Originally posted by: Extelleron
Originally posted by: Matt2
Originally posted by: Zstream
You know if you stopped using those silly things people would respect you more.
Here are somemore benchmarks More Benchmarks
They are using windows Vista with a few DX10 demo's. No idea about driver settings, I am still looking.
I have a GTX and GTS but I will not touch vista at all. Anyone willing to verify these scores with vista and a GTS/GTX using 1600*1200 8xAA and 16xAF?
Also if you can please download the global illumination demo and test and show us some SS of the test. I would like these verified if possible ASAP so I can say they are fake or possibly correct.
Haha.
We're supposed to believe "AMD ATI officiall test slide" from a site called r800.blogspot.com, but DT is full of crap?
Good one.
Although I do agree with you that someone should download the demo and verify the G80 scores. However, since it's an "AMD ATI officiall test slide", we have no way of knowing how badly the results (if any were even run) were manipulated.
I wonder where HurleyBird is to preach to us how the methodology of those benches should invalidate the results.
Where can I download this global illumination demo?
BTW I think those of you who still believe these DT benches should look at what those who are still under NDA have had to say:
http://forums.amd.com/forum/messageview...STARTPAGE=20&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
I think it's interesting that DT would compare an underclocked XTX (750MHz core vs 800MHz, which is what the clock apparently will be) to a heavily overclocked GTX (650/2000 vs 575/1800).
Originally posted by: Extelleron
Originally posted by: Matt2
Originally posted by: Zstream
You know if you stopped using those silly things people would respect you more.
Here are somemore benchmarks More Benchmarks
They are using windows Vista with a few DX10 demo's. No idea about driver settings, I am still looking.
I have a GTX and GTS but I will not touch vista at all. Anyone willing to verify these scores with vista and a GTS/GTX using 1600*1200 8xAA and 16xAF?
Also if you can please download the global illumination demo and test and show us some SS of the test. I would like these verified if possible ASAP so I can say they are fake or possibly correct.
Haha.
We're supposed to believe "AMD ATI officiall test slide" from a site called r800.blogspot.com, but DT is full of crap?
Good one.
Although I do agree with you that someone should download the demo and verify the G80 scores. However, since it's an "AMD ATI officiall test slide", we have no way of knowing how badly the results (if any were even run) were manipulated.
I wonder where HurleyBird is to preach to us how the methodology of those benches should invalidate the results.
Where can I download this global illumination demo?
BTW I think those of you who still believe these DT benches should look at what those who are still under NDA have had to say:
http://forums.amd.com/forum/messageview...STARTPAGE=20&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
I think it's interesting that DT would compare an underclocked XTX (750MHz core vs 800MHz, which is what the clock apparently will be) to a heavily overclocked GTX (650/2000 vs 575/1800).
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: Extelleron
Originally posted by: Matt2
Originally posted by: Zstream
You know if you stopped using those silly things people would respect you more.
Here are somemore benchmarks More Benchmarks
They are using windows Vista with a few DX10 demo's. No idea about driver settings, I am still looking.
I have a GTX and GTS but I will not touch vista at all. Anyone willing to verify these scores with vista and a GTS/GTX using 1600*1200 8xAA and 16xAF?
Also if you can please download the global illumination demo and test and show us some SS of the test. I would like these verified if possible ASAP so I can say they are fake or possibly correct.
Haha.
We're supposed to believe "AMD ATI officiall test slide" from a site called r800.blogspot.com, but DT is full of crap?
Good one.
Although I do agree with you that someone should download the demo and verify the G80 scores. However, since it's an "AMD ATI officiall test slide", we have no way of knowing how badly the results (if any were even run) were manipulated.
I wonder where HurleyBird is to preach to us how the methodology of those benches should invalidate the results.
Where can I download this global illumination demo?
