HD 2900XT, rate how bad this card sucks! or not?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Dr_asik

Distinguished
Mar 8, 2006
607
0
18,980
0
Maybe the R600 is overall faster, but its performance is less consistent than the G80. You know what you can expect out of a 8800 GTS 640MB: the HD 2900XT may perform a little better or significantly worse depending on the game and what graphical options you throw at it. The G80 still inspires me more confidence.

Also, for resolutions 1600x1200 and less, the 8800GTS 320MB offers just the same performance for 100$ less.

Ok enough ranting against poor ATI. Back to enjoying my X800XL :D
 

AfricanMonk

Distinguished
Jun 9, 2007
2
0
18,510
0
Seems we are all missing the point,ATI intended the HD 2900XT to compete with the GTS,which leaves us wandering when the said XTX version of the series comes out coz I figure its going to kill the GTX,at least until the 8850 or 8900 comes out!
Personally I've put my graphics card upgrade on hold until this ATI vs Nvidia DX10 dust settles so that I can get something thats really worth my money and time.
 

FireWater

Distinguished
Mar 20, 2006
82
0
18,630
0
I don't think the point is being missed. Regardless whether ATI/AMD said they were only going to compete with the GTS, its still disappointing that their technology that was released, not only is more expensive, and runs significantly hotter, it does not consistently outperform the GTS.

The fact that they lower their standards should be disappointing to ATI/AMD fans, they should expect better from a company that spent an extra 6 months developing their product.

I do think the R600 as of right now is a flop. This is speculation of course, but I feel that due do their design, ATi could not have made a faster card otherwise the damn thing would melt. So they tweaked their design to get what they would define as an acceptable level of performance out of it.

Because it runs so hot, I'm sure it would be difficult to run the card at a higher clock rate due to issues with Warranties.

AMD did lower their standards, but even when they did that, it turns out to be mostly a failure.
 

No1sFanboy

Distinguished
Mar 9, 2006
633
0
18,980
0
It is starting to look like there may be no xtx this generation. The new 1gig ddr4 higher clocked 2900 that is initially being sold through system builders is basically the same spec as the xtx was rumoured to be.

link
 

Chef_Boyardee

Distinguished
Oct 17, 2006
178
0
18,680
0
As far as I can see the 2900XT: (1) doesn't give you a performance reason to buy it over the 8800, (2) doesn't give you a price reason to buy it over the 8800, and (3) doesn't give you a cooling reason to buy over the 8800. Just try to ignore 8800 owners having a good laugh at those who patiently waited for this thing. Seriously, why would someone new to the market choose a 2900XT today? Is there any technical reason or is it just the brand name?
i'm with this guy.
 

samael

Distinguished
Apr 27, 2007
75
0
18,630
0
I was never an nvidia fan, a die hard P4 and ati guy!
So basically you admit that you're a fanboy!!! And by the way ... R600 is not a disaster you're post is a disaster ...
 

dragonsprayer

Splendid
Jan 3, 2007
3,809
0
22,780
0
I was never an nvidia fan, a die hard P4 and ati guy!
So basically you admit that you're a fanboy!!! And by the way ... R600 is not a disaster you're post is a disaster ...

lol! i posted a few pictures of few systems with ati and nivida parts - lol

i would spec your on a single core athlon running what? probably 9550 onboard graphics?

maybe recent upgrade to 9800 pro?
 

LAN_deRf_HA

Distinguished
Nov 24, 2006
492
0
18,780
0
The 2900 is utterly useless for these simple reasons:

1. Image quality, doesn't compare to any 8800.

2. Frame rate, barely breaks even with a gts.

3. Price, more expensive than a gts for less quality and same speeds? Fail!

and thats not even considering how horribly its rendered in directx 10 thus far.

