2900XT vs 8800GTS 320

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
June 15, 2007 review

HL2 Episode 1 @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 83
8800GTS 320 = 57
HD 2900XT = 67

FEAR @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 55
8800GTS 320 = 40
HD 2900XT = 50

Company of Heroes @ 1920 Full
8800GTS 640 = 53
8800GTS 320 = 33
HD 2900XT = 58

Prey @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 86
8800GTS 320 = 93
HD 2900XT = 80

Need for Speed Most Wanted @ 1920 FullAA/FullAF
8800GTS 640 = 55
8800GTS 320 = 43
HD 2900XT = 42

More proof and facts that I'm sure will get ignored. Good find BTW.

Something looks odd about their numbers. Look at the Prey @ 1920 numbers for the PNY 8800GTX XLR8.

no AA/no AF - 171
2xAA/4xAF - 147
4xAA/8xAF - 150

Framerates go UP by going from 2xAA/4xAF to 4xAA/8xAF?


And the Foxconn 8800GTS 320 as well.

no AA/no AF - 114
2xAA/4xAF - 88
4xAA/8xAF - 93


Company of Heros shows nearly 0 change going from noAA to Full at 1920 on the 8800GTXs, 2900 and 8800GTS 640. Shouldn't there be at least some drop in performance at that res?

Even the HL2 figures look weird. The 8800GTX XLR8 drops 1 fps from no AA/no AF to 4xAA/8xAF at 1920 while the Asus 8800GTX goes from 131 fps down to 111. That's a drop of 20 fps compared to 1 fps on the XLR8.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
June 15, 2007 review

HL2 Episode 1 @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 83
8800GTS 320 = 57
HD 2900XT = 67

FEAR @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 55
8800GTS 320 = 40
HD 2900XT = 50

Company of Heroes @ 1920 Full
8800GTS 640 = 53
8800GTS 320 = 33
HD 2900XT = 58

Prey @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 86
8800GTS 320 = 93
HD 2900XT = 80

Need for Speed Most Wanted @ 1920 FullAA/FullAF
8800GTS 640 = 55
8800GTS 320 = 43
HD 2900XT = 42

More proof and facts that I'm sure will get ignored. Good find BTW.

Something looks odd about their numbers. Look at the Prey @ 1920 numbers for the PNY 8800GTX XLR8.

no AA/no AF - 171
2xAA/4xAF - 147
4xAA/8xAF - 150

Framerates go UP by going from 2xAA/4xAF to 4xAA/8xAF?


And the Foxconn 8800GTS 320 as well.

no AA/no AF - 114
2xAA/4xAF - 88
4xAA/8xAF - 93


Company of Heros shows nearly 0 change going from noAA to Full at 1920 on the 8800GTXs, 2900 and 8800GTS 640. Shouldn't there be at least some drop in performance at that res?

Even the HL2 figures look weird. The 8800GTX XLR8 drops 1 fps from no AA/no AF to 4xAA/8xAF at 1920 while the Asus 8800GTX goes from 131 fps down to 111. That's a drop of 20 fps compared to 1 fps on the XLR8.

Good Lookin out Creig. Now why can't you do something like this for the H article? Show something odd.. You have a good eye for that stuff. And no. I'm not being sarcastic.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
June 15, 2007 review

HL2 Episode 1 @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 83
8800GTS 320 = 57
HD 2900XT = 67

FEAR @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 55
8800GTS 320 = 40
HD 2900XT = 50

Company of Heroes @ 1920 Full
8800GTS 640 = 53
8800GTS 320 = 33
HD 2900XT = 58

Prey @ 1920 4AA/8AF
8800GTS 640 = 86
8800GTS 320 = 93
HD 2900XT = 80

Need for Speed Most Wanted @ 1920 FullAA/FullAF
8800GTS 640 = 55
8800GTS 320 = 43
HD 2900XT = 42

More proof and facts that I'm sure will get ignored. Good find BTW.

Something looks odd about their numbers. Look at the Prey @ 1920 numbers for the PNY 8800GTX XLR8.

no AA/no AF - 171
2xAA/4xAF - 147
4xAA/8xAF - 150

Framerates go UP by going from 2xAA/4xAF to 4xAA/8xAF?


And the Foxconn 8800GTS 320 as well.

no AA/no AF - 114
2xAA/4xAF - 88
4xAA/8xAF - 93


Company of Heros shows nearly 0 change going from noAA to Full at 1920 on the 8800GTXs, 2900 and 8800GTS 640. Shouldn't there be at least some drop in performance at that res?

Even the HL2 figures look weird. The 8800GTX XLR8 drops 1 fps from no AA/no AF to 4xAA/8xAF at 1920 while the Asus 8800GTX goes from 131 fps down to 111. That's a drop of 20 fps compared to 1 fps on the XLR8.

Good Lookin out Creig. Now why can't you do something like this for the H article? Show something odd.. You have a good eye for that stuff. And no. I'm not being sarcastic.

See, but its impossible to do such a thing for HOCP since they only test once in "playable settings" ...

 

[bfdd]

Yeah, but they probably deemed playable settings something that wouldn't drop below a certain minimum fps requirement I don't know what they did, but they did nothing to make the GTS perform better by lowering their settings except in one situation with 50% but they still had something else enabled that wasn't ont he 2900xt and it was only the 320mb version they did this on

 

[RussianSensation]

Here is another review testing at extremely high resolutions:

Digit-Life - May 24, 2007

Drivers: ATI 8.37
NVIDIA 158.18/158.19.

Far Cry Research @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 83
HD 2900XT OC 850/2000 = 55.4
HD 2900XT = 47.8
8800GTS 640 = 48.4
8800GTS 320 = 46.7
*Note at 1600x1200 all the cards provide > 60 FPS.

Far Cry Research HDR @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 55
HD 2900XT OC = 47.2
HD 2900XT = 41.7
8800GTS 640 = 36.4
8800GTS 320 = 28.3
*Note at 1600x1200 all the cards provide > 60 FPS.

FEAR @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 45
HD 2900XT OC = 45
HD 2900XT = 37
8800GTS 640 = 32
8800GTS 320 = 26
*wouldn't call this acceptable performance on any card. Note at 1600x1200 all the cards provide > 60 FPS.

Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 52.3
HD 2900XT OC = 57.4
HD 2900XT = 47.1
8800GTS 640 = 31.2
8800GTS 320 = 29
*Note at 1600x1200 all the cards provide > 60 FPS.

Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory HDR @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 45.1
HD 2900XT OC = 51.5
HD 2900XT = 42.8
8800GTS 640 = 34.0 (odd that this is greater than above without HDR)
8800GTS 320 = 27.7
*Note 8800GTS 640 and 320 cannot provide 60FPS at 1600x1200. However, for this game even high 50s is fast enough.

Call of Juarez @ 1024x768 4AA/16AF (running at higher resolutions kills all the cards other than GTX):
8800GTX = 64
HD 2900XT OC = 42.5
HD 2900XT = 38
8800GTS 640 = 50
8800GTS 320 = 49.6
*Note potential ATI driver problems and room for improvement as HD 2900XT can barely outperform X1950XTX.

Company of Heroes @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 34.7
HD 2900XT OC = 51
HD 2900XT = 45
8800GTS 640 = 23.9
8800GTS 320 = 20.4
*Note ATI clearly dominates this benchmark as even X1950XTX outperforms 8800GTX at this setting.

Serious Sam II @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 73.8
HD 2900XT OC = 72.4
HD 2900XT = 62
8800GTS 640 = 49.5
8800GTS 320 = 33.8
*Note at 1600x1200 all the cards provide > 60 FPS.

Serious Sam II HDR @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 54.6
HD 2900XT OC = 60
HD 2900XT = 51.4
8800GTS 640 = 37.8
8800GTS 320 = 13.5
*Note at 1600x1200 all the cards provide > 60 FPS.

Prey @ 2560x1600 4AA/16AF
8800GTX = 48.9
HD 2900XT OC = 53.1
HD 2900XT = 45
8800GTS 640 = 34
8800GTS 320 = 33.3
*Note at 1600x1200 all the cards provide > 60 FPS.

Conclusions:

• For resolutions at or below 1600x1200 4AA/16AF, 8800GTS 320 provides the best value as it can sustain 60FPS in most of the games tested

• At the current time from the games tested HD 2900XT has a far superior ability to handle HDR than 8800GTS series outperforming NV in all HDR tests including: 1) Far Cry; 2) Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory; 3) Serious Sam II

• At stock speeds 8800GTX is the fastest card. Overclocked HD 2900XT becomes a serious contender and often outperforms 8800GTX

• Potential for future performance improvements as HD 2900XT sometimes barely outperforms previous generation X1950XTX

• Any conclusions related to DX10 implementation and efficiency in true DX10 games unknown relative to GeForce 8 due to lack of any true DX10 games

 

[imported_BS]

Originally posted by: bfdd
Hey look another review that puts it barely on par with the 8800 GTS series of cards 320/640.

Oh look another review on non mature drivers, Oh boy! Give it a few months and I think your going to see the 2900XT pull away from the GTS line of cards.

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/interviews/39


"We also had some last minute performance possibilities, which is always incompatible with stability, and we did not have enough time to get those tested and integrated in time for launch. We see in the latest driver, some 2x to 3x improvement in adaptive AA performance, for example, which is great but came later than I would have liked. But, I?ll admit, there?s so much to do still, that I haven?t really spent that much time on reviews and such. The reality is that I expect things to continue to improve and be much better in a few months."

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

It's not like nVidia is going to be sitting still in that time frame though. And isn't 'give it a few months' kind of akin to saying 'wait until it's no longer even relevant'?

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: BS

Originally posted by: bfdd
Hey look another review that puts it barely on par with the 8800 GTS series of cards 320/640.

Oh look another review on non mature drivers, Oh boy! Give it a few months and I think your going to see the 2900XT pull away from the GTS line of cards.

