FirePro S7000 vs Radeon HD 7970M Crossfire

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7970M Crossfire with FirePro S7000, including specs and performance data.

HD 7970M Crossfire
2012
200 Watt
14.69
+29.3%

HD 7970M Crossfire outperforms S7000 by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking401468
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.78
Power efficiency5.685.86
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameWimbledon XTPitcairn
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 May 2012 (14 years ago)27 August 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores25601280
Core clock speed850 MHz950 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt350 Watt
Texture fill rateno data76.00
Floating-point processing powerno data2.432 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data80
L1 Cacheno data320 KB
L2 Cacheno data512 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data292 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed4800 MHz1200 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data153.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno data1x DisplayPort
DisplayPort countno data1
Dual-link DVI support-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.112 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p132
+32%
100−110
−32%
Full HD102
+36%
75−80
−36%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data16.65

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+38.3%
60−65
−38.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Palworld 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 60−65
+42.2%
45−50
−42.2%
Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+38.3%
60−65
−38.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Fortnite 80−85
+40%
60−65
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
Palworld 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
Valorant 120−130
+35.6%
90−95
−35.6%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 60−65
+42.2%
45−50
−42.2%
Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+38.3%
60−65
−38.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+32%
150−160
−32%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Dota 2 90−95
+34.3%
70−75
−34.3%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Fortnite 80−85
+40%
60−65
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+40%
40−45
−40%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Palworld 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%
Valorant 120−130
+35.6%
90−95
−35.6%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+42.2%
45−50
−42.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Dota 2 90−95
+34.3%
70−75
−34.3%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%
Valorant 120−130
+35.6%
90−95
−35.6%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 80−85
+40%
60−65
−40%
Palworld 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+29.4%
85−90
−29.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+35.8%
95−100
−35.8%
Valorant 140−150
+40%
100−105
−40%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Palworld 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Palworld 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Valorant 70−75
+32.7%
55−60
−32.7%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Dota 2 50−55
+32.5%
40−45
−32.5%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Palworld 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%

This is how HD 7970M Crossfire and FirePro S7000 compete in popular games:

  • HD 7970M Crossfire is 32% faster in 900p
  • HD 7970M Crossfire is 36% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.69 11.36
Recency 1 May 2012 27 August 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 350 Watt

HD 7970M Crossfire has a 29% higher aggregate performance score, and 75% lower power consumption.

FirePro S7000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months.

The Radeon HD 7970M Crossfire is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S7000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7970M Crossfire is a notebook graphics card while FirePro S7000 is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.1 19 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7970M Crossfire on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 16 votes

Rate FirePro S7000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 7970M Crossfire or FirePro S7000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.