We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
[nextpage title=”Introduction”]
The new Radeon HD 7950, which is being released today, is a more affordable version of the Radeon HD 7970. Let’s check its performance and see if it is a good choice for users looking for a high-end video card.
The Radeon HD 7950 is a Radeon HD 7970 with fewer processors and lower clock rates. It is based on the same new architecture as the more expensive model, dubbed “Graphics Core Next” or simply “GCN,” and supports the new PCI Express 3.0 connection and the latest DirectX version (11.1). For a detailed explanation of the new features present on this new architecture, please read our Radeon HD 7970 review.
At USD 450, the Radeon HD 7950 fills the void between the GeForce GTX 570 (USD 370-400, if you can still find a video card based on this chip) and the GeForce GTX 580 (USD 470-500 for models with the standard clocks and 1.5 GB of memory) in terms of pricing.
In the table below, we compare the main specifications of the video cards included in our review. The prices listed below do not include rebates and are for the models with the clock and memory configurations listed below. Prices were researched at Newegg.com on the day we published this review, except for the Radeon HD 7950, which is the price advertised by AMD.
| Video Card | Core Clock | Shader Clock | Memory Clock (Effective) | Memory Interface | Memory Transfer Rate | Memory | Shaders | DirectX | Price |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 800 MHz | 800 MHz | 5 GHz | 384-bit | 240 GB/s | 3 GB GDDR5 | 1,792 | 11.1 | USD 450 |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 925 MHz | 925 MHz | 5.5 GHz | 384-bit | 264 GB/s | 3 GB GDDR5 | 2,048 | 11.1 | USD 550-560 |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 880 MHz | 880 MHz | 5.5 GHz | 256-bit | 176 GB/s | 2 GB GDDR5 | 1,536 | 11 | USD 330-370 |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 772 MHz | 1,544 MHz | 4,008 MHz | 384-bit | 192.4 GB/s | 1.5 GB GDDR5 | 512 | 11 | USD 470-500 |
NVIDIA offers a 3 GB version of the GeForce GTX 580 for USD 550, which is the true competitor against the Radeon HD 7970. However, we didn’t have one to include in our comparison.
You can compare the specs of these video cards with other video cards by taking a look at our “AMD ATI Chips Comparison Table” and “NVIDIA Chips Comparison Table” tutorials.
Today, only the LGA2011 Core i7 processors (“Sandy Bridge-E”) have a PCI Express 3.0 controller. Therefore, we tested the video cards using a Core i7-3960X processor on a motherboard based on the Intel X79 chipset. In our Radeon HD 7970 review, we discovered that, at this time, there is no difference between using a PCI Express 2.0 or a PCI Express 3.0 connection. We also discovered that if you are using a high-end video card, the CPU doesn’t affect gaming performance.
Now let’s take a complete look at the AMD Radeon HD 7950 reference model.
[nextpage title=”The AMD Radeon HD 7950″]
Below we have an overall look at the AMD Radeon HD 7950 reference model. It requires one six-pin and one eight-pin auxiliary power connectors.
Figure 1: AMD Radeon HD 7950
Figure 2: AMD Radeon HD 7950
One of the highlights of this video card is the possibility of connecting up to six video monitors at the same time, which is achieved by using a DisplayPort hub or a DisplayPort monitor that provides daisy-chaining capability. The card provides one DVI-D, one HDMI, and two mini DisplayPort connectors. According to AMD, Radeon HD 7950 video cards will come with a single-link active DisplayPort-to-DVI adapter, so you will have two DVI-D connectors available.
Figure 3: Video connectors
[nextpage title=”The AMD Radeon HD 7950 (Cont’d)”]
The Radeon HD 7950 uses a new cooler, based on vapor chamber technology, which is similar to the technology used by heatpipes. AMD says you can’t remove the GPU cooler, because the performance won’t be the same after you put the video card back together. That is why we didn’t disassemble this video card. Figure 4 was provided by AMD. According to the manufacturer, the fan is also new, providing higher air flow at a lower speed.
Figure 4: Video card cooler
The reviewed video card has two BIOS chips, selectable through a switch. This way you can select between the default configuration or an overclocked configuration, which you created and saved “permanently” to the second BIOS chip.
Figure 5: BIOS switch
Before seeing the performance results, let’s recap the main features of this video card.
[nextpage title=”Main Specifications”]
The main specifications for the AMD Radeon HD 7950 reference model include:
- Graphics chip: Radeon HD 7950 running at 800 MHz
- Memory: 3 GB GDDR5 memory (384-bit interface) running at 5 GHz QDR
- Bus type: PCI Express 3.0 x16
- Video Connectors: One DVI-D, one HDMI, and two mini DisplayPort
- Video Capture (VIVO): No
- Cables and adapters that come with this board: One DVI-to-VGA adapter and two power cable adapters
- Number of CDs/DVDs that come with this board: One
- Games included: None
- Programs included: Driver and overclocking utility
- More information: https://www.amd.com
- MSRP in the US: USD 450.00
[nextpage title=”How We Tested”]
During our benchmarking sessions, we used the configuration listed below. Between our benchmarking sessions, the only variable was the video card being tested.
