AMD Radeon HD 7970 vs AMD Radeon Pro 580 Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro 580 and AMD Radeon HD 7970 represent two distinct eras of AMD graphics architecture, with the former holding a decisive edge in the recorded data. The Pro 580 wins the only shared benchmark and posts a significantly higher average score, but the HD 7970 remains relevant in specific legacy scenarios. The data indicates a clear generational leap, yet the HD 7970's unique traits merit attention for certain use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 580 is the clear winner in raw compute performance as measured by the database. It secures victory in the sole head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 38457 against the HD 7970's 34541, a delta of 11.3%. Its average benchmark score of 40318 across three tests (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan) further cements its position, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. The HD 7970, with only a single recorded OpenCL score of 34541, sits in the 79th percentile.

The Pro 580 wins on architectural modernity and feature support. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, while the HD 7970 tops out at DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. This makes the Pro 580 the better choice for modern application compatibility. The HD 7970, however, holds a unique position with its 384-bit memory bus and higher raw memory bandwidth of 264.0 GB/s, which exceeds the Pro 580's 217.0 GB/s. For workloads heavily dependent on memory bandwidth rather than compute shaders, the HD 7970 could theoretically hold an advantage, though the Pro 580's superior compute results suggest this edge is not realized in the recorded tests.

The Pro 580 also wins on efficiency per the data. It has a TDP of 185 W versus the HD 7970's 250 W, despite delivering 5.530 TFLOPS of FP32 performance compared to 3.789 TFLOPS. This represents a 46% improvement in raw floating-point throughput while consuming 26% less power, a clear win for the newer part.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The Pro 580 uses the Ellesmere chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The HD 7970 uses the Tahiti chip on GCN 1.0, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process shrink allows the Pro 580 to pack 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 24.6 million per mm². The HD 7970, by contrast, contains 4,313 million transistors on a much larger 352 mm² die, with a density of just 12.3 million per mm².

The Pro 580 features 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The HD 7970 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. While the core counts are similar, the Pro 580 runs at a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz, whereas the HD 7970's clocks are not listed in the database. The Pro 580's higher clock speeds and newer architecture translate directly into its performance advantage.

Memory configurations differ notably. The Pro 580 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 7970 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus, achieving 264.0 GB/s. The Pro 580's memory runs at 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective), while the HD 7970's runs at 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective). The HD 7970's bandwidth advantage is real, but the Pro 580's larger frame buffer and newer memory controller compensate in the recorded benchmarks.

The HD 7970 also has a unique feature: it supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, though the database does not record an FP16 figure for it. The Pro 580 records FP16 at 5.530 TFLOPS, identical to its FP32 output, but the HD 7970's FP16 capability is listed as null in the data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The Pro 580 scores 38457, while the HD 7970 scores 34541. This gives the Pro 580 an 11.3% advantage. This is a meaningful margin, indicating that the newer architecture delivers roughly one-tenth more compute throughput in a widely used compute benchmark.

Looking at the Pro 580's other recorded benchmarks, it scores 39213 in Geekbench Metal and 43285 in Geekbench Vulkan. These figures are not directly comparable to the HD 7970, which lacks records for those tests, but they show the Pro 580's consistency across different API environments. Its average benchmark score of 40318 is 16.7% higher than the HD 7970's average of 34541, which represents the overall performance gap between the two parts.

The nearest rival data contextualizes these scores. The Pro 580 sits within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (40377 vs. 40318) and within 0.6% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100. It is 1.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 and 1.9% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile. The HD 7970, meanwhile, sits within 0.1% of the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB and within 0.4% of the NVIDIA A2. It is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA TITAN V and 1% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A1000. These rivalries place the Pro 580 in modern mid-range territory, while the HD 7970 aligns with entry-level workstation parts.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro 580 is the superior GPU. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark with an 11.3% margin, achieves a 16.7% higher average benchmark score, and consumes 65 W less power. Its 14 nm process, GCN 4.0 architecture, and 8 GB frame buffer make it the better choice for modern workloads, particularly those leveraging Metal, Vulkan, or DirectX 12.

Users should pick the Pro 580 for any application requiring current API support, higher compute throughput, or greater memory capacity. Its 82nd percentile ranking versus the HD 7970's 79th confirms this hierarchy. The HD 7970, however, should be considered only for legacy systems where its 384-bit memory bus and 264.0 GB/s bandwidth are specifically required, or where software is optimized for GCN 1.0 without benefiting from newer instruction sets. Its 3 GB frame buffer is a limitation for modern textures, and its 250 W TDP demands a more robust power supply, with the database listing a 600 W suggested PSU.

The Pro 580's nearest rivals include the RTX 5070, against which it trails by only 0.1%, making it competitive with recent NVIDIA offerings. The HD 7970's nearest rivals, such as the T1000 8 GB, are similarly matched, but the HD 7970 is a decade older in the database's timeline. For any new purchase or upgrade, the Pro 580 is the only rational choice based on recorded performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 580 has an average benchmark score of 40318, compared to the AMD Radeon HD 7970's 34541.

Q: What is the difference in OpenCL performance between the two?

A: The Pro 580 scores 38457 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the HD 7970 scores 34541, giving the Pro 580 an 11.3% advantage.

Q: How do memory bandwidths compare?

A: The HD 7970 has a higher memory bandwidth of 264.0 GB/s due to its 384-bit bus, while the Pro 580 has 217.0 GB/s on a 256-bit bus. However, the Pro 580 has 8 GB of memory versus 3 GB on the HD 7970.

Q: Which GPU supports newer APIs?

A: The Pro 580 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the HD 7970 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Pro 580 has a TDP of 185 W, while the HD 7970 has a TDP of 250 W.

Q: How do the GPUs rank against all other GPUs in the database?

A: The Pro 580 is in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 7970 is in the 79th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 580 | 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 |

| Base Clock | 1100 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective) | 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

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

| Shading Units | 2304 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 144 | 128 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 38.40 GPixel/s | 29.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 172.8 GTexel/s | 118.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.530 TFLOPS | 3.789 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 5.530 TFLOPS (1:1) | Not listed |

| TDP | 185 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 600 W |

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

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2017-06-04 | 2012-01-08 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 549 USD |

| Length | Not listed | 275 mm (10.8 inches) |

| Height | Not listed | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | Not listed | 38 mm (1.5 inches) |