PowerColor HD 7950 3GB Boost State Review Comment Thread

[frontier204]

Thanks for the review, SKY! I don't mind the delay because testing with an off-the-shelf video card is more realistic than getting a BIOS from AMD which essentially turns your card into an engineering sample.

current situation couldn’t be better for anyone looking for a mid-tier graphics card

I always had the impression that midrange for GPUs was around $(150-250], high-end was $(250-450], and higher was enthusiast/beyond the point of reason. Is there a spike of buying huge monitor / multi-monitor / stereo vision monitor for gaming that changed this? If that's the case, then call me a low-end gamer because I can't fit a bigger monitor on my desk and stereo vision won't work on my eyes

[SKYMTL]

Entry Level: <$150
Mid Range: $150 - $350
High End: $350 - $550
Enthusiast: $550+++

[sswilson]

Originally Posted by frontier204

Thanks for the review, SKY! I don't mind the delay because testing with an off-the-shelf video card is more realistic than getting a BIOS from AMD which essentially turns your card into an engineering sample.

I always had the impression that midrange for GPUs was around $(150-250], high-end was $(250-450], and higher was enthusiast/beyond the point of reason. Is there a spike of buying huge monitor / multi-monitor / stereo vision monitor for gaming that changed this? If that's the case, then call me a low-end gamer because I can't fit a bigger monitor on my desk and stereo vision won't work on my eyes

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Entry Level: <$150
Mid Range: $150 - $350
High End: $350 - $550
Enthusiast: $550+++

I'm glad somebody brought this up as I was thinking about it earlier this morning.

When did "midrange" pricing creep up as high as $299 let alone $350?

My first "decent" discrete card would have been an ATI 9600 Pro, followed by a 1950 Pro, then a HD 3850 (paid a premium on that because it was one of the HIS Ice-Q models with premium heatsink), 8800 GTX, 4850, GTS 450 (mostly for folding, but still capable of some gaming), finally settling on a GTX 560ti card prior to going all hog and purchasing the GTX 680 close to launch day. (There was also a 280 in there, but that was a deal I couldn't refuse... ;) ).

My point is that each of those cards was considered low/mid-range when I bought them, and not a single one of them cost me more than $250 let alone $350. It seems to me that the bar has been set awfully high for folks who want to purchase a decent gaming card, and that can't be a good thing for the future of PC gaming.

As far as the Review goes.... I came away kinda Meh.... yeah it appears to perform better than a 660ti, but even at the higher res I'm not convinved that it's $50+ better. There's (IMO) a huge pricepoint difference between purchasing something sub $300 (or any $100 mark for that matter) and something either mid $300 or even worse, 3/4 of the way to $400.

[Dzzope]

Considering that you can have a top end machine for less than ever (can buld a 2570k on good board etc for ~$600) I think it's justifyable to bump the GPU's slightly..

But at the same time I would say $300 for a card is top of mid range and start of high end.
IMO:
Entry: <$100
Low end:$100 -$175
Mid Range: $175 - $300
High End: $300 - $450/$500
Enthusiast: $450/$500+++
All being blurred lines where each price-point meets.

Really $450 will get you a 670 or 7970, overclocked and custom cooled.. either will max pretty much any game at 1080 or 1200 and are capable at 1440.. ie High end.
The only single core card thats more expensive is the 680 and it only provides small gains over the these 2.. ie enthusiast stuff

[JJThomp]

Originally Posted by eyefinity

Claiming the 660 Ti is a "no brainer" at 1080p is a joke at best. Why don't you overclock the hell out of the 660 Ti, 7950 and even the 7870 and see what the results are, then see where your "no brainer" comment stands. Most people in forums throughout the web see it completely opposite and the 7950 is by far the more enticing card at any resolution.

Even if you think the 7950 has better performance you cannot deny that it uses more power, is louder and runs hotter than the 660ti for what a couple of frames at best? Did I mention it is more expensive too. From the 6+ reviews I have read on both of these cards I came away with the same conclusion as sky and I find it interesting that you did not. 660ti at 1080p really is a no brainer.

[NyteOwl]

I know I'm likely in the minority but it's a bit disappointing to see the reference design with the center fan rather then end mounted blower. Yes they are noisy at higher speeds but they also cool better than most regular style fans and with the added benefit of dumping the heat out of the case.

[Master_Shake_]

I like reference coolers, i like how they're boxy. i like the clean look of a smooth finish and a single fan its so elegant.

i don't care if there bad, they just look so much better than a ton of heat pipes and fins and whatnot sticking out the side with 2 god awful looking (yet quiet) fans on them.

[Dave Baumann]

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

As we proved, this HD 7950 doesn't overclock all that well.

There is nothing inherant with the boost edition that would prevent that on other samples though. 7950's become a 7950 for one of two reasons: speed (i.e. they are slower than XT ASIC's) or harvesting (some CU's need to be disabled). Now, the harvested ASIC's actually have the same speed distribution as the XT's, so in many cases the opportunity good overclock (as measured as a percentage delta from the base / default speed) is even greater on the PRO than the XT.

Statistically speaking! :)

[SKYMTL]

Originally Posted by Dave Baumann

There is nothing inherant with the boost edition that would prevent that on other samples though. 7950's become a 7950 for one of two reasons: speed (i.e. they are slower than XT ASIC's) or harvesting (some CU's need to be disabled). Now, the harvested ASIC's actually have the same speed distribution as the XT's, so in many cases the opportunity good overclock (as measured as a percentage delta from the base / default speed) is even greater on the PRO than the XT.

Statistically speaking! :)

Dave, I totally agree. This is why I am trying my absolute best to get in other samples as we speak!!

Hopefully we will have the Sapphire, HIS and custom PowerColor cards all here within the next two weeks.

I.....WANT to be proven wrong on this one!

[Dave Baumann]

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Unlike NVIDIA's Boost, AMD's can't take advantage of lower temperatures for higher frequencies.

From a technical perspective, it actually can. At present we have chosen not to take this route specifically to limit variability.