R600: Finally DX10 Hardware from ATI

aUser · May 14, 2007

Pricing is what detrmines which card competes with performance of which card

No - the customer determines that. I'm willing to buy either the 2900 XT or the 8800 GTX, but I'd rather not settle for the 8800 GTS. The 2900 XT is like settling for the 8800 GTS, except with higher power requirements.

Phrozt · May 14, 2007

umm... the GTS-320 actually rasied its price by $20, it is now at $280 (with rebates) and before was at $260.

now thats NOT what i was looking for..

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130082

That's because nVidia knows that it is selling a card that can outclass a $400 card about half the time for $270.... of course they are going to raise it a bit.

I was hoping to see the GTS 640 come down closer to the GTS 320 range, but when it's already beating a card that costs $50-$70 more, why bring the price down even further?

No1sFanboy · May 14, 2007

Unfortunately it fares about the same as the GTS if you check the other reviews that are flooding the net right now.

And in most cases, again, the 2900xt is compared to the GTX. ATi never meant to beat the GTX with this card, as evidenced by their pricing.

Pricing is what detrmines which card competes with performance of which card, Not the other way around. A lot of people don't seem to understand this.

You are correct that pricing should determine which card it is compared to. Unfortunately in terms of actual street pricing 8800gts's are less money than 2900's. In all fairness any product is at it's highest price the day it is released and this could change. But for now if you want to position the 2900 by price it is currently higher than the gts640 and much higher than the gts320. I know somebody will dispute this and post the prices of the more expensive gts640's but if you honestly search you're lowest priced 2900 vs. you're lowest priced gts640 the truth is there.

Currently the 8800gtx has no direct competition in price or performance and it is unfair to expect the 2900xt to compete. ATI is for now simply not competing at this end of the market. I hope they do return and are not overly focused with the some new direction under AMD (fusion).

Gary_Busey · May 14, 2007

Keep in mind that that's NewEgg, who are constantly adjusting prices.

rodr · May 14, 2007

hat's because nVidia knows that it is selling a card that can outclass a $400 card about half the time for $270.... of course they are going to raise it a bit.

you're right, do u think its still a good buy tho?

goldragon_70 · May 14, 2007

From looking at the benchmarks, It seems the drivers are just getting in the way of the card. I'm seriously Disappointed, AMD/ATI has had plenty of time to work on the drivers and there Crap! At this point I would still get a 8800gts, If I had to chose, even with the vista driver issues.

Phrozt · May 14, 2007

From looking at the benchmarks, It seems the drivers are just getting in the way of the card. I'm seriously Disappointed, AMD/ATI has had plenty of time to work on the drivers and there Crap! At this point I would still get a 8800gts, If I had to chose, even with the vista driver issues.

I don't see how you can claim a driver issue "from looking at the benchmarks."

That, and drivers have 0 to do w/the fact that you need half of the nuclear power from soviet russia to power these things.

dean7 · May 14, 2007

From looking at the benchmarks, It seems the drivers are just getting in the way of the card. I'm seriously Disappointed, AMD/ATI has had plenty of time to work on the drivers and there Crap! At this point I would still get a 8800gts, If I had to chose, even with the vista driver issues.

I don't see how you can claim a driver issue "from looking at the benchmarks."

That, and drivers have 0 to do w/the fact that you need half of the nuclear power from soviet russia to power these things.
Nah, I think his point is that the hardware DOES sound impressive on paper. So, it seems somewhat logical to assume that if you have beefy hardware that should shred but you're getting so-so FPS, there could be an issue with drivers. Know what I mean?

goldragon_70 · May 14, 2007

From looking at the benchmarks, It seems the drivers are just getting in the way of the card. I'm seriously Disappointed, AMD/ATI has had plenty of time to work on the drivers and there Crap! At this point I would still get a 8800gts, If I had to chose, even with the vista driver issues.

I don't see how you can claim a driver issue "from looking at the benchmarks."

That, and drivers have 0 to do w/the fact that you need half of the nuclear power from soviet russia to power these things.

Look at the benches again. there were places were the drivers crashed, and they didn't have CF in some of the set ups, and they showed all of the cards in some places and none in others. You can tell that there had to be drivers issues if nothing showed up. Hell, I can't even rely on these benches yet to give me a good idea of performance because of the missing benches.

bum_jcrules · May 14, 2007

I am not sure if that PSU will do the trick. It only has to 20 A rails for 12 V. The PSU I used (while I needed 2 8-pin connectors and 2 6-pin for CF) has 6 12 V rails supplying 20 A a piece. You probably could power it up but any overclocking will be limited as ATI only allows the "Overdrive" functions if you have an 8-pin connenction.

Phrozt · May 14, 2007

There was only one instance in which the drivers crashed...

The paper tells a lot of stuff, but the actual hardware numbers show the limits... I don't think it's a driver issue when it comes to the reported marks.

