Radeon 8500 Review

[MoobyTheGoldenCalf]

Ok, this could be (I hope it is anyway) a bunch of BS, but nvnews.net has posted some numbers from a PC Mag review as well as a German site review. If these are accurate benches, things aren't looking too good for ATI

www.nvnews.net

 

[GTaudiophile]

How do you come to that conclusion when it clearly says,

Again, this is a rough translation (really rough)...But based on the limited info that I could get from this review, it does indeed appear that ATI has a winner on their hands. I've got to believe that it was this last 'driver drop' that was holding up the review sites.

 

[ndee]

What are you expecting from a Nvidia page?

 

[Migroo]

<< What are you expecting from a Nvidia page? >>



good point, exactly

 

[MoobyTheGoldenCalf]

<< How do you come to that conclusion when it clearly says,

Again, this is a rough translation (really rough)...But based on the limited info that I could get from this review, it does indeed appear that ATI has a winner on their hands. I've got to believe that it was this last 'driver drop' that was holding up the review sites. >>



Well, I was looking at this:

3D Winmark2000 (no AA)
8500: 236
Ti500: 262
3D WinMark2000 (2x)
8500: 84
Ti500: 137

3DMark 2001 (no AA)
8500: 7516
Ti500: 7552

3DMark2001 (2x)
8500: 3731
Ti500: 5679

Quake3 (no AA)
8500: 180
Ti500: 190

Quake3 (2x)
8500: 88
Ti500: 122


And this:

Nature test, 8500 scored 28 FPS vs. GF3's 40 FPS.

In Aquamark...I cannot understand what they said, other than @ 1600x1200, there's some issue with ATI's driver

In DX7 games, the GF3 was, in their words, 'clearly faster.' They based this off of Giants, Mercedes-Benz, and Max Payne.


But yes, I agree this should be taken with a grain of salt coming from an nVidia page.

 

[MoobyTheGoldenCalf]

Oh well nevermind. Tom's got his Radeon review up now, so I guess we'll start to hear the REAL story:

http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q4/011016/index.html

 

[Migroo]

Excellent, thanks for the link Mooby

 

[Jaraxal]

Well Tom's review would explain the poor AA performance from the other site's benchmarks.

The Radeon 8500 looks to be a great card, if ATI can get their driver problems fixed. But then again, we have pretty much known this was going to be an issue.

I'm waiting for a few months before I make my purchase decision (GF3 Ti 500 or Radeon 8500) ...

 

[CQuinn]

It looks like Tom's review does explain it. Smoothvision is not enabled in the drivers yet.
so the AA implementation is still on the slower software solution of the old Radeon cards.

One flaw noted in Tom's "facts" he mistakenly lists the ATI hardware as doing MPEG-2
encoding as well as decoding.