Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

UPDATE!!! ATI R600, X2900XTX - I'M BREAKING MY NDA NOW!

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 3, 2007 8:19:34 AM

Just kidding I missed AF but I did spend an hour on metacrawler.com and found out some stuff.

Eats alot of power, much more than the 8800GTX.

Best benchie information I could find show it a whoopoping 200pts higher than an 8800GTX in 3DMARK2006. (Like 3% fyi)

AMDTI makes most of their money selling the gimped defecto chips in the lower models; this is the reason for the delays to accumulate gimped chips to sell along the flagship at launch. (Cause G80 was a powerful suprise also I guess)

And drumroll .. I predict from the information I have researched:

The press launch will be end of April 2007 (yea! detailed benchies)

With product availability at the end of May 2007 (yea! oh maybe not it's a Canadian lifelike 8800GTX replica)

I've been waiting for four months and don't see any reason to wait any longer. I am purchasing the superior solution, the heavyweight of modern graphics processing, the XFX 8800GTS320.

I'm sure AMDTI will have a similar model in 3 months for $200 more if you want to wait.
April 3, 2007 8:23:28 AM

AWESOME 8O WOW ...i am not going to flame you i'll leave that for the experts :roll:

Just one suggestion great choice except get one from EVGA - awesome performance i have the superclocked version .

:D  love it . Also best post for a flame war yet :lol: 

Man the defences , to arms men :lol: 
April 3, 2007 8:31:07 AM

I think AMD is fine and is charged with saving ATI from their shenanigans. Or else it'll be the ATI comedy troupe from Canada next year. Like the 3Dfx comedy troupe I own $1700 shares of or did I mean I still have the certificate. I definately smell a fish in 2008 if AMD don't regulate, YO!
Related resources
April 3, 2007 8:38:33 AM

Quote:
AWESOME 8O WOW ...i am not going to flame you i'll leave that for the experts :roll:

Just one suggestion great choice except get one from EVGA - awesome performance i have the superclocked version .

:D  love it . Also best post for a flame war yet :lol: 

Man the defences , to arms men :lol: 


Great glad you likie; the result of 3600 seconds of grueling dialup research in Opera to bring you the scoop. Thats what it's all abooot
April 3, 2007 8:55:32 AM

Quote:
AWESOME 8O WOW ...i am not going to flame you i'll leave that for the experts :roll:

Just one suggestion great choice except get one from EVGA - awesome performance i have the superclocked version .

:D  love it . Also best post for a flame war yet :lol: 

Man the defences , to arms men :lol: 


Great glad you likie; the result of 3600 seconds of grueling dialup research in Opera to bring you the scoop. Thats what it's all abooot

I salute you :lol:  ... :trophy:
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2007 9:06:04 AM

Just make the text a little bigger for those of us with poor eyesight :roll:

Raise the drawbridge! Man the battlements!

April 3, 2007 9:47:20 AM

Quote:
Just kidding I missed AF but I did spend an hour on metacrawler.com and found out some stuff.

Eats alot of power, much more than the 8800GTX.

Best benchie information I could find show it a whoopoping 200pts higher than an 8800GTX in 3DMARK2006. (Like 3% fyi)

AMDTI makes most of their money selling the gimped defecto chips in the lower models; this is the reason for the delays to accumulate gimped chips to sell along the flagship at launch. (Cause G80 was a powerful suprise also I guess)

And drumroll .. I predict from the information I have researched:

The press launch will be end of April 2007 (yea! detailed benchies)

With product availability at the end of May 2007 (yea! oh maybe not it's a Canadian lifelike 8800GTX replica)

I've been waiting for four months and don't see any reason to wait any longer. I am purchasing the superior solution, the heavyweight of modern graphics processing, the XFX 8800GTS320.