Hardware Configuration
- CPU: Core i7-3960X (3.3 GHz)
- Motherboard: Intel DX79SI (0380 BIOS)
- Hard disk drive: Western Digital VelociRaptor WD3000GLFS (300 GB, SATA-300, 10,000 rpm, 16 MB cache)
- Video monitor: Samsung SyncMaster 305T (30” LCD, 2560×1600)
- Power Supply: Antec TruePower New 750 W
- CPU Cooler: Intel Liquid Cooling
Software Configuration
- Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
- Video resolution: 2560×1600 @ 60 Hz
Driver Versions
- AMD video driver version (Radeon HD 6970): Catalyst 11.12
- AMD video driver version (Radeon HD 7950 and 7970): 8.921.2.0 RC11
- NVIDIA video driver version: 285.62
- Intel Inf driver version: 9.2.3.1022
Software Used
- 3DMark 11 Professional 1.0.3
- Aliens vs. Predator + Benchmark Tool
- Battlefield 3
- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
- DiRT3
- Far Cry 2 – Patch 1.03
- Media Espresso 6.5
- StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty – Patch 1.3.5
Error Margin
We adopted a 3% error margin. Thus, differences below 3% cannot be considered relevant. In other words, products with a performance difference below 3% should be considered as having similar performance.
[nextpage title=”StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty”]
StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty is a very popular DirectX 9 game that was released in 2010. Though this game uses an old version of DirectX, the number of textures that can be represented on one screen can push most of the top-end graphics cards to their limits. StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty uses its own physics engine that is bound to the CPU and thus does not benefit from PhysX.
We tested this game at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600. The quality of the game was set to the “extreme” preset. We then used FRAPS to collect the frame rate of a replay on the “Unit Testing” custom map. We used a battle between very large armies to stress the video cards.
| StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 218.7 | 6% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 205.4 | |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 201.4 | 2% |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 182.9 | 12% |
| StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 176.7 | 6% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 166.7 | |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 164.4 | 1% |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 161.9 | 3% |
[nextpage title=”Far Cry 2″]
Released in 2008, Far Cry 2 is based on a game engine called Dunia, which is DirectX 10. We used the benchmarking utility that comes with this game at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600, setting overall quality to “ultra high,” maximizing all image quality settings, adjusting anti-aliasing to “8x,” and running the “Ranch Long” demo three times. The results below are expressed in frames per second and are an arithmetic average of the three results collected.
| FarCry 2 | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 105.1 | 19% |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 96.4 | 9% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 88.4 | |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 87.7 | 1% |
| FarCry 2 | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 70.8 | 14% |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 70.4 | 14% |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 62.1 | 0% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 62.0 |
[nextpage title=”Aliens vs. Predator”]
Aliens vs. Predator is a DirectX 11 game that makes full use of tessellation and advanced shadow rendering. We used the Aliens vs. Predator Benchmark Tool developed by Rebellion. This program reads its configuration from a text file. (Our configuration files can be found here.) We ran this program at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600, with texture set at “very high,” shadows set at “medium,” anisotropic filtering set at “8x,” and anti-aliasing set at “2x.”
| Aliens vs. Predator | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 68.4 | 11% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 61.5 | |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 60.1 | 2% |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 52.4 | 17% |
Aliens vs. Predator |
2560×1600 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 42.6 | 10% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 38.7 | |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 38.2 | 1% |
| GeForce GTX 580 |
32.5 |
19% |
[nextpage title=”DiRT3″]
DiRT3 is a DirectX 11 game. We measured performance using this game by running a race and then playing it back using FRAPS. We ran this game at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600 with image quality set to “ultra,” with anti-aliasing set at “8xMSAA.”
| DiRT3 | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 79.4 | 12% |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 71.4 | 0% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 71.2 | |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 70.4 | 1% |
| DiRT3 | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 57.3 | 15% |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 50.1 | 1% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 49.8 | |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 47.6 | 5% |
[nextpage title=”Deus Ex: Human Revolution”]
Deus Ex: Human Revolution is another DirectX 11 game. We used the in-game introduction to measure the number of frames per second, using FRAPS. We ran the introduction in two resolutions, 1920×1200 and 2560×1600, maximizing all image quality settings, configuring anti-aliasing as “MLAA Mode” and anisotropic filtering at “16x.”
