HD 2900XTX Benches

[ShadowOfMyself]

Hum.... Very disappointing but I want to see AA and HDR tested, everyone knows Nvidia has always had more "Raw" power, and Ati more "efficient" AA performance

Oh and, yay for testing stock 2900 agaisnt overclocked 8800 :roll:

 

[otispunkmeyer]

5mhz on the core is hardly worth paying extra for..... sure its got more and faster memory, but honestly i dont think thats were we're headed....its all going to be about computational power. more core speed please.

eitherway it doesnt seem to scale too well with core bumps anyway.... i mean 100mhz on the core yeilded less than 500 point increase in 3dmark. hardly worth the effort.
but it needs to come pushing way over 800mhz IMO

still we dont know what DX10 performance is like...for all we know G80 could do another FX5800 (remember it was good at DX8 but poor at DX9 which at the time was barely out)
and R600 could be top dog.

EDIT: good god look at the size of it! how many cases is that gonna fit in? least thats not the retail one lol, and they did use a factory OC'd 8800GTX

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: Matt2
:Q

Holy moly donut shop!

Wow. Bust of the century.

If true, DAAMIT has a true FX 5800u on their hands.

Yep that's what came to mind when I saw that though I'll hold off judgment until I see benchmarks for final silicon with release drivers. If the XTX does indeed suck this bad, ATi better start working on a R600 GX2 type of board right away.

 

[MrJim]

The core of the XTX version, is it 65nm or 80nm?

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Hum.... Very disappointing but I want to see AA and HDR tested, everyone knows Nvidia has always had more "Raw" power, and Ati more "efficient" AA performance

Oh and, yay for testing stock 2900 agaisnt overclocked 8800 :roll:

Before anyone asks, the quality settings for the games were as follows:

Company of Heroes - High shader quality, High model quality, Anti-aliasing enabled (in game), Ultra texture quality, high quality shadows, high quality reflections, Post processing On, High building detail, High physics, high tree quality, High terrain detail, Ultra effects fidelity, Ultra effects density, Object scarring enabled and the model detail slider all the way to the right.

F.E.A.R. - 4x FSAA (in game), maximum light details, shadows enabled, maximum shadow details, soft shadows enabled, 16x anisotropic filtering, maximum texture resolution, maximum videos, maximum shader quality.

Half Life 2: Episode 1 - High model detail, high texture detail, high shader detail, reflect all water details, high shadow detail, 4x multi-sample AA (in-game), 16x anisotropic filtering, v-sync disabled, full high-dynamic range.

Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion ? Preset ultra quality settings. The scene used was where you?re at the end of the tunnel and run outside for a little bit.

I'm sorry, but turning up the AA isnt going to make up for 20 fps deficits.

 

[HigherGround]

Oh and, yay for testing stock 2900 agaisnt overclocked 8800 :roll:

why is everybody bitchin' and moaning about that. This is exactly what happens when you get late to a party, you end up going against the fastest RETAIL card available, not a REFERENCE design.

 

[hardwareking]

hasn't anyone considered the possibility of poor drivers which is making performance seem like crap?
maybe by release time drivers wuda gotten better

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Hum.... Very disappointing but I want to see AA and HDR tested, everyone knows Nvidia has always had more "Raw" power, and Ati more "efficient" AA performance

Oh and, yay for testing stock 2900 agaisnt overclocked 8800 :roll:

Before anyone asks, the quality settings for the games were as follows:

Company of Heroes - High shader quality, High model quality, Anti-aliasing enabled (in game), Ultra texture quality, high quality shadows, high quality reflections, Post processing On, High building detail, High physics, high tree quality, High terrain detail, Ultra effects fidelity, Ultra effects density, Object scarring enabled and the model detail slider all the way to the right.

F.E.A.R. - 4x FSAA (in game), maximum light details, shadows enabled, maximum shadow details, soft shadows enabled, 16x anisotropic filtering, maximum texture resolution, maximum videos, maximum shader quality.

Half Life 2: Episode 1 - High model detail, high texture detail, high shader detail, reflect all water details, high shadow detail, 4x multi-sample AA (in-game), 16x anisotropic filtering, v-sync disabled, full high-dynamic range.

Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion ? Preset ultra quality settings. The scene used was where you?re at the end of the tunnel and run outside for a little bit.

I'm sorry, but turning up the AA isnt going to make up for 20 fps deficits.

Where did you read that?

