Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nvidia 8900 Series

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 8, 2007 4:03:50 PM

If history must repeat itself, the 8600GT will be a massive hit and ATI won't have anything worthy against it. But I hope ATI can learn from their mistakes.
March 8, 2007 4:11:23 PM

Quote:
Nvidia seems well poised to respond to ATI


Ya, but if you beleive the specs on those charts then Nvidia will really have nothing to match X2900XTX 1024mb, not even their 8950gx2. Supposedly Nvidia wont even have a 1024mb single card solution nore 512-bit, am I right? On top of that, The X2900XTX is also rumored to have slightly faster clock speeds then even the 8900gtx nevermind the gx2. So if those charts circling around turn out to be true, Nvidia wont really be "poised" to respond agressively enough. Cant wait to see actual benchmarks though.
Related resources
March 8, 2007 5:04:50 PM

Didn't that TweakTown article already get debunked or am I confusing it with something else?
March 8, 2007 5:10:45 PM

Quote:
Didn't that TweakTown article already get debunked or am I confusing it with something else?
On another forum, I had a guy state that Nvidia is skipping 89** totally and going on to G90/9*** series cores soon. However, I have seen no links/articles/proof. I'm open to suggestion here.
March 8, 2007 5:12:59 PM

Quote:
Nvidia seems well poised to respond to ATI


Ya, but if you beleive the specs on those charts then Nvidia will really have nothing to match X2900XTX 1024mb, not even their 8950gx2. Supposedly Nvidia wont even have a 1024mb single card solution nore 512-bit, am I right? On top of that, The X2900XTX is also rumored to have slightly faster clock speeds then even the 8900gtx nevermind the gx2. So if those charts circling around turn out to be true, Nvidia wont really be "poised" to respond agressively enough. Cant wait to see actual benchmarks though.You're sounding very optimistic, even though they've yet to get the product to market, or even demo it anywhere.
March 8, 2007 5:29:15 PM

Quote:
You're sounding very optimistic, even though they've yet to get the product to market, or even demo it anywhere.



Good point and a little of what I was illustrating. I am certainly not bashing AMD/ATI as I certainly hope they come out with a very competitive offering SOON. Competition is good for the consumer. It is not a good sign at all that AMD/ATI chose not to have a demo for R600 cards at CEBIT. If there are not suitable cards ready by now, it does not bode well for them. Nvidia has had the 88** on the market for several months now and appears to have 89** or even the rumored G90/9*** cards in the works to reply when AMD/ATI releases. ATI has been playing from behind for quite a while now. They need to even the score.
March 8, 2007 5:35:20 PM

Quote:
You're sounding very optimistic, even though they've yet to get the product to market, or even demo it anywhere.


All Im saying is if you beleive the spec sheets then nvidia doesnt look poised enough IMO.

Compare the X2800XTX 1024 with the 8900 GTX and its disapointing IMO.

March 8, 2007 5:37:55 PM

lets not forget it was only the midranged 6600 and 6800 series that nvidia really help a large crown.

before that NV didnt have an answer for the 9xxx and its basically a toss up between ATI & NV's midrange. There's very litte history imo.

It ATI, then NV now split so its time for one company to shine. However I feel you may be somewhat accurate. The canadians are focused on getting their high end out and charging...

This gives time for Nv to finalizing and market a solid midranged lineup.
March 8, 2007 5:43:08 PM

Weel Nvidia actually has their cards on the market and not AMD/ATI. We can suppose all we want but the fact is Nvidia leads right now. And also I am more likely to believe Nvidia has the 89xx done or close to being ready than AMD/ATI releasing new gfx cards anytime soon 'cause usually when a product gets delayed over and over, as the case with r600, once it actually comes out it's either too late as the market as better offerings, or the product is so lame nobody will buy it. Nvidia has learned its lesson with the 5xxx family. My opinion is it's ATI's turn now. And please don't brand me a fanboy as I had cards from both manufacturers in recent years.
March 8, 2007 5:55:07 PM

Quote:

Weel Nvidia actually has their cards on the market and not AMD/ATI.


What does that have to do with anything??


Quote:

We can suppose all we want but the fact is Nvidia leads right now.


Performance yes. Sales....about even past few quarters.



And this is where the retardation comes to light

Quote:

And also I am more likely to believe Nvidia has the 89xx done or close to being ready than AMD/ATI releasing new gfx cards anytime soon 'cause usually when a product gets delayed over and over, as the case with r600, once it actually comes out it's either too late as the market as better offerings, or the product is so lame nobody will buy it.


