Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Ati hd2900xt owners thread give us your opinions

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 17, 2007 11:52:36 AM

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.
May 17, 2007 12:17:57 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 12:24:11 PM

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)
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
May 17, 2007 1:03:11 PM

Quote:
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"


Quote:
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 )
May 17, 2007 1:13:34 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 1:36:35 PM

Quote:
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.
May 17, 2007 1:48:30 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 2:18:49 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 2:30:22 PM

Quote:
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...
May 17, 2007 2:39:34 PM

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?
May 17, 2007 2:45:48 PM

Quote:
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...
May 17, 2007 2:50:47 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 3:00:20 PM

Quote:
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?
May 17, 2007 3:06:01 PM

Quote:
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
May 17, 2007 3:06:16 PM

Quote:
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.
May 17, 2007 3:08:50 PM

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?
May 17, 2007 3:10:08 PM

Quote:
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
May 17, 2007 3:15:01 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 3:19:33 PM

Quote:
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
May 17, 2007 3:21:27 PM

There's no timetable on the XTX though...
May 17, 2007 3:27:57 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 3:31:28 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 3:35:48 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 3:48:14 PM

Quote:
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.
May 17, 2007 3:48:28 PM

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.
May 17, 2007 3:58:15 PM

Quote:
...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.


They DID aim to compete in this sector, but their XTX model wasn't up to snuff so they didn't release it. They chose to compete against the GTS 640 market segment and release a high-end competitor once they have one...

Nobody's saying Ati didn't drop the ball by not releasing a good XTX part to the public; but their failure to release the XTX doesn't catapult the XT into the high end category.

Performance and price decides the market segment, not the release date.
May 17, 2007 3:59:17 PM

Quote:
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.


Read some of the posts here
May 17, 2007 4:02:47 PM

Billion dollar corporations aren't stupid. Short sited maybe but they wouldn't release anything if they didn't think it was gonna make money and to make money the product has to compete. Netburst is an obvious exception. But even then Intel could have probably released c2d earlier but it would have probably had loads of problems and not been as competitive as it is now. Instead they waited till it was perfect and completely wiped the floor with amd. Amd/ati didint have that luxury because they are haemorrhaging money from everywhere.
May 17, 2007 4:12:48 PM

I thought in your original post you were saying that they never aimed to compete, rather than they were trying to, messed up, and have had to settle for competing lower. Whatever though its a shame, especially in terms of high GTX prices for a while and less urge for NVid to develop their 8900s.

Was buying a new gfx card yesterday and went for 640MB GTS..... even though the new drivers may put the 2900 above it, £300 ($600) for a GFX card is simply too much considering the performance increase over the GTS. Now if it were £240 that would be a different story and would sell a few more Ati cards I imagine.....
May 17, 2007 4:19:48 PM

Maybe they are just embarrassed?
May 17, 2007 4:20:41 PM

Cheers that was interesting read. Thats basically what I wanted to read. Its a shame there isnt the same thing going on here coz THG has much a wider audiance. That doesnt mean stop posting to everyone else because for once there is actually a mature discusion going on without all the unnecassary name calling.
May 17, 2007 4:35:27 PM

Price to performance ratio is what I really look at but at the same time I'm only going to get what I can afford. I'm not dissing Nvidia but $800 for the 8800ULTRA, screw that. It might be good but it's $800, that's my grocery budget for almost 4 months. As for ATI, they've just been gone for too long and when the finally released their product it's just not "that" good. Plus I just got a PC Power and Cooling 750Quad, and since it doesn't have an 8 pin cable for the graphics card I have to use an adapter or get a new power supply. Dumb on my part, dumb on ATI's part and just frusterating. Also the 2900XT uses more power than all the lightbulbs in my apartment put together.

In the end though even though the 8600GTS isn't what we expected it's what alot of people will get because it's what they can afford. I'm just waiting to see how the 2600XT stacks up.
May 17, 2007 4:41:31 PM

Quote:
I'm just waiting to see how the 2600XT stacks up.


