shadus

Distinguished
Apr 16, 2003
2,067
0
19,790
They have the review up on toms, being as the drivers are half working on a prototype card I'm pretty impressed. If they can clean up and release good quality drivers I think they'll probally have a pretty decent card on their hands. If they don't it'll be a total pos.

Shadus
 

silverpig

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
5,068
0
25,780
Yeah, it does look promising. I hope they work it all out.

Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.
 

scottkli

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2003
126
0
18,680
Why not the half the product?
To get people a early preview of the product and give them an idea of what its capabilites could be. Its all marketing, it got you to type in this forum about it. When the final product come out and tests are compared you'll probably be back here to talk about the improvement or lack of improvements that were found.
 

rain_king_uk

Distinguished
Nov 5, 2002
229
0
18,680
Personally if I were XGI I wouldn't allow any reviews of my product until it was working correctly and turning in some good benchmark results. You don't catch nvidia or ATi letting people review their half-finished products.


Edit: Having said that nvidia actually released a half-finished product (5800FX) :p
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by RAIN_KING_UK on 11/07/03 12:27 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

rain_king_uk

Distinguished
Nov 5, 2002
229
0
18,680
I'm not sure that's true. Look at ATi for instance - they didn't give even the slightest wiff of what they were about to unleash before the 9700 Pro came out, as a result that product turned heads bigtime.

I think allowing reviews of a product when it isn't even working properly does more harm than good personally. To the casual onlooker it seems like their product is very disappointing.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by RAIN_KING_UK on 11/07/03 03:43 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

shadus

Distinguished
Apr 16, 2003
2,067
0
19,790
Nod, but XGI doesn't really have a name that is recogniseable like ATI or Nvidia does. ATI and nvidia could not advertise at all and we'd all still know what the hell the cards were like :p XGI's a newbie they need attention good or bad until they get the spoken word flowin.

Shadus
 

cleeve

Illustrious
Yeah, as a new company XGI needs to attract 3rd party manufacurers and vendors...

I think the V8 Duo has potential, but I do find it kind of disturbing that it does absolutely fabulous in benchmarks, and horrendously in apps.

Suggests that they're been optimizing their cards just for benches...

------------------
Radeon 9500 (hardmodded to PRO, o/c to 322/322)
AMD AthlonXP 2400+ (o/c to 2600+ with 143 fsb)
3dMark03: 4055
 

Spitfire_x86

Splendid
Jun 26, 2002
7,248
0
25,780
Suggests that they're been optimizing their cards just for benches...
Agree with you. If it's true, we should avoid XGI cards. They've finished optimizing for half of the benchmarks/games. Finally we may see a product that performs well in synthetic benchmarks and games that are used in benchmarking, but deliver unplayable fps with games that aren't used for benchmarking

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
 

ufo_warviper

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2001
3,033
0
20,780
I do find it kind of disturbing that it does absolutely fabulous in benchmarks, and horrendously in apps.

Suggests that they're been optimizing their cards just for benches...

When I read the analysis, I felt <i>exactly</i> the same way. Such an enormous gap in for example the UT2k3 benchmark and the game itself is practically inexplicable. I wonder how XGI is going to dig themselves out of that hole. Well grape, it looks like your XaGIrator theory is appearing more like its going to be proven true. :p

"640k ought to be enough for everyone." - <b><font color=red>BILL GATE$</b></font color=red>
 

ChipDeath

Splendid
May 16, 2002
4,307
0
22,790
Just finished reading the review, and that was the impression I got too. does quite well in the 'established' benchies, but as soon as anything else gets thrown at it it falls straight to the bottom of the pile, by a comparatively large margin. I'm far too cynical in my old age to believe it's anything other than having been specifically optimized for those benchies.

I certainly hope I'm proved wrong though.. another top-end player in the GPU market can't be a bad thing for us at the end of the day.

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
 

rubikian

Distinguished
May 20, 2002
557
0
18,980
I think that's a good start for XGI. At least they came out with a card though the performance is yet to be great as what we see unlike the Trident... last year they promised with trident XP but till now, even the Ti4200 is facing out, their comparative card for the Ti4200 is not even out yet...