Rollo's 512MB 7800GTX Benchmarks

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: RiDE

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: nib95
Lol, these threads are full of whiney little fan tarts and trolls.
No thread is complete now without having some tarts having it out like grannys fighting with their handbags.
It's utterly ridiculous.

And what did you achieve here aside from your b!tching?

And what did you achieve here aside from your b!tching?

You should focus on Reducing Impaired Driving Everywhere instead of parroting a troll post.

 

[M0RPH]

Question for all the Nvidia owners. How do you feel about paying for Rollo's video cards?

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
You know, Rollo may have been secretive about his affiliations, but what you have done in the past few days blows the doors off of anything he ever did.

Of course you're going to say that! You still have him for mod in your sig!

So what size of collar did they have to fit you with so that Rollo could lead you around like his own personal *****?

Exactly what we're talking about. LMAO.... Much, much worse..

I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm also very sorry if you turn out to not be AEG.

I also feel sorry for you. I wish you would display some thoughts of your own sometimes. You seem like a reasonably smart guy. You just tend to parrot Rollo and waste whatever intelligence that you do have. Here's an example:

Rollo, want those benchies added to that SLI benchie sheet?

Smithers would be proud of that.

In any event, I haven't liked your bias from the moment you started posting here. Both Rollo and yourself were like "invaders" to this once-peaceful forum.

It's called contributing to a thread instead of detracting from it. I am truly sorry that Rollo and myself have transformed you into the bitter person we see here before us today. (That means you.) By the way you have been conducting yourself, you make castor oil seem sweet in comparison. Something to think about.

And why would you be sorry if I turned out "not" to be AEG? I don't even know what that means. Help me out here 'ol buddy.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: n7
X1800XT @ 690/800 (instead of 625/750) results

Min. fps = 20
Ave. fps = 31
Max fps = 49

Damn, can't catch Rollo's 7800GTX 512 MB even OCed

man, that's still very impressive :thumbsup:

strange that you are hitting that max FPS ceiling so hard...it looks like a CPU limitation but it shouldn't be, maybe a driver bug?

 

[RiDE]

Originally posted by: M0RPH
Question for all the Nvidia owners. How do you feel about paying for Rollo's video cards?

I don't have an Nvidia card but you and your cohorts make me want to get a Matrox. There doesn't seem to be any drama queens for that brand.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: n7
X1800XT @ 690/800 (instead of 625/750) results

Min. fps = 20
Ave. fps = 31
Max fps = 49

Damn, can't catch Rollo's 7800GTX 512 MB even OCed

man, that's still very impressive :thumbsup:

strange that you are hitting that max FPS ceiling so hard...it looks like a CPU limitation but it shouldn't be, maybe a driver bug?

Hmm, you know, i haven't tried it with the .exe renamed yet
I remember that was giving the ATi cards a boost in some cases wasn't it?

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
It's called contributing to a thread instead of detracting from it. I am truly sorry that Rollo and myself have transformed you into the bitter person we see here before us today. (That means you.) By the way you have been conducting yourself, you make castor oil seem sweet in comparison. Something to think about.

And why would you be sorry if I turned out "not" to be AEG? I don't even know what that means. Help me out here 'ol buddy.

Fair enough, it's just I find it hard to contribute to something I view as illicit.

You're right; I am quite bitter about everything. To be honest it irritates me that you still stick up for him even though he "sold you out" too (or did he?).

As for AEG, your role in it (or lack thereof) is your business. That said, as a member of this forum I would appreciate it if you were transparent about it. You should *announce* to the forums that you either are or are not AEG. You might want to explain to us why you so blindly back Rollo up.

Your posts have raised alarm bells among many very senior members here. I think we would all appreciate it and call off the "witch hunt" if you would simply express your intentions, affiliations, and reasons for parroting Rollo so perfectly.

I'm unequivocally apologizing to you for being a little "gruff" towards you in my bitterness. I also realize that you don't necessarily owe the forums any kind of explanation. That said, I think it would be best for all parties involved if you were to just do what I suggested above.

Goodnight.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Yea, i think its the NV's not so efficent AA that hurts NV most in F.E.A.R. 16x12 results show the GTX 512mb dominating F.E.A.R. (i got to hand it to ATi with there efficent AA which is making the X series so competitive to the 7 series, even though the 7 series has a sligth edge in shader performance.)

Does anyone think there is any truth to this:

The reason ATI has much lower performance hits when AA is enabled is because ATI hardware and drivers do not apply AA to the entire scene. There is a distance cutoff point. Nvidia on the other hand applies AA to the entire scene at full distance, hence the much larger performance drop.