Ati has completely screwed up here and frankly it doesn't make much sense. This shouldn't have happened.
 

weskurtz81

Distinguished
Apr 13, 2006
1,557
0
19,780
0
Are you kidding, did AMD cause this to happen? Yeah, sure, because AMD is that quick in designing cards, that from start to etail they did this in 1 year. Are you kidding? AMD could have done very little to effect the final outcome of R600, it was near completition when AMD bought them, you can't just go back in and start making whatever change you see fit, and even if they could, they wouldn't pick the slower of two options, they would only make it better. The 2900XT isn't a flop, it competes with the other cards in the price range, the XTX is what got messed up. And I imagine, it will probably best the GTX in most cases and run neck and neck with the 8900 when it comes out. I could be wrong, but if the XT can best the GTX, the XTX will be even better if they can get the kinks worked out.

wes
 

rmriggin

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2007
1
0
18,510
0
I don't understand how the 2900xt is not a better card. ATI needs to get their act together. The 2900 has 320 stream processors and better memory bandwidth. The 8800gtx has 128 and the 8800gts has 96 and less memory bandwidth yet nvidia still is better?
ATI needs to get some people that can code for their products because the 2900 is not living anywhere near what its potential could and should be.
 

oswold

Distinguished
Feb 27, 2007
197
0
18,680
0
Apparently the stream processors on the 2900 are clocked at 742mhz while the ones on the 8800gts are 1.2ghz, although the 29000 has more than 3 times the amount.

If I had an sli mobo, i'd get the 8800gts 640mb tommorow, so i could sli it when it performance starts to dip in new games. But I was waiting on ATI to deliver an alternative. Now I'm worried that my PSU is'nt going to be able to hanlde two 2900's. Hopefully a revision of the chip (like with the x1950s) will make ATI a good buy.
 

sdrawkcaBgoD

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2006
354
0
18,780
0
Personally, the only reason I care that the 2900 is not the 8800 killer some people were hoping for is for one reason: price. And I'm not talking about the price of the 2900 itself. I'm talking about the price of the 8800s. I really wanted AMDs new card to be competitive with the 8800gtx in order to drive the price down on the top nvidia cards. But since the 2900 cannot compete directly with nvidia's flagship card then there is no reason for nvidia to cut their price point in the high-end. Hence the 8800s are still in the $525-$600 range with no sign of dropping to an affordable (for me) price in the near future.

Honestly, this should be one of the main concerns for almost everyone responding to this thread. Who cares which company is currently manufacturing the fastest card on the market if 95% of us cannot afford to own one? Had the 2900 been a more capable card then many more of us would be able actually own a powerful DX10 capable card as opposed to getting caught up in pointless, rampant fanboyism.
 

cleeve

Illustrious
Moderator
Personally, the only reason I care that the 2900 is not the 8800 killer some people were hoping for is for one reason: price.
Exactly.

I've used the 2900 XT in testing, and it works fine. It's real problem is that it's not $10 cheaper than an 8800 GTS 640mb.

At $410 though, it's too expensive to recommend.
 

AsRock

Distinguished
Jun 19, 2007
3
0
18,510
0
Well i love my 2900XT it runs all mine games at 16x12 maxed details in OB Stalker Supreme Commander HL2.

Fan noise ? WHOT THE HELL i've heard my fan about 5 times over the last too weeks even had to check if it's working. As for heat yeah there hot just as hot as the GTX's and some times cooler.


Default temps are around 63c in our house which this time of year is 88f+ at this time it's 94f and i'm getting temps of 69c 89 under full load well as far as i can with my fast aging 3800 x2.

There is surly a AA bug thats for sure but still get around 60+ fps.

I know one thing for sure i don't trust reviews as getting one of these cards has proved most wrong on whot they say.

Am i a ATI fan Umm sure why not my last card was a EVGA 7900GT OCSC and it cannot touch the 2900XT so i am happy lol.

Fan noise some people must have some real bad heat problem to drive the fan at such high speeds which i've never heard.

Maybe you can buy one from here 330 euro's.
http://www.drivecity.de/product_info.php?products_id=156097&pid=geizhals
 

Blackhawk44M

Distinguished
Nov 10, 2006
56
0
18,630
0
Just popped a 2900XT in and I must say it is not that bad.I was so upset when they where realeased that I went to a local store that just happened to have the EVGA 8800gts 320 for a good price and then yesterday compusa had the ATi Brand (LONG STORY) 2900xt for 399.99 plus an employee discount.So far in FEAR the 2900XT beats the 8800 by a little both with and without 4xaa.The fan spining up at random is aggervating but I just feel at home more with ATi.That green PCB just stands out like a redheaded stepchild.Also the ATi brand is now visiontek and I mean the same box and they even left the VisionTek name.I checked Comp### online and it says ATi Brand ,ect,ect and so does the egg.Still I worried because I thought sapphire made the reference cards but it looks like visiontek might have built the last few ATi cards maybe , but the only way I could prove its an " ATi" is the 102 Seral # so quite a few things are changing.I was gonna do some benches and maybe an article with some real details.One thing I will say about the fear test was that the 8800 was running with the CPU at (E6300) 2.8 but I could not get the thing to boot(PSU maybe) but I'll try that befor I confirm the numbers.I have the chance to test and then deside with is better, I did start to love the 8800 and Nv like I did with my older builds its just the PCB , make me want to stepup to a GTX lol.
 