Thats what i am waiting to see. Its competition shouldn't be hard to beat, the 8600 is truly a flop. If the rumours are true and the 8600 will come in a 256bit flavor, then a 256bit 2600 will be sure to follow, and if we get 256bit in the mainstream market, i will be happy. $300 is my budget when it comes to cards.
May 17, 2007 4:46:04 PM

mmmm.....

interesting discussion

i do not doubt in any way that ati messed up the xtx part, but i would say that in the long run, the 2900xt will beat the gts 640, because with similar performance and unmatured drivers, in a few months, it will probably faster compared to the gts, which has relatively matured drivers.

in a couple of months i would imaging that nvidia will drop the price on the gts as the 2900xt gains perfomance, and hence becomes more competetive.

however the 2600xt stacks up, it can hardly be worse value form money than the 8600's, which are overpriced and perform worse than pervious gen hardware (either that, or nvidia know something i dont about dx10 requirements).

in short, in a couple of months i would think that the 2900xt will have performance in between the gts and the gtx, making it competetive with both (not shure wether this would be a good move though, jack of all trades, master of none).

if ati can get the 65nm shrink right it will be an awesome card, not even thinking about oc'd versions......
May 17, 2007 5:19:59 PM

I have to agree the the 2600xt cant be worse than the 8600 but I think the 128bit memory is gonna hamper performance too much. ati has gone from one extreme to the other with 512bit mem on 2900xt and the 128bit on 2600xt. The logical step would have been 256bit. Because of the high clock rates of the 2600xt its gonna be more of a bottleneck. If ati are clever the 2600xt should beat 1950pro by a few fps in everything and offer reasonable dx10 performance. Otherwise it would be hard to justify the upgrade just for the extra features.
May 17, 2007 5:46:15 PM

Yeah, just a bit of confusion between me and Crazypyro.... I re-read his post but substituted '2900XT' for 'R600' and it makes sense now :) 
May 17, 2007 5:58:11 PM

again.....
yes, the strategy of using 128bit on new cards is just silly, as 256bit has been around for a while and is easily doable, it just seems illogical that ati and nvidia would want to crpple their cards so much....

it would seem that there be no 2900 owners around these parts......
understandable for such a new product, perhaps this thread was a bit premature, although its very good.....
May 17, 2007 6:19:22 PM

It probably is a bit early for a thread on it. Like i said im glad it hasnt become a thread full of name calling like most others have been on this subject. We might get some owners on here when more of the US starts login on.

I still dont understand why nvidia and ati insist on using 128bit instead of 256bit. Surely the extra cost of produceing it is only minor. Especially for ati considering the 2600xt is a 65nm card and therfore cheaper.

I think its short sighted on ati's behalf because if the 2600xt performs better than last generations mid range cards at the same price it will be a steal. Thats were 8600 loses out. Last generations cards beat it therefore removing upgrade potential. Nvidia is also competing with its self. the 8600gts is too closely priced to the 8800gts320mb but the performance difference is huge. The midrange is also just as lucrative as high end possibly even more so. Thats where joe average shops. That also where most oem sales goes.

Sorry for my riduculously long posts but once i start typing its hard to stop.lol!
May 17, 2007 6:25:47 PM

This is a question for cleeve if he is still around. Do you know why THG uk site hasnt been updated for like 2 days? There is no new articles or news. Or have you guys run out of stuff to talk about for the mo? It could also be that i havnt noticed anything new and there is actually new stuff on there.

Cheers
May 17, 2007 6:40:03 PM

Quote:
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.
}

dont know you but most shops had free 3 day shipping.
what if most wanted to save few bucks and used that 3 day shipping :p 
, sadly I wont get mine 'til July, cause Im gonna have my trip to the US by that month...
May 17, 2007 6:59:54 PM

Fair enough. In the uk they tend to always charge you for shipping, and a lot of the time and doesnt cost much more to get it sent next day anyway.

Hey at least you can get a gpu in june. I have no money till september when my next student loan comes through. And even then I might have to wait till new year for the next loan to really have enough money. On the plus side I get to watch all of this pan out. I also get to find out all the pros and cons from the people who do own them like I have already from g80 owners. I admit I was too hasty with this thread.
May 17, 2007 7:03:55 PM

dw
it led to an interesting discussion anyhows.

any more opinions/questions would be welcomed (aside form fanyboi namecallings lol)
May 17, 2007 7:04:59 PM

Quote:
Do you know why THG uk site hasnt been updated for like 2 days?


