HD 2900XT review

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: apoppin

http://it-review.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1325&Itemid=91

up for Part 2

fake?

i think not

Originally posted by: Ackmed


An update to the it "review"; http://it-review.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1325&Itemid=91

Still not sold on the authenticity of it however. The M2N32-SLI is a AM2 mobo, yet they show they are using a C2D 6700? They show Oblivion much faster with 8xAA at 2560x1200 than with 4xAA. To the tune of 51fps compared to 32fps. Not to mention many more inconsistencies... as Ive been saying all along, Ill wait for a trusted review.

They do say this about IQ, but again, Ill wait for real reviews...

There's one other "trick" here, and that's image quality, also "to be covered" in a separate article. In all honesty, 8 and 16xAA modes look a bit better on HD2900XT then on 8800 series. This is one of those things that make HD2900XT what it is - very interesting product. Stay tuned for CrossFire vs SLI article tomorrow, done on 975 chipset for CrossFire and 680i chipset for 8800's.

http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/03/0110248

A lot of things simply do not add up. It may be a real review, with good numbers, and they just suck at putting it to paper, or just suck at reviews. Either way, its not very good.

 

[apoppin]

who said anything about "good" ?


the DT review was not "good"

--substandard by ANY AT standards - even for a "preview"

 

[5HAD0W]

Click Here

Not great I know, and I'm assuming the chart they refer to is published in the mag, but its some idea of real-world performance.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: 5HAD0W
Click Here

Not great I know, and I'm assuming the chart they refer to is published in the mag, but its some idea of real-world performance.

i'm sorry but - even for a "recovering" ATi fanboy - their conclusion made me ill:

ATI has been able to convert its technological advantages into some lethal framerates. It didn't beat the 640MB version of the 8800 GTS in all of our game tests, but it did come awfully close (see chart, below). The advantage is greatest at a resolution of 1,024x768, which suggests that the less detail you want to stack on, the better this card will prove.

:roll:

OK

10x7 it is ... and "less detail"
:thumbsup:

i will sell my LCD and pick up a budget CRT and HD2900xt

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: ronnn
Yep that review really slammed the 2900xt, if accurate amd is out of the graphic business.

You make it sound like 2900XT is priced arround 8800GTX level. it priced at $400 and is a real compititor to 8800GTS 640MB. IT also has loads more feature and better driver for vista. Also pre early DX10 benchmark show it beating up 8800GTX in crysis. Your just blined by your love for nvidia that you start to talk all the crap nvidia throws at you. Nothing more than a fanatical fanboy.

Pot......> Kettle .......> Black???

You are stating things here that you can't possibly know short of being under NDA.
You know for a fact that R600 has loads more "functioning" features before credible reviews? I'm not saying it doesn't, but you are talking like it's past history and confirmed.
Better drivers in Vista? You know this how? What credible review? We'll see what really happens in crysis shortly.

Do me a favor, don't post anymore till after official reviews are up. AND you are one of the few people on this forum who has no right to use the term "fanboy". You demonstrated this yesterday "talking" with CookieMonster. That was just silly.

/peace.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: 5HAD0W
Click Here

Not great I know, and I'm assuming the chart they refer to is published in the mag, but its some idea of real-world performance.

i'm sorry but - even for a "recovering" ATi fanboy - their conclusion made me ill:

ATI has been able to convert its technological advantages into some lethal framerates. It didn't beat the 640MB version of the 8800 GTS in all of our game tests, but it did come awfully close (see chart, below). The advantage is greatest at a resolution of 1,024x768, which suggests that the less detail you want to stack on, the better this card will prove.

:roll:

OK

10x7 it is ... and "less detail"
:thumbsup:

i will sell my LCD and pick up a budget CRT and HD2900xt

ROFL.

Anthing lower than 1920x1200 isn't even worth comparing these days.

 

[n7]

K, so i decided to do a breakdown of what i consider to be the most important resolutions/settings from the latest IT review.
I don't consider 1280x1024 worth worrying about, & while the HD 2900 XT did do even better @ 16x AA, it results in pretty much unplayable fps unless running CF, which does seem to be a good way to run high resolutions + gobs of AA.




1920x1200 4x AA 16x AF
vs. 8800 GTS
2 ties
5 losses

vs. 8800 GTX
7 losses


2560x1600 4x AA 16x AF
vs. 8800 GTS
2 wins
2 ties
3 losses

vs. 8800 GTX
7 losses


1920x1200 8x AA 16x AF
vs. 8800 GTS
2 wins
1 tie
4 losses

vs. 8800 GTX
7 losses


2560x1600 8x AA 16x AF
vs. 8800 GTS
4 wins
2 ties
1 loss

vs. 8800 GTX
2 wins
1 tie
4 losses

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Your forgetting the important rule of fanboy, they are not def but blind.

