R520 Benchies at HA

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: 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?

I would think that under max load it scales up to 500mhz "7800gtx has many 'clocks'" ... no reason for it to go to 500mhz in 3DMark but not games

 

[compgeek89]

2x 6800 GT is $550

 

[Killrose]

Originally posted by: 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.

I did read it. Although HA did'nt have NDA bindings, they knew full well that there is an NDA "Blackout" on the R520 and have done a bad thing screwing themselves forever into the future with ATi.

And besides, we all know that the amount of posts a person has does'nt mean crap, or have'nt you learned that yet?

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: Killrose

Originally posted by: 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.

I did read it. Although HA did'nt have NDA bindings, they knew full well that there is an NDA "Blackout" on the R520 and have done a bad thing screwing themselves forever into the future with ATi.

And besides, we all know that the amount of posts a person has does'nt mean crap, or have'nt you learned that yet?

I am sure you did read it, after you had posted on this forum. If ATI left them out of the review this round, it is a pretty good indicater that they will be left out in the future no matter what they did. Whether it be release of benchmarks or not, they still would most likely not have received an R580 part or any other future RXXX part...

The ammount of posts someone has should count for something. It means you have been on the forum a long time and either have learned, or not learned one thing. Post count means something for some people, for others, it just shows they still do not have a clue.

 

[James3shin]

wow....im at a loss. here is the obligatory "WTF!?"

 

[Munky]

Well, imagine if the r520 was actually doing full-fledged AF, and not the hacks we're used to seeing (I doubt it but it's possible). Would that justify the performance difference to some of you? Or what if it could actually do EXR HDR with AA, would that make things different? There's still a lot that reamins unknown with this card, and these preliminary benches, even if they are accurate, only tell a small part of the big picture.

The x850 almost always had a performance edge over the 6800u, and that didnt stop many people from getting the 6800gt/ultra because it had newer features compared to the x850, even at a time when few games were utilizing these new features. Yeah, it is a disappointment that the r520 came out later and didnt blow the 7800 out of the water in some games that are a year old, but then again nobody complained that the r300 didnt blow the nv3x out of the water in Quake3. Until we see some official benches and with newer games like FEAR and BF2, as well as IQ analysis, it's way too early to post crap like "OMG, teh r520 sux0rx, Nv p3wnz Ati".

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: 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?

ive never understood this, the G70 doesnt seem to follow normal clocking methods, its got like some kind of other thing going under the hood....baffling me.

 

[Keysplayr]

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!

How is that shocking when a single GTX is just about equal to 2x6800U's????????????????

Talk about fair weather fans. If you can't find 2 6800GT's for about 600 bucks, you got problems.

 

[jasonja]

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: 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?

I would think that under max load it scales up to 500mhz "7800gtx has many 'clocks'" ... no reason for it to go to 500mhz in 3DMark but not games

Yeah... there's no reason for nVidia to do anything special for 3DMark05 only. That would never happen.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: munky
Well, imagine if the r520 was actually doing full-fledged AF, and not the hacks we're used to seeing (I doubt it but it's possible). Would that justify the performance difference to some of you? Or what if it could actually do EXR HDR with AA, would that make things different? There's still a lot that reamins unknown with this card, and these preliminary benches, even if they are accurate, only tell a small part of the big picture.

The x850 almost always had a performance edge over the 6800u, and that didnt stop many people from getting the 6800gt/ultra because it had newer features compared to the x850, even at a time when few games were utilizing these new features. Yeah, it is a disappointment that the r520 came out later and didnt blow the 7800 out of the water in some games that are a year old, but then again nobody complained that the r300 didnt blow the nv3x out of the water in Quake3. Until we see some official benches and with newer games like FEAR and BF2, as well as IQ analysis, it's way too early to post crap like "OMG, teh r520 sux0rx, Nv p3wnz Ati".

Well Munky, I agree with you that your post is possible, but highly unprobable. You are right stating the fact that we do not know a lot of its features (I posted that above your post a well) but more than likely, the card is going to be a flop. You are right that we cannot set that statement in stone, but in all likelyhood, that is the case. Remember, if you do set it in stone and in the offset that it actually does have die hard killer features, then you will be impressed because it wasn't hyped. But if you hold out for wishful thinking, it has been my experience that you will be let down again from a wild imagination of possibilities that just are not probable.

 

[ronnn]

These numbers are quite encouraging, as it has been expected for months that the r520 would be slower than the gtx. For early drivers, this is closer than I expected, so time to see what other features are in store. Good news for all that it looks like some competition is on the way. Or I suppose this article could turn out to be a fabrication and the r520 is even slower.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: jasonja

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: 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?

I would think that under max load it scales up to 500mhz "7800gtx has many 'clocks'" ... no reason for it to go to 500mhz in 3DMark but not games

Yeah... there's no reason for nVidia to do anything special for 3DMark05 only. That would never happen.

I detect sarcasm, but unfortunately I still don't get it.

 

[jasonja]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

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!

How is that shocking when a single GTX is just about equal to 2x6800U's????????????????

Talk about fair weather fans. If you can't find 2 6800GT's for about 600 bucks, you got problems.

Can you find me two 6600GTs a SLI mobo, and the new memory and AMD chip I'll need to upgrade to it for $600? My point is we don't all want or need an SLI rig to play games because we already have perfectly good fast PCs without SLI motherboards. Lets stick to comparing apples to apples. So stop with the MSRP vs. Street price comparisons and the SLI vs single card comparisons.

 

[Killrose]

Originally posted by: munky
Well, imagine if the r520 was actually doing full-fledged AF, and not the hacks we're used to seeing (I doubt it but it's possible). Would that justify the performance difference to some of you? Or what if it could actually do EXR HDR with AA, would that make things different? There's still a lot that reamins unknown with this card, and these preliminary benches, even if they are accurate, only tell a small part of the big picture.

The x850 almost always had a performance edge over the 6800u, and that didnt stop many people from getting the 6800gt/ultra because it had newer features compared to the x850, even at a time when few games were utilizing these new features. Yeah, it is a disappointment that the r520 came out later and didnt blow the 7800 out of the water in some games that are a year old, but then again nobody complained that the r300 didnt blow the nv3x out of the water in Quake3. Until we see some official benches and with newer games like FEAR and BF2, as well as IQ analysis, it's way too early to post crap like "OMG, teh r520 sux0rx, Nv p3wnz Ati".

I would tend to agree that even with this "Review" there is still too much unknown about the chips capability. But even so, it does'nt look prommising for other benchmarking techniques

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ronnn
These numbers are quite encouraging, as it has been expected for months that the r520 would be slower than the gtx. For early drivers, this is closer than I expected, so time to see what other features are in store. Good news for all that it looks like some competition is on the way. Or I suppose this article could turn out to be a fabrication and the r520 is even slower.

I'm impressed ronnn. It looks like you're the only one in this thread that isn't dissappointed. Kudos. Nice to see someone look for those silver linings. Kind of like KeepItRed always does.

 

[Acanthus]

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!

6800GT SLI is $600 now.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Rollo
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.

1. i guess MS should dump stock to since they get sued all the time?
2. yeah its late, but i doubt CF would have substaintial effect on thier stock, certainly not as much as xbox360
3. we dont even know performance yet, there is a link in other thread that claims this is purely an hoax

i would be more than happy to take one of those execs positions

 

[Corporate Thug]

http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=3069

 

[gsellis]

Removed as CT posted the same thing

credit to darkknight69 for providing the link

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: jasonja

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

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!

How is that shocking when a single GTX is just about equal to 2x6800U's????????????????

Talk about fair weather fans. If you can't find 2 6800GT's for about 600 bucks, you got problems.

Can you find me two 6600GTs a SLI mobo, and the new memory and AMD chip I'll need to upgrade to it for $600? My point is we don't all want or need an SLI rig to play games because we already have perfectly good fast PCs without SLI motherboards. Lets stick to comparing apples to apples. So stop with the MSRP vs. Street price comparisons and the SLI vs single card comparisons.

wow, busy day for you defending ati i was referring to the cards, not your upgrade path but whatever.

so using your apples to apples, single card to single card, based on these benches, why would you get the 1800xt?