Well, of course it wont, thats why I said its very disappointing... And now according to fudzilla, the mid/low end was pulled to June... Looks like AMD is pulling a Sony

 

[Pugnate]

Even better drivers won't catch up that much. This is a massive disappointment. I can't believe it.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Hum.... Very disappointing but I want to see AA and HDR tested, everyone knows Nvidia has always had more "Raw" power, and Ati more "efficient" AA performance

Oh and, yay for testing stock 2900 agaisnt overclocked 8800 :roll:

thats pretty old man, times have changed, that used to be the case yes, but now.... i dont think it is to be honest.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: hardwareking
hasn't anyone considered the possibility of poor drivers which is making performance seem like crap?
maybe by release time drivers wuda gotten better

Of course we have.

This is where AMD's spouting off about how great R600 is going to be is going to backfire on them badly.

Vijay Sharma, Director of Product Marketing for AMD, is on record saying that AMD's Vista drivers are rock solid and ready to go.

AMD itself has claimed many times that they "could ship R600 today". With this bad of drivers?

If it is due to drivers, then AMD has even less of a clue than Nvidia on how to program drivers.

 

[Aberforth]

Originally posted by: Pugnate
Even better drivers won't catch up that much. This is a massive disappointment. I can't believe it.

Why are you so sad you've got GTX...I'm quite happy with this news

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Hum.... Very disappointing but I want to see AA and HDR tested, everyone knows Nvidia has always had more "Raw" power, and Ati more "efficient" AA performance

Oh and, yay for testing stock 2900 agaisnt overclocked 8800 :roll:

Before anyone asks, the quality settings for the games were as follows:

Company of Heroes - High shader quality, High model quality, Anti-aliasing enabled (in game), Ultra texture quality, high quality shadows, high quality reflections, Post processing On, High building detail, High physics, high tree quality, High terrain detail, Ultra effects fidelity, Ultra effects density, Object scarring enabled and the model detail slider all the way to the right.

F.E.A.R. - 4x FSAA (in game), maximum light details, shadows enabled, maximum shadow details, soft shadows enabled, 16x anisotropic filtering, maximum texture resolution, maximum videos, maximum shader quality.

Half Life 2: Episode 1 - High model detail, high texture detail, high shader detail, reflect all water details, high shadow detail, 4x multi-sample AA (in-game), 16x anisotropic filtering, v-sync disabled, full high-dynamic range.

Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion ? Preset ultra quality settings. The scene used was where you?re at the end of the tunnel and run outside for a little bit.

I'm sorry, but turning up the AA isnt going to make up for 20 fps deficits.

Where did you read that?

Well, of course it wont, thats why I said its very disappointing... And now according to fudzilla, the mid/low end was pulled to June... Looks like AMD is pulling a Sony

It's under the benches in the comments. It was posted by a guy from DailyTech.

 

[josh6079]

God, 2007 has really sucked for us gamers so far.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: HigherGround

Oh and, yay for testing stock 2900 agaisnt overclocked 8800 :roll:

why is everybody bitchin' and moaning about that. This is exactly what happens when you get late to a party, you end up going against the fastest RETAIL card available, not a REFERENCE design.

not only that they didnt have time to go find a stock card.

what would you rather them do? produce 1 or 2 tests while they fanny'd around looking for a stock card or downlcocking the one they had on a machine which might not even be theirs or do you wan them to get cracking on some numbers?

seems to me DT are damned if they do and damned if they dont.

people would complain of lack of benches, or they would complain of rushed benches....sorry but given the time frame they had, they did the best they could.

still its not that big an overclock and some ones already pointed out that even at stock it still had no hope of beating the 8800GTX (little bit of extrapolation tho)

and higher ground is right.

ok it might be fair to do stock to stock, but the fact of the matter is, when you go to buy a 8800GTX you cant help but trip over countless vendor tuned models....infact i know shops where thats the only choice you have..... BFG OC's. EVGA superclocked KO's, golden samples etc etc. whats the point in benchin it against a stock 8800 when thats not what people are buying?

what they should be testing really is popular cards, or testing at the same price point. for me its all about bang for buck. if Nvidia have the faster card at the time simply because EVGA overclocked it for me...thats the one ill buy, im not interested that stock vs stock it isnt the fastest because im not gonna go home and then turn the wick down on cool bits am i?

this is just simply the price ATi must pay for being late. OC'd editions are the cards of choice for 8800 buyers...thats just a fact, ATi will only have refrence clocked cards to sell..and if past experience is anything to go by thats all they'll have becuase i dont think ATi have ever let vendors jimmy the clocks much if at all.

 

[chrismr]

I just wish ATI would lift there damn NDA so that we could get tests from more than just one source. If these really are accurate then it really is sad. Yes, I have an 8800GTX, but I still believe that competition is good.

And speaking of the NDA - how come DailyTech can publish their results?

 

[Pugnate]

Originally posted by: Aberforth

Originally posted by: Pugnate
Even better drivers won't catch up that much. This is a massive disappointment. I can't believe it.

Why are you so sad you've got GTX...I'm quite happy with this news

I posted my thoughts here:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=2039116&enterthread=y

Also I wanted the XTX to blow the GTX away so that I could enjoy Oblivion more on a higher rez.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: chrismr
I just wish ATI would lift there damn NDA so that we could get tests from more than just one source. If these really are accurate then it really is sad. Yes, I have an 8800GTX, but I still believe that competition is good.

And speaking of the NDA - how come DailyTech can publish their results?

AMD is currently briefing select members of the press on its R600 architecture in the Tunisia, but there is no embargo date on the R600 for DailyTech -- we can show you benchmarks now.

link

 

[tuteja1986]

Something is seriously wrong with the benchmark because if its right than a Dual X1950pro is faster than X2900XTX in those benchmark.

 

[chrismr]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Something is seriously wrong with the benchmark because if its right than a Dual X1950pro is faster than X2900XTX in those benchmark.

And if thats the case, then maybe the 1950 dual doesn't look like such a bad idea anymore - if the price is right.

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: chrismr

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Something is seriously wrong with the benchmark because if its right than a Dual X1950pro is faster than X2900XTX in those benchmark.

And if thats the case, then maybe the 1950 dual doesn't look like such a bad idea anymore - if the price is right.

I'd rather get the X2900XT since it's at least DX10.

 

[sisq0kidd]

April fools?

 

[rmed64]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: HigherGround

Oh and, yay for testing stock 2900 agaisnt overclocked 8800 :roll:

why is everybody bitchin' and moaning about that. This is exactly what happens when you get late to a party, you end up going against the fastest RETAIL card available, not a REFERENCE design.

not only that they didnt have time to go find a stock card.

what would you rather them do? produce 1 or 2 tests while they fanny'd around looking for a stock card or downlcocking the one they had on a machine which might not even be theirs or do you wan them to get cracking on some numbers?

seems to me DT are damned if they do and damned if they dont.

people would complain of lack of benches, or they would complain of rushed benches....sorry but given the time frame they had, they did the best they could.

still its not that big an overclock and some ones already pointed out that even at stock it still had no hope of beating the 8800GTX (little bit of extrapolation tho)

and higher ground is right.

ok it might be fair to do stock to stock, but the fact of the matter is, when you go to buy a 8800GTX you cant help but trip over countless vendor tuned models....infact i know shops where thats the only choice you have..... BFG OC's. EVGA superclocked KO's, golden samples etc etc. whats the point in benchin it against a stock 8800 when thats not what people are buying?

what they should be testing really is popular cards, or testing at the same price point. for me its all about bang for buck. if Nvidia have the faster card at the time simply because EVGA overclocked it for me...thats the one ill buy, im not interested that stock vs stock it isnt the fastest because im not gonna go home and then turn the wick down on cool bits am i?

this is just simply the price ATi must pay for being late. OC'd editions are the cards of choice for 8800 buyers...thats just a fact, ATi will only have refrence clocked cards to sell..and if past experience is anything to go by thats all they'll have becuase i dont think ATi have ever let vendors jimmy the clocks much if at all.

If these benches are true, there is no point in releasing the XTX, just release the XT for $399 and be done with it.

When testing, to be fair, if they are gonna use an oced GTX, they should of oced the XTX to the same percentage (if possible).

 

[defiantsf]

The other question is whose OC'ed 8800GTX did DT use? IIRC, no one has a 650MHz clocked GTX forsale atm, though end users can clock it that high themselves.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: chrismr

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
Something is seriously wrong with the benchmark because if its right than a Dual X1950pro is faster than X2900XTX in those benchmark.

And if thats the case, then maybe the 1950 dual doesn't look like such a bad idea anymore - if the price is right.

I'd rather get the X2900XT since it's at least DX10.

and if the XT can do some good video decoding and encoding then its still a good choice.
hell if it encodes DivX thats more than a reason for me to get one