hd 7950 3gb review.. amd beats fermi to a pulp

[exar333]

This would of been a perfect price. The cards would be selling like crazy and the 7970 would still sell at $550 because of its best in class pedigree.

They are too close to one another in pricing that the 7950 is still falling into the price bracket of buyers who buy the best on the market, these same buyers will pass on a 7950 over a 7970 every time.

This is a great point.

Why buy anything other than the 'vanilla' 7950, when all the 'superclocked' and so forth boards will be closing-in on the price of a 'vanilla' 7970?

AIBs cannot be too pleased either. This doesn't provide a lot of pricing space to differentiate products between the 7950 and 7970. If the 7950 was $399, that gives a good $100 to range from the 'vanilla' all the way to the 'super duper, extra copper, extra fan EXTREME HARD CORE GAMER edition' GPUs. [Edit - the $100 range allows for a difference in price from the ~$500-600 rang on the 7970]

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Oh I see. They just happen to perform like a high end card, a GTX580 for example. Unless you think that is not a high end card perhaps?

So we have two options here.

AMD released a high end card over a year late, they've been behind quite a bit over the last two years, and FERMI dominated 40nm, or...

AMD released a mid ranged card before Nvidia could get anything out, while charging a high end price. Thus gouging their consumers for a few months of early access to the mid ranged performance 28nm offers.

 

[AnandThenMan]

So we have two options here.

AMD released a high end card over a year late, they've been behind quite a bit over the last two years, and FERMI dominated 40nm, or...

AMD released a mid ranged card before Nvidia could get anything out, while charging a high end price. Thus gouging their consumers for a few months of early access to the mid ranged performance 28nm offers.

Perhaps you missed this article:

AMD Radeon HD 7950 Review Feat. Sapphire & XFX: Sewing Up The High-End Market

 

[superjim]

Seeing how used 1.5GB GTX 580s are going for $300-350 on ebay, unless you need the extra VRAM, that's an easy choice if you're considering a 7950. Yes it's awesome in other areas and is the faster card, but not $150 faster.

 

[exar333]

This sums-up the thread (and attitude here) pretty accurately:

Intel: 'The 2500K is TOO expensive at >$200'
AMD : 'The 8150 is priced accordingly because of it's size and # of cores'
NV: 'The 580 is a complete and utter rip-off; just buy 2 6950s for the same price'
AMD : 'The 7970/7950 prices are justified because they are new and AMD makes them'

And yes, for the record, the 580 is over-priced IMHO opinion too. I get tired of the free passes we constantly give AMD. In the case of the 58xx series, AMD had the prices TOO far apart, and this was corrected shortly after (5850 was increased).

I don't think the 7950 is a $200 card, but certainly $349-399 would be more appropriate. You can get a 6950 for a $250, and this is $200 more!? It's the SAME SKU in your line-up for heaven's sake.

 

[sandorski]

So we have two options here.

AMD released a high end card over a year late, they've been behind quite a bit over the last two years, and FERMI dominated 40nm, or...

AMD released a mid ranged card before Nvidia could get anything out, while charging a high end price. Thus gouging their consumers for a few months of early access to the mid ranged performance 28nm offers.

Protip: The Fastest are the "High-end".

 

[exar333]

Protip: The Fastest are the "High-end".

True.

It's a little more difficult thsese days with the addition of dual-GPU cards as well. I don't think the GTX 590, for example, precludes the GTX 580 from also being high-end. The same would have applied to the AMD 6990 and 6970. Not 100% sure how the 6990 and 7970 relate now, but thats just because we are still 'in-between' generations to some degree.

Edit: The GTX 570 and 7950 would be 'mid high-end' IMHO. That is based on where they fall in their respective line-ups, rather than just comparing performance between companies. That's just how I see it, and is my opinion.

 

[gramboh]

I'm impressed with the performance, power usage and noise (on the Sapphire card AT tested). Price, I agree it is too high (for me personally), but hopefully it makes AMD a bunch of money. I'm waiting until Kepler comes out, then I will have to decide on GTX 560Ti SLI, Kepler or 7950.

Pretty happy to see the OC results reviewers are getting.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

This sums-up the thread (and attitude here) pretty accurately:

Intel: 'The 2500K is TOO expensive at >$200'
AMD : 'The 8150 is priced accordingly because of it's size and # of cores'
NV: 'The 580 is a complete and utter rip-off; just buy 2 6950s for the same price'
AMD : 'The 7970/7950 prices are justified because they are new and AMD makes them'

That's exactly how I read it.

I'm just not able to make the connection between last gens high end justify this gens first products being considered "high end". Perhaps that just a personal problem though, others seem more than capable of it.

It used to be the 580 was a poor choice over the 6970/50 price/performance, now it's used to justify AMD's latest cards which perform similarly.

I'll personally wait to see where the chips fall after Nvidia has products out for this gen before calling something high end and giving $500+ to charity.