BTW I think those of you who still believe these DT benches should look at what those who are still under NDA have had to say:
http://forums.amd.com/forum/messageview...STARTPAGE=20&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
I think it's interesting that DT would compare an underclocked XTX (750MHz core vs 800MHz, which is what the clock apparently will be) to a heavily overclocked GTX (650/2000 vs 575/1800).
why the HELL would *anyone* believe a "fansite" as a "choice" over another established HW website?
the people under NDA are not saying anything ... their friends are
don't forget ... AMD is supposed to have better drivers ... nvidia will also
--nvidia announces a new card the day XT is released
are we even expecting the XTX for another couple of months?
and DX10 games are not an "issue" ... ALL the coming games *this* year are DX9c with added "dx10 features" ... by next year both 8900 and r660 [hopefully] will tacked "real dx10 games"
:thumbsup:Originally posted by: Ackmed
Skipping over and blocking are two different things. Especially when a single post is twice as big as my monitor, and its 24". Makes for lots of scrolling. Id like to block a few on here, but you cant do that. Nothing against you, but your posting style is very annoying. 5 words per line, half in italics, other ones with asterisk's, half a dozen faces.. sigh. Just post in a normal paragraph already...
Originally posted by: Extelleron
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: Extelleron
Originally posted by: Matt2
Originally posted by: Zstream
You know if you stopped using those silly things people would respect you more.
Here are somemore benchmarks More Benchmarks
They are using windows Vista with a few DX10 demo's. No idea about driver settings, I am still looking.
I have a GTX and GTS but I will not touch vista at all. Anyone willing to verify these scores with vista and a GTS/GTX using 1600*1200 8xAA and 16xAF?
Also if you can please download the global illumination demo and test and show us some SS of the test. I would like these verified if possible ASAP so I can say they are fake or possibly correct.
Haha.
We're supposed to believe "AMD ATI officiall test slide" from a site called r800.blogspot.com, but DT is full of crap?
Good one.
Although I do agree with you that someone should download the demo and verify the G80 scores. However, since it's an "AMD ATI officiall test slide", we have no way of knowing how badly the results (if any were even run) were manipulated.
I wonder where HurleyBird is to preach to us how the methodology of those benches should invalidate the results.
Where can I download this global illumination demo?
BTW I think those of you who still believe these DT benches should look at what those who are still under NDA have had to say:
http://forums.amd.com/forum/messageview...STARTPAGE=20&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
I think it's interesting that DT would compare an underclocked XTX (750MHz core vs 800MHz, which is what the clock apparently will be) to a heavily overclocked GTX (650/2000 vs 575/1800).
why the HELL would *anyone* believe a "fansite" as a "choice" over another established HW website?
the people under NDA are not saying anything ... their friends are
don't forget ... AMD is supposed to have better drivers ... nvidia will also
--nvidia announces a new card the day XT is released
are we even expecting the XTX for another couple of months?
and DX10 games are not an "issue" ... ALL the coming games *this* year are DX9c with added "dx10 features" ... by next year both 8900 and r660 [hopefully] will tacked "real dx10 games"
DX10 games DO matter. DX10 games are coming this year, in limited quantities but it is an issue. Crysis, one of the biggest games of the year, is coming and it will have some DX10 support... according to the developers of Crysis the HD 2900XTX is currently slightly faster than the 8800GTX in the most recent builds... I think this is a shining example of my belief that ATI makes cards that will perform better in the long run, if you want your GPU to last a while, get an ATI card.
65 nmWe feel that R600 will be one of the most important products this year, especially for AMD. People have been talking and waiting for far too long now, and AMD has zero space for failure this time. They took a very big "leap of faith" to switch to 65nm and with the whole merger, so let's see what happens. ATi, now division of AMD has been known for their "delayed launches" for quite awhile now. Let's hope everything is ok now and that actual product is around the corner. We'll bring you more details and info soon...
Originally posted by: xSkyDrAx
Originally posted by: Ackmed
Originally posted by: apoppin
seriously ... unless i get addressed by you i *never* read your posts
somehow i already know exactly what you are gonna say and what "side" you are gonna take
:roll:
nothing against you but your posts also annoy the crap outta me
... but i didn't want to mention it
--first
Doubtful. What side I took? Yeah, I took the 'wait and see side'. Unlike most people in this thread, which have already made an opinion on unfounded numbers, either way. Sure I prefer ATi, everyone prefers one side or the other, no matter if they admit it or not.
One day you're going to have to go out in the real world, and make a real paragraphs that are comprehendable...
Originally posted by: HurleyBird
Originally posted by: apoppin
we ARE waiting
The smart people are waiting. The less smart have already made their decisions one way or the other.