The final offering of the R600 was tapped out and completed quite some time ago. Trust me, if ATI wanted to ship the R600, they could.... might not have been the hardest launch (then again the 8800 wasnt either)
but it could have been done. The fact remains is the timing, they (ATI) realese cards when the surrounding environment is ready as well. 8800 is an excellent performer, but it was modeled around the "Next Gen" that Gen being DX10. I dont see any games supporting that yet, nor do I see Nv drivers not having problems with Vista. Nv pushed out a GPU early to boost sales, I'm still convinced because they have a great idea how sizably the R600 will kill the G80.

We KNOW the R600 is real, we know that the 8900 is something that is GOING to manafest in the coming time....but nothing is completely concrete right now. Nv could delay the whole thing for a refresh 6 months later.... we know ATI's move...realese their new series, but we dont have solid evidence on damn that that the guys in green might do.


Quote:

And please don't brand me a fanboy as I had cards from both manufacturers in recent years.



That doesnt mean anything, I had/still have GPU's from 4 manufactorers.
Aside from the performance of the 8800 series, my perference/ slight fanboyishness is towards ATI. I like what they offer for the price, performance and tinkering. Owning certain cards doesnt mean anything.

Brand you a fanboy....maybe not..... an idiot....maybe yes
March 8, 2007 6:07:17 PM

thx for the idiot remark .... been a while since someone's been this nice to me .... wow what a wake up call ... to think I could have gone on with my life without ever knowing this !!!!! ..... you my friend are the perfect example of why these forums are less and less visited by poeple who actually have something to say in regards COMPUTERS ! So keep your insults to yourself and if you wanna have an intelligent debate I am your man but if you are only out to flame well find another playpal 'cause I will not even give you the satisfaction of insulting you back (people with an iq over 140, wich is obviously not your case, will understand why and the other flamers in here will not get it)
March 8, 2007 6:27:59 PM

Quote:
Nvidia seems well poised to respond to ATI


Ya, but if you beleive the specs on those charts then Nvidia will really have nothing to match X2900XTX 1024mb, not even their 8950gx2. Supposedly Nvidia wont even have a 1024mb single card solution nore 512-bit, am I right? On top of that, The X2900XTX is also rumored to have slightly faster clock speeds then even the 8900gtx nevermind the gx2. So if those charts circling around turn out to be true, Nvidia wont really be "poised" to respond agressively enough. Cant wait to see actual benchmarks though.

dude, rumors, speculations...., how sad, do wait for the real benchmarks, until then, stop it...., its just sad, and just to say I'm fair, I don't believe those charts either, I can make charts just like that in excel also.
March 8, 2007 7:37:00 PM

Quote:
...And also I am more likely to believe Nvidia has the 89xx done or close to being ready than AMD/ATI releasing new gfx cards anytime soon 'cause usually when a product gets delayed over and over, as the case with r600, once it actually comes out it's either too late as the market as better offerings, or the product is so lame nobody will buy it. Nvidia has learned its lesson with the 5xxx family. My opinion is it's ATI's turn now...


I fear the same type of thing. ATI may have to come out soon, and AMD may release it before it is 100% ready for market. Hopefully I'm wrong, and ATI surprises everyone with an awesome card that nvidia has to play catchup with. Competition drives innovation.

I am glad that they at least delayed it until may rather than releasing a repeat of the GeForce FX5800 Ultra "dustbuster", better late and working than on-time and crappy. I hope AMD will not forget what happened when nvidia responded too early...
March 8, 2007 7:59:05 PM

not really sure if "too early" is really the operative word there. It takes years to design, spec, sample, test, and build a chip. By the time it is close to market there is very little that can be done to change what it is. When the 9700 came out Nv could do little to change their later to market 5800. Yes, it was lame on dx9 but great on dx8. When they designed it they may have figured that dx9 performance was not going to shine until the later revs... so from the start they designed it as a dx9 chip in name only... dx8 perf was what they wanted. ATI went differently and won, but it was from inception and not any last-minute changes on both sides. (all speculation, but it fits)

b/c we have yet to see any dx10 marks we won't know what their design plans were for the 8800. They may have made a similar decision and said "dx9 is king, dx10 can get better with later revs"... and if that is true then in this case it seems to have worked out. Big difference is that the fx had to show chops on dx9 right away, and the 8800 has yet to be forced into dx10. If the fx did not have to deal with dx9 except in specs only then we would be thinking much different of them than we are now.

The ati part is a wild-card only in that we dont know how it does on dx9 like we do the 8800. NEITHER card can show what dx10 will do and that will ultimately determine any similarities with the fx/9700 fight.