I'm sure AMDTI will have a similar model in 3 months for $200 more if you want to wait.



let's all just wait and see what AMD will give us next, ok?
April 3, 2007 9:52:49 AM

OK, it was supposed to launch last December.... Then it was January... Then it was March..... Last time I checked my calendar, its April 03, 2007.

Can anyone spell vapourware, boys and girls?

OK, I hear rumours that it is likely in May...

Pardon my sceptisism... But at this point I will not hold my breath.

And 240 watts?
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2007 10:03:02 AM

Wasnt the OEM version 240W, or was it 280W? And wasnt it 12" long?!
April 3, 2007 10:09:08 AM

Dragon head 2, (retail, 19.5 ", whatever that is in CM....) was listed in TT as needing 240. The Draonohead OEM was, I do believe, 280. But its all vapourware..... And vapour can't use too many watts, can it? (Leaving Howard and Rudd out of it, of course!)
April 3, 2007 10:51:03 AM

Well any 8800 GTS is good enough. All the overclocked versions have the same cooler like the stock 8800, so u can download nview and overclock by yourself.

Only difference is that u have the guarantee for the overcl. version with overcklock enabled. Everything else is same.

I recommend it to everyone, have recently bought one, definitly a very good card.
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2007 10:54:29 AM

The other difference is the warranty is extended to that OC.
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2007 11:34:14 AM

Quote:
I've been waiting for four months and don't see any reason to wait any longer. I am purchasing the superior solution, the heavyweight of modern graphics processing, the XFX 8800GTS320.

I won't comment on the rest of your rant; not worth it. But to this I say, the heavyweight is the 8800GTX and don't confuse it with the 320MB 8800GTS. Check out my Oblivion outdoor benchmark results in which I found that the 8800GTS didn't offer all too much more performance than a X1950XT Turbo. Paired with an FX-55 and 2GB ram, here are the results of a stck speed 320MB GTS vs a stock clocked His X1950XT 256MB ice Q Turbo.

Oblivion Outdoor Foliage Run: 1680x1050 4xAA/16xAF (all in game settings maxed but no self shadows, no grass shadows, and shadow filtering low)

Fraps - MIN/MAX/AVE

8800GTS
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
5457, 205438, 14, 51, 26.563

X1950XT
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
4562, 205021, 9, 35, 22.251



The 320MB GTS is a nice card for the money, but Hardly a heavyweight!!! And I'm guesiing withing the next 2-3 months it will be quite a few notches down the totem pole like a 7800GT after X1900's and GF7900's launched.
April 3, 2007 11:52:14 AM

Looks more like the gts320 is middleweight, the x1950xt lightweight, and the gtx.. super heavyweight that can only compete against...

April 3, 2007 12:11:29 PM

Quote:
Dragon head 2, (retail, 19.5 ", whatever that is in CM....) was listed in TT as needing 240. The Draonohead OEM was, I do believe, 280. But its all vapourware..... And vapour can't use too many watts, can it? (Leaving Howard and Rudd out of it, of course!)


Did you just pull 19.5" out of your ass? That musta hurt.

The retail is 9" and the OEM 11.5", or around that.

Did you honestly believe that anyone would release a 19" card?
April 3, 2007 8:06:30 PM

Pauldh, your results are very different from those of [H]enthusiast, but apparently that's because they are using an X6800, the fastest processor there is. So it seems greedy Oblivion is not satisfied with mere extra GPU power.
April 3, 2007 8:43:27 PM

Yawn. FUD-spreading nVidiots.
April 3, 2007 8:46:44 PM




large green letters so people know I'm super serial!



a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2007 9:47:19 PM

Reminds me of the 300W G80 card;

http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjE1NTksLCxobmV3c...

At this rate if the G80 was 300W and the R600 is 270W does that mean that the R600 will be less power hungry than the G80? Wow, impressive! :twisted:

Perhaps waiting for the actual hardware to arrive before talking about power consumption would be a wise idea, especially since no one knows whick Belle ATi is finally going to bring to the launch party/ball.

