Prey Benchmarks Are In!

[BFG10K]

Gosh, you are a silly little fellow, aren't you?

Are you going to frame all of those dear little pictures you like taking of my posts? :roll:

Firstly, what exactly are you trying to do here, other than get yourself banned for blatant trolling that is?

Secondly, why does it appear that you don't even read or comprehend what you respond to but instead reply with random answers?

 

[BFG10K]

YOU came in and posted

That would be in response to what I quoted you, which probably explains your confusion given you appear to have issues with reading.

You then started gunning for SLI performance:

The ATi card just barely beats a7900GTX, not a 7950GT or any SLi card,

After which you flip-flopped back to single cards:

Mate, you are the one who told us about the benchmark between a 7900GTX & X1900 XTX

It's like arguing with an intoxicated individual.

 

[Gstanfor]

The only time I mentioned SLi in this entire thread was in response to you implying that I endorse the 7950. I challenge you to find one single post of me endorsing SLi or the 7950 anywhere on the internet (good luck with that...)

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Gstandfor just quit it. Drop your pants for the nvidia engys :heart: and leave!

 

[Gstanfor]

You then started gunning for SLI performance:

quote:
The ATi card just barely beats a7900GTX, not a 7950GT or any SLi card,


After which you flip-flopped back to single cards:

I didn't flip-flop at all!, nor did I "gun for SLi results", the results you posted were between 7900 GTX & X1900XTX, therefore the only thing the X1900XTX could have possibly beaten *was* the 7900 GTX and not a 7950 or any other SLi combo.

You are the only intoxicated individual around here if you got me arguing in favor of SLi from what was posted above and from your original post...

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
To me it means ATi has to throw vastly more resources at a problem than nvidia does

Then BFG10K commented with how Nvidia added another whole GPU to their previous single card, a "vastly more resourceful" (as in using more resources than the orignial single GPU and improved drivers) way to gain performance. That is what he meant by:

Orignially posted by: BFG10K
You mean like slapping two 7900GTs onto one 7950 so they could claim the "single card" performance crown?

If Nvidia would have been more effecient about it, why wouldn't they make drivers that would keep their OpenGL lead ahead of ATI?

You did bring up the fact that it doesn't compete with a 7950GX2 or any SLI card:

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
The ATi card just barely beats a7900GTX, not a 7950GT or any SLi card

We're not trying to say that you're endorsing the things, but rather that for the sake of argument you did bring them up in the thread when you said

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
I bloody well did'nt bring up SLI!!!

Whether you did it first or not isn't the point since BFG10K only brought up the 7950 to explain the "vastly more resourceful" theory of yours.


Not saying that the 7950 is bad and all, but the fact is that ATI has done significantly better with their drivers pertaining to OpenGL performance. You have been in here from the begining discrediting this performance improvement that for so long has been the mockery of ATI. Now when they actually yeild improvements, you still want to discredit their efforts? From development relations, to fanATIc bias within the benchmark site, even to a "shader replacement thing" you have tried to distort/discredit this improvement. Stop trolling.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
To me it means ATi has to throw vastly more resources at a problem than nvidia does

Then BFG10K commented with how Nvidia added another whole GPU to their previous single card, a "vastly more resourceful" (as in using more resources than the orignial single GPU and improved drivers) way to gain performance. That is what he meant by:

Orignially posted by: BFG10K
You mean like slapping two 7900GTs onto one 7950 so they could claim the "single card" performance crown?

If Nvidia would have been more effecient about it, why wouldn't they make drivers that would keep their OpenGL lead ahead of ATI?

You did bring up the fact that it doesn't compete with a 7950GX2 or any SLI card:

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
The ATi card just barely beats a7900GTX, not a 7950GT or any SLi card

We're not trying to say that you're endorsing the things, but rather that for the sake of argument you did bring them up in the thread when you said

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
I bloody well did'nt bring up SLI!!!

Whether you did it first or not isn't the point since BFG10K only brought up the 7950 to explain the "vastly more resourceful" theory of yours.


Not saying that the 7950 is bad and all, but the fact is that ATI has done significantly better with their drivers pertaining to OpenGL performance. You have been in here from the begining discrediting this performance improvement that for so long has been the mockery of ATI. Now when they actually yeild improvements, you still want to discredit their efforts? From development relations, to fanATIc bias within the benchmark site, even to a "shader replacement thing" you have tried to distort/discredit this improvement. Stop trolling.

Why are you trying to reason with this fool? He isn't interested in Prey performance, he's interested in an argument. This is obvious by the fact that there is a 6 page thread over about what amounts a 4 fps difference between the two top cards at 1600x1200 4AA/8AF, both are above 50, and the game is capped at 60. The difference is negligible, and since both cards appear to have crappy AA in this game, the IQ is not a deciding factor either.

