OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

AMD Radeon HD 6970 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£440VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):250 W

AMD Radeon HD 6970 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 24 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Radeon HD 6970
6.0/10

Overall score

Score
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

40%

4.3

Technical score

25%

8.1

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

4.3

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 89% of graphics cards
6.7

Value for money

Value for money
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

8.2

Price

▼Worse than 83%
4.3

Technical score

Technical score
4.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

44%

3.1

Performance

24%

3.4

Memory

12%

6.9

Power

11%

5.8

Features

5%

7.9

Design

4%

5.6

Connectivity

▼Worse than 91%
8.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 60% of models

80%

7.8

Average grade

20%

9.1

Popularity

Grades by review (24)
17 reviews: 11 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 7 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 60%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • amd-radeon-hd-6970
  • amd-radeon-hd-6970
  • amd-radeon-hd-6970
  • amd-radeon-hd-6970
  • amd-radeon-hd-6970
amd-radeon-hd-6970
amd-radeon-hd-6970
amd-radeon-hd-6970
amd-radeon-hd-6970
amd-radeon-hd-6970
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Radeon HD 6970

Based on 17 · 8

Reviewers like its display outputs and generous memory, are split on performance, and criticize its power use and drivers.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Radeon HD 6970

Based on 115 owners sharing their experience in online comments

61%positive18%mixed21%negative

Owners praise its strong gaming and overclocking performance, while heat, power draw and driver problems remain the main drawbacks.

What owners dislike

  • Struggles with newer demanding titles: Metro Exodus is playable only at minimum settings, and GTX 570 and 580 beat it by 10–30% in tests.12
  • Newer Radeon drivers can drop performance, and some owners get game crashes on Windows 8.1; the open Linux driver ran GTA V noticeably faster.10
  • Reaches 80–90°C in Battlefield 3, and the stock fan stays slow, so owners raise fan speed manually to avoid overheating.10
  • A 500-watt power supply could not handle it, and owners say it draws heavy power, so you need a strong PSU.3
  • Artifacts show up in games like Fallout 4, and one owner fixed them by reheating the card with a hair dryer.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon HD 6970

Technical score
Technical score
4.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components:

44%

3.1

Performance

24%

3.4

Memory

12%

6.9

Power

11%

5.8

Features

5%

7.9

Design

4%

5.6

Connectivity

4.3
Reviews score
8.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components:

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

8.2

Price

6.7
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
?
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
2,831 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 2,831 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 96.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
3,136 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 3,136 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 89.6% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
2.7 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 2.7 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 92% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
2 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.3% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 50.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
176 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 176 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 89.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
5,500 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 5,500 MHz, which is slower than that of 95.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2.1
This graphics card supports PCIe 2.1, which is older than on 97.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
11.2
This graphics card supports DirectX 11.2, which is older than on 98.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
?
OpenGL version
4.4
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.4, which is older than on 98.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91% of graphics cards and equal to 6.6% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
2560x1600
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 2560x1600, which is lower than that of 97.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
2
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 2 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 78.3% of graphics cards and equal to 9.8% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
21.6 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 21.6 Gbps, which is faster than on 49.7% of graphics cards and equal to 2% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
250 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 250 W, which is higher than that of 59.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
250 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 250 W under peak load, which is higher than 57.6% of graphics cards and equal to 4.8% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
550 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 550 W PSU, which is lower than that of 61.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.3% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
250 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 250 W, which is higher than that of 56% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
250 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
286x 126x 42 mm
Length
286 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 286 mm long, which is longer than 50.9% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Height
126 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 126 mm tall, which is taller than 51.3% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,020 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,020 g, which is heavier than 50.2% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Radeon HD 6970 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 21.33x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (512 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    512 MB vs 24 MB
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 60% of models

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    9.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (24)
    17 reviews: 11 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 7 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 15.4% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (550 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    550 W vs 650 W
  • 4 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (4 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    4 vs 0
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
    1:4 vs 1:64
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 60% of models

