Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

r650 may come in Q3

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 5, 2007 6:34:25 PM

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

If this is true i'm pissed. I'm sick of waiting for ATI to release a model to compete with nvidia. I'm not going to wait a year for them to release something compeitive. I will be buying nvidia if there isn't a high end model release on may 15th.

However, I wonder if this rumor is even true. As i read an offical statement somewhere that said ATI would be bringing 10 or so direct x 10 products to the market in may as a hard launch with all compeitive ranges. Meaning they should have a high end card that competes with the 8800 GTX. They also said that the rumors about the bad memory aren't true, and are having no problems.

Some conflicting info there, i forget where i read that though. I really hope the HD 2900xtx comes out, or nvidia here i come!

More about : r650

May 5, 2007 7:10:52 PM

Hopefully it will be worth the wait, but who knows. At the point...probably not!

Best,

3Ball
May 5, 2007 7:15:57 PM

Mythoss, if you want the fastest DX9 card now, buy 8800GTX and dont bother about R600 till autumn. If you are looking for fastest sub 400$ card, wait several weeks for 2900XT.
Related resources
May 5, 2007 8:23:20 PM

I waited over 6 months now for a new video card, i'm not going to buy a 8800 GTX now, i'll wait another 3 months i guess... but this is rediculous. Where is the 8900 GTX? What is this ultra crap?
I have the 7950 gx2 and the 8800 GTS isn't any fast, in some cases slower, in some cases like 2 fps faster, it's not worth the 300 bucks. And neither is a HD 2900xt. I want my high end ATI or nvidia card.
May 5, 2007 9:04:27 PM

Hey idiot, the 2900xt isn't even released yet. The r650 core is probablly going to be the new xtx or 2950 series. You are forgetting that the r600, r610, and another "r" card are being released next Monday the 14th. Yes you will be able to purchase one on the 14th, you can even preorder one now and it will be delivered to you on the 14th. I have my reciept and tracking number in hand.
May 5, 2007 9:18:19 PM

Thing is, anyone who waited the 7 months that it is now is kinda screwed if it barely beats the nvidia cards. Thats 7 months of usage you haven't had and you are going to pay pretty much the same price.

Now apply the technology goes out of date law. In theory there should be something 20-30% better than that 8800 out in the next 6 months or so.
May 5, 2007 9:50:45 PM

exactly, i'm pretty much screwed. And as for the HD 2900 XT, that's not a high end card. It's mid range, and it's not much better then what i already have. lets not throw around the name calling. You have a reciet for an XT. Not XTX. We don't even know if the XTX exsits
May 5, 2007 10:43:17 PM

Quote:
Thing is, anyone who waited the 7 months that it is now is kinda screwed if it barely beats the nvidia cards.


I'm sorry but anyone who waited 7 months for a video card is stupid, not just screwed.

And what exactly do you need a card for that beats an 8800GTX? That's right.. there's nothing it can't handle. And won't be until after the summer at the earliest, and even then, 1 or 2 titles worth it at most until likely next year. And by that time, whatever you would have bought NOW will be out of date as well...

Golden rule. Buy for now and now only, as by the time anything you are "Future proofing" comes around, paradigms will undoubtedly have shifted again.
May 5, 2007 11:24:01 PM

I just bought a 7950gx2, buying a 8800 GTX 3 months later wasn't in my best interest. I can't afford to buy 600 dollar cards every 3 months. I skip generations. Anyone who buys a new video card every 3 months is either rich, or stupid.

As for waiting 7 months, I think it's intelligent to see what the compeitition has to offer before buying a new card. With in reason anyway. No one thought ATI would keep pushing their cards back so much. All i can do is cross my fingers and hope that on may 15th the xtx comes out and it rocks, if not, maybe i'll pick up a 8800 GTX, and step up to something else later. No biggy.