| Deus Ex: Human Revolution | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 208.8 | 10% |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 201.8 | 6% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 190.6 | |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 184.1 | 4% |
| Deus Ex: Human Revolution | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 139.5 | 12% |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 131.5 | 5% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 124.7 | |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 121.2 | 3% |
[nextpage title=”Battlefield 3″]
Battlefield 3 is the latest installment in the Battlefield franchise released in 2011. It is based on the Frostbite 2 engine, which is DirectX 11. In order to measure performance using this game, we walked our way through the first half of the “Operation Swordbreaker” mission, measuring the number of frames per second using FRAPS. We ran this game at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600, maximizing all image quality settings, configuring anti-aliasing as “4xMSAA” and anisotropic filtering at “16x.”
| Battlefield 3 | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 58.3 | 13% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 51.5 | |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 50.8 | 1% |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 50.4 | 2% |
| Battlefield 3 | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 44.4 | 12% |
| Radeon HD 7950 | 39.8 | |
| GeForce GTX 580 | 38.9 | 2% |
| Radeon HD 6970 | 37.4 | 6% |
[nextpage title=”3DMark 11 Professional”]
3DMark 11 Professional measures Shader 5.0 (i.e., DirectX 11) performance. We ran this program at 1920×1200 and 2560×1600, selecting the four graphics tests available and deselecting the other tests available. We used two image quality settings, “performance” and “extreme,” both at their default settings. The results being compared are the “GPU Score” achieved by each video card.
| 3DMark 11 – Performance | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 |
4033 |
20% |
| Radeon HD 6970 |
3724 |
11% |
| Radeon HD 7950 |
3362 |
|
| GeForce GTX 580 |
3152 |
7% |
| 3DMark 11 – Performance | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 |
2387 |
20% |
| Radeon HD 6970 |
2175 |
9% |
|
1994 |
||
| GeForce GTX 580 |
1846 |
8% |
| 3DMark 11 – Extreme | 1920×1200 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 |
2487 |
16% |
| Radeon HD 6970 |
2144 |
4% |
| Radeon HD 7950 |
2053 |
|
| GeForce GTX 580 |
1892 |
9% |
| 3DMark 11 – Extreme | 2560×1600 | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 |
1539 |
20% |
| Radeon HD 6970 |
1302 |
2% |
| Radeon HD 7950 |
1282 |
|
| GeForce GTX 580 |
1153 |
11% |
[nextpage title=”Media Espresso 6.5″]
Media Espresso is a video conversion program that uses the graphics processing unit of the video card to speed up the conversion process. We converted a 449 MB, 1920x1080i, 18,884 kbps, MPEG2 video file to a smaller 640×360, H.264, .MPG4 file for viewing on a portable device such as an iPhone or iPod Touch. We also ran this test on our two CPUs (Core i7-980X and Core i7-3960X) in order to compare the difference in performance of using a high-end CPU and a high-end GPU to transcode video.
| Media Espresso 6.5 | Seconds | Difference |
| Radeon HD 7970 |
29 |
3% |
| Radeon HD 7950 |
30 |
|
| GeForce GTX 580 |
44 |
32% |
| Core i7-3960X |
46 |
35% |
| Radeon HD 6970 |
48 |
38% |
| Core i7-980X |
65 |
54% |
[nextpage title=”Conclusions”]
Before our analysis, we have to explain that we re-tested the Radeon HD 7970 using the latest drivers provided by AMD, and that is the reason that the numbers for this video card presented in this review are different from the Radeon HD 7970’s original review.
The new Radeon HD 7950 proved to be a good contender to the GeForce GTX 580, with the advantage of being cheaper. The only game where the GeForce GTX 580 was significantly faster than the Radeon HD 7950 was FarCry 2, with the video card from NVIDIA being between14% and 19% faster. The GeForce GTX 580 was also between 5% and 6% faster on Deus Ex: Human Revolution. On Battlefield 3, both video cards achieved the same performance level. They also achieved the same performance level on DiRT3 at 1920×1200, but at 2560×1600 the Radeon HD 7950 was 5% faster. On StarCraft II, the Radeon HD 7950 was 12% faster at 1920×1200, but at 2560×1600 both achieved the same performance level.
In all other games and simulations we ran, the Radeon HD 7950 was faster than the GeForce GTX 580: between 17% and 19% on Aliens vs. Predator, between 7% and 11% on 3DMark 11, and 47% on Media Espresso.
As you can see, although the battle between the GeForce GTX 580 and the Radeon HD 7950 will depend on the game and resolution you run, the Radeon HD 7950 has a better price/performance ratio than its big sister, the Radeon HD 7970. To prove this point, consider that the Radeon HD 7970 was between 6% and 20% faster than the Radeon HD 7950 on the games we ran, but it is 22% more expensive.
Therefore, the Radeon HD 7950 is a good option if you are looking for a high-end video card and have USD 450 to spend on one.