This is nobody's quote, this is just what I got out of a thread started here a few days ago where a GTX owner purchased an X1900XT and complained that it seemed the ATI card did not apply AA for distances and noticed pronounced aliasing past certain points no matter what settings he tried. This is after a hdd wipe and fresh winders install.

Just a question to throw out there. It would be interesting to see how the different sides field this.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: M0RPH
Question for all the Nvidia owners. How do you feel about paying for Rollo's video cards?

You mean the ones that he gets that would never be available in retail stores anyway?
I wonder how your parents feel after spending all that money all those years to keep you alive and raise you. I wonder if they think it was worth it these days. Talk about buyers remorse.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Yea, i think its the NV's not so efficent AA that hurts NV most in F.E.A.R. 16x12 results show the GTX 512mb dominating F.E.A.R. (i got to hand it to ATi with there efficent AA which is making the X series so competitive to the 7 series, even though the 7 series has a sligth edge in shader performance.)

Does anyone think there is any truth to this:

The reason ATI has much lower performance hits when AA is enabled is because ATI hardware and drivers do not apply AA to the entire scene. There is a distance cutoff point. Nvidia on the other hand applies AA to the entire scene at full distance, hence the much larger performance drop.

This is nobody's quote, this is just what I got out of a thread started here a few days ago where a GTX owner purchased an X1900XT and complained that it seemed the ATI card did not apply AA for distances and noticed pronounced aliasing past certain points no matter what settings he tried. This is after a hdd wipe and fresh winders install.

Just a question to throw out there. It would be interesting to see how the different sides field this.

Absolute nonsense imo. I was looking at some Farcry screenshots in an x1900xtx review the other day that certainly was not the case in back to back comparisons (but the 7800 GTX 512 DID do something very strange to the water and the details of rocks in the far background very pronouncedly blurrier than the x1900XTX screenshots).

In fact i should dig that review up and post the comparisons, b/c the difference in the water especially was night and day (the nvidia card merely blurred the waves and showed no detail after a certain point moving into the background).

I'll look now, but it may take me a while, i'm at work

 

[rise]

i think i remember the one you're talking about but can't remember who did it. i'd love to see it again though.

 

[GOREGRINDER]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Yea, i think its the NV's not so efficent AA that hurts NV most in F.E.A.R. 16x12 results show the GTX 512mb dominating F.E.A.R. (i got to hand it to ATi with there efficent AA which is making the X series so competitive to the 7 series, even though the 7 series has a sligth edge in shader performance.)

Does anyone think there is any truth to this:

The reason ATI has much lower performance hits when AA is enabled is because ATI hardware and drivers do not apply AA to the entire scene. There is a distance cutoff point. Nvidia on the other hand applies AA to the entire scene at full distance, hence the much larger performance drop.

This is nobody's quote, this is just what I got out of a thread started here a few days ago where a GTX owner purchased an X1900XT and complained that it seemed the ATI card did not apply AA for distances and noticed pronounced aliasing past certain points no matter what settings he tried. This is after a hdd wipe and fresh winders install.

Just a question to throw out there. It would be interesting to see how the different sides field this.

Absolute nonsense imo. I was looking at some Farcry screenshots in an x1900xtx review the other day that certainly was not the case in back to back comparisons (but the 7800 GTX 512 DID do something very strange to the water and the details of rocks in the far background very pronouncedly blurrier than the x1900XTX screenshots).

In fact i should dig that review up and post the comparisons, b/c the difference in the water especially was night and day (the nvidia card merely blurred the waves and showed no detail after a certain point moving into the background).

I'll look now, but it may take me a while, i'm at work

hes talking about anti aliasing,.. not anisotropic filtering

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: rise4310
i think i remember the one you're talking about but can't remember who did it. i'd love to see it again though.

i could have sworn it was rage3d, but the screenshots don't seem to be there

can anyone help find them?

I IM'd the link to synth, so i'll pm him and see if he still has it...

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: GOREGRINDER

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Yea, i think its the NV's not so efficent AA that hurts NV most in F.E.A.R. 16x12 results show the GTX 512mb dominating F.E.A.R. (i got to hand it to ATi with there efficent AA which is making the X series so competitive to the 7 series, even though the 7 series has a sligth edge in shader performance.)

Does anyone think there is any truth to this:

The reason ATI has much lower performance hits when AA is enabled is because ATI hardware and drivers do not apply AA to the entire scene. There is a distance cutoff point. Nvidia on the other hand applies AA to the entire scene at full distance, hence the much larger performance drop.