I can think of a few games that can't handle a GTX, running high res with max settings, so that's not true at all. It does handle a lot of things though. Keep in mind, going from a 7950 gx2 to a 8800 GTX is not a BIG leap at all. it's very minor. In most cases it's a 2-10 fps increase. In some rare cases it's more, in games i don't play, or are already running at 100 fps so i could careless. I think i made a smart move waiting.. but that's me. Nvidia is just being lazy because there is no reason to push out cards, and ATI is struggling.
May 6, 2007 1:20:34 AM

Not to keep pushing this, but you bought a gx2... I could rest my case right there.

Notwithstanding that, however, you shouldn't have been looking to upgrade so soon in any case, so you didn't really wait 7 months to upgrade as you weren't wanting a GTX or equivalent in any case. So the above doesn't even apply to you and the whole topic is a little misleading.

If what you're looking for is the BEST FPS in FUTURE games, you shouldn't be buying anything until those titles are actually out. How do you know Crysis or whatever isn't going to suck nuts and then were are you with your 5-month-early $600 investment? Makes absolutely no sense.

I still don't get it.. the GTX isn't worthy of the upgrade, but you think the XTX will be? The G80 was quite a significant paradigm shift, expecting ATI to best it by another significant margin is not realistic.... :? (with equivalent generation hardware)
a b U Graphics card
May 6, 2007 1:27:03 AM

Quote:
Keep in mind, going from a 7950 gx2 to a 8800 GTX is not a BIG leap at all. it's very minor. In most cases it's a 2-10 fps increase.

8O You are kidding right? The 8800GTX crushes the 7950GX2. Much Better Performance, Image Quality, and Features. Plus it doesn't rely on SLI driver support.
a b U Graphics card
May 6, 2007 1:27:47 AM

Quote:
Not to keep pushing this, but you bought a gx2... I could rest my case right there.

:lol: 
May 6, 2007 1:28:51 AM

I was hoping it would best it actaully. Even if a little. Because of the way it's designed, i know it's a little more future proof in direct x 10 (hopefully) due to the way it's designed. However, the selling point is the HDMI out and built in physics and sound. Atleast for me, that's going to be awesome on my HDTV. As well as ATI has better driver support recently, and less problems with vista (i'm annoyed with nvidia's lack of 7950 gx2 support) and i'd rather support a underdog competiter if it has a good product, knowing that compitetion is good, and if ATI goes under we will all be shit out of luck.

Also, to your GX2 comment. How was i suppose to know it would have horrible support? At the time it had the best benchmarks. No where on the box did it say "After release we will never support this product" no where did reviews say "It is buggy in a lot of games" no, i was pretty much swindled. I don't see how that makes me a stupid consumer, as i did my research. However, i did not buy it, i stepped up with EVGA from a 7900 GTX. This is probably why I am not so angry, as i never really payed for it. It runs great in a lot of games, and runs horrible in others due to lack of profile support. Oh well. I guess i can hang onto it a little longer.
May 6, 2007 1:40:40 AM

Quote:
Keep in mind, going from a 7950 gx2 to a 8800 GTX is not a BIG leap at all. it's very minor. In most cases it's a 2-10 fps increase.

8O You are kidding right? The 8800GTX crushes the 7950GX2. Much Better Performance, Image Quality, and Features. Plus it doesn't rely on SLI driver support.

Negative. That's not true at all. Look through the games in this benchmark.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/msi8800g...

At the resolution i play at, 1600 x 1200 you can see that the GTX is really only a few fps faster for most games. It only really pulls away at higher resolutions that i don't play in anyway, or even support on my monitor. To be fair, there are some cases where the 8800 GTX blows it away and this is true. But your being overly dramatic because you own a 8800 GTX, and you think it's the greatest thing in the world. For me, it would be a small upgrade at a high cost. And again, the crappy peformence in some games is due to lack of driver support, only fueling my angry towards nvidia and turning me towards ATI.
May 6, 2007 1:41:59 AM

There's some truth to that I guess, but really... still not realistic.