Sorry mate, I've no idea. I don't really have any involvement with staff on the other side of the pond. :) 
May 17, 2007 7:10:09 PM

Hi everyone, so far I am happy with my 2900xt. I usually play Vanguard Saga of Heroes, Battlefield 2142, and I was hoping to Play HL2 ep2 which was supposed to come with the card but for not. :x Anyways, the latest drivers for the card really make Vanguard shine, I get 20 more FPS than my freinds GTX in that game. His crushes me in Battlefield though by like 30 FPS. The card runs hot and unfortuneatly I really don't think much can be done about this since they are 80nm cores. I usually buy new cards when they come out and I offer the company as much feedback as I can. I do have e-mail correspondence set up with ATi, so hopefully when the cooler more power efficient 65nm cores come out they can break me a deal. All in all this card wedges perfectly in between the other top end graphics cards by power and price. Now I just can't wait to try out the new 8900 series and the R650 series when they come out. Right now we are in a time when both companies of graphics cards are extremely powerful and extrememly power hungry, and I would say is a pretty bad time to purchase a card anyway. Just think 4 to 8 months from now we will have cards that are twice as fast but more importantly, for the first time power efficient. A GPU that is top-end and only consumes under 100 watts of power I'm all for it.
May 17, 2007 7:15:17 PM

Quote:
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 )
My mistake then; I didn't realize that the HDMI adapter was bundled with it and was able to output sound through DVI. :oops: 
Quote:
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 crazy if you think ATI did not intend on using the R600 to compete with the 8800GTX; what happened to ATI talking up how great it's performance would be? What happened to all the people saying "Don't buy an 8800GTX now as the HD 2900XT/X will kill it"? I think the HD 2900XT will still be a great product to compete with the 8800GTS, but anyone who says the R600 truly was not meant to compete with the 8800GTX is in denial.
May 17, 2007 7:16:16 PM

AHA!
positive proof that people who bought htis card do post on this forum!

after all that wait.......


is it rly 20fps faster?

maybe that could be because the 2900 is only slowed by drivers, or that the game suts the achitecture? mmmmm
i guess it shows that the 2900 can reproduce its scores in real life....

nice one :D 
May 17, 2007 7:26:48 PM

Quote:
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"


Yeah, because for Months and months people were saying its the GTX killer, that people should wait till the R600 to come out [Which i did]. Now that its out people don't wanna match it up against the GTX anymore. I think it deserves to look like a flop beside a GTX until the XTX one or whatever comes to show it up.

NOBODY said ANYTHING about it having to match up against a GTS, it was always a GTX until benchmarks came out, then everyone saying OOooo i don't trust those sites, their fake, wait until Tom or someone good has real bench's. Then it turns out to be true, that the GTX was better, then all the fanboys are going oooo its the driversss its has so much potentiallllll, yet that have had many many months to spend on them...
May 17, 2007 7:35:38 PM

Welcome

Glad to finally hear an opinion and a good one at that. Have you had a go at trying decode hd with it yet? Or do the drivers not support it yet?
Sounds like yours is performing well even beating a gtx in that case. I would be quite pleased with that. A lot of people dont realise when you dont spend top end money you dont get top end beating performance. Brought back to its place by Battlefield but thats to be expected.

What system are you running it with coz im quite interested to see how it scales with different systems?
What happened with HL2 ep2?
May 17, 2007 7:42:21 PM

Look if you dont have anything interesting to say go post somewhere else. That has been argued to death all of this week and frankly a lot of people are fed up about hearing it. This is a thread with people having a friendly discussion. At the end of the day who gives a sh!t about what may or may not have been said and what was supposed to happen. The 2900xt is here end of story!
May 17, 2007 7:53:55 PM

ok

yes fine.... i get it.... you think it should compete against the gtx.....

read the first half of the thread plz...

and not im not a fanboi (i have a gts 320 atm..)



ooh!

is ep2 out yet?

yes, please post your system, it would be defo interesting to see how it scales whn not benckmarked on an core 2 extreme 680i etc.....
!