JMO of course.
March 8, 2007 9:43:54 PM

Well, it seems ATI really needs some engineering help from AMD.

Crossfire = Late and bad
RD600 = Late and bad
R600 = Late and who knows.....
March 8, 2007 9:54:41 PM

Quote:
Well, it seems ATI really needs some engineering help from AMD.

huh? Late != a need for engineering help. Maybe marketing or PR help on release dates, but not engineering.

Quote:

Crossfire = Late and bad

:roll: too many ppl dump on crossfire... yet provide no proof on how it is "bad". In many/most cases it outperforms sli in performance and quality.

Quote:

RD600 = Late and bad

It did not win top performance, but certainly was not the bottom either. How is that "bad"?

Quote:

R600 = Late and who knows.....

ya, sure.

you see to jump on what you say are "bad" engineering and yet fail to see anything else. First you point out only 3 bad things. (forgetting for the moment that none of them are really bad at all, crossfire being the opposite in fact) and then you fail to say anything about what they have done well. On top of that how many "bad" things has Nv done? If you really look you would see some equality there.

Regardless, take your fanboyism somewhere else.
March 8, 2007 10:19:44 PM

how about R600 = late and grrrrrrreat (I guess we'll see :? )
March 8, 2007 11:23:24 PM

This is not fan boy stuff so lay off. I simply started a discussion. As far as what ATI has done, the info is about what ATI has done lately, which is not much. As far engineering help, ATI has been late with several launches lately so, in a positive way, I hope they get some good assistance from whatever they gain from the association with AMD. I'm not bashing ATI, you need to get whatever chip it is off your shoulder.

I hope ATI and AMD, and in the area of CPUs, GPUs, and chipsets, do very well. Competition is good for the consumer and none of us will benefit from an Nvidia + Intel dominated world. But, the RD600 chipset is not the answer and is likely EOL soon if not already. And you have probably noticed that DFI (who may soon be totally out of the enthusiast MOBO business) is the only MOBO maker that chose to build on the RD600 chipset and look how late that chipset and board was. And, the performance did not live up to the hype. So, too late too little = bad when products go EOL so quickly these days.

And, while we are at it, I initially said Nvidia appears to be poised well to respond. They may or may not retain the performance crown but, they ARE ready to respond and on time, if not ahead of schedule.

So, I'm not a fan boy. You need to stop trying to be some cute little neighborhood enforcer. As I said, this is simply a discussion.
March 8, 2007 11:58:38 PM

Quote:
And this is where the retardation comes to light


The only retards around here are the ones that are buying DAMMIT's lies about why they delayed the R600 yet again. They've shown they have functioning cards, if they had good news on the benchmarks they would put it out there so that people would hold off on their 8800 purchases and wait for them come out. Instead they decided not to, which can only mean that the hope and hype already out there was and is superior to the reality of the R600s performance. No other explanation makes a bit of sense. No other explanation is true.
March 9, 2007 2:32:27 AM

hey man, what you said smacked of just normal "company X sucks and company Y rules" stuff and I called it that way. Sorry if you did not intend that and I read it wrong. I just get burned out by ppl running bogus claims like "ati puts out crappy drivers" or "Nv still makes crap cards like the FX" when they both clearly make mistakes and yet still stay in the heat of competition. Discussion is cool though... If that is what you intend then no harm, no foul. :) 
March 9, 2007 2:43:04 AM

Quote:

:roll: too many ppl dump on crossfire... yet provide no proof on how it is "bad". In many/most cases it outperforms sli in performance and quality.



Actually this is the opposite from I usually hear regarding SLI vs Crossfire. Do you care to share any links just for reference?

SLI has had more time to mature so I could have sworn it was the better way to go for a 2 card setup.

Just look at the vga charts here on Tom's for a good start. Other sites like Firingsquad or the [H] also show both dual card setups being very competitive with crossfire winning more than not. (8800 setups notwithstanding)

Honestly, crossfire had a rocky start but stabilized fine with the x1k gen cards. The only legit argument in favor of sli would be the need for a master card, but that does not say performance is worse but just that you need a "special" card. Performance was still competitive with sli. This of course is moot now as the master card is getting phased out in current gen crossfire.

I am not a fan of ANY dual setup, but just think it is lame to say Nv is better than ati on this when the benchmarks clearly show that is not true. (not asking for flames here, just pointing this out)
March 9, 2007 3:05:16 AM

Quote:
You're sounding very optimistic, even though they've yet to get the product to market, or even demo it anywhere.