 

[xtknight]

I don't trust Sander Sassen who wrote this article as he's written retarded stuff in the past. How do we know these aren't just some made-up numbers? Coming from that guy I'd be suspicious. He looks like he's setting up a cover by saying he sent the benchmarks somewhere else so he can't guarantee they're correct, but he could have just made them up, then when they're wrong, he can say it's the vendor's fault.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: xtknight
I don't trust Sander Sassen who wrote this article as he's written retarded stuff in the past. How do we know these aren't just some made-up numbers? Coming from that guy I'd be suspicious. He looks like he's setting up a cover by saying he sent the benchmarks somewhere else so he can't guarantee they're correct, but he could have just made them up, then when they're wrong, he can say it's the vendor's fault.

Again, possible but unlikely.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: orwell84
People seemed to expect the 1800 series to be a better performing card for the same money. I just don't think this happens in the hardware world. I'm not surprised the cards are neck and neck. It always seems to turn out this way.

NV has been beating ATI in terms of price and availability, but I never expected a clear performance winner. And I'm not concerned bya few lower fps from the ATI cards. I think better drivers will close the gap.

I think the info is reassuring to fans of both cards actually. Those who bought the 7800GTX won't feel bad for taking the plunge. Those who waited for an ATI card will eventually be able to get one. They I'm sure are both amazing cards. The real snag for ATI will be getting enough units to market to compete with the GTX. This has been my problem with ATI. I waited forever for the x800xt (nonPE) edition to reach MSRP and put off buying a 6800GT. I lost patience with the way ATI was handling the release of the r520 and circumstances were such I couldn't put off building my rig any longer.

Just to let you know where I am coming from, I have a preference for ATI, but took the plunge and bought a 7800GTX. I feel better about having done so after looking at these benches.

Same price? Way off. You can get a 7800GTX for cheaper than what an X1800 PRO is MSRPing at.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814135187

 

[nitromullet]

"This is a complete hoax - done with an OC'd X850, we think. Call our partners yourself and ask if they have R520XTs in house. The numbers aren't even close."

Doom3 @ 1024x768 4AA/8AF
X850XT = 30.6
X1800XT = 53.8
(78% increase)


SS:CT @ 1024x768 4AA/8AF
X850XT = 66.21
X1800XT = 89.88
(36% increase)


SS:CT @ 1280x1024 8 4AA/8AF
X850XT = 48.32
X1800XT = 66.31
(37% increase)

SS:CT @ 1600x1200 8 4AA/8AF
X850XT = 39.08
X1800XT = 52.33
(34% increase)

I am certianly no OC wizard, but are results like that even possible with overlcocking?

Wouldn't you have to clock the X850XTPE at around 750MHz to get a 35% increase and over 950MHz (!!!!) to get 78% increase? ...I am assuming a direct correllation between OC % and performance gain, which to my knowledge is not generally the case.

Edit: that quote is from the Guru3D article posted earlier in the thread, incase anyone didn't check that out.

Second Edit: If they plan on launching this card in 3 weeks (Oct 5 rumor), shouldn't the partners have at least one by now? Or, is it normal to supply parts for a product that you want them to build in volume a day before launch?

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: orwell84
People seemed to expect the 1800 series to be a better performing card for the same money. I just don't think this happens in the hardware world. I'm not surprised the cards are neck and neck. It always seems to turn out this way.

NV has been beating ATI in terms of price and availability, but I never expected a clear performance winner. And I'm not concerned bya few lower fps from the ATI cards. I think better drivers will close the gap.

I think the info is reassuring to fans of both cards actually. Those who bought the 7800GTX won't feel bad for taking the plunge. Those who waited for an ATI card will eventually be able to get one. They I'm sure are both amazing cards. The real snag for ATI will be getting enough units to market to compete with the GTX. This has been my problem with ATI. I waited forever for the x800xt (nonPE) edition to reach MSRP and put off buying a 6800GT. I lost patience with the way ATI was handling the release of the r520 and circumstances were such I couldn't put off building my rig any longer.

Just to let you know where I am coming from, I have a preference for ATI, but took the plunge and bought a 7800GTX. I feel better about having done so after looking at these benches.

Same price? Way off. You can get a 7800GTX for cheaper than what an X1800 PRO is MSRPing at.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814135187

True, but the 7800 GTX still MSRP's at 599 as well... Which means that MSRP is an flated number that only Apple can realisticly get.