Sure, there's room for improvement via drivers, but the same can be said for nVidia as well.

dean7 · May 14, 2007

I'm going to have to disagree on the "raw power" statement. On paper I think the 2900 looks great. Plus, it DID do really well in 3DMark 2005:

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/05/14/r600_finally_dx10_hardware_from_ati/page20.html

On a side note: I'm no fan of the 2900 series due to power consumption/noise (I think the 8800 gts consumes plenty of power for my tastes). Somebody needs to say "enough is enough" before we have 4kw PSUs that require special wiring in your house or something.

goldragon_70 · May 14, 2007

The doom 3 Benchmarks showed the 2900xt in CF, but when you jump over to F.E.A.R it doesn't show that, and it doesn't show it in Oblivion. Plus you add into that that there was a driver release about a week ago that gave a %5 to %10 performance boost, and you can tell AMD/ATI wasn't on the ball with getting there drivers ready.

shawnpaul3 · May 14, 2007

I thought the benchmarks showed a good comparison. The 2900 ranked at, or slightly above, the 8800 320. The price for the 2900 is too high imho. Once it is priced at the range of the 8800 320, I think it would be a serious contender. Right now, it's priced higher than the 8800 640, but performs less.

Collector619 · May 14, 2007

what are they doing ????
the stream processors i say ! they are so lazy , 320 of them , why are so many if they cant compete with 96 old fashion working stream processors , or they want some dx10 ice cream??

if i had the money , and if i lived in another country , not romania , i would definately have one

tamalero · May 14, 2007

what are they doing ????
the stream processors i say ! they are so lazy , 320 of them , why are so many if they cant compete with 96 old fashion working stream processors , or they want some dx10 ice cream??

if i had the money , and if i lived in another country , not romania , i would definately have one

they're 64x5

Nvidia's are 96x2, but at way higher frcuency

Phrozt · May 14, 2007

I'm going to have to disagree on the "raw power" statement. On paper I think the 2900 looks great. Plus, it DID do really well in 3DMark 2005:

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/05/14/r600_finally_dx10_hardware_from_ati/page20.html

On a side note: I'm no fan of the 2900 series due to power consumption/noise (I think the 8800 gts consumes plenty of power for my tastes). Somebody needs to say "enough is enough" before we have 4kw PSUs that require special wiring in your house or something.

Since when have synthetics meant anything?? All the really show is which company tweaks their products to cheat in fake benchmarks... I don't see the point of that argument.

Guy 1 "wow dood.. my 8800 GTX KILLS games!"
Guy 2 "Yeah? Well my HD 2900XT gets REALLY high numbers in an application that doesn't actually provide any productive or gaming use!!"

golddragon.. The FEAR problem is the "one thing" I was referring to. Not sure what you're talking about with the Oblivion thing.

dean7 · May 14, 2007

Well, my point is that it does seem to have a fair amount of power for some applications. It didn't do half bad in Oblivion either.

Gary_Busey · May 14, 2007

I seriously doubt ATI went out of their way to "tweak" their card to "cheat" on 3DMark.

dean7 · May 14, 2007

I seriously doubt ATI went out of their way to "tweak" their card to "cheat" on 3DMark.

Especially since synthetics don't mean anything according to Phrozt. 😉

Gary_Busey · May 14, 2007

Personally, I don't put a whole lot of stock into synthetic benchmarks, but to say a company would alter their card in some way for the sole purpose of "cheating" in an outdated synthetic benchmark is rather ridiculous.

cb62fcni · May 14, 2007

Uhm, anyone else notice the power consumption here looks a little...off? Like the 2900 pulling 70 more watts or something crazy at idle, but then using less than a GTX under load? Kinda the reverse of almost every other site, which shows the 2900 idling with slightly less power draw than a GTS, but pulling a bit more under load. What gives? I know power consumption is tricky to measure, but it'd be nice to get some clarification here.

GSTe · May 14, 2007

I'm willing to buy either the 2900 XT or the 8800 GTX, but I'd rather not settle for the 8800 GTS. The 2900 XT is like settling for the 8800 GTS, except with higher power requirements.

:lol: So you won't settle for the GTS, but you'll settle for the XT because it has higher power requirements? :lol: :?: :!: :lol:

dean7 · May 14, 2007

True. If they altered their card to "cheat" on something they should cheat on Oblivion or something. 😉

vic20 · May 14, 2007

From looking at the benchmarks, It seems the drivers are just getting in the way of the card. I'm seriously Disappointed, AMD/ATI has had plenty of time to work on the drivers and there Crap! At this point I would still get a 8800gts, If I had to chose, even with the vista driver issues.

I don't see how you can claim a driver issue "from looking at the benchmarks."

That, and drivers have 0 to do w/the fact that you need half of the nuclear power from soviet russia to power these things.

ATi is using superscalars (ironically like Geforce FX...), which thereotically gives them more power. Unfortunately it requires much more programming to keep them busy.

nV is using normal scalars, which is a much simpler setup. They only need to keep 2 shaders busy per unit vs. 5.

This is why drivers will make much more of a difference with 2900 than 8800, and also why the 2900 performance is so inconsistant.

I agree with the power. I'm tired of buying new PSUs and having a noisy machine.

R600: Finally DX10 Hardware from ATI

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Share this page