Good point and a little of what I was illustrating. I am certainly not bashing AMD/ATI as I certainly hope they come out with a very competitive offering SOON. Competition is good for the consumer. It is not a good sign at all that AMD/ATI chose not to have a demo for R600 cards at CEBIT. If there are not suitable cards ready by now, it does not bode well for them. Nvidia has had the 88** on the market for several months now and appears to have 89** or even the rumored G90/9*** cards in the works to reply when AMD/ATI releases. ATI has been playing from behind for quite a while now. They need to even the score.

It's all good man, I reacted harshly also but, I tried to clarify early that I was pulling ATI to do well. Read above. I'm a best bang per buck kind of guy personally as a consumer so, I buy what works best. And, the bulk of people that I know who have tried Crossfire hate it so, I am basing that on experience from people I trust yet, not personal experience. I have not and will not try it unless I get 2 cards from work for testing purposes.

It should be very interesting for sure. And, my point about the engineering help is that I hope AMD can help ATI start meeting these release dates so that we get more competition over both markets, chipsets and GPUs. Until then, the best offerings by far between Nvidia vs ATI is Nvidia in both catagories.
March 9, 2007 3:44:01 AM

Quote:
...Until then, the best offerings by far between Nvidia vs ATI is Nvidia in both catagories.


What?!?

Quote:
...This is not fan boy stuff so lay off.

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: FANBOY! FANBOY! FANBOY! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

(I'm obviously kidding)
March 9, 2007 4:32:59 AM

Quote:
It's all good man, I reacted harshly also but, I tried to clarify early that I was pulling ATI to do well. Read above. I'm a best bang per buck kind of guy personally as a consumer so, I buy what works best. And, the bulk of people that I know who have tried Crossfire hate it so, I am basing that on experience from people I trust yet, not personal experience. I have not and will not try it unless I get 2 cards from work for testing purposes.

If you are a bang for buck guy, then ANY dual card setup is not for you. The "best gaming cards for the money" article each month here shows that clear enough. I still asked if you had proof that we all can see (not just a "this guy I know said so" kinda thing) about how crossfire is bad. If these people that you know have tried it and hate it, why? What was bad? I am honestly curious to know what the reasoning is... Do you have any links for current reviews that show crossfire being "bad"?
March 9, 2007 5:24:28 AM

Quote:
thx for the idiot remark .... been a while since someone's been this nice to me .... wow what a wake up call ... to think I could have gone on with my life without ever knowing this !!!!! ..... you my friend are the perfect example of why these forums are less and less visited by poeple who actually have something to say in regards COMPUTERS ! So keep your insults to yourself and if you wanna have an intelligent debate I am your man but if you are only out to flame well find another playpal 'cause I will not even give you the satisfaction of insulting you back (people with an iq over 140, wich is obviously not your case, will understand why and the other flamers in here will not get it)


Booyah!
March 9, 2007 11:46:19 AM

Quote:



And please don't brand me a fanboy as I had cards from both manufacturers in recent years.


Brand you a fanboy....maybe not..... an idiot....maybe yes

Raven, name-calling was not appropriate. When debating, use arguments, data, references, facts, etc... when you go down to outright insults it simply ruins the whole credibility of the rest of your posts.
March 9, 2007 12:02:55 PM

Quote:
It's all good man, I reacted harshly also but, I tried to clarify early that I was pulling ATI to do well. Read above. I'm a best bang per buck kind of guy personally as a consumer so, I buy what works best. And, the bulk of people that I know who have tried Crossfire hate it so, I am basing that on experience from people I trust yet, not personal experience. I have not and will not try it unless I get 2 cards from work for testing purposes.

If you are a bang for buck guy, then ANY dual card setup is not for you. The "best gaming cards for the money" article each month here shows that clear enough. I still asked if you had proof that we all can see (not just a "this guy I know said so" kinda thing) about how crossfire is bad. If these people that you know have tried it and hate it, why? What was bad? I am honestly curious to know what the reasoning is... Do you have any links for current reviews that show crossfire being "bad"?Well, I never mentioned SLI or Crossfire as being great values and that is really beyond the scope here. And, I only mentioned Crossfire because it was so far behind SLI's release. I'd really like to see ATI keep up withi Nvidia and meet their projected launch dates. That's where I figure sooner or later that the AMD engineering, R$D, QA, etc will help out.

And, I did a bit of reading. I see that apparently the newer generation Crossfire stuff works well so, my opinion appears to have been outdated. As I said, I have not personally used it and my info was 2nd hand. However, with the best current dual card setup from ATI vs Nvidia, Nvidia mops the floor with ATI.

Bang per buck is more my attitude towards OCing and when I build machines that earn my money. So, it does not really concern this discussion. The most efficient bang per buck machine I have right now is a DV editing station for the wife:
Appr 1.2FB of storage, ASUS P4C800 E-D, 2.4c at 3.3ghz, 2 x 512mb of memory, Matrox G550 video card, etc.

But, back to another earlier point, competition is good for the consumer. We all NEED ATI to do well regardless of which brand we purchase or prefer.
March 9, 2007 12:44:53 PM

Quote:
All Im saying is if you beleive the spec sheets then nvidia doesnt look poised enough IMO.

Compare the X2800XTX 1024 with the 8900 GTX and its disapointing IMO.

Don't drink the kool-aid dude; until the card is out, we won't really know how it stands against the 8800GTX.
a b U Graphics card
March 9, 2007 1:04:47 PM

Quote:
All Im saying is if you beleive the spec sheets then nvidia doesnt look poised enough IMO.

Compare the X2800XTX 1024 with the 8900 GTX and its disapointing IMO.

Don't drink the kool-aid dude; until the card is out, we won't really know how it stands against the 8800GTX.

Agreed, the proof will be in the benchies. I am very interested in seeing how the 8900GTS stacks up against the X2800XTX as they are both about the same price/specs range of being on the lower side of the high end. Also interested to see how GDDR4 has progressed since the X1950XTX.

Kool-Aid! HA! I always enjoy that reference...
March 9, 2007 3:11:02 PM

The numbers are always satisfying as for the specs presented, sometimes even "eye-popping" at least for the number sensitives only. I myself is number difference sensitive, and conscious in benchmarks. 8) .. But, lets put theory to practice, put practice to application and lastly, lets put application in the proper REAL WORLD SITUATION as it is where our video cards are designed and tested for it's true performance over value..
Take every benchmarks you'll find and present it here when you've got 20 fps advantage in either in an nVidia card or an ATI one in same video card ladder and relative comparability-let's not be biased as the results well all reflect your status in this thread :lol: . Ex. take an nVidia 7900 vs. an ATI X1900.. Of course their are several series's released from the two chips compared, that's why i'm writing it down...

There could be a GT, a GTS, a GTX, an XT, and an XTX, and for the reliability's sake you can't pair an ATI's XTXs with nVidias GTS :(  for common sense.. For short yet single handed statement, let's compare a video card to another one when their specs are closely related and reasonable for comparison.. You can't compare an X2800XTX to an FX5500 for sanity's sake their a world apart of the specs and X2800XTX ATI offering is not yet even out in your local computer shops, and the FX5500 is gonna be phased out!! :lol:  Sounds very unnecessary? Well, just a guide so that someone won't slip out of track in here....

Now, let's take those things above for the so called REAL WORLD APPLICATION mentioned above... Does a 5fps diff. important? How about a 10? Or a 15fps difference? Or a 20fps difference? A 20 is definitely valuable and worthy of praise, a 15 is an eye-candy, a 10 is exciting, a 5 is piteous increase :cry:  .. Or whatever way you want to describe yourself the numbers i had above.. Let's put it in a simple ending statement, take an X2800XTX(when these are out) with an 8800GTX, run them to their limits(OC) and comeback here with the results, and if that X2800XTX can have an average of 20 fps performance lead over 8800GTX then it should be the time anyone in here must use the word powerful for a description of a video card... What now, go for dual graphics high-end setup's? Well, if it won't hurt your pocket to buy high-end vid. cards which are gonna be outperformed by half within a 1.5 years time, or roughly a 2 yr. time(i doubt it) 8O ...

When running with high-end cards, numbers are often overvalued-which does not actually reflect the real world performance of the cards. Maybe just a 10 fps increase? Are those numbers really really a thing to be bothered between high-cost high-end vid. cards? Hopefully, you wanna expect more than that :evil:  !!..


you might want to start HERE:

And one thing:
Be sure you'll be back...
March 9, 2007 6:12:23 PM

This is dumb... r600 isn't even out... Nvidia has the clear advantage.

As several of the posters pointed out, ATI should have provided some benchies for this product by now ( at the very least to delay attrition on their current high-end customer base)...

Therefore, this is NOT a marketing issue... it is an engineering/fabrication issue.
March 9, 2007 6:23:06 PM

sigh, :roll:


if it is even going to reach the new pushed back target date, the it is already designed, engineered and samples are built. (arguably production is already underway) Whether marketing or not (may be low yields on production honestly) and whether it rules or sucks, it can't be engineering issues if we are this close to it being released. simple as that.


You will continue to flame, but that is a reality too I guess.
March 9, 2007 6:49:58 PM

Quote:
sigh, :roll:


You will continue to flame, but that is a reality too I guess.


double sigh :roll: :roll:

yes, I came into a thread about "Nvidia 8900 Series" and started debating how great the specs on the r600 look.

r600 fanboys will contiue to flame in defense of ATI in every and any thread they can find... tiresome.

I'm not tied down to Nvidia or ATI... I'm building a completely new rig in a few months - may the best GPU have my $$$$.
March 9, 2007 7:30:39 PM

oh don't mistake what I am doing as a defense of ati... that card could very well suck worse than any other... but I am saying that neither engineering nor fear of bad performance is what is holding it back... engineering is long done, and fear will usually force a release early, not late. It is "something else". (?) I have given a few possible reasons but they are just speculation. Reality will hit us when we see benchmarks on how it performs but we may never know why the date kept getting pushed back.


as for why there are no benchies... like I pointed out a while ago, benching a dx10 card is not possible right now, and dx9 benchies do not tell a true story just as dx8 benches did not tell a good story on the gf-Fx cards in the day. This is again not saying that the r600 will be good, just a possible reason for the lack of tests as of yet... it may not do much better on dx9 than what is current. (8800)

but regardless... this is all opinion/speculation... doesn't really matter


but then, not much on an internet forum really does matter now does it?... we are all here just because I guess... sometimes we help, other times we just waste time ;) 
March 9, 2007 7:38:49 PM

Seems like ATI is almost always a bit late to the game, but then again Nvidia rushes out their hardware with crappy drivers almost all the time. The 8800 series video card has been around a few months now and it's still giving BSODs with the latest drivers. 680i board continues to have problems with SATA HDD corruptions and etc (They also rushed 680i to the market with the MCP southbridge)...And SLI in Vista is still "beta." There's really no excuse for Nvidia (or any other company) to have crappy drivers for Vista when Vista was delayed for almost a year.

My friend have an EVGA 8800GTS 640MB running WOW @ 1028x1024 and it'll give BSOD at specific spots everytime - seems like everyone with a 8800GTS/GTX crashes at similar sites when playing WOW accrording to the forums. And every EVGA rep have told us to "turned" down the resolution and quality and it still crashes. If he have to turned down his resolution and quality settings for stability why the hell did he spend 400-600 on a video card when he can easily run low res, low quality with a sub 200 card? They also told him to uninstall nTune utility - which didn't work and still give him the same problems. This is bogus and some will consider it a fraud. A half baked video card that will perform well in benchmarks and crashes in actual games.

But anyhoo, I also notice lots of debate between SLI and Crossfire setup, I do admit that the one sucky thing about Crossfire is the external connectors - which should internal with the r600. Dual video card setup is overrated anyway! R600 will win in some benchmarks and will lose in some benchmarks when pitted against G80. The important thing is, who will give us the best driver support.

There are no official or legit R600 benchmarks yet so we don't know how it will perform against g80s - most people assume it will perform better because it is released later. But the r600 delays are real and its hurting ATI's market share.
March 9, 2007 7:46:47 PM

Quote:

The final offering of the R600 was tapped out and completed quite some time ago. Trust me, if ATI wanted to ship the R600, they could....


you cant be serius....

Quote:
The fact remains is the timing, they (ATI) realese cards when the surrounding environment is ready as well.


and when that will be?next year perhaps?they will never get more hype than what they had so far.In fact , they get more and more negative comments.

Quote:
We KNOW the R600 is real

8O ??
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
March 10, 2007 2:22:36 AM

Quote:
Didn't that TweakTown article already get debunked or am I confusing it with something else?


You're right this got debunked, in the first day it was posted back in February, and nothing's changed but people wanna believe none the less because they have something else to try and say, despite the fact that the R600 was shown last weekend running a stream demo with 64 shader units, not the 128 in the list; as for rumour no GF8600U, price is wrong for the GT, speeds are wrong, as are shader units, and the GF8900 isn't going to 80nm if you wanna go with rumours.

But since there's no hard info out the Fanbois will post anything. :roll:

How many days 'til the next Level505 repost?

March 10, 2007 3:30:45 AM

Dateline- March 9, 2007-

The 8800 GTX has been out, running solidly in front for over 5 months now. Granted, driver support has been sketchy at best, but the card, and its slower sibling, have dominated the charts since inception.

The much vaunted R600, from rival AMD/ATI, is over 3 months behind launch, and is scheduled for a "future" upgrade in 2 months, prior to its official launch date in the original configuration.

Who is smoking the crack pipe here?

Talking 2xxxx ATI vs possible nVidia future cards is ludicrious considering the R600 has not even launched yet. If, and I stress if, it is such a killa, why has the R600 not launched?

I look forward to the new ATI card, but have many stories for everyone in the fantasy realm till then........
March 10, 2007 1:22:14 PM

If this is true it means ATI have missed one whole generation of grahics cards.
March 10, 2007 2:27:52 PM

Quote:
If history must repeat itself, the 8600GT will be a massive hit and ATI won't have anything worthy against it. But I hope ATI can learn from their mistakes.


What mistakes would that be?
Consistantly being able to trade video card performance punches with nvidia?

Sure it's been a bit longer than normal for a vc release but don't forget there was just a merger and things have to get in order. Also, if you believe the marketing nonsense (and I really only partially do) they are holding back release so they can release a slate of mid and high-end cards at once, and just before Barcelona at that.

What other mistakes have they made... hmm... oh yeah having a fantastic hold over mobile graphics, mac graphics, and hell.. even server graphics still use ati-rage chips.
March 10, 2007 4:16:22 PM

The whole R600 vs Nvidia 8 series is reminding me too much of the old 7 series vs X1xx series. Nvidia has got their foot out of the door first like before, and ATIs response is 6 months down the line again.

If history repeats itself we will be seeing the X2900XTX just beat the 8800GTX, then the release of the 8800 Ultra which will topple the X2900. ATI will then finish the X2950XTX, which Nvidia wont be able to beat with their 8900GTX.

Thats what happened last gen anyway, Nvidia got in the first word, but ATI had the last laugh. Its pretty much given anyway that after R600 there will be a flurry of releases on both sides, and its anybodys guess as to who will be on top once all of the major cards of the new generation are out.
March 12, 2007 2:05:12 AM

Sorry for my absense.... been rather busy; anywho


@ smartel7070

Perhaps I went to far to cut an insult, but your post wasnt what
one would call enlightening or specific.


@ Rob

Yeah, would you rather be Nv and have your product face
competition that would match and beat you?

or

Would you perfer to push it out early
and nab market share? :idea:


@ eric54

booyah for what???


@ stefx

Already apologized....

apply for moderator.... =)


@ Cal7

Yeah, dead serious. As grape said, a summer launch
with Vista. Then when that was pushed back, ATI
began sampling a better retail cooling design for because
of some reported deterioration of the PWM and proper air flow.


ATI seems to be accurate on environment.
Example, 04' flash back. I remember reading posts on here how the X8xx line sucked because it didnt carry SM 3.0 and that in itself was going to break ATI. Well, turns out, in 07' that ATI didnt need to include it in that series because A) there were no/few games worth the development and
implementation & B) we see what happens when a 68xx series uses a SM 3.0 game with some details and it becomes rather...not fun.... touche?


Savvy?
March 12, 2007 5:32:55 AM

Quote:
@ Cal7

Yeah, dead serious. As grape said, a summer launch
with Vista. Then when that was pushed back, ATI
began sampling a better retail cooling design for because
of some reported deterioration of the PWM and proper air flow.


ATI seems to be accurate on environment.
Example, 04' flash back. I remember reading posts on here how the X8xx line sucked because it didnt carry SM 3.0 and that in itself was going to break ATI. Well, turns out, in 07' that ATI didnt need to include it in that series because A) there were no/few games worth the development and
implementation & B) we see what happens when a 68xx series uses a SM 3.0 game with some details and it becomes rather...not fun.... touche?


Savvy?


no, i still dont get your point (or AMDs )
having such a superior product , as you say , and dont get it out asap and kill competition is not such a wise move in an industry like this.
As for SM3.0 , well i would still get a card that supports it and never uses it,than one that doesnt have it.The same with 8800.
And in general , i would remind you 3Dfx.The had the same "timing" back then and look where they are now.Not that it will happen with ATI but you have an example.
March 12, 2007 9:32:48 AM

it IS a wise move. this way they dont have to worry about a refreshed high end against the 8900, ATI can simply bump clocks speeds a bit to compensate.

if NV is going to counter with the 8900 series then they know that while their sales for the high end have been slipping with the 8800(and started abysmal anyway) that they needed a better product to compete. the rumors have simply confirmed my opinion the R600 would be and will be superior to the 8800GTX, or why would Nv be so stirred as to push out another card in a certain time frame?


and it wasnt 'timing' that killed 3DFX... if thats what you want to imply
March 12, 2007 10:45:36 AM

Thanks for the link dude,makes me feel better knowing the prices won't be too high on the next gpu being put out by nvidia.That dual gpu one looks like it might be useful.Later.

Dahak

AMD X2-4400+@2.6 S-939
EVGA NF4 SLI MB
2X EVGA 7950GT KO IN SLI
2X 512MB CRUCIAL BALLISTIX DDR500
WD300GIG HD
ACER 22IN WIDESCREEN LCD 1600X1200
THERMALTAKE TOUGHPOWER 850WATT PSU
COOLERMASTER MINI R120
3DMARK05 13,471
March 12, 2007 1:01:41 PM

If you people think that not releasing a product for several months is a wise move , then i must be dumb cause i dont get it.The only thing that makes AMD look "wise" as you say (for GPUs only that is) is the slow sales of 8800 due to lack of DX10 games (but how slow is slow in this case?).Many people -including me-were waiting for R600 but then jumped to 8800 because , if anything else, it is the faster card you can buy today.As you probably know , selling high end cards is not what makes money for them but gives the typical speed crown so they can sell their cheaper parts easily.
R600 will be faster than 8800 (hell if it wasnt after 6 months) but not having to worry about refreshing it?You mean they will have R700 or something out the next 6 months?Or will it be so much faster that nvidia wont have something close to it for the whole year?And why not releasing the R600 when it was ready (and so much faster) and speed up their whole future product line?What you say just doesnt work in this industry.We are not in the 80s whne Intel could release one CPU in five years.Forget that.
It was timing that killed 3Dfx.They didnt have anything to compete to others at a certain point.As i said they dont have the luxury (or the size) to afford such "wise" moves.
AMD is under pressure from intel and nvidia too.If they could , they would have R600 out from the very first second.
March 12, 2007 1:29:08 PM

I believe ATI realizes that launching their newest product would be a waste of time until they have a stock pile ready to ship and there's games(more importantly an OS) to take advantage of the features.

3DFX was killed not by the quality of their GPU, but their inability to get it out the door quick enough. Its obvious ATI doesnt have the problem due to their current market strength. They see the 8800 isnt selling well because of the absense of DX10 titles and complete support.

Why bother? Their Midrange is still solid and they can afford to position themselves to put out a single series that matches/beats 2 from Nvidia....
Thus, cutting on marketing expenses, production costs and consumer confusion.

What do you mean they dont have size? Your refering to ATI? There an equivilent to Nv. AMD is still making $$... maybe not from high end CPU sales, but low cost, lower power CPU's, mobiles, integrated solutions and server still has decent buck. The Canadians arent going anywhere, and I'm sure there smiling knowing in comfort that Nv is the one going to have to counter their launch and not vice versa.
March 12, 2007 2:36:06 PM

I figure, that by the time any r600 derivative hits the shelves, most of those interested in keeping up with the arms race will have a 8*00 series card in their PC, and reluctant to upgrade yet again.
8800 gts 320 has been available for a while, quite an affordable card I must say. with a great price/performance ratio. 8600 is just round the corner. They all bring the new architecture and the dx10 support.

Seriously. Say AMD releases their Barcelona chips and they are 5-10% faster than Conroes in the same price range (give or take 15 bucks). Would you go for it?

And I seriously doubt that ATI's long awaited comeback is based on architectural improvements when looking at the size of those ...um...things. And the power consumption rumours...
March 12, 2007 8:56:09 PM

Quote:
I believe ATI realizes that launching their newest product would be a waste of time until they have a stock pile ready to ship

so they are not in time
Quote:
and there's games(more importantly an OS) to take advantage of the features.

this explains the slow sales of the 8800 as well , but they are selling faster every day anyway because they are available

Quote:
3DFX was killed not by the quality of their GPU, but their inability to get it out the door quick enough. Its obvious ATI doesnt have the problem due to their current market strength.

thats exactly what i said...

Quote:
What do you mean they dont have size? Your refering to ATI? There an equivilent to Nv. AMD is still making $$... maybe not from high end CPU sales, but low cost, lower power CPU's, mobiles, integrated solutions and server still has decent buck.

i meant something bigger like Intel.Intel was in real trouble for a couple of years but due to their size they did what they needed to move ahead again.And anyway AMD now has to face Intel and nVidia.Its becoming harder isnt it?But if they manage their resources wisely they can get even higher.Just faster than today right?
Quote:
The Canadians arent going anywhere, and I'm sure there smiling knowing in comfort that Nv is the one going to have to counter their launch and not vice versa.

I think they are in the position to counter nVidia right now and not how you see it.But we need competition and i think they its better for us if its direct and not every company release better products when there is nothing as fast to compete with.
Ok,enough discussed already.Lets see some real hardware on shelves :) 
!