True. Sadly most are not smart enough to wait. None of these numbers prove anything to me. And they are hardly a real review. I want more that a one page article, with no mention of IQ, heat, noise, new features, etc. DT's numbers may very well be spot on, but Ill wait for real reviews to back them up. The others look even less likely.
edit, while DT didnt run these numbers themselves, they also took the bait by posting them. If you remember the whole PC Perspective debacle. Again, not saying DT is up to anything, but its just more reason for me to wait and see, from a real review.
The next best thing is always around the corner. Play the waiting game and that will be the only game you will be playing. Upgrade according to your present needs. All those people waiting on the R600 to say 'i told you so' instead of playing the games they wanted to sure are brilliant...i wonder what's their secret.
Originally posted by: apoppin
it's probably been covered
I am to lazy to click on it
what does it say?
Originally posted by: HurleyBird
Originally posted by: apoppin
it's probably been covered
I am to lazy to click on it
what does it say?
Too lazy? Then why are you even responding?
Pretty much has quotes from a shitload of people under NDA who think that the DT results are bunk. Clashes pretty completely against your "the people under NDA are not saying anything ... their friends are" (what was the reasoning behind that comment anyway?)
I am to lazy to read all the pages in this thread or if accurate.
Originally posted by: SPARTAN VI
Ouch.. Competitive pricing is their only avenue of success. If they offer the HD2900XTX (in its current state) somewhere between the 8800GTS 640 and GTX, then all that's left to hope for is a big enough case!
Originally posted by: apoppin
look at *who* i was responding to and what HE said:
I am to lazy to read all the pages in this thread or if accurate.
look at the *context* of a statement before you accuse [i saw his link long ago but wanted to make a point about HIS laziness]
:thumbsdown:
and i personally think it is courteous to at least give an "idea" of what you are talking about instead of just saying "click here"
that IS lazy
Regarding the DailyTech "benchmarks":
On a serious note, I still see some stuff out there that have no merit. Patience.
They christened the OEM version we've known and loved for quite a few months as an "XTX". That should tell you a lot about their credibility actually.
Ok, so before this goes totally out of hand, let me say this, and this will be my final say on the matter, until the NDA is lifted: AMD made certain decisions concerning this card. I took a hard look out there, to see what's being leaked, and it seems there are still some stuff that are totally made up - tbh, it smells like a FUD campaign to me, if I take into consideration certain emails that are flying around lately. Certainly there are some stuff out there that are true, and you will know which is which when the NDA lifts soonish. The journalists that were in Tunis certainly know, and are probably laughing at some of those at this minute.
...
Bum_JCRules @ THG (under NDA with cards):
Total Crap.. well almost:
While I am required to follow the NDA, the stuff up on Daily Tech today is almost worthless. Yes Anandtech was present in Tunisia (signing Non-disclosure agreements like the Inquirer), why they are posting this stuff is beyond me because their numbers are off. They must be only using the XP drivers and OS because the numbers in CF vs the GTX are very much different. So until I can officially comment on the architecture and the performance.. hold all of this as useless until the rest of the world writes about it.
I really would love to comment on this stuff...
I understand that DT and Anand are seperate but that is so childish. Derek was there and his cards got to his place of business before he returned home from Tunisia. That long board they have ... Not what Derek should have gotten in his delivery. That is all I will say before I go too far.
Kink (under NDA with cards):
Dailytechs benchmarks are inaccurate. Atleast in terms of 3dmark 06 (commenting on HD 2900 XT)
Metro.cl (under NDA with cards): www.chilehardware.com
laughable (whistling emoticon (wasn't me))
BenchZowner (under NDA and has card):
1) These benchies from DailyTech are quite off the reality, that's all I can say.
2)The 2900XTX & the 8800GTX are performing on par in Crysis at the moment ( direct info from a developer of the game )
3) Is it a deja-vu ? Remember the Mr Sanders case ? The...non invited to the press event at Ibiza editor of Hardware Analysis who wanted to "punish" ATi by publishing his...numbers of desire for the R580 ? He he, Deja-Vu
http://i12.tinypic.com/2py29hz.png
"Do I really have to express myself here ?
