R520 Benchies at HA

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Killrose
tsk tsk, H.A. you broke NDA. No more ATi cards for you.

First off what benchmarks are they using? They are calling all thier benchmarks "Custom" which leads me to believe they are in-house made benchmarks which is not good if true. Normally all other sites will use the same built in game benchmark utility.

they never signed the NDA

 

[linkgoron]

Originally posted by: Killrose
tsk tsk, H.A. you broke NDA. No more ATi cards for you.

First off what benchmarks are they using? They are calling all thier benchmarks "Custom" which leads me to believe they are in-house made benchmarks which is not good if true. Normally all other sites will use the same built in game benchmark utility.

So what? If the cards are tested on the same timedemo it it doesn't matter...

 

[compgeek89]

What custom means is they use the same program/utility but use their own recorded segment of the game.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Killrose
tsk tsk, H.A. you broke NDA. No more ATi cards for you.

First off what benchmarks are they using? They are calling all thier benchmarks "Custom" which leads me to believe they are in-house made benchmarks which is not good if true. Normally all other sites will use the same built in game benchmark utility.

Actually I'd rather have custom benches than timedemos, because Nv or Ati can make optimizations/cheats for built in timedemos, and at least one of them has been caught doing so in the past.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: linkgoron

Originally posted by: Killrose
tsk tsk, H.A. you broke NDA. No more ATi cards for you.

First off what benchmarks are they using? They are calling all thier benchmarks "Custom" which leads me to believe they are in-house made benchmarks which is not good if true. Normally all other sites will use the same built in game benchmark utility.

So what? If the cards are tested on the same timedemo it it doesn't matter...

Exactly, consistency in testing is the main thing. Additionally, creating in-house benchmarks is sort of part of the job of review sites... A monkey with a keyboard can run the included timedemo, but we read review sites because we expect them to have the knowledge to be able to construct a good test.

In the article, they mention:

With the help of a board partner we?ve been able to run the same set of benchmarks we?ve previously run on NVIDIA?s GeForce 7800GT and GTX, although we could only submit our benchmark scripts and testing configuration to them

...I would like to see them make this informarion made available to the general public.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: Richdog
Complete and utter dissappointment from ATI... what were they thinking...

Nvidia won this round...

After reading the negative stuff in that review I have my doubts about the results. HA seem to have a problem with ATI so I would wait until Anandtech release a review for a fair review.

It could be the other way around. ATI could have a problem with HA telling it like it is? Maybe?

 

[Kalessian]

I never expected the card to beat the GTX. For one reason:

nv cancelled their 7800u. I would think that they know as much about the R520 as ATi does, and they knew they were safe.

A G70 clocked at 500+ with 1400mhz RAM would utterly destroy an R520. What did they use in those tests, a reference GTX? A lot of the GTX cards people are buying are already 10% faster than reference boards.

On the other hand, I don't think the R520 will find much overclocking headroom.

 

[compgeek89]

Well the RAM should OC nicely as its rated 1600mhz

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: jasonja

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: vision33r

Originally posted by: mindgam3

Originally posted by: vision33r
It looks like ATI got their ass handed again. It looks like the new cards are only competitive against the 6800 series.

The drivers are RC, they are pretty much production quality. I expect a jump of 20% in performance when they mature somewhat but not gonna be more than 50% leap, whoever thinks that better drivers would do is just a "fool's hope" The 7800 series performance was evident even with beta drivers.

There's no question, the R520 is a dissappointment while the fanboys now will chant the "R580 will rock."

Only competitive against the 6800 series? Are you on crack it actually beats the GTX in a few of the benchmarks and always beats the 6800 except on a few of the SLI tests... And why do you have to bring fanboy crap into the post .

Yes, because it was able to beat the 6800 but not the 7800 clearly. In some benches, the 6800GT SLI was about to pull ahead comfortably.

The bad part is that with 600-700mhz, it can't beat the 7800 with 24 pipes and only 500mhz part.

What a dissappointment.

The stock core speed for the 7800 is ~430 isn't it? Can't remember, I think one of the OC 7800's would improve upon these results by quite a bit.

Who's to say you won't be able to overclock a X1800 to 700mhz?

I think ATI would have released a 700MHz XT if they could have gotten it there and stable.
From what I can tell, this card has to be very near it's ceiling in speed. Just a guess. At least with stock Dual slot cooling. Might need to go with water.

 

[Killrose]

Unfortunately for ATI we have other sources to get detailed information from....

