The NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GS: A Closer Look
by Josh Venning on September 19, 2006 5:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Test Setup
We already had a look at how the 7900 GS performs relative to several other cards currently on the market from both ATI and NVIDIA. Today we will be looking at how well these individual 7900 GSs perform relative to each other, and we've thrown in a couple of other cards from NVIDIA and ATI for reference. From NVIDIA, we included the reference 7800 GT and the 7900 GT, and from ATI, the X1900 GT and the X1800 GTO.
We tested three different games at three different resolutions to give us a general idea of performance. The games we tested were Battlefield 2, Half-Life2:Episode One, and The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. We tested each of these games at 1024x768, 1280x1024, and 1600x1200 with graphics quality settings on high in each game whenever possible.
This is the system we used for testing:
*Note that sound was disabled for testing.
Battlefield 2
We start our performance tests by looking at Battlefield 2, one of our standard game benchmarks. This benchmark is basically a running game demo following several players in different vehicles (including a jet) and on foot in third-person view. This gives us samples from different perspectives in the game and provides a good overview of the performance in Battlefield 2. Detail settings are on "High" for testing.
The five 7900 GS samples we have here offer a good representation of the performance potential this card has with different factory overclocks from card manufacturers. The "out of the box" performance of the 7900 GS will vary more or less depending on the game between different card versions. In Battlefield2, we see a significant difference between performance between the slowest 7900 GS (the Albatron GeForce 7900 GS) which is clocked at reference speeds, and the higher clocked BFG GeForce 7900 GS OC. At 1600x1200 resolution, there is a 17.5% framerate increase with the overclocked BFG 7900 GS, which could definitely be a noticeable improvement during gameplay.
Also, we can see how at reference speeds, the 7900 GS gets lower framerates than the reference 7900 GT, but most of our factory overclocked 7900 GS cards match or surpass the performance of the 7900 GT in each resolution. This is important considering that the 7900 GT generally costs around $100 more than the 7900 GS. Keep in mind however, that the 7900 GT has potential for overclocking as well, and its performance potential will exceed that of the 7900 GS depending on the specific card and application.
Something else we see that is particularly noteworthy here and in the other game tests is how ATI's X1900 GT compares to these 7900 GS cards in performance. The 7900 GS at reference speeds doesn't perform as well as the X1900 GT; for example, at 1024x768 the Albatron 7900 GS gets a framerate of 105.9 FPS verses the X1900 GT's 111.1 FPS. But as we saw in the previous example, our Leadtek and BFG 7900 GS samples get higher performance with their factory overclocks, which is of interest given these cards are in direct competition with each other.
We already had a look at how the 7900 GS performs relative to several other cards currently on the market from both ATI and NVIDIA. Today we will be looking at how well these individual 7900 GSs perform relative to each other, and we've thrown in a couple of other cards from NVIDIA and ATI for reference. From NVIDIA, we included the reference 7800 GT and the 7900 GT, and from ATI, the X1900 GT and the X1800 GTO.
We tested three different games at three different resolutions to give us a general idea of performance. The games we tested were Battlefield 2, Half-Life2:Episode One, and The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. We tested each of these games at 1024x768, 1280x1024, and 1600x1200 with graphics quality settings on high in each game whenever possible.
This is the system we used for testing:
CPU: | Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2.93GHz/4MB) |
Motherboard: | Intel D975XBX (LGA-775) ASUS P5NSLI |
Chipset: | Intel 975X NVIDIA nForce 570 SLI |
Chipset Drivers: | Intel 7.2.2.1007 (Intel) NVIDIA nForce 8.22 |
Hard Disk: | Seagate 7200.7 160GB SATA |
Memory: | Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 (1GB x 2) |
Video Card: | Various |
Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 6.8 NVIDIA ForceWare 91.47 |
Desktop Resolution: | 1920 x 1440 - 32-bit @ 60Hz |
OS: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
*Note that sound was disabled for testing.