As for who's seen the HSF assembley, it's been no secret for a while, even the retail model showed it's stripes... err... flames at CeBit.

So... OEM as big as the GF7GX2 and retail smaller than the GTX and about the same size as the GTS.

I don't know of anyone who'd worry about that in a retail product, heck they'd likely sell their case and rebuild if the performance was worth it to them.
April 3, 2007 10:24:10 PM

You'll need a bigger font so the OP can see it. Please dumb it down too-that post seems far too reasonable with not enough conjecture or FUD. Darn it, Ape, you've been around here long enough to realize you gotta post a whole buncha crap in big fonts to get attention, then have your message be about something completely unrelated to the heading of the thread, and make sure you have no facts to back it up. You're lettin' us all down, man.
April 3, 2007 10:30:02 PM

this thread officially makes me giggle


god i love NV fanboys..
April 3, 2007 10:45:15 PM

I don't understand all the fuss re. the long OEM card. Having the fan mounted in front of the card drawing air cool intake air from the front of the case could be a better solution,(that is how the long card appeared in the pictures anyhow).

In reply to OP. If you have truly been waiting four months for r600 why give up now? Your timing could be terrible. I've had a g80 for close to four months and have/will have no regrets. Having said that I wouldn't buy one today if I had already waited for 4 months. I would just have to find out first what AMD's response is after all this time.
April 3, 2007 11:10:02 PM

Quote:



large green letters so people know I'm super serial!





OH... The sins of youth! :lol: 
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2007 11:39:57 PM

Quote:
Pauldh, your results are very different from those of [H]enthusiast, but apparently that's because they are using an X6800, the fastest processor there is. So it seems greedy Oblivion is not satisfied with mere extra GPU power.

Yeah, That was my very same initial reaction. Of course I am comparing apples to apples not their goofy lets turn off grass settings. Who with a freakin X1950XT would ever play Oblivion without grass. :roll: I basically chose my test settings because that is what I hoped to be able to play Oblivion at once I installled the GTS. And part of my expectation was based on their results. I was not surprised the X1950XT struggled at those settings as they were above what I had been playing at, but was very surprised that the 8800GTS wasn't spanking the X1950XT in the demanding later part of my run.

The other difference besides CPU is that they were using a super-clocked 8800GTS and a stock clocked X1950XT. I have the opposite with the X1950XT Turbo and a reference clocked 8800GTS. But I would not think that is not going to make up for the huge difference in our results. I mean take a couple fps from my XT and add 3-5 for the GTS. Granted, my benchmark might be more demanding than theirs, but with settings pretty close to theirs, I am getting alot lower fps out of the GTS. Could be they don't test the most demading spots, or could very well be because their cpu totally pawns mine.

Looking at how the core 2 duo was able to stretch a lead over the FX-62 even with just a lousy (in Oblivion) 7900GTX in this review of theirs, it show Oblivion, or at least their benchmark of Oblivion (wherever that may be in the game), is quite CPU/system limited. And Obviously the 8800GTS has a ton more Oblivion power than the 7900GTX, so that could be the difference.


EDIT: I should add another possibility; I am running some Oblivion high res texture mods which while looking better might be too much for the 320MB and 256MB of VRAM at this resolution. I ran the same mods at 12x10 with the X1950XT but with slightly lower in game settings, but at 16x10 and higher details, maybe I need more VRAM than either card has. But that again would back up my reason for posting my results, that the 320MB GTS is not the heavyweight the OP makes it out to be.
April 4, 2007 12:31:47 AM

as far as the first DX10 cards go, I think Nvidia has pretty much already won. I don't dislike ATI, but I just don't have faith in a company that releases a product 7 months after their lead competition.

What's really going to make the clear winner though is who takes the midrange market. 7600GT a great product and beats the pants off ATI's 1650xt that came out way to late in the game. I'm guessing since the 7600GT was so gosh darn good for its price that the 8600 will be no different...a gosh darn good product at a good price.
April 4, 2007 2:07:24 AM

Quote:
as far as the first DX10 cards go, I think Nvidia has pretty much already won. I don't dislike ATI, but I just don't have faith in a company that releases a product 7 months after their lead competition.