So they don't even have an X1800XT / Pro in house, but are posting some benchmarks from another source which they mixed with thier own recent hardware tests. I hope for ATi's sake that they got an old slow engineering sample run on early drivers, because these benches are not very impresive.

 

[Kalessian]

Originally posted by: compgeek89
Well the RAM should OC nicely as its rated 1600mhz

I meant core, sorry.

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: jasonja

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: vision33r

Originally posted by: mindgam3

Originally posted by: vision33r
It looks like ATI got their ass handed again. It looks like the new cards are only competitive against the 6800 series.

The drivers are RC, they are pretty much production quality. I expect a jump of 20% in performance when they mature somewhat but not gonna be more than 50% leap, whoever thinks that better drivers would do is just a "fool's hope" The 7800 series performance was evident even with beta drivers.

There's no question, the R520 is a dissappointment while the fanboys now will chant the "R580 will rock."

Only competitive against the 6800 series? Are you on crack it actually beats the GTX in a few of the benchmarks and always beats the 6800 except on a few of the SLI tests... And why do you have to bring fanboy crap into the post .

Yes, because it was able to beat the 6800 but not the 7800 clearly. In some benches, the 6800GT SLI was about to pull ahead comfortably.

The bad part is that with 600-700mhz, it can't beat the 7800 with 24 pipes and only 500mhz part.

What a dissappointment.

The stock core speed for the 7800 is ~430 isn't it? Can't remember, I think one of the OC 7800's would improve upon these results by quite a bit.

Who's to say you won't be able to overclock a X1800 to 700mhz?

If you READ carefully I was just trying to keep things at an even keel, he is stating the XT can't keep up with a 500mhz part, when in reality it's a 430mhz part.

Actually, and I was about to post this anyway, the 7800GTX is a 500mhz stock part AFAIK. When running 3DMark 05 for instance it shows the core at 500mhz, and with my oc of 477, it shows the core at 515mhz... so it may be that we are looking at a 600mhz/16pp vs. 500/24pp

 

[Bona Fide]

Wow...not only is it late, but it's inadequate as well. In most games it barely keeps pace with the 7800GT.

 

[Dribble]

Originally posted by: Killrose
Unfortunately for ATI we have other sources to get detailed information from....

So they don't even have an X1800XT / Pro in house, but are posting some benchmarks from another source which they mixed with thier own recent hardware tests. I hope for ATi's sake that they got an old slow engineering sample run on early drivers, because these benches are not very impresive.

What they mean is they have got a couple of cards off a manufacturer (e.g. asus, galaxy or someone) who because it's being released in a few weeks must be producing these things by the thousand right now. Hence the card *is* one of the cards you hopefully find in the shops in a few weeks.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Wow...not only is it late, but it's inadequate as well. In most games it barely keeps pace with the 7800GT.

its not inadequate, its keeping up pretty well, few more driver revisions should see it a little more gain

the main point is that ATI's new card is keeping up, which is all i expected from it. we have yet to see its SM3 performance, and yet to see if this AA and HDR at the same time is true, and if it is how well it performs

but again NV have the more efficient/powerful GPU, it has more, pipes pretty simple really (theres no replacement for displacement). high clocks can only do so much. i think trying to make up 8 pipes worth of power was just beyond ATI, maybe when the process matures abit more they can up it., but props to them for making it close.

looks like Nv need'nt get the Ultra unwrapped just yet, but it would be oooo so easy now to just release a 500Mhz + part with dual slot cooling and call it a day.

R520 as it is at the moment may not be OMGWTFINSANE but its certainly adequate.

 

[nRollo]

I've said many times that I'll buy one of these to test, but it would have to be a really good deal at this point to make me buy this stinker. Compare those benchmarks to the 6800GT SLI and 7800GTX SLI I have in my two computers now, the X1800 is p3wned.

It's been quite a month for ATI, I can see why their execs dumped 40% of their stock. (they probably wanted to dump it all)

1. Six pending lawsuits for insider trading
2. Crossfire late, and having a serious design flaw
3. R520 late, and not worth the price

I'd be surprised if the ATI execs aren't sending out resume's at this point, what could go wrong, has.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Killrose
tsk tsk, H.A. you broke NDA. No more ATi cards for you.

