Ati hd2900xt owners thread give us your opinions

gpippas

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
463
0
18,790
EDIT: IF YOU ARE AN OWNER IGNORE ALL THE CRAP AT THE BEGINNING. PAGES 3&4 HAVE SOME OWNERS. JUST IGNORE THE BULLSHIT IN BETWEEN!!

First off I dont own a hd2900xt. However after reading all the reviews and reading the opinions in forums everywhere of people who dont actually own one im interested to hear from someone who does.

Tell us about your experiences.
What do you think of the drivers?
What power supply do you have?
Is it noisy?
Is the performance what you expected?
Have you tried using the sound and other features?
Have tried overclocking?
What system are you running it on?

Well anyway you get the idea.

Also could we please have NO FANBOYS and I mean ATI and NVIDIA!!

Post benchmarks but only if you have a pic. Dont just write a load of fps numbers next to a game coz i can claim my ati X300 gets 200fps in oblivion all maxed out but we all know thats bullshit it barely runs desktop.lol!

Looking forward to hearing from some owners.
 

jjknoll

Distinguished
Sep 13, 2006
225
0
18,680
I'm not sure how realistic/helpful this thread will be, since in all likelyhood only the ATI fanboys are going to buy these cards right now. Most reviews will probably have given you a more honest response than you might receive hear. The card, I'm sure has a nice feature sebut it was suppose to compete(dominate?) the gtx. Even if it settles into a nice price range EVERYONE was expecting something more. ATI guys will say it's a great card of course, but if you had told them a month ago that it would get beat bad by a gtx upon release they would have swore at you and called you names. Ati promised a Corvette and delivered a Camaro and even though it's priced like a Camaro we all wanted and were willing to pay for a Corvette. It is very, very disappointing in this regard. (Sorry about the response despite non-ownership)
 

tamalero

Distinguished
Oct 25, 2006
1,125
133
19,470
I'm not sure how realistic/helpful this thread will be, since in all likelyhood only the ATI fanboys are going to buy these cards right now. Most reviews will probably have given you a more honest response than you might receive hear. The card, I'm sure has a nice feature sebut it was suppose to compete(dominate?) the gtx. Even if it settles into a nice price range EVERYONE was expecting something more. ATI guys will say it's a great card of course, but if you had told them a month ago that it would get beat bad by a gtx upon release they would have swore at you and called you names. Ati promised a Corvette and delivered a Camaro and even though it's priced like a Camaro we all wanted and were willing to pay for a Corvette. It is very, very disappointing in this regard. (Sorry about the response despite non-ownership)

compete with the GTS dammit
why people kept saying the GTX again over again?
it was a fanboy hype that made them say "fight against the "GTX"


I'm pretty sure that none of the current HD 2900XT's have the integrated audio function enabled as none of them have integrated HDMI.

you have proof of what you say?
because all HD2900XT sold in newegg, has the DVI-to-HDMI
with sound ( the lower bracket suposed to give the sound )
 

jjknoll

Distinguished
Sep 13, 2006
225
0
18,680
So you're telling me that a month ago you would not have said that the "r600" was going to compete wit the gtx. Of course that is not the case as it stands now. I don't believe that this first offering was only suppose to compete with the gts. If people are honest with themselves they know they were expecting a gtx caliber part. I'm not saying we should compare it with the gtx NOW as it is priced lower, but that is only because it can't compete, not that it wasn't suppose to compete. If you are happy with your card then great but face it ATI did not deliver this time.
 

TSIMonster

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2006
1,129
0
19,280
I'm pretty sure that none of the current HD 2900XT's have the integrated audio function enabled as none of them have integrated HDMI.
They all have HDMI adapters. The sound is also provided by the DVI port via the adapter.

Honestly I am rather disappointed. Luckily, I just got my second ASUS x1950Pro for crossfire for a good deal, so I am good for a while.
 

jjknoll

Distinguished
Sep 13, 2006
225
0
18,680
Personally, I think in the future the architecture might end up being quite good, but right now the heat and power concerns seem warranted. A shrink to 65nm will help I'm sure. It's just a shame that it ended up being what it was. I had always bougth ATI prior to my gts320. I just got frustrated with waiting and thought get a 320, that way I haven't sunk all that money into a gtx just to have the r600 poop on its head. Now that I am real happy with my 320 I will probably wait for nv and ati to shrink or intrduce new arch. That 320 is a sweet card for the price. I don't think for res at 16x12 or less you can beat it. Got mine at 614/1888 now and it really does an awesome job.
 

gpippas

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
463
0
18,790
I know there is a large chance that anybody who posts about their card is going to be bias but I was hoping that there would be at least some mature owners who can talk about it without being a fanboy or overly biased. I have bought enough things in the past which I have thought were not perfect in everyway and if something is a let down I am the first to admit it. It would be nice if some of them gave us their thoughts on what they have found as pros and cons because at the end of the day it’s us the consumer that has to live with them not reviewers.

And I’m not employee of ati or nvidia I’m just someone who has an interest. I’m doing an electronics degree so I find the technology on this card very fascinating but I've read as much as I can on it from professionals so I’m now interested to hear from people like me who have it in a real world situation.
 

tamalero

Distinguished
Oct 25, 2006
1,125
133
19,470
So you're telling me that a month ago you would not have said that the "r600" was going to compete wit the gtx. Of course that is not the case as it stands now. I don't believe that this first offering was only suppose to compete with the gts. If people are honest with themselves they know they were expecting a gtx caliber part. I'm not saying we should compare it with the gtx NOW as it is priced lower, but that is only because it can't compete, not that it wasn't suppose to compete. If you are happy with your card then great but face it ATI did not deliver this time.

please, go back and see the 1800 and 1900 series.. where did the XTX was positioned ? ;)
top most right?

so please.. you suddenly seem to have created this post just to bash ATI even further to what others have done before.
I dont see the manuy "owner's opinions" here...
 

gpippas

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
463
0
18,790
I created this thread because I wanted to hear from owners of the card not have people say what they were and wern't gonna buy and what it should compete with and frankly all that other bullshit. If you don't own one don't post your opinion on what it should and shouldn't do. I'm hoping that people won't screw up this post like all others have been and im sayign this against you im saying this for anyone who reads this thread.

There must be an owner out there somewhere. I know that there is in the uk at least because stock has gone down on a lot of sites. Does anyone in the world who bought have one have any opinions on it at all?
 

cleeve

Illustrious
So you're telling me that a month ago you would not have said that the "r600" was going to compete wit the gtx...

...If you are happy with your card then great but face it ATI did not deliver this time.


These are two different arguments, and aren't necessarily related.

Did everyone expect an 8800 GTX-competitive part? Well, sure we did. We all did. But how exactly does our expectation make the 2900 XT a direct competitor to the 8800 GTX?

Obviously if you have $550 to spend you're not even going to consider the 2900 XT, so how is it a competitor again?

Now... if you have $400, of course you're going to make a choice between the 8800 GTS 640 and the 2900 XT. That's direct competition, their performance ands price is similar. So how are they not competitive for the same gamer's dollars?


As far as Ati not delivering this time, of course they didn't. Everyone expected to see a 2900 XTX part that's competitive with the 8800 GTX, but it's not here.

But this fact does not make the 2900 XT an 8800 GTX competitor...
 

crazypyro

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2006
325
0
18,780
R600 is not a flop, it was never meant to be the GTX killer has its been said earlier, from the start it was claimed to be the GTS competitor. It may be a flop in your opinion, because it didn't meet your expectations. Read THG 20+ page review or 3D Guru's 25 page review, where they actual dissect the cards technology, the simple consensus is the card is too complex for 80nm, and its ahead of its time. When the card gets overclocked to 850mhz or higher it actually competes with the GTX, sure it loses by only by a few frames. The chip is so complex and is a completely different design then what ATi traditionally uses plus it has so much going on inside it, its going to take sometime to get a decent pair of drivers to extract all the performance they can. ATi has continously demonstrated this with each revision they keep cracking 5%-10% more performance out of the card.