The 'physics' support from what I can tell is just marketing, though of course we can't be sure yet.

HDMI - what do you need it for? Are you running it to an HDMI-capable receiver? Unlikely as those are still quite rare and expensive. Dear G-d, please don't tell me you are running your sound to your TV's speakers...
I don't really see HDMI as being at all useful.

Built in sound.. see above.

There really is nothing exciting about what ATI is doing here for the enthusiast... Image quality is par with G80, more or less, performance so far is par or lower, and nVidia driver support is getting better in VISTA from what I hear.

So that leaves... supporting the underdog. Good enough reason as any I suppose.

**EDIT**
That nVidia doesn't 100% support the GX2 with everything they've got should have been obvious. It's too much money for two little gain, SLi has always been a gimmick except back the Voodoo2 days when it was neat, and the gx2 was the same way. Shouldn't make you angry towards nvidia... the gx2 was just a marketing tool you weren't actually supposed to BUY one :) 

**EDIT#2**
Those graphs show the GTX besting the GX2 by an average of 25% at the res you're talking about... I would say that is significant, especially when you add the improved image quality and unififed architecture which should improve with DX10. Actually, the fact that the GTX bests TWO of the previous gens top cards put together by that much is quite extraordinary.
a b U Graphics card
May 6, 2007 2:17:33 AM

Quote:
Negative. That's not true at all. Look through the games in this benchmark.


I say it's a positive. For proof, try this 8800GTX review from the same site as your link. (xbit labs). In that review, the 8800GTX just kills the 7950GX2 at your 16x12. Edit: LINK: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/gf8800gt...

BF2142 (+ 30%)
7950- 61.2 fps
8800 79.7 fps

Call of Juares (+25% )
7950 - 31.9 fps
8800 - 40 fps

C&C ( + 29%)
7950 - 23.3
8800 - pinned at 30
The 7950 is by far the worst in this one with a low of 10 fps. The X1950XT is far better.

Company of Heroes ( + 50%)
7950 - 59 fps
8800 - 88.7 fps

Gothic 3 ( + 105%)
7950 - 20.4 fps
8800 - 41.8 fps

Never Winter Nights ( + 50%)
7950 - 20.1 fps
8800 - 31.1 fps

SC: Double Agent (+ 77% )
7950 - 26.5 fps
8800 - 46.8 fps

Stalker ( + 13%)
7950 - 44.1 fps
8800 - 49.7 fps

Supreme Commander (+ 185% )
7950 - 25.3 fps
8800 - 72.1 fps

Stalker is the only game that isn't a blow out. And in the 9 games, the 8800GTX averages a 63% lead over the 7950GX2 at your res. Add the better IQ and features to boot, it's a clear blowout. And this is just average fps. Also consider minimum fps and the cases where the 8800GTX is playable but the 7950GX2 stuggles at 12x10 even.

And again, the 8800's have far better image quality. They support fsaa + HDR in many games that they GF7's can't. And in some games, they destroy the GX2, even at 16x12. Max playable settings at 16x12, the 8800GTX would provide a much better gaming experience. Think 16xAA/16XAF HDR+FSAA, no worry about SLI profiles, etc. How can you say it is a "very minor leap" ????
a b U Graphics card
May 6, 2007 2:24:47 AM

BTW, I don't own an 8800GTX, but I wish I did. Even so, I wouldn't trade my puny lil 8800GTS 320MB for a 7950GX2 headache.

Edit: For another review, check out Anandtech: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2870&p=22

At high res, a single 8800GTX is crushing the 7950GX2 and even competing with Quad SLI 7950's.

Quotes:
"A single GeForce 8800 GTX is more powerful overall than a 7900 GTX SLI configuration and even NVIDIA's mammoth Quad SLI".

"Architecturally, G80 is a gigantic leap from the previous generation of GPUs."
May 6, 2007 2:48:59 AM

Quote:
Keep in mind, going from a 7950 gx2 to a 8800 GTX is not a BIG leap at all. it's very minor. In most cases it's a 2-10 fps increase.