 

[railven]

This sums-up the thread (and attitude here) pretty accurately:

Intel: 'The 2500K is TOO expensive at >$200'
AMD : 'The 8150 is priced accordingly because of it's size and # of cores'
NV: 'The 580 is a complete and utter rip-off; just buy 2 6950s for the same price'
AMD : 'The 7970/7950 prices are justified because they are new and AMD makes them'

And yes, for the record, the 580 is over-priced IMHO opinion too. I get tired of the free passes we constantly give AMD. In the case of the 58xx series, AMD had the prices TOO far apart, and this was corrected shortly after (5850 was increased).

I don't think the 7950 is a $200 card, but certainly $349-399 would be more appropriate. You can get a 6950 for a $250, and this is $200 more!? It's the SAME SKU in your line-up for heaven's sake.

Do tell please where you've read the bold in this thread - let alone this forum?

Last time I was checking out the CPU section, Bulldozer wasn't being recommend by anyone and the AMD fans were having a hard time even convincing themselves it was worth getting.

 

[Ieat]

The 7970 is the King of the Hill and AMD can charge whatever they want for it. I don't care as I would never buy one and the people that do probably don't care about paying $100 to $200 more. But the cut down card should be priced within reason. All the talk about the gtx 580 here is bull. The gtx 580 was the King of the Hill during release, the 7950 is not. The gtx 570 was released at $150 less then the gtx 580 for a reasonable $350. $450 to $500 for a cut down card is insane and the fact that Newegg has just about every 7950 still in stock is proof of that.

Edit: Newegg now offering free shipping on every HD 7950. Probably another sign that sales aren't good.

 

[jackstar7]

This sums-up the thread (and attitude here) pretty accurately:

Intel: 'The 2500K is TOO expensive at >$200'
AMD : 'The 8150 is priced accordingly because of it's size and # of cores'
NV: 'The 580 is a complete and utter rip-off; just buy 2 6950s for the same price'
AMD : 'The 7970/7950 prices are justified because they are new and AMD makes them'

And yes, for the record, the 580 is over-priced IMHO opinion too. I get tired of the free passes we constantly give AMD. In the case of the 58xx series, AMD had the prices TOO far apart, and this was corrected shortly after (5850 was increased).

I don't think the 7950 is a $200 card, but certainly $349-399 would be more appropriate. You can get a 6950 for a $250, and this is $200 more!? It's the SAME SKU in your line-up for heaven's sake.

Leaving out the 'Dozer stuff, I think AMD built up a lot of good will among customers with their pricing over the last few generations. Clearly it wasn't enough for a lot of people who are balking at their pricing this time out. And of course there are people who chose to go with nVidia for whatever reasons and they seem to want to just yap about it because they want to entertain themselves.

For me, my needs can be met by their products, so that's what I'm buying. I've been buying their cards for the last few gens completely due to Eyefinity. It's the feature that sells me. Now that I've got 120Hz monitors, I want the fastest card that can also handle triple monitors: AMD.

I think a lot of people are buying solely because they have the itch. I think to some degree we all get that.

But I also think there's a lot of wasted time editorializing about the products rather than just scanning the specs, deciding if it is right for your needs, and then making your purchase or not from that point. The emotional aspects of tech is mostly good for entertainment (at best) and nothing more.

 

[Grooveriding]

There is going to be some serious gold from the price-outrage contingent when the $850 7990 hits the market.

 

[Gikaseixas]

It used to be the 580 was a poor choice over the 6970/50 price/performance, now it's used to justify AMD's latest cards which perform similarly.

No, 580 is still a poor choice over SLI 570 or CF 6950. Guess what 7900 series is bad value also compared with these multi card configurations but EVERY company charges a premium for their fastest stuff. Intel charges what they think their customers will pay to have the baddest 6 cores / 12 threads monster, when a i7 2700 comes really close to it in most cases and even outperforms it in a few. I don't see ppl complaining as much so why the noise when it's AMD???

I'll personally wait to see where the chips fall after Nvidia has products out for this gen before calling something high end and giving $500+ to charity.

I'll personally wait to see where Kepler chips fall after AMD has a faster product out for this gen before calling something super 3D OMG, driverlicious perfect high end and giving $800+ to the so called premium company

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I'm going to laugh in a few months when NV releases their 28nm high end card and it beats the 7900 series handily. AMD will have to drop prices to compensate, and everybody who bought a 7900 at current prices start to moan and whine. That is, unless NV prices their new cards at $600 - $700. They wouldn't do that, would they? <cold shiver goes up spine>

Yeah... except you forgot the important fact that by then AMD can just release the HD 8000 series. Tahiti has a lot of clock speed headroom and with improved yields plus some more execution units they can easily get 25-30% more performance than the HD 7970. Or do you actually think the 7970 is their best effort? They didn't release a faster card because they have no competition currently and given the current state of the process it would increase power consumption by a significant amount, probably putting it close to the GTX 580.