ATi should've continued to tweak this down to 65nm, and focused on bringing out the 2400 and 2600 series first.
 

GSTe

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2006
656
0
18,990
R600 is not a flop, it was never meant to be the GTX killer has its been said earlier, from the start it was claimed to be the GTS competitor.

You're seriously saying that AMD/Ati have intentionally developed a card without the aim of competing with their rival's top offering?
 

tamalero

Distinguished
Oct 25, 2006
1,125
133
19,470
R600 is not a flop, it was never meant to be the GTX killer has its been said earlier, from the start it was claimed to be the GTS competitor.

You're seriously saying that AMD/Ati have intentionally developed a card without the aim of competing with their rival's top offering?

again learn to see the diference betwen XT and XTX models pls...

*redit*
let me rephrase..
R600 = family of chips, not just one chip, get it?
R600 = competition of the G80 series...
big diference than saying R600s vs 8800GTX.

XT = gts, XTX = GTX, XL = slower version of GTS
 

The_Abyss

Distinguished
Mar 24, 2006
1,333
0
19,310
R600 is not a flop, it was never meant to be the GTX killer has its been said earlier, from the start it was claimed to be the GTS competitor. It may be a flop in your opinion, because it didn't meet your expectations. Read THG 20+ page review or 3D Guru's 25 page review, where they actual dissect the cards technology, the simple consensus is the card is too complex for 80nm, and its ahead of its time. When the card gets overclocked to 850mhz or higher it actually competes with the GTX, sure it loses by only by a few frames. The chip is so complex and is a completely different design then what ATi traditionally uses plus it has so much going on inside it, its going to take sometime to get a decent pair of drivers to extract all the performance they can. ATi has continously demonstrated this with each revision they keep cracking 5%-10% more performance out of the card.

ATi should've continued to tweak this down to 65nm, and focused on bringing out the 2400 and 2600 series first.

I don't think that is entirely accurate. ATI and Nvidia have a tradition of giong head to head and seesawing the performance crown. to say that they were not aiming to deliver the fastest card in the market place is incorrect I think.

What they did do however is deliver what they could which was clearly not enough to be the leader at this time, so they priced it accordingly to pitch it up against the Nvidia offering with which it was most closesly matched in terms of performance.

The fact remains, next gen hardware and architecture etc notwithstanding, at this stage, the card draws too much power and is hot (not much hotter than an 8800, but hot nevertheless).

Both can be solved to some extent by moving to 65nm, but for me the noise aspect is one of the most disappointing aspects of this card's release. the cost of a cooling solution is relatively low compared to the overall cost of the card, and the card layout and PCB would have been known for a long while now. It wouldn't have taken a rocket scientist to put some more resources into developing a quieter more effective cooling solution. You can bet that Saphire and the like will have their own new ones out in a few weeks, so not having them at original release is very disappointing.
 

gpippas

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
463
0
18,790
I know this going against the point of this thread but at the end of the day ati had to release something regardless of driver problems, arch, heat, power whatever because they were losing so much money. I agree that all the comparisons to the gtx are pointless. The comparisons should only be done to the gts because of the pricing. I know its different to the US but here in the UK the hd2900xt is nowhere near the price of the gtx so they cant compare. And i am definatly not disputing that 8800gtx/ultra isnt the fastest card out there but you do pay more for the privilage.

Just as a side note could anyone post a link were ati/amd themselves ever said that any r600 chips will beat 8800gtx wasnt all of that just rumors and fanboys?
 

crazypyro

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2006
325
0
18,780
R600 is not a flop, it was never meant to be the GTX killer has its been said earlier, from the start it was claimed to be the GTS competitor.

