AMD Radeon HD6950/6970(Cayman) Reviews

[Florinmocanu]

future games will demand more than 1.2 GB at 1920x1200, with max details, 8x AA, 16x AF. going with 2 GB is really a nice future-proofing of your gaming rig.

[Dimitriman]

Nvidia WINS!




Flawless Victory.

[flopper]

Great new product.
crossfire 6950 got to be bang for the buck of the decade.
the order of dominance AMD has over nvidia is astounding,
fastest card in the world 5970 soon to be 6990,
so AMD will have 6990/5970 and then a trailing mid range 580 comes along.

[Motiv]

Nvidia WINS!

Flawless Victory.

Utter Pimhole, and you know it.

The 580, is the single best GPU, then we have the 6970 a little above the 570 and the 6950 at the rear.

so

580>6970>570>6950

If you play at 1900x1000, then the 570 looks to be the better card (with the 6950 shaking up for those on a little bit more of a budget). If you play at higher resolutions then the 580 is king, with the 6970 for those on a budget (budget all being relative).

Looks like the norm we've had for a couple of years now.

[hurrdurr]

I am not impressed. Nvidia still looks as good as it did yesterday. It's very interesting that AMD lost all the advantage it had in pricing and power efficiency.

[tajoh111]

One positive things I will say that comes out of this generation, is it really shows both architectures may have legs on the next generation and a super obvious advantage really doesn't exist at this point for either company. Although I am not sure if will ever happen, it just means both companies have to really throw off the gloves the next generation at 28nm and not hold back because neither company has room because they are closer than ever with performance. I kind of like this type of situation because it gives room for both companies to make money. AMD actually might need to get not conservative and build a monster monolithic chip.

Sure NV chip is bigger but it has only 10% less transisters and I don't see it loosing the GPU Computing crown. So I think they are playing at pretty even level.

On another note, I hope when the 5970 get sold out, people don't mistake the 6970 for a dual chip and successor to the 5970. AMD naming scheme is a real mess.

[sergiojr]

i play on resolution 1920x1200 so Again Give me one reason to pay 20$ in addition to the 350$ Do not forget that gtx 570 (350$) have the same performance hd 6970 (370$)

If you want to buy a new card now and still be able to play new games at 1920x1200 in 2-3 years than 2GB of RAM is a real reason. If you will change card in a year, than go with GTX570. It's pretty simple, huh?

[Gilgamesh]

Utter Pimhole, and you know it.

The 580, is the single best GPU, then we have the 6970 a little above the 570 and the 6950 at the rear.

so

580>6970>570>6950

If you play at 1900x1000, then the 570 looks to be the better card (with the 6950 shaking up for those on a little bit more of a budget). If you play at higher resolutions then the 580 is king, with the 6970 for those on a budget (budget all being relative).

Looks like the norm we've had for a couple of years now.

+1

Same story of last april:
480>5870>470>5850, all in 25-30%

[Dimitriman]

I am not impressed. Nvidia still looks as good as it did yesterday. It's very interesting that AMD lost all the advantage it had in pricing and power efficiency.

ding ding ding ding that is the CORRECT answer sir!

Its not that these cards suck, it's cause Amd's small chips lower power strategy failed this time around. These cards are shader starved and thing are worst off this round then they were last round. At least the 5870 had clear performance and power advantage over the 470.
Also I am not too pleased with the 6950, its basically 10%% faster than Barts in most cases and that is barely relevant. They could just as well given 6870 2gb and more clock and called it a day.

Amd should be praying there won't be a dual fermi in the works cause that will destroy their strategy on all levels then.

[zerazax]

This post is ridiculous:

ding ding ding ding that is the CORRECT answer sir!

Its not that these cards suck, it's cause Amd's small chips lower power strategy failed this time around.

If this card were on 32nm with all the features Anand hinted at, would people still complain?

The most likely issue is that 32nm was cancelled and AMD wanted to recuperate its R&D cost, so the best thing to do is sell it at 40nm (which they're quite familiar with) and hope for the best until TSMC gets its act together for 28nm. The fact this supposedly all happened in less than a year's time clearly caught AMD by surprise so it's amazing they even managed to get cards out that fast, given that most cards are planned out far earlier

These cards are shader starved and thing are worst off this round then they were last round. At least the 5870 had clear performance and power advantage over the 470.
Also I am not too pleased with the 6950, its basically 10%% faster than Barts in most cases and that is barely relevant. They could just as well given 6870 2gb and more clock and called it a day.

10% faster than Barts? What reviews are you looking at? The vast majority has the 6950 awfully close if not right at the 570 - the card that's dissapointing is the 6970, which is just 10% faster than the 6950

Of course, that's just proof that the 69xx's are a forward looking architecture - in older games they don't beat the 5870 by much, but in newer engines they do by a good amount - look at Stalker and Metro.