darkguset

Distinguished
Aug 17, 2006
1,140
0
19,460
50
The only dissappointment from my side is the fact that the 2900 does not display things right! What good is a card that can't display what it is supposed to display? Can't remember the site, where they did a comparison of a DX10 application, and although both NVIDIA and ATI's solutions where slow, at least on NVIDIA everything was there! on the 2900 there was no snow and no fence where it was supposed to be! That is utterly ridiculous! Actually the ATI solution should have fared better since it didn't even display half of the stuff on screen! LOL!

ATI, make it work properly first, THEN make it faster!!!

ATI X1950XTX is still the best card...
 

bats2jm

Distinguished
May 25, 2007
31
0
18,530
0
The only dissappointment from my side is the fact that the 2900 does not display things right! What good is a card that can't display what it is supposed to display? Can't remember the site, where they did a comparison of a DX10 application, and although both NVIDIA and ATI's solutions where slow, at least on NVIDIA everything was there! on the 2900 there was no snow and no fence where it was supposed to be! That is utterly ridiculous! Actually the ATI solution should have fared better since it didn't even display half of the stuff on screen! LOL!

ATI, make it work properly first, THEN make it faster!!!

ATI X1950XTX is still the best card...
that may be true but this is not good " Predicting whose cards will be the "DX10 champs" is almost impossible at this point. These tests also tell us that most of the midrange DX10 graphics cards just aren't going to give a satisfactory play experience on games that actually make good use of DX10. The $400-and-up cards are barely delivering playable frame rates on these early DX10 tests. Even with dramatic driver improvements, there's not much chance for the $200 cards to make DX10 games run very well without dropping detail levels or resolution." not good at all. dx10 sucks.
 
The only dissappointment from my side is the fact that the 2900 does not display things right! What good is a card that can't display what it is supposed to display?
And this didn't occur early on with every generation of cards sofar in some app or another? :?:
If you even look at the release notes of the latest nV driver there's some display/render issues even now. Like see through trees in Oblivion or AA making the crosshair disappear in STALKER. So really, is either perfect yet? Or have they ever been?

Can't remember the site, where they did a comparison of a DX10 application, and although both NVIDIA and ATI's solutions where slow, at least on NVIDIA everything was there! on the 2900 there was no snow
In the Lost Planet benchmark? C'mon that's far from a balanced test. It's a TWIMTBP benchmark that needed nVidia beta drivers to run properly after it had been optimized for nV hardware already. C'mon.

and no fence where it was supposed to be!
Yes that's an issue, and a strange one, it'll be interesting to see what happens with the edge detection setting, but it is an interesting artifact that appears in other cards as well.

Regarding the same benchmark (HL2 episode 1) I notice you don't mention the FOG issue, would that be because the GF8800 suffered the same fog problem at it's launch not rendering the scenecorrectly using MSAA only when using SSAA (see the original G80 review if you want to compare the MSAA to SSAA screenies)? Xbit mentions that both the GF8800 and HD2900 suffered from FOG at launch in their review;
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/r600-architecture_16.html#sect0

That is utterly ridiculous! Actually the ATI solution should have fared better since it didn't even display half of the stuff on screen! LOL!
'Half the stuff', far from it, it didn't display a very small portion of all that is on the screen. Seriously, if you need hyperbole to sell your argument, you don't have much of a case.

ATI, make it work properly first, THEN make it faster!!!

ATI X1950XTX is still the best card...
Did you notice that the X1950XTX only renders part of that fence too?
They didn't compare under SSAA because the results are similar to the G80, but MSAA the X1950XTX also suffers the same issue, but with a few links being rendered instead of none.

Right now I think that they're working on both, performance and quality. But like nV shows with their current buglist in their drivers, it's a long process that won't happen overnight and will be an ongoing thing, the question is what issues garner the most attention and thus get the most focus from the Catalyst crew.
 

Similar threads


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS