AMD Radeon HD 7970 vs AMD Radeon Pro 575X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable measurement in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is close. The AMD Radeon Pro 575X scores 34,773 against the AMD Radeon HD 7970's 34,541. That is a delta of 0.7%, a margin small enough that it falls within normal run-to-run variance. The Pro 575X takes the win in this single head-to-head test, but the data does not suggest a meaningful performance gap in compute workloads. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: the Pro 575X sits at 39,116, while the HD 7970 lands at 34,541. That gap is largely driven by the Pro 575X having two additional benchmark results (Metal and Vulkan) that the HD 7970 does not have recorded.

Look at the broader context. The Pro 575X holds an 82nd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the HD 7970 sits at the 79th. That is a modest separation. The Pro 575X's nearest rivals include the Pro 580X at 38,706 (1.1% behind) and the Pro 575 at 39,555 (1.1% ahead). The HD 7970's closest competition includes the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB at 34,561 (0.1% behind) and the NVIDIA TITAN V at 34,355 (0.5% ahead). So both cards are clustered tightly with their peers; neither is an outlier in either direction.

The OpenCL result is the only place where both cards have a recorded score, so any other comparison must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than direct measurements. That said, the Pro 575X's additional Vulkan score of 37,919 and Metal score of 44,655 indicate that its driver stack and feature set are competitive in modern APIs, whereas the HD 7970 has no such entries in the database.

Architecture Differences

The Pro 575X is built on GCN 4.0 with the Ellesmere chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The HD 7970 uses GCN 1.0 with the Tahiti chip, on a 28 nm process at TSMC. That is a two-generation jump in architecture and a full node shrink. The transistor counts reflect this: the Pro 575X packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, yielding a density of 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The HD 7970 has 4,313 million transistors spread across a much larger 352 mm² die, for a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The Pro 575X is nearly twice as dense, which is exactly what the node transition would suggest.

Both cards share the same core configuration: 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. That is an unusual parity. The pixel rate and texture rate differ because of clock speeds: the Pro 575X achieves 35.07 GPixel/s and 140.3 GTexel/s, while the HD 7970 manages 29.60 GPixel/s and 118.4 GTexel/s. The Pro 575X is about 18% faster in both rates. FP32 compute follows the same pattern: the Pro 575X delivers 4.489 TFLOPS, the HD 7970 delivers 3.789 TFLOPS. The Pro 575X also supports FP16 at 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1), while the HD 7970 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Memory is a point of divergence. The Pro 575X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, producing 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 7970 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus, producing 264.0 GB/s. So the older card has more bandwidth despite having less capacity and slower effective memory clocks (5.5 Gbps vs. 6.8 Gbps). The HD 7970's wider bus compensates for its lower clock speed. In practice, the Pro 575X's higher compute rates may matter more than raw bandwidth, but the HD 7970 is not starved for memory throughput.

Power and physical design differ sharply. The Pro 575X is rated at 150 W and is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no power connectors and no slot width. It is designed for a portable device, and its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent." The HD 7970 is a 250 W dual-slot card requiring a 600 W suggested PSU and both a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector. It measures 275 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 38 mm wide. The HD 7970 is a traditional add-in board with 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Pro 575X, by contrast, has no standalone physical card dimensions recorded.

API support also separates them. The Pro 575X lists DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The HD 7970 lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support modern APIs, but the Pro 575X has a newer Vulkan revision and a higher DirectX feature level. The HD 7970's GCN 1.0 architecture has known limitations in certain DirectX 12 features, which the database reflects with the 11_1 designation.

The Verdict

The Pro 575X wins on compute throughput, efficiency, and modern API support. The HD 7970 wins on memory bandwidth and physical expandability. If you need a card for a portable system where power draw and space are constrained, the Pro 575X is the clear choice. Its 150 W TDP, IGP form factor, and no power connectors make it suitable for integrated designs. Its FP32 output is 18% higher than the HD 7970, and it offers FP16 support that the older card lacks.

If you need maximum memory bandwidth or a traditional PCIe card with multiple display outputs, the HD 7970 has advantages. Its 264.0 GB/s bandwidth is 21.6% higher than the Pro 575X, and its 3 GB capacity, while smaller, is paired with a 384-bit bus that excels in bandwidth-bound tasks. It also has a higher TDP at 250 W, which means it requires a proper PSU and cooling, but it delivers that bandwidth in a standard dual-slot form.

The benchmark data shows the Pro 575X is marginally ahead in OpenCL (0.7%), but that is not a decisive margin. The real differentiators are the architectural and feature-level gaps. The Pro 575X is a newer, denser, more efficient design. The HD 7970 is an older, larger, more power-hungry design with a bandwidth advantage. Choose based on platform constraints, not raw scores.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The Pro 575X scores 34,773 versus the HD 7970's 34,541, a 0.7% lead. That is within noise.

Q: Do both cards have the same number of shading units?

A: Yes, both have 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The HD 7970 has 264.0 GB/s, which is 21.6% higher than the Pro 575X's 217.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the HD 7970 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it lists Vulkan 1.2.170. The Pro 575X lists Vulkan 1.3, a newer revision.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Pro 575X is rated at 150 W, the HD 7970 at 250 W.

Q: Can the HD 7970 be used in a laptop?

A: No. It is a dual-slot card with two power connectors and a 275 mm length. The Pro 575X is an IGP with no power connectors.

Where Each One Wins

The Pro 575X wins in compute-heavy workloads that scale with FP32 or FP16 throughput. Its 4.489 TFLOPS FP32 and 4.489 TFLOPS FP16 give it a clear edge over the HD 7970's 3.789 TFLOPS FP32 and no FP16 path. The higher pixel rate (35.07 GPixel/s vs. 29.60 GPixel/s) and texture rate (140.3 GTexel/s vs. 118.4 GTexel/s) also favor the Pro 575X in rasterization and shader-bound scenes. Its newer Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0) support mean it is better positioned for modern game engines and compute APIs.

The HD 7970 wins in scenarios that are sensitive to memory bandwidth. Its 384-bit bus and 264.0 GB/s throughput outperform the Pro 575X's 256-bit bus and 217.0 GB/s. This matters for large textures, high-resolution framebuffers, and certain data-parallel workloads that saturate bandwidth before compute. The HD 7970 also has a traditional display output set (1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DP), making it usable as a standalone desktop card, whereas the Pro 575X's outputs are device-dependent.

The HD 7970's 3 GB capacity is smaller than the Pro 575X's 4 GB, but its bandwidth advantage may compensate in non-VRAM-limited tasks. Neither card is a clear winner for all use cases; the choice depends on whether the workload is compute-bound or bandwidth-bound.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 575X | AMD Radeon HD 7970 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 4,313 million |

| Die Size | 232 mm² | 352 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.6M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 217.0 GB/s | 264.0 GB/s |

| Effective Memory Clock | 6.8 Gbps | 5.5 Gbps |

| FP32 Compute | 4.489 TFLOPS | 3.789 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1) | None recorded |

| Pixel Rate | 35.07 GPixel/s | 29.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 140.3 GTexel/s | 118.4 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 150 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None recorded | 600 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions (LxHxW) | Not recorded | 275 x 111 x 38 mm |

| Release Date | 2019-03-17 | 2012-01-08 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | 549 USD |