Amd should be praying there won't be a dual fermi in the works cause that will destroy their strategy on all levels then.

More ridiculous-ness. When the:

GTX 295 > 4870 X2
GTX 285 > 4890
GTX 275 > 4870
GTX 260-216 > 4850

Did AMD's destruction across every single card matter? Of course not, the 4800's brought AMD back in market share and everything.

Now that Cayman is closer but not quite that the performer of the 580, its doom and gloom? Seriously?

How's this also for perspective:

Look at where the 5870 performed at release - it lost to the 4870X2 in a lot of things and the GTX 295 as well. Look at where AMD's drivers and game optimizations + game development has gone - the 5870 is clearly ahead, and it's even creeping up on the GTX 480 in performance (at release, the GTX 480 was a good 15-20% faster, now we have situations where the 5870 can close within 10%).

Let me ask this: who's more likely to get a boost over the next year, the 580 based on the 480 or the 69xx based on nothing prior?

And to say nothing of the fact that if 28nm really did get delayed by TSMC to 2012, as some rumors are swirling now, who will be in the better position to deliver another 40nm card? The company with a 530mm^2 GPU flagship or the one with a 389mm^2 GPU flagship?

Sheesh, some people need to seriously calm down and look at perspective here outside of JUST raw performance #'s

[TheBreezyBB]

Someone please explain?!!

WTF AMAZON 6970=483$
Amazon 6950=372$

[zerazax]

Amazon price gouging because they don't have sales tax in states Newegg does

And why do you care so much anyways for someone being outside the US? Just curious, since all your posts are geared the same way

[-Sweeper_]

after all the buzz, they could only match a geforce GTX570

[570091D]

I suggest all of you just close eyes on all those reviews, and wait till reviewers will have latest drivers (8.801+)

"Best Ever"

SUNNYVALE, Calif. — Dec. 13, 2010 — AMD (NYSE: AMD) today announced AMD Catalyst™ graphics drivers have been independently verified as providing the most stable and reliable experience in the industry, and introduced an intuitive user interface. The new user interface is available for the full suite of AMD Radeon™ drivers supporting desktop, notebook and chipset graphics products. With support for Windows® 7 and Windows® Vista operating systems, the new AMD Catalyst™ drivers enable industry-leading stability, advanced performance and superior usability and simplicity.

i am tired of hearing about how awesome amd drivers are then being asked to wait for the next driver to get a products "real" performance.

[TheBreezyBB]

Cause i buy everything from Amazon! I have a US address and they get shipped there and to here afterward. And there's Tax on amazon just FYI!!

[dartaz]

It gives decent preliminary info.
Nice tessellation improvements, but not enough to catch up with Fermi. Good pricing. Outperforming GTX570 by 10-20% at high resolutions or when AA+AF are enabled.

No, it doesn't, or Maybe in very few cases

Looking at anandtech review, GTX 570 performed better in 4 out of the 10 games they tested at 2560x1600

HD6970 performed better in the other six games, but difference was small in most of them
(for example the difference in mass effect 2 was just 0.2 fps)

It seems that the the extra memory that HD6970 has is almost useless even at extremely high resolution like 2560x1600

[zerazax]

Cause i buy everything from Amazon! I have a US address and they get shipped there and to here afterward. And there's Tax on amazon just FYI!!

Nope, only in states they have a physical presence in that also has a sales tax.

No, it doesn't, or Maybe in very few cases

Looking at anandtech review, GTX 570 performed better in 4 of the 10 games they tested at 2560x1600

HD6970 performed better in the other six games, but difference was small in most of them
(for example the difference in mass effect 2 was just 0.2 fps)

It seems that the the extra memory that HD6970 has is useless even at extremely high resolution

Anandtech is just one review. Someone needs to compile the results, because every reviewer's game suite dictates results (hence they're all over the place). Try comparing Techreport with someone else for instance, and it's a headache

[-Sweeper_]

No, it doesn't, or Maybe in very few cases

Looking at anandtech review, GTX 570 performed better in 4 of the 10 games they tested at 2560x1600

HD6970 performed better in the other six games, but difference was small in most of them
(for example the difference in mass effect 2 was just 0.2 fps)

It seems that the the extra memory that HD6970 has is useless even at extremely high resolution

that may give an advantage in tomorrow's DX11 titles, but then again, well be more interested in 7xxx and GTX6xx when they come

[VoodooProphetII]

Now that Cayman is closer but not quite that the performer of the 580, its doom and gloom? Seriously?

I've read through so many posts on this forum, and I find it odd that when people say that it would be the end of Nvidia, or doom and gloom for Nvidia or anything bad about Nvidia it is fine. It seems around here we'll grab at anything that would make our assumptions "seem" valid but will ignore anything that might counter our assumptions or beliefs.

I know that I'll be labelled as a troll for stating my opinion, not because it is my opinion but because I seem to be stepping on toes. As they say: "If the shoe fits, then you should wear it."

[Jodiuh]

If you need only one reason than 0.7GB of RAM.

768's still enough for 1920x1200 and we had that 4 yrs ago. I'm pretty sure anyone reading this topic wont have a 470 in 2014.

GTX 260-216 > 4850

Owned both. 260 was faster and didn't wig out in COD: MW.

[hurrdurr]

All reviews I read put 6970 slightly above 570 and well behind 580.

[Kai Robinson]

All you guys whining about how it didn't live upto the hype - AMD has remained virtually silent - the Hype is of your own making. Theorising over and over about specs, when nothing concrete has been released, trying desperately to get the information you all crave. So you built up the card into some nVidia toppling king, which clearly ISN'T the case.

Look at the data you have:

5870 = 1600SP's/80TMU's
6970 = 1536SP's/96TMU's

You're expecting miracle performance from this....why? The fact it's 15 to 20% faster than a 5870 which has an SP advantage, is pretty impressive. Take into account the whole package. It's EVOLUTIONARY - not REVOLUTIONARY.

nVidia have consistently released cards with the words 'WE ARE TEH WINZ0RS! WE ARE FASTER THAN ANYONE!' and then slap on a pricetag to match. So AMD comes along, gives you 95% the performance, for a lower price, gains marketshare, as they're 'fast enough' (this is an INITIAL release, with release drivers afterall). Seriously - what gives with some of you?

I buy cards not based on the brand, but the bang-for-buck. I considered upgrading to a GTX460 from my HD4850, and then the 6850's came along, stomped on that sandcastle, and here i am again, re-assessing what i really NEED. Do i game at 2560x1600 with ALL the eye candy? No. I have a 1680x1050 monitor that i want to last before replacing - and most games i find don't need more than 4xAA & 8xAF to look 'pretty'. If you want more performance out of these cards - overclock them, perhaps? That is, afterall, what this forum specialises in, not hypothetical fanw@nking...

[zerazax]

I've read through so many posts on this forum, and I find it odd that when people say that it would be the end of Nvidia, or doom and gloom for Nvidia or anything bad about Nvidia it is fine. It seems around here we'll grab at anything that would make our assumptions "seem" valid but will ignore anything that might counter our assumptions or beliefs.

I know that I'll be label as a troll for stating my opinion, not because it is my opinion but because I seem to be stepping on toes. As they say: "If the shoe fits, then you should wear it."

Well, it used to be AMD doom and gloom way back

I'll give you a little timeline of how things went these past 4 years in the GPU world:

May 14, 2007 - R600 is released - "AMD bankrupt by end of the year"
Oct 29, 2007 - 8800 GT released - "OMG AMD is done! 8800GT and G92 is going to be legendary!" (little did we know what kind of legendary )
Nov 19, 2007 - RV670 is released - "Good try AMD, but too little too late - your dual GPU can't even match our top single GPU - see you in bankruptcy"
Jun 17, 2008 - GT200 released - "Can of whoop ass opened. 2x G80 vs. 480 SP RV770 - gg AMD"
Jun 25, 2008 - RV770 released - Can of whoop ass spills on self. "zomg Nvidia is screwed"
Sep 23, 2009 - 5870 released - "Just wait for Fermi..."
Dec 31, 2009 - "Er... Nvidia where you at"
Mar 26, 2010 - GF 100 released - "Nvidia bankrupt by end of the year"

[VoodooProphetII]

All you guys whining about how it didn't live upto the hype - AMD has remained virtually silent - the Hype is of your own making. Theorising over and over about specs, when nothing concrete has been released, trying desperately to get the information you all crave. So you built up the card into some nVidia toppling king, which clearly ISN'T the case.

QFT.... Well said

[flyck]

No, it doesn't, or Maybe in very few cases

Looking at anandtech review, GTX 570 performed better in 4 out of the 10 games they tested at 2560x1600

HD6970 performed better in the other six games, but difference was small in most of them
(for example the difference in mass effect 2 was just 0.2 fps)

It seems that the the extra memory that HD6970 has is almost useless even at extremely high resolution like 2560x1600

It is mentionned countless of times, but go read a review that uses the 10.11 drivers which are available.... Anandtech used the 10.10. Hardocp for example, the 6950 NEVER looses to a 570GTX.. the 6970 trade some blows with the GTX580 but is overall slightly slower. Still blows the 570GTX by a significant margin (e.g.10%).