Battlefield 2
We start our performance tests by looking at Battlefield 2, one of our standard game benchmarks. This benchmark is basically a running game demo following several players in different vehicles (including a jet) and on foot in third-person view. This gives us samples from different perspectives in the game and provides a good overview of the performance in Battlefield 2. Detail settings are on "High" for testing.
The five 7900 GS samples we have here offer a good representation of the performance potential this card has with different factory overclocks from card manufacturers. The "out of the box" performance of the 7900 GS will vary more or less depending on the game between different card versions. In Battlefield2, we see a significant difference between performance between the slowest 7900 GS (the Albatron GeForce 7900 GS) which is clocked at reference speeds, and the higher clocked BFG GeForce 7900 GS OC. At 1600x1200 resolution, there is a 17.5% framerate increase with the overclocked BFG 7900 GS, which could definitely be a noticeable improvement during gameplay.
Also, we can see how at reference speeds, the 7900 GS gets lower framerates than the reference 7900 GT, but most of our factory overclocked 7900 GS cards match or surpass the performance of the 7900 GT in each resolution. This is important considering that the 7900 GT generally costs around $100 more than the 7900 GS. Keep in mind however, that the 7900 GT has potential for overclocking as well, and its performance potential will exceed that of the 7900 GS depending on the specific card and application.
Something else we see that is particularly noteworthy here and in the other game tests is how ATI's X1900 GT compares to these 7900 GS cards in performance. The 7900 GS at reference speeds doesn't perform as well as the X1900 GT; for example, at 1024x768 the Albatron 7900 GS gets a framerate of 105.9 FPS verses the X1900 GT's 111.1 FPS. But as we saw in the previous example, our Leadtek and BFG 7900 GS samples get higher performance with their factory overclocks, which is of interest given these cards are in direct competition with each other.
42 Comments
View All Comments
Bonesdad - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
I'd have to go with the Leadtek card. Near to the BFG in almost every level of performance, nearly equal in watt consumption, lower heat output under load, a couple of (suspect, I admit) games included. the (maybe) $20 more is worth it for the heat output alone to me.Also, why no noise output comparisons?
Nimbo - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
Why ATI cards are not overclock in the reviews? Are they bad overclokers? Why are not factory overclock versions?DerekWilson - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
ATI's current generation of GPUs have not been good overclockers. It is also not as easy to find ATI factory overclocked cards.We will look at ATI overclocking in similar roundups of ATI cards.
formulav8 - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
I was hoping to see a 7600GT including in the mix to see what I would have to gain from a 7900gs. :(Jason
Josh Venning - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
The 7900 GS launch article compared the 7900 GT to the stock 7900 GS, which you can take a look at here: http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2827">http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2827. We tested these overclocked 7900 GSs on the same system, so you can compare the numbers directly (with the exception of Oblivion which we tested with different quality settings for this article).yyrkoon - Wednesday, September 20, 2006 - link
Hmm, only roughly 5FPS more on the 7900GS vs the 7600GT acrossed the board. Thats pretty sad, but I think I know what I'll be doing when I get a conroe system going, I'll be adding another 7600GT for SLI . . .DerekWilson - Wednesday, September 20, 2006 - link
across the board is a little off I think ... in bw2 and oblivion, yes the fps difference is low. But when 4.2 fps is the increase over 17 (a 24% difference), you can't ignore it -- it does make a big difference. I would tend to argue that at these very low framerates, a 5 fps difference is much more noticable than the difference between 60 and 120 fps. In most other tests (especially with AA) frame rate differences were much higher in addition to being higher precent differences.DerekWilson - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2827">http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2827sum1 - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
"The BFG 7900 GS OC's core clock is set at 520MHz, a 70MHz increase over the standard NVIDIA 7900 GS"It’s listed at 540MHz everywhere else.
"EVGA"
Is usually written eVGA.
"Something slightly unique about this 7900 GS..."
Uniqueness does not come in shades of grey.
rushfan2006 - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
You are WRONG on all 3 of your points....Stop being so damn anal for the sake of just busting stones because you are bored.