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    9.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (24)
    17 reviews: 11 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 7 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
    1:4 vs 1:64
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 21.33x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (512 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    512 MB vs 24 MB
  • 4 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (4 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    4 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 15.4% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (550 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    550 W vs 650 W
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (40 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    40 nm vs 5 nm
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 54.2% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (880 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    880 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • 44.9% lower sentiment score
    4.3 vs 7.8
  • 10.8% worse value for money
    AMD Radeon HD 6970 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.69 vs 7.4).
    6.69 vs 7.41
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 54.2% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (880 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    880 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • 77.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (84.5 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    84.5 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 82.5% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (28.2 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    28.2 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 88 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (96 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    96 vs 184
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 88.1% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (2.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    2.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 13 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2010 vs 2023).
    December 2010
    2010 vs 2023
  • 87.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (2,831 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    2,831 points vs 22,638 points
  • 74% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (3,136 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    3,136 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 90.8% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (2.7 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    2.7 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 2,816 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,536 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,536 vs 4,352
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 71.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (5,500 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    5,500 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 60.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (176 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    176 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 21.4% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,375 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,375 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 93.8% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (8 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    8 KB vs 128 KB
  • 8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (40 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    40 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • No FSR support
    This graphics card does not support FSR, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 4).
    2.1 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (11.2 vs 12 Ultimate).
    11.2 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (1.1 vs 3).
    1.1 vs 3
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (5 vs 6.8).
    5 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • Older OpenGL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenGL version than the average graphics card (4.4 vs 4.6).
    4.4 vs 4.6
  • 88.5% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (2,640 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    2,640 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1 vs 3.1
  • 32.3% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (389 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    389 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1a).
    1.4a vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • 1 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    2 vs 3
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (2560x1600 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    2560x1600 vs 7680x4320
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 16.3% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (250 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    250 W vs 215 W
  • 13 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (80 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    80 °C vs 67 °C
  • 37 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (37 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    37 dB vs 0 dB
  • 7.1 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (42.5 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    42.5 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 66.7% higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (20 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    20 W vs 12 W
  • 5 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (100 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    100 °C vs 95 °C
  • 13.6% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (250 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    250 W vs 220 W
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

7.0
DanielC
≈ estimated
29/09/2024
Benchmark · seven older games at various settings
Verdict
AMD Radeon HD 6970 is still playable on older systems at lower settings, but only worth buying cheap.
8.0
PhilsComputerLab
≈ estimated
12/05/2023
Retro hands-on review · ports, Windows XP and older games
Verdict
AMD Radeon HD 6970 works well for Windows XP and XP/Vista hybrid builds, but older games often needed workarounds like vsync.
8.0
Nexus Tech
≈ estimated
16/01/2022
Hands-on review · cleaning, benchmarks and game tests
Verdict
AMD Radeon HD 6970 offers a strong performance gain for its age, though Metro 2033 is effectively unplayable.
8.0
BenchyDoesStuff
≈ estimated
24/05/2021
Hands-on review · 2021 game tests at 1080p
Verdict
AMD Radeon HD 6970 is still enjoyable in many modern games, despite stutter and a few problem titles.
8.0
OC3D TV
≈ estimated
15/12/2010
Hands-on review · benchmarks, noise and overclocking
Verdict
AMD Radeon HD 6970 is a great card, but it is louder than a GTX 570 and overclocks minimally, so temper expectations.
7.0
technhealth
≈ estimated
12/12/2017
Short review · game benchmarks at 1080p
Verdict
AMD Radeon HD 6970 still handles games decently if you lower settings and work around driver errors.
9.0
Motherboards.org
≈ estimated
15/12/2010
Hands-on review · benchmarks and feature overview
Verdict
AMD Radeon HD 6970 beats the GTX 570 and trails only the GTX 580 in speed.
9.0
Motherboards.org
≈ estimated
15/12/2010
Launch review · benchmarks and bundle features
Verdict
AMD Radeon HD 6970 is worth buying for its bundle, though the GTX 580 still holds the performance crown.
Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
14/12/2010
Lab test · Reference-design card
Verdict
The HIS Radeon HD 6970 follows AMD's reference design with 2 GB of memory, but its launch slipped and Nvidia's GTX 570 and 580 arrived first.
9.0
overclockers.com
≈ estimated
15/12/2010
Overclocking test · Reference card
Verdict
The AMD HD 6970 is a fast high-resolution card that overclocks easily and stays quiet with the fan on automatic, but driver trouble and software limits hold it back.
8.0
hothardware.com
✓ explicit
15/12/2010
Launch coverage · New flagship
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 is AMD's new flagship with 2 GB of memory and 175 GB/s bandwidth, but on paper it has fewer shaders than the HD 5870.
8.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
20/05/2011
Lab test · Gaming benchmarks
Verdict
The AMD Radeon HD 6970 suits gamers who want DirectX 11 features, but it isn't consistently faster than the GeForce GTX 570 it rivals.
8.0
expertreviews.co.uk
✓ explicit
15/12/2010
Lab test · Full HD gaming
Verdict
The AMD Radeon HD 6970 runs Crysis at Full HD almost as fast as the GTX 580, but its sibling HD 6950 delivers very similar performance.
8.0
pcper.com
≈ estimated
15/12/2010
Lab test · Efficiency and features
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 beats the GeForce GTX 570 in many tests and nearly matches the GTX 580, but it draws power close to Nvidia's high-end cards.
7.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
15/12/2010
Lab test · Launch review
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 is a big step up from the HD 5870, but it struggles against Nvidia, whose rival cards already match its performance.
7.0
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
15/12/2010
Benchmark test · Dual BIOS
Verdict
The AMD Radeon HD 6970 is about 20% faster than the HD 5870 and has a backup BIOS and 2 GB of memory, but it can't beat the GeForce GTX 570.
7.0
gamezoom.net
≈ estimated
16/12/2010
Lab test · Dual-slot card
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 stays cool and quiet on the desktop and edges out the GTX 570 at 1920x1200 and up, but draws power on a par with the GTX 580.
5.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
15/12/2010
Lab test · Launch review
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 and 6950 bring a reworked Cayman architecture, but the review finds both cards disappointing next to Nvidia's new GTX 580 and 570.
7.8
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
18/03/2011
Lab test · Bundled game card
Verdict
The Sapphire Radeon HD 6970 Vietnam Game Edition runs nearly all games smoothly at top detail and includes a full game, though Crysis and Metro 2033 dip to 30 fps.
7.7
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
27/06/2011
Lab test · Multi-monitor card
Verdict
The Asus EAH6970 DirectCu II suits multi-monitor setups thanks to four DisplayPort outputs, but its oversized cooler delivers only a tiny speed gain.
8.0
chip.de
≈ estimated
20/02/2026
Lab test · Benchmarks and noise
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 is a fast gaming card whose larger memory pulls ahead of the GTX 570 at 1920×1080 and up, though the GTX 580 stays faster.
6.0
01net.com
✓ explicit
23/12/2010
Lab test · Quiet but underwhelming
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 is quiet and stays under its rated power, but it trails the GeForce GTX 570 in many Full HD tests.
8.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
25/05/2011
Lab test · Disappointing flagship
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 runs current games at high resolutions, but it's slower, louder and more power-hungry than the GeForce GTX 570.
8.0
tecnovortex.com
≈ estimated
13/01/2012
Hands-on test · Large high-end card
Verdict
The Radeon HD 6970 runs every game maxed out and drives several Full HD monitors, but it's huge and needs a big case and a strong power supply.
10
nexthardware.com
✓ explicit
15/12/2010
Lab test · Power and heat
Verdict
The Sapphire Radeon HD 6970 runs cooler than any card in the test suite and draws power in line with its performance, though overclocking was only lightly tested.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Radeon HD 6970