This is nobody's quote, this is just what I got out of a thread started here a few days ago where a GTX owner purchased an X1900XT and complained that it seemed the ATI card did not apply AA for distances and noticed pronounced aliasing past certain points no matter what settings he tried. This is after a hdd wipe and fresh winders install.

Just a question to throw out there. It would be interesting to see how the different sides field this.

Absolute nonsense imo. I was looking at some Farcry screenshots in an x1900xtx review the other day that certainly was not the case in back to back comparisons (but the 7800 GTX 512 DID do something very strange to the water and the details of rocks in the far background very pronouncedly blurrier than the x1900XTX screenshots).

In fact i should dig that review up and post the comparisons, b/c the difference in the water especially was night and day (the nvidia card merely blurred the waves and showed no detail after a certain point moving into the background).

I'll look now, but it may take me a while, i'm at work

hes talking about anti aliasing,.. not anisotropic filtering

and i talked about AA too (just quickly since there was no difference in the AA throughout either screenshot that i could see)

 

[dug777]

I found them:

http://www.rage3d.com/image.php?pic=/re...00xtx.jpg&comment=Far%20Cry%20X1900XTX

http://www.rage3d.com/image.php?pic=/re...800gtx.jpg&comment=Far%20Cry%207800GTX

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
It's called contributing to a thread instead of detracting from it. I am truly sorry that Rollo and myself have transformed you into the bitter person we see here before us today. (That means you.) By the way you have been conducting yourself, you make castor oil seem sweet in comparison. Something to think about.

And why would you be sorry if I turned out "not" to be AEG? I don't even know what that means. Help me out here 'ol buddy.

Fair enough, it's just I find it hard to contribute to something I view as illicit.

You're right; I am quite bitter about everything. To be honest it irritates me that you still stick up for him even though he "sold you out" too (or did he?).

As for AEG, your role in it (or lack thereof) is your business. That said, as a member of this forum I would appreciate it if you were transparent about it. You should *announce* to the forums that you either are or are not AEG. You might want to explain to us why you so blindly back Rollo up.

Your posts have raised alarm bells among many very senior members here. I think we would all appreciate it and call off the "witch hunt" if you would simply express your intentions, affiliations, and reasons for parroting Rollo so perfectly.

I'm unequivocally apologizing to you for being a little "gruff" towards you in my bitterness. I also realize that you don't necessarily owe the forums any kind of explanation. That said, I think it would be best for all parties involved if you were to just do what I suggested above.

Goodnight.

I appreciate your apology, but if my name was on that list you sent the mods, then no amount of apologizing will be adequate. Even if I was AEG, and were to admit that I was, what in the land of all that's holy makes you think your "witch hunt" will end?
Why do I back Rollo up? Because we usually have similar thoughts about graphics hardware. We agree more than not. It hasn't cost me a cent to know him, he did not sell me out. I just didn't know he was in that focus group. But now that I know he is, nothing has changed. He is still the same person.

You, Morph, Creig, apoppin, can just as easily be "agents" for some secret ATI focus group. But you don't see me sending lists to mods just because I suspect so. Whatever happens with Rollo, happens. On the other hand, you may still have a chance to turn yourself around and not be so bitter. It's just a little forum, on a little web site, on a very large internet. If you can't get past this, I can't see you getting past much else in everyday life. So I suggest a reform is in order. For the better. Lets take it to PM's from this point on shall we?

keys

 

[n7]

Holy crap, new drivers = enormous performance improvement! :Q
Must be a driver bug with the 6.1s

I was using the Catalyst 6.1s, & i just switch to the 6.2s.

X1800XT 690/800 @ 1600x1200 4x AA 8x AF everything maxed screenie

Min. fps = 23
Ave. fps = 44
Max fps = 94

My old X1800XT just pwned the 7800GTX 512 MB

Okay, okay, i know it's just one game, but damn...what an improvement

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: n7
Holy crap, new drivers = enormous performance improvement! :Q
Must be a driver bug with the 6.1s

I was using the Catalyst 6.1s, & i just switch to the 6.2s.

X1800XT 690/800 @ 1600x1200 4x AA 8x AF everything maxed screenie

Min. fps = 23
Ave. fps = 44
Max fps = 94

My old X1800XT just pwned the 7800GTX 512 MB

Okay, okay, i know it's just one game, but damn...what an improvement

Hehe.. X1900 XTX stock speeds 1680 x 1050 with 4xAA/16xAF

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Hehe.. X1900 XTX stock speeds 1680 x 1050 with 4xAA/16xAF

Way to ruin my party

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Hehe.. X1900 XTX stock speeds 1680 x 1050 with 4xAA/16xAF

Way to ruin my party

Hehe hey at least the X1800 pwned the GTX 512 right?