If these guys are so called my colleagues ( as of being reviewers like me ) then I should feel ashamed, really
What are we looking at here ?
a) They used a better test system today, better drivers ( supposed to be ) and they managed to get the 2900XT to perform worse than their previews bench session with a worse test system & worse drivers ?
How come ?
On April 24 they got 84FPS on F.E.A.R. with the 2900XT with a QX6700 and pre-release drivers, and they got 79FPS today with a QX6800 and retail drivers ? Oh really ?
b) Where's the result for the 2900XT in Company Of Heroes today ? Why N/A ?
c) On Half-Life 2:E1 today they got the 2900XT to score 1FPS more than the 2900XTX.
What could've caused this ? A typo ? Quite angelic.
Something else ? Using a CPU limited resolution which would cause both cards to behave like they're the same? And then there's the GTX surpassing the R600s by ~40 FPS. Quite the real leap over the Radeon X1950XTX at that game. :evil: ? heh
d) Now, the best part...they scored ~48FPS in Oblivion on the 24th, and now they present us a 54FPS gain by a move from the QX6700 to the QX6800 and the small gain from running the RAM at 1T Command Rate ?
e) A reviewer in order to conduct comparable and a valuable & trustworthy review must use the same testbed, quite they opposite is what they did ( if they really went through a performance testing process )
f) And for what reason would somebody present unclear results in combination with unclear drivers & filters ( AF & AA ) settings ?
***** right boy
My two cents ( oh wait, I have another one ) [ I'll save it for later ]
P.S. The stock core clock for the 2900XTX as of current is 800MHz and not 745MHz as they state.
P.S.2. That's pretty much all I can say at the moment.
P.S.3. Now I have to finish a memory roundup and then pack my stuff for a trip.
What did Crysis lead Developer (has the cards) say about the two (G80GTX and R600XT)?
And remember, Crysis is a DX9 game with an additional DirectX 10 codepath which will only help in getting better performance (gains) for the ones with DX10 cards.
28th April:
I'm gonna spit out a very last detail ( before they get me behind the bars for disclosing information )
The 2900XTX is 4fps in front of the 8800GTX ( in average ) in Crysis ( information directly from a developer of the game )
The 2900XTX won't be the G80 killer that everybody was expecting, but it'll be in front in most cases, with little to good margins depending on the game and settings.
nVIDIA did a great job with the G80 this time, and the performance leap over the previous generation is huge and only compared to the R300 launch in the past
That's STOCK clocks guys, it can OC high
BTW, from Fudzilla by "mouth": GeForce 8800 Ultra get 14000 scores in 3DMARK06 with no detail of test platform and no driver detail:
http://www.fudzilla.com/index....=view&id=678&Itemid=1
From DailyTech: Radeon HD 2900XT get 14005 scores in 3DMARK06 with full detail of test platform and driver detail:
http://www.dailytech.com/Overc...+R600/article7044.htm
AND NONE of them are with with release drivers, look at the GPU clocks very carefully aswell, look for the silicon version, look at the benchmarks used aswell and the detail in each setting (compare), look at the motherboard used too and that 8800GTX is no where to be found BUT by BFG at $950 as a watercooled card. PLUS those are EARLY pre-release sample cards, ES samples if you understand what that means and do you remember the abysmal performance of the faulty 8800GTX early ES samples with the wrong resistor values on release? What about the driver optimization that took place over months on end to get decent performance? Joe is on the JEDEC board BTW, and an AMD/ATi employee who helped produce GDDR4 for X1950XTX and made it a killer product so now you are telling me after 2 years spent on it like nVidia had spent 4 years on the G80, and millions of dollars, it simply doesn't beat the X1950 in benchmarks and no higher clock on the GDDR4? BTW, those benchmarks are not remotely correct either. We have 100's of GTX split around in our corporation and my own work system has 2 in SLi at 650/2100 with watercooling. Seriously, some of them benchmarks for let's say Oblivion, are 100% increased by h*ll knows what!
Hint #200: Memory clocks can go much higher and bandwidth (i.e. performance too) is much greater in upcoming titles and higher res/detail.
BTW the owner of Fudzilla, Fuad, is the ex-Graphics Editor of The Inquirer if you didn't already know. Take everything with a brick of salt.
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: HurleyBird
Originally posted by: apoppin
it's probably been covered
I am to lazy to click on it
what does it say?
Too lazy? Then why are you even responding?
Pretty much has quotes from a shitload of people under NDA who think that the DT results are bunk. Clashes pretty completely against your "the people under NDA are not saying anything ... their friends are" (what was the reasoning behind that comment anyway?)
look at *who* i was responding to and what HE said:
I am to lazy to read all the pages in this thread or if accurate.
look at the *context* of a statement before you accuse [i saw his link long ago but wanted to make a point about HIS laziness]
:thumbsdown:
and i personally think it is courteous to at least give an "idea" of what you are talking about instead of just saying "click here"
that IS lazy
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Even if it does end up outperforming the G80 by a small amount, as some others have reported, it's too little, too late. Most of the high-end gamers have already grabbed a G80 because they were tired of the waiting, and have been enjoying playing games maxed out since.
Originally posted by: yacoub
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Even if it does end up outperforming the G80 by a small amount, as some others have reported, it's too little, too late. Most of the high-end gamers have already grabbed a G80 because they were tired of the waiting, and have been enjoying playing games maxed out since.
"Most"? Maybe "some". Some are still waiting because their 7900 series / X1900 series cards run their games today just fine and were in no rush to spend hundreds on an 8800 series card especially since the R600 series would be out soon to not only offer an alternative but also push down the 8800 series prices a bit.
Originally posted by: aigomorla
*sigh*
looks like im staying with crappy 680i
And looks like i'll be putting the orders on 2 x 8950 or 8900's when they come out.
i was really hoping the ATI solution would be far superior. But i guess were stuck with buggy ass hardware and promised stability, when their isnt any.
However, lately ive been really happy with my system.
She's been WCGing non stop for 3 days straight. No errors reported yet. That itself has its own weight.
Originally posted by: yacoub
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Even if it does end up outperforming the G80 by a small amount, as some others have reported, it's too little, too late. Most of the high-end gamers have already grabbed a G80 because they were tired of the waiting, and have been enjoying playing games maxed out since.
"Most"? Maybe "some". Some are still waiting because their 7900 series / X1900 series cards run their games today just fine and were in no rush to spend hundreds on an 8800 series card especially since the R600 series would be out soon to not only offer an alternative but also push down the 8800 series prices a bit.
Your absolutely right. I knew NVidia would pull another 7800/7900 scenario, so i skiped the 8800 series entirely.
The 8800 series is a heavy piece of equiptment, but it has a hugh price on it. That price is HEAT.
A 8800GTX system on SLI can push out MORE heat then a heavily overclocked Kentsfield. Im talking of heat ranges in ~ 400W.
F that. I'll just wait for their little sisters on a smaller die sitting to arrive. There isnt any DX10 games out yet that takes advantage of it.
So no thanks... my e6600 and stupid NB 680i are already furnaces..
Originally posted by: CrystalBay
"The four hundred thousand that pulled the trigger on a $600.00 DX10 card. The four million that will pull the trigger on a $400.00 DX10 card with 350MB driver that include daily updated embedded porn , Priceless...."
Originally posted by: Laminator
Radeon HD X2900 is slightly faster than 8800? nVidia releases a super-fast next-gen card, then ATi releases a slightly faster next-gen card, then nVidia releases a faster refresh? Sheesh, the video card market is so boring and predictable these days. We need something exciting to happen, like...
1. One of the big two tanking under a pile of lawsuits after it is discovered that their cards are susceptible to violent and spontaneous combustion after six months of use.
2. Corporate-espionage-wars, where ATi and nVidia both employ attractive corporate hooker-spies to extract secrets from rival card engineers by sleeping with them. Or trained monkeys that can break into the development offices of rival companies and swipe prototype cards.
3. Matrox coming back with the Parhelia X3950GTX Ultra, a low-profile, passively-cooled card that has the capacity to power 16 30" LCD monitors simultaneously.
4. Instead of designing video cards, product engineers at both ATi and nVidia design a 12-foot tall battle robot. They fight in an arena and the creator of the winner gets exclusive worldwide distributing rights for video cards until the next generation.