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
To me it means ATi has to throw vastly more resources at a problem than nvidia does

Then BFG10K commented with how Nvidia added another whole GPU to their previous single card, a "vastly more resourceful" (as in using more resources than the orignial single GPU and improved drivers) way to gain performance. That is what he meant by:

Orignially posted by: BFG10K
You mean like slapping two 7900GTs onto one 7950 so they could claim the "single card" performance crown?

If Nvidia would have been more effecient about it, why wouldn't they make drivers that would keep their OpenGL lead ahead of ATI?

You did bring up the fact that it doesn't compete with a 7950GX2 or any SLI card:

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
The ATi card just barely beats a7900GTX, not a 7950GT or any SLi card

We're not trying to say that you're endorsing the things, but rather that for the sake of argument you did bring them up in the thread when you said

Originally posted by: Gstandfor
I bloody well did'nt bring up SLI!!!

Whether you did it first or not isn't the point since BFG10K only brought up the 7950 to explain the "vastly more resourceful" theory of yours.


Not saying that the 7950 is bad and all, but the fact is that ATI has done significantly better with their drivers pertaining to OpenGL performance. You have been in here from the begining discrediting this performance improvement that for so long has been the mockery of ATI. Now when they actually yeild improvements, you still want to discredit their efforts? From development relations, to fanATIc bias within the benchmark site, even to a "shader replacement thing" you have tried to distort/discredit this improvement. Stop trolling.

Why are you trying to reason with this fool? He isn't interested in Prey performance, he's interested in an argument. This is obvious by the fact that there is a 6 page thread over about what amounts a 4 fps difference between the two top cards at 1600x1200 4AA/8AF, both are above 50, and the game is capped at 60. The difference is negligible, and since both cards appear to have crappy AA in this game, the IQ is not a deciding factor either.

Sorry, you're right. I can't help but comment on underthought remarks.

 

[CKXP]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Why are you trying to reason with this fool? He isn't interested in Prey performance, he's interested in an argument. This is obvious by the fact that there is a 6 page thread over about what amounts a 4 fps difference between the two top cards at 1600x1200 4AA/8AF, both are above 50, and the game is capped at 60. The difference is negligible, and since both cards appear to have crappy AA in this game, the IQ is not a deciding factor either.[/quote]

QFT....the only worth while post in this thread

 

[Bull Dog]

Originally posted by: Nightmare225
You understand that Prey uses a DirectX version of the Doom 3 engine? OpenGl has little or nothing to do with this...

That my friend is BS!

Originally posted by: BFG10K

You understand that Prey uses a DirectX version of the Doom 3 engine?

I believe this has been proven to be false; I'm 99% certain it's OpenGL.

It is OpenGL and I can prove it too.

 

[Bull Dog]

Originally posted by: gersson
Gstandfor just quit it. Drop your pants for the nvidia engys :heart: and leave!

Hey, you have to give the real nVIDIOTS credit for at least one thing; their complete lack of the ability to carry on a decent conversation without resorting to name calling.

 

[weeds]

Ratchet at Rage3D has some prey benchmarks up.
http://www.rage3d.com/articles/preydemoperf/index.php?p=1

 

[TanisHalfElven]

well pushing aside the large number of insultying replies i'd like to make to SOME participants in this thread...

i'm really impressed with ati's drivers AND prey. the game looks absolutly stunning and is vewry playable on my x800gt with 4xAA and 16xAF. amazing. i'll be trying adaptive AA next time to check the performce hit. BTW i have not played the dempo much (only installed it 1.5 hour ago) but where is this time demo i keep hearing about.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: weeds
Ratchet at Rage3D has some prey benchmarks up.
http://www.rage3d.com/articles/preydemoperf/index.php?p=1

That's a nice review. Very comprehensive set of settings tested.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Its only the demo... both camps hasnt even released any drivers to give any performance boost to this game.

lets just wait for the game to be released?

 

[BFG10K]

i'll be trying adaptive AA next time to check the performce hit.

There will be none because it doesn't work in OpenGL (neither does nVidia's transparency AA).

 

[Gstanfor]

Yes, the specular aliasing (creates nasty fresnel ring arcs everywhere) on the grilled floors and elsewhere really get to me in Doom3 and I was hoping T:AA would fix this, unfortunately it has no effect whatsoever.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
It would hardly be possible for it to deteriorate much further so it had no place to go but up...

Must you troll in every thread you participate in?

Personally I suspect Humus has been at the old shader replacement thing again

That's quite an interesting theory given 6.5 pre-dates Prey.

