8970M may not be a rebrand of 7970M

EDIT: False alarm. The reviewer tested with Tessellation Off, meaning it will score much more than 7970M which was tested with Tessellation. 8970M looks again like 7970M just with higher clocks unless later benchmarks somehow get the same score with Tessellation enabled.

Someone who have been around here lately and followed the threads, may remember that "Laptopmonkey" put out HD 8970M @ Ebay for pre sale. He also made a video which showed that 8970M and 7970M look 100% alike. He also put out AIDA64 screenshot which showed 8970M specifications.

As you can see, the 8970M can reach 950MHz top and the memory runs at 1250MHz. Compared to 7970M which runs at 850/1200MHz.


Now we all assumed it was just a rebrand since the benchmarks showed a minor 10% increase (10% higher clocks gives 10% better score).



However, the recent benchmark I found reveals a completely different picture. We may have been deceived by the benchmark like above because it only shows the total score and not the graphic score, which is the GPU performance isolated.

Here is 7970M benchmarked on 3DMark11. Take a close look at the Graphic score.


Now with 10% higher clocks for the 8970M (950MHz vs 850MHz) you would assume 10% higher Graphic score right?


You see that? That is clearly not the case. 8970M score 7923 while 7970M score 6229. Thats not just 10% higher, that is 27% higher score and actually higher score than GTX 780M.

That explains why LaptopMonkey had huge issues to get the GPU-Z to reckognize the 8970M since its a brand new one, and that explains the $250 higher price than 7970M.

This just got a ton more interesting. I`m guessing more cores than 7970M :thumbsup:

For some benchmarks, visit the source:
Notebookspec review

 

No link? For all we know they disabled tesselation.

The pictures of the 8970M show the same core with identical PCB AND auxiliary components around the core.

It's the same chip.

 

Hm, tessellation didn`t pop up in my head while I was writing this. That is always an option, that they disabled it. I find it weird that they compare 7970M with and 8970M without though but you never know.

 

tess normal



edit ,
Tess OFF

 

They seem to have increased the voltage compared to 7970M. Not sure if that tells anything.

8970M 1.075V
http://notebookspec.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/2013-05-07_1108291.png

7970M 1.050V
http://i.imgur.com/ekBAyf6.jpg

@VSSS: Is that a normal 3DMark run? According to NBR, 7970M scored 6423 (Graphic score) on the GX60 with A10-4600M. GX70 with A10-5750M and 8970M score 25% higher. If its the same tessellation settings though.

 

is that 7970m bench you posted Cloud, what kind of a junky cpu they used to do that test???

 

AMD Richland. A10-5750M. Yes they are not very good

 

never 8970m will not have 8k points on OEM gpu clock with AMD CPU.

 

Look at VSSS, matches the graphics score with tess off, thought so.

 

Thanks VSSS and Meaker. The scores seem to line up perfectly.

Well false alarm then. Bad comparison by the reviewer.

 

http://notebookspec.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/8970M.png

7970m@950/1250+I7 3840qm "welcome to the jungle"

HIG+2xSMAA 950/1250 crysis3
Frames: 11557 - Time: 237262ms - Avg: 48.710 - Min: 35 - Max: 82

Very HIG+2xSMAA 950/1250
2013-05-08 22:29:48 - crysis3 "welcome to the jungle"
Frames: 10682 - Time: 326198ms - Avg: 32.747 - Min:23 - Max: 65

VERY HIG + 2xSMAA ~1100/1450
crysis3 "welcome to the jungle"
Frames: 13671 - Time: 364965ms - Avg: 37.458 - Min: 28 - Max: 56


"welcome to the jungle" this is the most heavy piece of game for CPU and GPU

edit BF3
ULTRA
Multiplaer Server 64
bf3
Frames: 25557 - Time: 488673ms - Avg: 52.299 - Min: 39 - Max: 79

 

Hmm, this is interesting. Can't wait to see these two cards go head-to-head inside an Alienware machine!

