<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>AMD Radeon HD 7970 hits 1.26GHz and P10259 in 3DMark 11</title>
		<description>Discuss AMD Radeon HD 7970 hits 1.26GHz and P10259 in 3DMark 11</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 07:38:50 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/25385/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>techno says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36768</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I forget where I saw it now but the 7970 is showing some really impressive crossfire scaling results...almost 100% in some situations...very impressive....but of course there is always the micro stutter issue...there was talk that pcie 3.0 helps to eliminate that though? would be interesting to see an analysis of that.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>techno</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 18:53:10 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36768</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36765</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was saying scalability is never linear, not even in the same chip. TPU does some good scaling graphs that show this. With the CFX I was hinting that a second card would be a better way of increasing performance than OC'ing the core.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:24:30 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36765</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>pogsnet says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36694</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Because of this Nvidia next gen will be delayed further. A single-GPU based card faster than dual-GPU based card of previous generation, wow! http://www.techpowerup.com/157771/Sapphire-Readies-Radeon-HD-7970-Cards-with-1335-MHz-Core-Clock-6-GB-Memory.html]]></description>
			<dc:creator>pogsnet</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 09:40:15 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36694</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>leftiszi says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36654</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The physics score comes from the CPU and they are using a six core Sandy here, God knows at what frequency (the @3.3Ghz comes from the specification string). So if it was running at 5Ghz, the 15000 physics score would come easily.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>leftiszi</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 17:50:19 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36654</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>techno says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36651</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Bl0bb3r I'm not refering to the ln2 results.... http://www.techpowerup.com/157771/Sapphire-Readies-Radeon-HD-7970-Cards-with-1335-MHz-Core-Clock-6-GB-Memory.html Sapphire are releasing an air cooled 7970 with clocks of 1335MHz.That's 44% higher than the 925 reference clock speed. Also I'm not talking about crossfire scaling, but clock speed : performance....which is about as linear as it gets.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>techno</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 17:25:00 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36651</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>trancer23 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36650</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This gen of AMD chips are looking awesome but there's something funny in those scores - 15,500 physics score? The overall total of 10,000 3d mark11. That beats my pair of quadfire 5970's (both watercooled) and an overclocked watercooled i7. I'd expect the dual chip card to beat that but not the one chip. Something not right coz in GT1-4 i get 10-15fps more yet lower score. Anyone else got any thougths?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>trancer23</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 17:20:58 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36650</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36649</link>
			<description><![CDATA[and techno That was on Liquid Nitrogen (LN2), not water, you won't see those on the shelves any time soon. So not a valid comparison. Anyway, even so scalability is never linear, but seeing how 3 in CFX manage a 200% - 250% total, no one should complain about the performance.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 17:13:14 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36649</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>techno says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36636</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yeah I was referring to the oced sapphire card. So if you accept that the stock 7970 is 20% faster than a 580 then increasing the clock speed by 44% would give a 73% increase above the 580. That is of course assuming linear performance increase with clock speed. And tbh with a 384bit memory bus giving this card huge memory bandwidth I doubt the memory sub structure will limit the gpu performance from scaling almost linearly.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>techno</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 15:07:59 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36636</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Memristor says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36632</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi think he was talking about 1.7GHz for the extreme overclocker with water cooling etc. (see Fudzilla's other post)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Memristor</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 14:56:05 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36632</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Medallish says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36631</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I agree it's exaggerated, although I think he was refering to the 1335MHz Sapphire 7970 which is nearly 45% increase in clocks, combined with the already strong lead, I would say 50-55% faster than a stock GTX580, and probably around the same consumption :D.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Medallish</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 14:55:26 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25385-amd-radeon-hd-7970-hits-126ghz-and-p10259-in-3dmark-11#comment-36631</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