This would therefore be unlike Tomb Raider (and many other harped TWIMTBP titles) where nVidia has to rush emergency beta drivers because they can't even meet basic rendering requirements like a stutter-free experience for user. :roll:

Being the doom 3 engine its likely the same optomizations for doom and quake would work for prey.

 

[Thorny]

Originally posted by: tanishalfelven
well pushing aside the large number of insultying replies i'd like to make to SOME participants in this thread...

i'm really impressed with ati's drivers AND prey. the game looks absolutly stunning and is vewry playable on my x800gt with 4xAA and 16xAF. amazing. i'll be trying adaptive AA next time to check the performce hit. BTW i have not played the dempo much (only installed it 1.5 hour ago) but where is this time demo i keep hearing about.

There is a benchmark function but no timedemo map included. You have to either create a map yourself or download one from somewhere. If you look and find a good one, please link to it, I didn't find one last night...

 

[lopri]

ATI has always had equal (or better) hardware than NV's. Their software team (and management) screw things up.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: lopri
ATI has always had equal (or better) hardware than NV's. Their software team (and management) screw things up.

6xxx series vs x8xx series? Seriously? Or, more laughably, the x850xt series vs the 7800GT/GTX...

Besides that, looking at benches of doom3 even with the newest cats, the x850xts get beat by or only narrowly eclipse the 6800GT despite having an enourmous advantage in fill rate and a more modest bandwidth advantage. Before the x18xx series, ATI had a hardware deficiency in OpenGL titles, pure and simple. The proof is even linked in this thread.

But now it appears to have be rectified, which is awesome in my book. If ATI had quiet coolers and lower power draw, I would pick up one of there new highend cards in a heart beat.

As it is, my $125 x850xt is doing a remarkable job, 30-50 FPS in HL2 EP1 @ 1440*900 full HDR and details and supposedly 4xAA 16xAF (not sure if AA is on while HDR is going in the Source, haven't investigated it yet).

When Prey comes out, I made need another upgrade, but I hope I can make my self wait for the refreshes that have to be coming. I am hoping for a x1700xt with 256 bit 512 megs DDR3 and something like a 12/24 configuration at ~650/700 clockspeeds and a big quiet cooler for ~$200. I can dream, can't I?

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: lopri
ATI has always had equal (or better) hardware than NV's. Their software team (and management) screw things up.

6xxx series vs x8xx series? Seriously? Or, more laughably, the x850xt series vs the 7800GT/GTX...

Whats more laughable, is that youa re trying to compare the X850XT vs. a 7800 card or any kind. They are not direct competitors. That would be the X1800XL and X1800XT.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: lopri
ATI has always had equal (or better) hardware than NV's. Their software team (and management) screw things up.

6xxx series vs x8xx series? Seriously? Or, more laughably, the x850xt series vs the 7800GT/GTX...

Whats more laughable, is that youa re trying to compare the X850XT vs. a 7800 card or any kind. They are not direct competitors. That would be the X1800XL and X1800XT.

Were they launched directly against those cards on anything but? I didn't think so... there was a gap of several months in there where nvidia was very clearly superior... and what made them so late? Hardware issues, naturally, not management OR software. Just taking issue with Lopris assertion, nothing more.

What is too bad is that the x850xt did compete against the 7800GT, in price point and as ATI's performance leader for so long. Oh well...

The x1800xt vs 7800 is a much more interesting battle, and I would have to say ATI retook the crown then.

Nat

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: blckgrffn
As it is, my $125 x850xt is doing a remarkable job, 30-50 FPS in HL2 EP1 @ 1440*900 full HDR and details and supposedly 4xAA 16xAF (not sure if AA is on while HDR is going in the Source, haven't investigated it yet).

Half Life uses a different form of HDR, not FP16 HDR like in FarCry and Serious Sam 2. Valve's version of HDR can be run at the same time as AA on any card(unlike FP16 HDR + AA which can only be done on ATi X1K cards) so you probably are getting both.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: blckgrffn
As it is, my $125 x850xt is doing a remarkable job, 30-50 FPS in HL2 EP1 @ 1440*900 full HDR and details and supposedly 4xAA 16xAF (not sure if AA is on while HDR is going in the Source, haven't investigated it yet).

Half Life uses a different form of HDR, not FP16 HDR like in FarCry and Serious Sam 2. Valve's version of HDR can be run at the same time as AA on any card(unlike FP16 HDR + AA which can only be done on ATi X1K cards) so you probably are getting both.

Sweet It's nice that such powerful cards are so cheap now. I like ATI's stance to older cards, its like they what they did with the 9800 Pro. Makes you wonder why they even bother to make a midrange card... how long before X800XT's are $150? Hopefully not to long, though I doubt they will continue to make the 512 verisions of the card.