8O You are kidding right? The 8800GTX crushes the 7950GX2. Much Better Performance, Image Quality, and Features. Plus it doesn't rely on SLI driver support.

Negative. That's not true at all. Look through the games in this benchmark.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/msi8800g...

At the resolution i play at, 1600 x 1200 you can see that the GTX is really only a few fps faster for most games. It only really pulls away at higher resolutions that i don't play in anyway, or even support on my monitor. To be fair, there are some cases where the 8800 GTX blows it away and this is true. But your being overly dramatic because you own a 8800 GTX, and you think it's the greatest thing in the world. For me, it would be a small upgrade at a high cost. And again, the crappy peformence in some games is due to lack of driver support, only fueling my angry towards nvidia and turning me towards ATI.

You were saying? Aside from the Obvious performance advantages, the 8800GTX is also able to use FP16 HDR+AA and higher quality anisotropic filtering.
May 6, 2007 3:02:32 AM

whats the big deal anyway? what dx10 game is there right now? crysis is the first real dx10 game coming and its still 6 months away and a x1900/7900 can run every dx9 game maxed out
a b U Graphics card
May 6, 2007 3:33:10 AM

Quote:
...a x1900/7900 can run every dx9 game maxed out

What? Not even close. Have you heard of Oblivion, Call to Juarez, and (in the 7900's case even) Need for speed carbon?
May 6, 2007 4:02:27 AM

I wish the 7900 could run every game out at 1920x1200.. I would buy it right now! Only $143 CDN up north here

Unfortunately it doesn't quite manage much at that res... sigh
a b U Graphics card
May 6, 2007 4:06:44 AM

Yeah, imagine if the bargain priced 7900GS could do that. My 8800GTS 320MB would crawl at that res in some games. Trying to truely max Oblivion at 1680x1050 HDR with 4xaa/16xaf is too much for it even.
May 6, 2007 11:58:45 AM

Quote:
I wish the 7900 could run every game out at 1920x1200


:)  Oh, I wish that was true. While my 7900gs can't run every dx9 game maxed out, it does a good enough job for me.
May 6, 2007 12:43:01 PM

Quote:
As for waiting 7 months, I think it's intelligent to see what the compeitition has to offer before buying a new card. With in reason anyway. No one thought ATI would keep pushing their cards back so much. All i can do is cross my fingers and hope that on may 15th the xtx comes out and it rocks, if not, maybe i'll pick up a 8800 GTX, and step up to something else later. No biggy.


Heh, what is comptetition. ATI definately aren't!
May 6, 2007 12:45:38 PM

Quote:
I still don't get it.. the GTX isn't worthy of the upgrade, but you think the XTX will be? The G80 was quite a significant paradigm shift, expecting ATI to best it by another significant margin is not realistic.... :? (with equivalent generation hardware)


I just realised this guy was the OP. That was the point i was making. Waiting for the XTX is waiting 7 months for an 8800GTX with a different badge...
May 6, 2007 1:23:35 PM

Truth is no matter what happens, there is always a bigger fish. I have been waiting like 2 years for a good card, i can wait 2 more if i need to(funding issues(like being broke ass poor)).
May 6, 2007 3:59:03 PM

Quote:
I still don't get it.. the GTX isn't worthy of the upgrade, but you think the XTX will be? The G80 was quite a significant paradigm shift, expecting ATI to best it by another significant margin is not realistic.... :? (with equivalent generation hardware)


I just realised this guy was the OP. That was the point i was making. Waiting for the XTX is waiting 7 months for an 8800GTX with a different badge...

<--- This guy is not the OP, this guy is the voice of reason :lol:  The OP is me with another 's', which of course must be a sure sign of identity crisis :twisted:
May 6, 2007 4:56:25 PM

i have a 7600gt and im not complaining, waiting is fun
May 6, 2007 9:18:05 PM

It gets old after about 23 months...
!