 

[IlllI]

Seeing how used 1.5GB GTX 580s are going for $300-350 on ebay, unless you need the extra VRAM, that's an easy choice if you're considering a 7950. Yes it's awesome in other areas and is the faster card, but not $150 faster.

i fail to see how you can compare a used item price to a new item price.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I agree that the 7950 should be a $399 part, AMD is charging way too much for it. Nvidia should drop the 580 to $349 also. You guys can argue all day but that's just my honest opinion on the matter. Also the new CEO is $$$ hungry.

 

[Vesku]

The 7970 is a high end card of the "reasonable die size" strategy AMD has had since the 5800 series. It is not a 28nm version of NVIDIA's "as big as we can make it" strategy.

People are talking about how AMD is missing out on sales, but at least with the 7970 I doubt TSMC is cranking out enough to support a $400-450 price right now. Odds are good that one of the reasons we haven't heard about NVIDIA enthusiast 28nm is that they are dedicating to Apple whatever 28nm TSMC can make for them.

Edit: I'm of the opinion that AMD and board makers have missed the 7950 sweet spot (supply/demand) by about $30-60. Now if they had the unlockability of the 6950...

So we have two options here.

AMD released a high end card over a year late, they've been behind quite a bit over the last two years, and FERMI dominated 40nm, or...

AMD released a mid ranged card before Nvidia could get anything out, while charging a high end price. Thus gouging their consumers for a few months of early access to the mid ranged performance 28nm offers.

 

[Subyman]

I can't remember the last time there has been this much backlash at a highend line videocard release. Seems like AMD did just enough to beat nvidia, but not too much for whatever reason and then priced them relative to last gens performance. I can see why people are bummed.

Has anyone noticed that only one 7950 card is OOS on newegg? The 7970 sold out within hours. Maybe they have a ton of stock though.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I'm of the opinion that AMD and board makers have missed the 7950 sweet spot (supply/demand) by about $30-60.

Yep, too close to the 7970. Traditionally the fastest product price gap to the second best is larger.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

This sums-up the thread (and attitude here) pretty accurately:

Intel: 'The 2500K is TOO expensive at >$200'
AMD : 'The 8150 is priced accordingly because of it's size and # of cores'
NV: 'The 580 is a complete and utter rip-off; just buy 2 6950s for the same price'
AMD : 'The 7970/7950 prices are justified because they are new and AMD makes them'

And yes, for the record, the 580 is over-priced IMHO opinion too. I get tired of the free passes we constantly give AMD. In the case of the 58xx series, AMD had the prices TOO far apart, and this was corrected shortly after (5850 was increased).

I don't think the 7950 is a $200 card, but certainly $349-399 would be more appropriate. You can get a 6950 for a $250, and this is $200 more!? It's the SAME SKU in your line-up for heaven's sake.

Don't know where you got that. No one has even remotely said that.

1. The FX-8150 is an overpriced piece of crap. My 2600K walks all over it for just a bit more and even the 2500K is a good amount faster while being cheaper.

2. The GTX 580, if you value bang-for-buck, isn't a good deal. Neither is the HD 7970 and HD 7950, but they are definitely priced right where they need to be with the competition. The higher tiers of the Enthusiast market have never been about bang-for-buck. I personally don't care and would never spend $450+ on a single graphics card, but to say the HD 7970/7950 are overpriced when looking at the GTX 580 is completely disingenuous and hypocritical at best. It was NVIDIA that decided to price the GTX 580 at $500-500 because at the time it had no competition. Similarly, because the HD 7970 has no competition, it's priced $50 higher, so why are people whining? If anything, you should be whining at NVIDIA for always taking so long to release new cards on a new process. If NVIDIA could compete right now the cards would be cheaper.

 

[Ieat]

Its a bummer that people who were eyeing this card are now turned off by the price. But I'm sure the market will correct the pricing soon enough. Remember when AMD tried to price the 5830 at $240 and Nvida release the gtx 465 at $280. Yeah those prices didn't last very long. I'm betting that's what happens with the 7950.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

That's exactly how I read it.

I'm just not able to make the connection between last gens high end justify this gens first products being considered "high end". Perhaps that just a personal problem though, others seem more than capable of it.

It used to be the 580 was a poor choice over the 6970/50 price/performance, now it's used to justify AMD's latest cards which perform similarly.

I'll personally wait to see where the chips fall after Nvidia has products out for this gen before calling something high end and giving $500+ to charity.

You compare what is available now, not some mythical product that doesn't exist. Enthusiast Kepler will be here in May or June at the very earliest.

 

[lifeblood]

Hmm, lets try this. I think both AMD and NVs high end cards are to expensive and would like the price to drop. Anyone agree with me?

I buy midrange cards, not high end. But It seems the higher the high end cards are, the more the midrange cards are. When prices drop on high end cards their is usually a trickle down effect and everything drops a little. I want a 7800 or Kepler equivalent for about $200, but I bet I'm going to have to settle on the next level down for that. Of course, a 6850 is around $135 on NewEgg and would double the performance of my current 4830, so if NV takes too long with Kepler I can go that way.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

lol! 7950 now with free shipping and a Dirt 3 coupon. That didn't take long. I wonder if newegg gives AMD sales numbers for the day?