You're seriously saying that AMD/Ati have intentionally developed a card without the aim of competing with their rival's top offering?


Yes, i do believe thats what i just said.

When you use a different and new design, you can't always compete with the best there is until you can tweak it just right. Especially one that is that technologically advanced. On terms of engineering, its a marvel what they did on 80nm, its thermals and power consumption is the down side. just like Xenos in the 360 was the reference design for the R500 generation, R600 is the reference design to future GPU's from ATi, it being a 4 mini-core approach puts it right inline with FUDzilla's report that R700 will be a multi-core chip.

Software leads Hardware. Have the best hardware design but if your software can't use it, then you have a pretty piece of silicon. Hence the tweaking and drivers revisions we see from both ATi and nVidia
 

crazypyro

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2006
325
0
18,780
I half agree with you. As my post above says the card was just too much for 80nm. But also with its design it needs an efficient driver.

I would have happily waited for them to tweak the 2900 to 65nm, so long as they put out the 2400 and 2600, atleast then we would know R600 architecture was for real and could get an idea of what the 2900 would be capable of.
 

tamalero

Distinguished
Oct 25, 2006
1,125
133
19,470
I half agree with you. As my post above says the card was just too much for 80nm. But also with its design it needs an efficient driver.

I would have happily waited for them to tweak the 2900 to 65nm, so long as they put out the 2400 and 2600, atleast then we would know R600 architecture was for real and could get an idea of what the 2900 would be capable of.

I think Ape already did a good comparation of tehnology, the Ra 8500 was very advanced technology for their time, but still ended slower than the nvidia counterpart.


its hard to have a very fast but wild horse ( you cant control it good )
thus the "driver" needs to be well "trained" XD
 

gpippas

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
463
0
18,790
I have to say I agree with your posts it is possible that it is being held back by 80nm and it would have been nice to see it as 65nm but I dont think people would have waited another two months for it and I don't think ati could afford the wait. There however a few people like you and me and iv read jaydeejon say who dont have the need to buy anything now and are willing to wait to see what becomes the best solution. Personally i don't care if my next card is ati or nvidia as long as does all the things I want it to do and at the moment and in the near future it seems that the r600 cards are the ones to do that especially when it comes to future proofing. But that remains to be seen.
 

GSTe

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2006
656
0
18,990
I mean you no offence, but I find that very hard to believe from a business standpoint. Although the mid-range cards are probably where the majority of the money is to be made, the high end stuff will also be very profitable not to mention the Kudos and subsequent marketing potential having the best card would bring, and to not aim to compete in that sector would be lunacy.
 

gpippas

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
463
0
18,790
I think thats the point tho they would have loved to compete in that sector but what they had didnt compete so they chose not to release something that couldnt. It would have been a waste of money and made them look worse.
 

crazypyro

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2006
325
0
18,780
I mean you no offence, but I find that very hard to believe from a business standpoint. Although the mid-range cards are probably where the majority of the money is to be made, the high end stuff will also be very profitable not to mention the Kudos and subsequent marketing potential having the best card would bring, and to not aim to compete in that sector would be lunacy.

I agree. I'm sure they're aim was too compete top-to-top but when they realized they weren't getting that performance it would have been even worse business to continue to push your new product at the top level for which it couldn't even scratch the surface of. It was mismanaged thats for sure. The real R600 product we were all wanting will be here in the R650. The 2600 a middle road, mainstream card is clocked at 800-850mhz on 65nm, current 2900's can reach 850mhz with ease at 80nm, when 2900 becomes 65nm it will be at the Ghz level and will be the performer we all wanted.
 

gpippas

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
463
0
18,790
Seriously I can't believe their isnt a single owner of a hd2900xt roaming theses forums who is willing to share their experiances with us.