First off what benchmarks are they using? They are calling all thier benchmarks "Custom" which leads me to believe they are in-house made benchmarks which is not good if true. Normally all other sites will use the same built in game benchmark utility.

actually it seems to me many places, incl AT use custom benchmarks (tho initially when the software first comes out they may use the built-in tool) -- which is why the actual fps from one review to another may vary, but the relative difference is usually close.

what matters is both cards use the same settings, benchmarks, etc.

what's interesting is how many of the ati fans are comdemning these figures, when in general they simply reflect what has been rumored all along -- that at would be "competitive" with nv this round, and these benches really shouldn't be any surprise as they seem to reflect just that.

the problem is, while competitive, it hurts ati to be so late (again, as most eveyone has been talking about) as the 7800's have been out some time and street prices have dropped considerably, so while generally in the same performance ballpark (albeit slightly slower overall, tho not enuff to cry about) from a "price to performance" perspecitve, ati is clearly behind.

i am also curious as tho how pushing the gpu to 600mhz will affect heat output, etc., and how much noise/space is required to cool these cards....

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: Sentential
I really think those results are biased. These idiots are the same people who claimed that it takes a 5.2ghz intel to match an FX, which has been proven false by so many other sites

These idiots didn't do the test. An ATI board partner did. All HA did was send the benchmark request, get the results back, and post them. These benches look about right to me. I'm not declaring them final, but they seem close enough to spot on that I can say that I'm pretty disappointed, and don't expect much difference from an AT review in the future.

For those that are thinking HA skewed the results...remember, they sent benchmark configurations to an ATI board partner. Why would any ATI board partner skew their own results to make their own card look worse? It won't happen. If you want to say that HA played with the numbers after they got them back, go ahead, but I think that's extremely far fetched.

 

[jasonja]

Originally posted by: Frackal


Actually, and I was about to post this anyway, the 7800GTX is a 500mhz stock part AFAIK. When running 3DMark 05 for instance it shows the core at 500mhz, and with my oc of 477, it shows the core at 515mhz... so it may be that we are looking at a 600mhz/16pp vs. 500/24pp

Do they do this for every game or are they specifically overclocking more for 3DMark05?

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Killrose
Unfortunately for ATI we have other sources to get detailed information from....

So they don't even have an X1800XT / Pro in house, but are posting some benchmarks from another source which they mixed with thier own recent hardware tests. I hope for ATi's sake that they got an old slow engineering sample run on early drivers, because these benches are not very impresive.

they already stated they were release candidate drivers.... and as they were done on an ati "board partners" hardware, this close to release i seriously doubt they are running "engineering" samples...

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Compare those benchmarks to the 6800GT SLI and 7800GTX SLI I have in my two computers now, the X1800 is p3wned.

yikes.

thats the shocker. if these benches are true, the 6800gt sli is a viable, if not better, option compared to this dog.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: Killrose
tsk tsk, H.A. you broke NDA. No more ATi cards for you.

First off what benchmarks are they using? They are calling all thier benchmarks "Custom" which leads me to believe they are in-house made benchmarks which is not good if true. Normally all other sites will use the same built in game benchmark utility.

This is common on this forum. People do not read, but comment first. I am surprised to see that someone with 5,500 posts has not learned that yet.

On a side note, I was a little dissapointed with the results. I trust this review, but I still would like another to confirm it. I will hold my final opinion of the card until Anand reviews it. Since, he will compare image quality and do a little more extensive testing. There may be some things about the card that we do not know, and thus may explain away the performance.

 

[jasonja]

Originally posted by: rise4310

Originally posted by: Rollo
Compare those benchmarks to the 6800GT SLI and 7800GTX SLI I have in my two computers now, the X1800 is p3wned.

yikes.

thats the shocker. if these benches are true, the 6800gt sli is a viable, if not better, option compared to this dog.

Yeah that's a real shocker that a TWO card solution costing $1000+ is beating up on a $599 MSRP (I stress MSRP) single card. That's unbelievable!

 

[Creig]

If these benches hold true, consider the fact that a 16 pipe card from ATI is hanging with not only the 20 pipe 7800GT, but also the 24 pipe 7800GTX. R520 may not be an Nv killer, but think what a 24 or 32 pipe card could do (R580?).

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: jasonja

Originally posted by: rise4310

Originally posted by: Rollo
Compare those benchmarks to the 6800GT SLI and 7800GTX SLI I have in my two computers now, the X1800 is p3wned.

yikes.

thats the shocker. if these benches are true, the 6800gt sli is a viable, if not better, option compared to this dog.

Yeah that's a real shocker that a TWO card solution costing $1000+ is beating up on a $599 MSRP (I stress MSRP) single card. That's unbelievable!

lol, 2x6800gt for $1000?