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/interviews/39


"We also had some last minute performance possibilities, which is always incompatible with stability, and we did not have enough time to get those tested and integrated in time for launch. We see in the latest driver, some 2x to 3x improvement in adaptive AA performance, for example, which is great but came later than I would have liked. But, I?ll admit, there?s so much to do still, that I haven?t really spent that much time on reviews and such. The reality is that I expect things to continue to improve and be much better in a few months."

I'll give them that, that the drivers are still immature, but nvidias drivers still suck for the 8800 series too saddly =\ I just stopped getting nkmdvm error in vista 64 =\

 

[bfdd]

Neat, that last one was pretty good. Wonder how they all would compared when overclocked?

 

[Slugbait]

Originally posted by: BS

Originally posted by: bfdd
Hey look another review that puts it barely on par with the 8800 GTS series of cards 320/640.

Oh look another review on non mature drivers, Oh boy! Give it a few months and I think your going to see the 2900XT pull away from the GTS line of cards.

Hey, I'm STILL waiting on final drivers for my Rage...





j/k, never bought a Rage

 

[imported_BS]

Originally posted by: PhatoseAlpha
It's not like nVidia is going to be sitting still in that time frame though. And isn't 'give it a few months' kind of akin to saying 'wait until it's no longer even relevant'?

I believe the 8800 series has been upto speed now for several months. Your not going to see the improvements in speed your going to see on the 2900XT due to the totally new architecture of the 2900XT over the next few months. If everyone thought like you about it then there would be no sense of ever buying anything that is new as it would always stay the same.

 

[solofly]

Originally posted by: BS

Originally posted by: bfdd
Hey look another review that puts it barely on par with the 8800 GTS series of cards 320/640.

Oh look another review on non mature drivers, Oh boy! Give it a few months and I think your going to see the 2900XT pull away from the GTS line of cards.

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/interviews/39


"We also had some last minute performance possibilities, which is always incompatible with stability, and we did not have enough time to get those tested and integrated in time for launch. We see in the latest driver, some 2x to 3x improvement in adaptive AA performance, for example, which is great but came later than I would have liked. But, I?ll admit, there?s so much to do still, that I haven?t really spent that much time on reviews and such. The reality is that I expect things to continue to improve and be much better in a few months."

In few months I'll be running 2nd-gen Nvidia DX10 card in my box.lol

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: BS

Originally posted by: PhatoseAlpha
It's not like nVidia is going to be sitting still in that time frame though. And isn't 'give it a few months' kind of akin to saying 'wait until it's no longer even relevant'?

I believe the 8800 series has been upto speed now for several months. Your not going to see the improvements in speed your going to see on the 2900XT due to the totally new architecture of the 2900XT over the next few months. If everyone thought like you about it then there would be no sense of ever buying anything that is new as it would always stay the same.

This is a ridiculous statement because it implies that the 8800 series doesn't have a totally new architecture, btw that isn't always a good thing either. Remember Netburst? I don't think the 8800s are fully up to speed yet with the crappy drivers nvidia keeps turning out for Vista =\

 

[imported_BS]

Originally posted by: solofly

Originally posted by: BS

Originally posted by: bfdd
Hey look another review that puts it barely on par with the 8800 GTS series of cards 320/640.

Oh look another review on non mature drivers, Oh boy! Give it a few months and I think your going to see the 2900XT pull away from the GTS line of cards.

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/interviews/39


"We also had some last minute performance possibilities, which is always incompatible with stability, and we did not have enough time to get those tested and integrated in time for launch. We see in the latest driver, some 2x to 3x improvement in adaptive AA performance, for example, which is great but came later than I would have liked. But, I?ll admit, there?s so much to do still, that I haven?t really spent that much time on reviews and such. The reality is that I expect things to continue to improve and be much better in a few months."

In few months I'll be running 2nd-gen Nvidia DX10 card in my box.lol

Good luck with that one in a few months LOL! As there will be no new Nvidia DX10 cards in 2 months time. Sorry to break it to ya.

 

[imported_BS]

Originally posted by: bfdd

Originally posted by: BS

Originally posted by: PhatoseAlpha
It's not like nVidia is going to be sitting still in that time frame though. And isn't 'give it a few months' kind of akin to saying 'wait until it's no longer even relevant'?

I believe the 8800 series has been upto speed now for several months. Your not going to see the improvements in speed your going to see on the 2900XT due to the totally new architecture of the 2900XT over the next few months. If everyone thought like you about it then there would be no sense of ever buying anything that is new as it would always stay the same.

This is a ridiculous statement because it implies that the 8800 series doesn't have a totally new architecture, btw that isn't always a good thing either. Remember Netburst? I don't think the 8800s are fully up to speed yet with the crappy drivers nvidia keeps turning out for Vista =\

Its far from a ridiculous statement, Oh I know Nvidia is putting out crap drivers as I had to return 2 8800GTS's because of it. I just don't see any huge speed increases coming for the 8800 series at this point 7 months in.