So that's why ATI put a sound chip on their new cards. :laugh:

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: n7
Anthing lower than 1920x1200 isn't even worth comparing these days.

except that, % wise, 1920x and above is almost insignificant as 1280 is still the most widely used resolution, by far. it's certainly much better than 1280 (generally cpu bound) for letting a gpu flex it's power, but doesn't really do justice to the majority of ppl (at least those who use lcd's) who can't run that high of resolution.

20-22" lcd's have dropped to reasonable prices, and they run either 1600x1200 or 1680x1050 (WS) which is enough to start moving the 'bottleneck' from the cpu to the gpu, and is probably a lot more relevant for those wanting to know how a card might perform in their system - especially with higher level/higher quality AA for those titles which support it... that in itself makes "anything lower than 1920..." very much worth comparing.

 

[n7]

Sure, you can still compare @ those lower resolutions, but i'd rather only see high ones (if given a choice), as it shows what high settings will do, not to mention it's a good comparison for future games, if you assume they'll be even more intensive than the current ones.

I know, it doesn't entirely work that way, but it's a good general indicator.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: n7
I know, it doesn't entirely work that way, but it's a good general indicator.

hehe. true.

i don't mind seeing 1920x and above (esp when comparing sli), but it's good to keep lower resolutions so ppl can see how an upgrade can help THEIR computer, not one that they can't afford.. or with me, who could probably afford a $600+ monitor, but would be hard to justify to the wife and i don't want the wife agro

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
...and i don't want the wife agro

Hah!

Sig worthy :laugh:

 

[MadBoris]

Well, I don't see any reason to think that these 2 benchmark suites aren't valid scores.
As it sits the scores look very driver skewed. It's also not uncommon for certain games to make a better showing on a certain card, so that in itself is not a surprise.
It has a wider bus but less ROP's so it will likely do better in certain scenarios, worse in others.
If ATI does release new drivers or has really recently, it might be too little too late since majority of testing is done by now by review sites.

The sound chip idea sounds cool with it's possibilities, but it will likely not produce as high a quality as creative addons currently do. Nor will it be used for anything special anytime soon.
I don't know if I want one company doing all the sound/Video/CPU, that sounds like disaster in the making. Besides, too much diversification for the company could be a bad thing.

 

[Nightmare225]

I wish there were official DX10 benchmarks out... Would really help in the Crysis/Alan Wake/World in Conflict card decision for many people...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Nightmare225
I wish there were official DX10 benchmarks out... Would really help in the Crysis/Alan Wake/World in Conflict card decision for many people...

monday ....

we will see something ...
:Q


and the "wise shopper" usually *waits* for the game, not the card ...
THEN decides on the best upgrade

the other way round, you are just "guessing" till it is released

UNLESS you *need* one now

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Nightmare225
I wish there were official DX10 benchmarks out... Would really help in the Crysis/Alan Wake/World in Conflict card decision for many people...

monday ....

we will see something ...
:Q


and the "wise shopper" usually *waits* for the game, not the card ...
THEN decides on the best upgrade

the other way round, you are just "guessing" till it is released

UNLESS you *need* one now

you buy for whats now, not in 6 months

 

[MadBoris]

Originally posted by: swtethan

you buy for whats now, not in 6 months

True most of the time, but you must admit DX10 is kind of compelling, many are looking forward to it. Crysis And UT are my games of the year, and not even out yet, I want my current purchase to do real well on them.

Not sure I would trust any DX10 tests right now with such a lack of DX10 apps to compare with.
It would be cool for someone to run the nvidia DX10 demo and bench that, if the ATI loses it won't prove anything (could be nvidia coding), but if ATI hammers the 8800 that will be very telling.

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: MadBoris

Originally posted by: swtethan

you buy for whats now, not in 6 months

True most of the time, but you must admit DX10 is kind of compelling, many are looking forward to it. Crysis And UT are my games of the year, and not even out yet, I want my current purchase to do real well on them.

Not sure I would trust any DX10 tests right now with such a lack of DX10 apps to compare with.
It would be cool for someone to run the nvidia DX10 demo and bench that, if the ATI loses it won't prove anything (could be nvidia coding), but if ATI hammers the 8800 that will be very telling.

when crysis comes, the 8 series would be one year old already.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Nightmare225
I wish there were official DX10 benchmarks out... Would really help in the Crysis/Alan Wake/World in Conflict card decision for many people...

monday ....

we will see something ...
:Q


and the "wise shopper" usually *waits* for the game, not the card ...
THEN decides on the best upgrade

the other way round, you are just "guessing" till it is released

UNLESS you *need* one now

you buy for whats now, not in 6 months

nonsense

or you will buy a new card every six months

planning ahead makes sense ... especially with DX10 here ...