What's really going to make the clear winner though is who takes the midrange market. 7600GT a great product and beats the pants off ATI's 1650xt that came out way to late in the game. I'm guessing since the 7600GT was so gosh darn good for its price that the 8600 will be no different...a gosh darn good product at a good price.
Based on their stellar performance running all those DX10 games out there?

Not only does your assertion make no sense whatsoever, you could make the opposing argument that nVidia may have pretty much already lost by rushing a product to market too early in the game, thus allowing ATI 7 months to come out with a better product.

As others have said, why don't we wait until the R600 is actually released before declaring either company the winner in this round?
April 4, 2007 4:41:32 AM

First of all I don't appreciate the condescending tone. I was merely saying that the winner for the 1st DX10 cards goes to Nvidia. So saying I make no sense, makes no sense. Also anyone that would assume that getting jump start in an ever changing market is a bad idea is a doof. Look at AMD/ATI's stock, they suck right now, and like I said I'm no fan of any company whether that be AMD/ATI or Nvidia or Intel...that being said I would agree that we as consumers can only benefit from the competition, which is why most of us should wait for the R600.

In the end you can't say much about something that's not even out yet. Sometimes waiting for a new product to develop into something better is the best thing to do, but at the same time if you have a product that works fairly well and is profitable than you should absorb that profit as much as you can. In the meanwhile, while ATI is "perfecting" things Nvidia is already on the next best thing. Point being, ATI is in a catch up game, and will probably be their for the next couple of years.
April 4, 2007 5:00:21 AM

I don't mean to be condescending but it seems to me that you are jumping to unfounded conclusions. If you want to award the "1st DX10 cards" crown to Nvidia, be my guest, but I for one, am not yet willing to do that. I have already seen questions arise on how good the cards will actually run DX10 games such as Crysis when they finally arrive, being that the card will be about a year old by then. I just happen to disagree with your conclusion, which is my right.

The 8800s are great cards, and I am not taking anything away from them, but we don't yet know how they will stack up to ATI's first generation offering. Further, as I said, its debatable whether they could currently be considered DX10 cards, since there are no DX10 apps, and I have seen questions as to whether the fully support DX10 or not. As long as both company's offerings are ready in time for the DX10 games to run them, the most you can say is that nVIdia currently owns the VGA crown, which at this moment in time has very little to do with DX10.

And I think it is nothing but hyperbole to say that ATI is now in a catch up game and probably will be for years. What do you have to base that on? When has either company been playing catchup for years?
April 4, 2007 5:48:28 AM

I'm not trying to placate but, I think we're probably on the same page with everything. I'm only saying that it's a fact that the 8800's are the 1st DX10 cards, it's not my opinion that they are first. Also I agree we don't know how the G80's will do against the R600's but by a month or two after they come out NV will be puting out another series of G8* cards.

And to address the catch up game. Every company plays catch up at some point, and it's not usually just a month or a week to get ahead, it's more like a year or 2. For example, Intel was pretty much the king of the 80's and 90's for Processors, then AMD was made it cought up to to Intel and passed them for a few years. Now Intel is the leader. I'm not saying this only because of benchmarks but because of market shares as well.

Also ATI was great then Nvidia then ATI and then Nvidia... back and forth it goes. At this juncture in time I would say that AMD/ATI are both playin catch up. In a few years things may be completely different.

SO in the end I would say that we are agreeing, that we can't predict the future. Nvidia has a good card, but who knows what's next. Intel has a great position in the market right now, but who know's how things will be with AMD in a little while. This is a time where people need to not be so biased.
April 4, 2007 6:00:10 AM

That is true, but for non-integrated graphics, NV is it. I feel bad for integrated graphics, because for most people it's good enough, but at the same time it's not really that good.
April 4, 2007 6:56:12 AM

:? integrated graphics :lol:  slllllllliiiiiidddeeeee show :D 
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2007 7:30:47 AM

I wouldnt depend on integrated, not if I really wanted to game. And for those who dont like the 7 month late r600, dont buy it. No matter what. Even if its priced/performs way better than the 88's. Simple as that. And if it doesnt, then again dont buy it heheh
April 4, 2007 8:43:00 AM

I dunno who Terror is, maybe you're refering to me T8RR8R. AMD/ATI aren't in good shape right now, and I'm not saying that because I have a bias of any sort it's just the truth, look at there share holdings for the last year. All down hill. NOW I'm not saying AMD/ATI is bad, infact this is when I'd buy into it. I think it's a good company that makes good products, but for right now at the very moment I'd go Intel and Nvidia.

Also integrated graphics are good enough for most people out their. If you game with more modern games it's not too great, but if you have a couple of games that you really like and they aren't overly GPU dependent than go ahead. They are also a great start for those of us who don't OC much and would like to wait to buy a graphics card because of market uncertainty. What I mean is if your games are playable and you don't know what card you're going to want to buy, then go for built in stuff.

Just don't be so closed minded. When someone says AMD/ATI is in a tight spot don't take offense, crap. Intel and Nvidia might be that way in a few years and that's how it is. Things go back and forth. As for the integrated graphics, if you don't want them then don't use them.
April 4, 2007 9:12:28 AM

Who cares about delays? No really, the 8800 GTX being twice as fast as an X1950 is nothing; doesn't matter at all! After all, DX10 games are not out yet! :lol: 

When the 9700 Pro was released back in 2002 and offered huge performance gains over the Geforce 4 did you say that this didn't matter, as no DX9 content was available yet? :roll:
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2007 9:25:28 AM

What gets me is, here we are with a card that had no drivers for dx10 over the majority of its existance. It gets praises, rightfully so for its dx9 ability, then people come on saying they have no predjudice and slam the delayed offering of ATI, claim all this wonderful ability of nVidia, then go on to say that theyre are what?? Waiting for the midrange cards!!! Yes waiting!! All at the same time saying they are not fanboys. Ill be using whatever the best solution is, be it ATI or nVidia, and using this future gpu, whatever it will be, Ill still be able to get a clear picture of a fanboy, either way
April 4, 2007 10:17:36 AM

The 8800 is the fastest DX 9 CARD on this planet period :x

The DX10 performance is UNKNOWN --ITS LIKE STAR TREK , WHERE NO CARD HAS GONE BEFORE :lol: 

SO TO SUM IT UP --DX9 = STUD , DX10 MIGHT BE A DUD.

i own a 8800, i am very happy :D 
April 4, 2007 10:20:50 AM

Quote:
Ill be using whatever the best solution is, be it ATI or nVidia, and using this future gpu, whatever it will be,


Exactly. I think you guys are getting me all wrong here. I'm not saying AMD/ATI suck or make bad products, just that they are in a rut. The 8800GTS is the 1st Nvidia card I bought. My last card was an ATI X700 and before that I had integrated( :(  I know). So when you guys might be thinking I'm a fan boy I beg to differ. Why did I quote jaydeejohn? because I agree with him. Get WTF you want when you want. There will ALWAYS be something better down the road.
April 4, 2007 10:36:21 AM

R600 was to release in December... 2006. Its now near mid April... 2007. What do we know? Squat. When will we know? Whenever... PPP attitude, imo, for a mfg that is having problems.

I know, we 'saw' some examples at CeBit.

RRargh.... Where's the benchies??????