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: dug777
I found them:

http://www.rage3d.com/image.php?pic=/re...00xtx.jpg&comment=Far%20Cry%20X1900XTX

http://www.rage3d.com/image.php?pic=/re...800gtx.jpg&comment=Far%20Cry%207800GTX

The AA in the X1900 screenshot looks better. Look at the gun, the palm tree right below the boat, boathouse roof, the sand right under the birds (which has some boulders on it), even the far off island looks better in the X1900 screenshot.

 

[Kaeishiwaza]

Originally posted by: rise4310

Originally posted by: Kaeishiwaza
Rollo gets compensated with free products because he posts pro-NVidia material here. A wise person should understand that that does not imply an unbiased opinion. Rollo won't tell you that, but I certainly will.

fiirst, its in his sig. open your eyes.

second, you don't know what he is or isn't obligated to say so if you want to speculate, than head over to the thread that was left open to discuss that.

noob

:roll:

Not everyone reads all the threads in these forums all the time. I do. Perhaps you do. But there are many who would casually read through a forum like this, see benchmarks posted by what they consider a regular user, and then take them on faith. Up until a week ago, that's certainly what I would have done. Nor, for that matter, would a casual user read anything into 'AEG Focus group member' that's at the bottom of his sig. So yes, I believe the fact that Rollo is 'on the payroll' for NVidia is very important information for those forum users who are looking for objective reviews. He's not an independent benchmarker, like many of the sites around the web. . . and casual users should be warned vigorously that Rollo is not objective whenever he posts benchmarks.

Personally, the last place I would look for a review of NVidia, ATI or anything else in the world, would be the reviews written by company employees. Truth is that NVidia's product line is still probably superior to ATI's in many regards. But one can reach that conclusion without having to sift through propaganda that NVidia is distributing in forums like these, gussied up as 'forum member reviews.'

If you have an graphics card, love it, benchmark it, and post here, great, awesome, that's the type of info I'm here to see. If you're getting free hardware with the expectation from the company that gave it to you that you'll post positive reviews here, don't waste my time!

 

[SickBeast]

There's so many flames in here it feels like a BBQ.

:Q:Q:Q OMGWTFBBQ!!! :Q:Q:Q

 

[fliguy84]

Originally posted by: dug777
I found them:

http://www.rage3d.com/image.php?pic=/re...00xtx.jpg&comment=Far%20Cry%20X1900XTX

http://www.rage3d.com/image.php?pic=/re...800gtx.jpg&comment=Far%20Cry%207800GTX

hmm actually i see that the hills on GTX's screenie is a little bit aliased tt

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Kaeishiwaza

Originally posted by: rise4310

Originally posted by: Kaeishiwaza
Rollo gets compensated with free products because he posts pro-NVidia material here. A wise person should understand that that does not imply an unbiased opinion. Rollo won't tell you that, but I certainly will.

fiirst, its in his sig. open your eyes.

second, you don't know what he is or isn't obligated to say so if you want to speculate, than head over to the thread that was left open to discuss that.

noob

:roll:

Not everyone reads all the threads in these forums all the time. I do. Perhaps you do. But there are many who would casually read through a forum like this, see benchmarks posted by what they consider a regular user, and then take them on faith. Up until a week ago, that's certainly what I would have done. Nor, for that matter, would a casual user read anything into 'AEG Focus group member' that's at the bottom of his sig. So yes, I believe the fact that Rollo is 'on the payroll' for NVidia is very important information for those forum users who are looking for objective reviews. He's not an independent benchmarker, like many of the sites around the web. . . and casual users should be warned vigorously that Rollo is not objective whenever he posts benchmarks.

Personally, the last place I would look for a review of NVidia, ATI or anything else in the world, would be the reviews written by company employees. Truth is that NVidia's product line is still probably superior to ATI's in many regards. But one can reach that conclusion without having to sift through propaganda that NVidia is distributing in forums like these, gussied up as 'forum member reviews.'

If you have an graphics card, love it, benchmark it, and post here, great, awesome, that's the type of info I'm here to see. If you're getting free hardware with the expectation from the company that gave it to you that you'll post positive reviews here, don't waste my time!

Why would you trust anyone's review in here, be it from a focus group member or not? Just from this thread alone, look how many morons there are in here who worship their respective video card brands... what makes you think they'll give an objective review of anything when they're obviously fan boys. Sure there are some out there who are actually capable of giving an unbiased review, but it's probably hidden in some flamebait thread and I don't have the time to dig through all the drama. :roll: Oh well... too bad it turned out this way. Heh.