  • Competitive price compared to high-end Nvidia rivals like the GTX 580
  • Generous 2GB of GDDR5 memory, making it well-suited for high-resolution gaming and multi-monitor Eyefinity setups
  • Strong DirectX 11 performance, particularly with improved tessellation units
  • Includes a dual BIOS switch, allowing for safer overclocking and 'tweaking'
  • Introduced PowerTune technology, giving users control over power consumption limits
  • Efficient performance scaling when used in CrossFire multi-GPU configurations

What customers don't like about AMD Radeon HD 6970

  • High power draw, especially during Blu-ray playback and intensive 3D tasks
  • Reference cooler can be quite loud and runs hot under full load
  • Bulky 'box' design can restrict airflow in multi-GPU setups on some motherboards
  • Incremental performance gains over the previous generation (HD 5870) in some older titles
  • Lack of support for Nvidia-exclusive features like CUDA and PhysX
  • Limited long-term support, as AMD transitioned newer APIs like DirectX 12 mostly to GCN-based parts

Verdict

The AMD Radeon HD 6970 is a high-performance graphics card built on the 40nm 'Cayman' architecture, featuring 1,536 stream processors, a core clock of 880 MHz, and 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus delivering 176 GB/s bandwidth. Main characteristics include the VLIW4 shader architecture, a dual-BIOS switch for safer overclocking, and support for DirectX 11.2 and AMD Eyefinity for multi-monitor setups. Its primary pros are its impressive 2.7 TFLOPS of compute power, significant tessellation performance improvements over previous generations, and high image quality through Enhanced Quality Anti-Aliasing (EQAA). However, it has notable cons, including a high power draw of up to 250W TDP, significant heat generation under load, and a lack of support for modern APIs like Vulkan or DirectX 12.

Compare AMD Radeon HD 6970 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Radeon HD 6970 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found