Nvidia may as well just launch its next gen cards... There's no competition left to beat.
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2007 10:53:55 AM

I agree, this is all very frustrating. Lets see.. Im waiting for R600, nVids response, Barcelona/ nehalim, SSD and fully compatible hdmi cable card thruput hardware/monitors at 1080p.... aaaaAAAARRRRGGGHHHhhh
April 4, 2007 10:57:20 AM

Quote:
R600 was to release in December... 2006. Its now near mid April... 2007. What do we know? Squat. When will we know? Whenever... PPP attitude, imo, for a mfg that is having problems.

I know, we 'saw' some examples at CeBit.

RRargh.... Where's the benchies??????

Nvidia may as well just launch its next gen cards... There's no competition left to beat.


I agree to a degree, from a business standpoint Amd are justified to delay the R600 as dx10 games have not been released, also vista has quite caught on like a house on fire.

Although from a consumers point of view it sucks as they have not done anything to justify the loyalty that their customers have shown to them .

Reputation is where business is made and broken , right now they are hanging on by their fingernails.

If the r600 doesn't blow away every number crunching , benchmarking computer addicted juiced up dude, then they are going to get a shitoad on their face .

I have been a Ati customer for a longtime now but i had to settle for a 8800 which by the way has been great.

I was sick of waiting for the next ATI card as i was very happy with their product but there was nothing i could upgrade to :evil: 

So AMD better not have crapped all over ATI :lol:  :evil: 
April 4, 2007 11:00:39 AM

AND like always whenever something comes out it's a couple of months before the bugs are worked out. Not even going to go on about Vista.
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2007 11:21:45 AM

OK, if you wont I will. I need the os that runs dx10.period. I want to get a dx10 card, but whats thwe point? I know nVids 88's kick @$$ but no games, crap drivers, weve all been put on hold. I agree it would be nice to see or have a 2900xtx right now... but guess what? If we did wed all be beeching about VISTA!!!! So Im going a lil light on ATI/AMD right now. But how long will it be before all the dust settles, and we can truly run our dx10, hdmi capable rigs? I bet ATI beats VISTA, and I bet game makers beat VISTA as well. For right now my 2 to 3 grand is on hold...waiting
April 4, 2007 11:24:40 AM

Quote:
OK, if you wont I will. I need the os that runs dx10.period. I want to get a dx10 card, but whats thwe point? I know nVids 88's kick @$$ but no games, crap drivers, weve all been put on hold. I agree it would be nice to see or have a 2900xtx right now... but guess what? If we did wed all be beeching about VISTA!!!! So Im going a lil light on ATI/AMD right now. But how long will it be before all the dust settles, and we can truly run our dx10, hdmi capable rigs? I bet ATI beats VISTA, and I bet game makers beat VISTA as well. For right now my 2 to 3 grand is on hold...waiting


DITO, ma brotha from anotha motha
April 4, 2007 11:47:03 AM

What frustrates me about the whole situation is how Nvidia is holding off on the release of their own mid range cards until ATI launches.

I realize that people are frustrated at ATI/AMD for delay after delay (justifiably so) but I am just as frustrated at Nvidia because you know that they have a working product and they just aren't releasing it until they have to. At least ATI seems to have a reason for not releasing yet.
April 4, 2007 12:56:03 PM

Actually I know for a fact that it's because they don't want to compete with themselves. For example if the best car out there is a Corvette and you make $30,000 in profit for each Corvette, why would you put out a Camaro that's almost as good, cheaper for everyone but only draws in $15,000 profit. Once ATI puts out their goods, NVidia will drop their prices lower than ATI's and people that have been holding off might find paying a lower price more important than performance, even if ATI's stuff is better. Then Nvidia will probably put their midrange cards out before ATI...same thing again, lower their prices when ATI puts their mid level stuff out and then NVidia will launch one of their high end cards like a 8900 or what have you.

Ok I'm pretty much done now. Oh and don't burn me for the Corvette and Camaro stuff, they just popped in my head.
April 4, 2007 1:02:31 PM

Ati will release the whole r600 line up at once.
April 4, 2007 1:04:12 PM

That'd be a smart move.
!