications, the card should be a maximum of 50 percent faster, while in most games it is only about 30 percent. The problem is that AMD, despite the double number of units, uses only the front end of the half-sized Tonga GPU. This can not overload the over 4,000 shader units.

Looking back, the high-end graphics cards from AMD have "only" grown by a factor of 5 since 2009, and they are six times as fast in mid-range. The next big leap could be with Vega but imminent.
Click to expand...
Source
 
Guess it's a matter of perspective. I'm more than happy with how well the Fury X does in comparison to my old 390. The graph in the link shows a very linear growth path. The 7970 was almost 100% faster than the 6970, the 290X was 50% faster than the 7970, and the Fury X was 25% faster than a 290X. That's linear performance growth. No problem with that here. The real problem is that the growth stops a year and a half ago.
 
I am not saying one cant be happy with a Fury X. The card is a high end GPU that performs better than the 390X. I loved the experience of my 390X. But given the chance then, or now, to buy a Fury X over 980Ti or 1080. I would choose the other two GPUs every time. Trust me, I will happily give AMD my money next time they make a 7970/290X type of card.
 
I picked up a fury non x and been a little underwhelmed. My FPS in project cars jumped up a huge amount --40% i think , but the rest of my games feels about the same. Right now im troubleshooting a windows desktop manager crash and took the fury out. Put in two rx480 4gb in crossfire and getting huge fps jump... for the games that support crossfire anyway.
 
Omegas said:
Still haven't replaced my 7970 in my main gaming rig, ridiculous how long it's lasted.
Click to expand...
Yeah man I can agree with this. Hell even a gimped 7970m holds its own fairly well in modern titles like WD2 and BF1 and it's got less processing power and vram then an actual 7970 (Tahiti right?).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top