 

nothing interesting, vCore and Cooling (Custom) ends at 1.175V,
gives the result ~ 1150 Mhz Core, and differs from the specifications MXM 3b

 

I'm referring to how everyone has been posting the 8970M is going to be a rebrand, and now this thread shows up. Wasn't directly referring to your post.

 

yes the new card but rather a new name = new customers, but it worries me but he will be hotter housing

 

no problem, and so most of the time I spend on cooling testing,
benchmakt here and there is no difference,
Cast one 7970m @ 8970m on the clock
<iframe width='640' height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/mvUNC3xP-EI?rel=0" frameborder='0' allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Full test with A10 no Core i7 MSI GX70 Review

 

The confusion continues...


7970M HWInfo:



8970M HWinfo. Take a close look at it. It put 7950M and 8970M together. Not 7970M and 8970M. 7950M have never seen the light of the day

 

8970M is an overclocked 7970M. The 3DMark11 score on first post is wrong and inflated.

AnandTech | MSI GX70 3BE: Richland A10 APU and Neptune 8970M Gaming Notebook

 

The above program was likely a typo lol.

 

AnandTech | AMD Launches Radeon HD 8970M

 

very clear 8970m is a rebrand

 

So any reason we can't flash 7970m to 8970m BIOS? Would we actually want to do this?

 

maybe able to set higher for price in used market

 

Can't fool people with 7970M written on the die itself..

 

could potentially prolong/improve the card's driver support when flashing it to 8970m

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

When will these actually be available..... I'm getting this sort of picture:

AMD "releases/announces" 8970m, calling it the fastest mobile gpu in the world (maybe im exaggerating...), but we can't actually buy one, and by the time we can, the 780m will be out, which will more than likely be faster....

Why not release the 9970m, call it 50% faster than the 680m and "the fastest in the world", but you can't buy it till 2015........... and therefore no one can even check these figures or compare...?

Is it just me, or is this 8970m "launch" a bit odd, why release something we cant buy, and make claims we can't prove or disprove ?

 

It's called a "paper launch". Both AMD and nV have been doing it for years and years to say they have a competing product when they actually don't. It keeps the sheep waiting with baited breath so they don't buy the other guy's stuff.

Market a chip that won't be ready for over a year (whose capabilities are still probably not fully clear to even AMD) is probably pushing believability for most people, so they tend to keep the marketing to products that will at least be available within the next 2-3 months.

My guess is the 8970 will be available in limited manner before 780m. It's not like it's a new chip with any extra work to be done (other than a slight vbios change), so AMD can sit on their hands until just before their competition releases.

 

if u guys are interested, a user over in the aw forum already has a 780M sli setup ready and posted a load of game and bench scores

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

Thought you had something to contribute about the 8970M..

Seriously though, the title of this thread just reminds us all of the false hopes that people might've had and how they were crushed by the bleak reality. Time for this piece of premature optimism to die..

 

Finally, here is the 3DMark11 score of 8970M to put a final nail to the coffin that it is a rebrand

 

and please do remind me what a 7970 gives in 3dmark 2011?

 

My my the trinity APU is slow!! My 920xm scores WAY higher than that and it is old and not pushed at its limit!

 

It was also a $1k, 62W flagship processor for the company that is the king of processing power, while the Richland part is a ~$125, 35W APU... Being a couple years old doesn't completely negate those differences...

 

Nearly 4 years old actually and the 1K price was only when it was new. I got this chip for about double the price of the richland part 2 years ago! Double the performance for double the price on a 4 year old chip...

Sorry AMD apu's are slow

 

They are indeed slow if you're into CPU performance, and the APUs in the GX60 and GX70 are going to be the weakest link in most games, but for most non-enthusiast uses they're more than adequate. Anyway, I was just trying to inject a little perspective.

 

I am confused I was trying to find more information about the 8970M and they say it scores 79xx in 3d mark 11 (GPU score) ? NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M On Sale, New AMD Radeon HD 8970M Benchmark | VideoCardz.com .
There seems to be 0 info on this card. I only see it running with the slow APU from AMD so far. The result must be fake though, if the card is just a slightly OC 7970 with 4GB Vram.