R600 Benchmarks

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: CKXP
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5524

These early specifications and launch dates line up with what DailyTech has already published and are present on ATI internal roadmaps as of workweek 49.

When DailyTech contacted the site owner to get verification of the benchmarks, the owner replied that the benchmark screenshots could not be published due to origin-specific markers that would trace the card back to its source -- the author mentioned the card is part of the Microsoft Vista driver certification program.

If Level505's comments seem a little too pro-ATI, don't be too surprised. When asked if the site was affiliated in any way to ATI or AMD, the owner replied to DailyTech with the statement that "two staff members of ours are directly affiliated with AMD's business [development] division."

Might not be BS after all...

Heh lets see site goes up 2 days ago and two people working for the site work for AMD.
Viral marketing here we come

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Is it real or not? Why shouldn't it be? Seems like its inline with what was exspected.
Some said numbers don't match other review site scores. Since there seems to be AMD employees involved in this review. The test were likely done with AMD processors . Almost all reviews were done using Intel processors on the 8800gtx. The amd processors using the 8800gtx at these res. Are quite abit lower than Intel processor numbers. So they are actually very close to being correct.

They were using a kensfield overclocked at 3.2ghz

Well that makes no sense at all. Why would AMD chaps use Intels processor to Show R600 results.

The entire "review" makes no sense at all.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Heh lets see site goes up 2 days ago and two people working for the site work for AMD.
Viral marketing here we come

If it truly were viral marketing, they would never have admitted that AMD employees were associated with the website.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: BlameCanada
I think AMD Graphics division will do a lot better job of sticking to deadlines under the new management.

Anne Murray will step on you for that. Ati sure has had their troubles..........

 

[Nightmare225]

Those frames are way too low for an 8800GTX with a 3.2 GHz Kentsfield at 1600x1200... :frown:

 

[crazydingo]

ok even the inq is calling BS on this review http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36671

Its time dailytech retracted their support, it has already tarnished their reputation quite a lot.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: crazydingo
ok even the inq is calling BS on this review http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36671

Its time dailytech retracted their support, it has already tarnished their reputation quite a lot.

Dailytech will post anything for a page hit. I don't really think they filter their stories all that much.

 

[flexy]

(makes up another fake R600 benchmark and places it on site... uh..... JK )

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: crazydingo
ok even the inq is calling BS on this review http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36671

Its time dailytech retracted their support, it has already tarnished their reputation quite a lot.

Dailytech will post anything for a page hit. I don't really think they filter their stories all that much.

No they dont.

Kris posts here in this forum and is the chief editor there. He wouldnt back an obviously fake review like this normally.

 

[IntelUser2000]

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36671

The same site that posted the preliminary R600 benchmarks suggests that the benchmarks could be a hoax.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36673

R600 may be delayed till March 2007.

Now to the people who's waiting for R600. I'd say R600 may turn out to be underwhelming.

What does the following couple have in common:
-Willamette
-Prescott
-NV30
-R520

1. They all have faced serious delays
2. The "good" rumors about them always sounded fishy
3. Numerous rumors talking about the problems they were having were surfacing
4. It turned out to be much below the expectations, sometimes the product didn't even meet the worst expecations made by people

Not being anti-ATI, I would be cautious about waiting for R600. There may be ever slim chance of the product turning out to be good, but the chance is getting slimmer with every rumors.

 

[Cookie Monster]

I am not talking about pseudo-penismarks here.

:laugh:

Ok that was funny, its like the INQ is pissed off at the rogue duo from the 505level site.

 

[Drayvn]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

I am not talking about pseudo-penismarks here.

:laugh:

Ok that was funny, its like the INQ is pissed off at the rogue duo from the 505level site.

Its because they are stealing all their page hits because of the "good" predictions or review that INQ are usually great at getting wrong...

 

[crazydingo]

LEVEL505's review is updated now

So take our benchmarks with a grain of salt so far

LOL? This is getting ugly for dailytech.

 

[jim1976]

Ok let's make an estimation as I said to the other thread..

ASSuming the 4-way SIMD channel we have

64*4*0.8 = 205 GFLOPs/s

Should I say more? :disgust: