Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

HD2900XT xfire up to 3x faster than 8800GTX sli under Vista

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Windows Vista
  • SLI
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 4, 2007 10:36:07 AM

There has to be some truth to this... "the 2900s almost triple the performance of the 8800 system at 2560x1600 in Company of Heroes, with PC Mag bods quoting 84 FPS for the 2900s and 32 FPS for the SLI rig"

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40770

I am not technical enough to know the exact reason that the HD2900Xt's scale so well, memory bandwidth, double bandwidth of the xfire bridge, better drivers for vista etc, but it's good :) 

It's good to see the tables being turned on the Nvidia team, a more balanced market is what we all need.. But the HD2900XT are going to show some real future potential, as Vista and super high res displays are the future.

More about : hd2900xt xfire faster 8800gtx sli vista

July 4, 2007 11:07:34 AM

Top INQ Stories
1. DAAMIT seeds ninja 2900 rig
2. Huge energy company tells staff to dress scruffily
3. Exploding mobile phone battery kills welder
4. Microsoft file format pot calls file format kettle black
5. Iphone cracked in three days

Need I say more?
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 11:16:32 AM

Have you seen annands lately? They have a story on it also. All true
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 11:22:24 AM

From the first word and benches on the 2900 DailyTech http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=7864 Take it for what its worth, as Ive already seen some of these a month ago. Didnt say anything then, as Im sure no right thinking fan would believe me.
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 11:26:28 AM

Quote:
Looking closely at the benchmarks, however, does suggest a reason for the massive discrepancy - the 2900s almost triple the performance of the 8800 system at 2560x1600 in Company of Heroes, with PC Mag bods quoting 84 FPS for the 2900s and 32 FPS for the SLI rig. Our suggestion - Nvidia's drivers still suck when it comes to SLI and Vista, and it could be that DAAMIT has finally gotten its act together on that front.

It's not necessarily that the hardware is three times as fast - although someone with more hardcore creds than PC Mag is welcome to offer their thoughts on that - but more that setting up Vista SLI with an 8800 properly for a specific game title is the devil's own work and is more than likely to result in a duff setting somewhere that kills off performance.

Either way, the picture isn't good for the boys in green - the continuing poor performance and release schedule of Green Team drivers in Vista is now really starting to hurt. µ

So now I guess we must wait looonger, again waiting for decent saviour drivers for the GTX. Sheeeeeesh. OK, Im loving this. No drivers can save the GTX. Must be crap :roll:
a c 89 U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 11:28:15 AM

That looks extremely promising, looks like they got the drivers working properly.
July 4, 2007 11:32:22 AM

Here are the full results, somewhat limited.


This is something that needs to be looked into further. These benches are very limited but they do a good job of exploiting Nvidia's Achilles heal; namely Vista SLI drivers. It may turn out that for the multi gpu crowd that the 1 gig xt's xfired are the top choice. If you notice in the gif I linked to they were still calling those cards xtx's.
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 11:43:50 AM

Also, if you look, on that chart, the cpu is actually running slower on the ATI rig. I dont think nVidia can make good drivers :roll: , and theres no hope for them at the very top of the top :roll: , Theyve had their cards out for how long? And how long have everyone waited? :roll: And they cant take the crown? As if newer drivers could help... OK, Im being sarcastic here. The GTX is a fine card, as is the 2900, just tired of all those fanbois, now heres a lil sumpin for them too. People just have to understand, this is all new territory, DX10, Vista et al. Theres going to be problems. Ive read a interview that the head designer at ATI believes the AA and AF problems can be solved with drivers. But can the SLI be solved for the GTX? heheh
July 4, 2007 11:49:02 AM

The ATI drivers department has always been on top.
They have done a pretty decent job concerning xrossfire vista drivers.

I believe that 2900XT's in general have even greater potential that will be revealed in future driver versions.

ATI seems to be gaining right now on the high end.
8)
July 4, 2007 11:52:56 AM

ati does bad. the product sucks. when nvidia does bad. they say its the drivers.
July 4, 2007 12:12:58 PM

One reason can be that 2900 is ROPS bottlenecked and Nvid shader botlenecked. When there are 2 2900's there are enough ROPS in DX10 environment...
But, yeah most propably it's driver problem.
July 4, 2007 12:17:45 PM

This is great news if it is correct.

ATI / AMD need some good news badly and this will likely push volume sales of the mid range cards too.

Obviously the fanbois here will go wild with some stupid comments to amuse the level headed.

I'm still steering clear of this part until they bring in a cooler 65nm replacement though.

All we need now is some similar news on Barcelona ...

A nice level playing field again will keep the prices down ... that equates to cheaper and speedier FPS gaming.

If AMD could knock Intel off their pedistal (a big ask) we could all afford quads too !!

:) 
July 4, 2007 12:19:28 PM

It's about time AMD did something right. Now maybe nvidia will get goosed into fixing their sucky drivers. I'm tired of being limited to a hundred fps in dx9 games. :roll:
July 4, 2007 12:42:49 PM

You say the perform better under Vista, but what about xp? I'm not a Vista user nor will I ever be so does anyone have any benchies for the two in xp?
July 4, 2007 12:51:40 PM

Those are actually good news (if true) because now Nvidia will put more effort in improving his Vista drivers, and we could finally switch.
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 1:10:04 PM

OK, heres a tip. XP is DX9 based, not DX10. The drivers for SLI in XP run fine. Theyre old drivers, easy to do, lotsa history. Plus , the hardware is DX9 capable, but its also DX10 capable, and thats where it starts getting tougher. And youre never going to buy a new game? Or use DX10? I will, but not for awhile tho. I hate Vista at this point also
July 4, 2007 1:10:26 PM

ATi really has to gain some ground in the high end market, though this looks promising.
July 4, 2007 1:12:48 PM

Quote:
There has to be some truth to this... "the 2900s almost triple the performance of the 8800 system at 2560x1600 in Company of Heroes, with PC Mag bods quoting 84 FPS for the 2900s and 32 FPS for the SLI rig"

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40770

I am not technical enough to know the exact reason that the HD2900Xt's scale so well, memory bandwidth, double bandwidth of the xfire bridge, better drivers for vista etc, but it's good :) 

It's good to see the tables being turned on the Nvidia team, a more balanced market is what we all need.. But the HD2900XT are going to show some real future potential, as Vista and super high res displays are the future.

While it does look good for ATI at first look then I went over the benchmarks. These arent the HD2900XT's. The benchmark linked from PC Mag states HD2900XTX's. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2147064,00.asp

That said ATI may well have a monster GPU on the way. The differance between the HD2900XT and the HD2900XTX is 80nm v/s 65nm. Thats about 2/3's more space for stream processors which should show this improvement.
July 4, 2007 1:15:40 PM

Someone will get dx10 running on xp, and if not then I'll have to live without it, I don't game all that much anyway. I hate most everything about Vista so I don't see it ever being appealing to me, and remember my main os isn't windows based.

I'm just curious as to which architecture is more efficient, sli or cf
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 1:30:37 PM

Someone put it this way "sli is not as promising but is more stable, and cf is killer in some games and reek in others, or not as stable. Reading an interview by a desgner from ATI, I think thats about to change for cf tho. The biggest problem for ATI now is, its more like game to game for good drivers per HW. Oh, me too, Vista sucks. And as for windows, I didnt gnu you didnt heheh
July 4, 2007 1:34:18 PM

I believe it if I see it but I'm sure not all games will run on Nvidia's favor.
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 1:42:57 PM

Im sure the GTX will win 1 or 2, but the 2900 stomps for now. Sound familiar? Its the drivers, really
July 4, 2007 2:30:20 PM

I agree it's drivers and not faulty hardware on nvidia's side or great on ATI's. Just look at the 3dmark score.The GTX system has a higher clocked CPU and even then it only makes 12200. For comparison , my system with a slower clocked dual core and only one GTX gets 11538 (on xp though). This is ofcourse still a victory for ATI, however not one atributed to hardware IMO. I do hope nvidia gets their sh#t together as one day Vista will be inevitable (crysis on Dx10 :p  ) but for now...meh
July 4, 2007 2:45:01 PM

I´m not too excited yet. I´ve seen a crossfire setup (1950 pros) beat a 8800 before in DX9 Need for Speed. Last time it was an error thanks to the way the frame rates are measured using fraps. Once Anand, THG or another site does an in-depth review of it, i believe it.
It´s not that i don´t want the X2900 to succeed, technological i prefer it over the 8800 any day, but i´m very skeptical and the crowd that want´s to see the 2900 succeed will take any opportunity they get to twist and exaggerate the truth - just like the hardcore 8800 idiots.
July 4, 2007 2:47:20 PM

U guys are fucks i don't think any one in here even has 2 of this card , ati or nvidia. What i can't stand is the wankers that stand up for the cards but don't even own them or only have mid range. YEYEY Ati are winning...wow, I think its stupid to do cf or sli ....doesn't say much ay...

Now the thing is i work in a shop in sydney aus and my coworker have the whole cf going and i have the whole sli thing going and half the time the sites are all bull shit . as i have a 680 and he has the dfi 965 both cpus oc @3.6 and the scores are full of crap online , he just for the new 7.6 drivers and can't enble cf with them without restarting ? wtf is that and even then the restard the little tick doesn't show that there if cf enabled...i would have to say that most fan boys just talk shit and don't even own the cards.
July 4, 2007 3:11:21 PM

Here's a pretty good XP performance comparison of xfire v. SLI setups.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6173135/index.html?tag...;title;2

I like how they've done the whole dollars per frame chart, that's pretty interesting, might even be useful for people buying a rig for a specific game or two.

On a side note, I'm not a huge fan of using Stalker as a benchmark. I love the game, but it's so poorly coded that I think in some cases its use as a benchmark muddies rather than clears the water. What do you guys think?
July 4, 2007 3:37:08 PM

Quote:

That said ATI may well have a monster GPU on the way. The differance between the HD2900XT and the HD2900XTX is 80nm v/s 65nm. Thats about 2/3's more space for stream processors which should show this improvement.


What about the more important parts of the GPU that is causing the XT to fall behind?

Faster texture units?
More TMU's?

The 2900's Vertex shaders leave the 8800GTX in the dust, but the pixel shading is pretty bad. There's only 16 TMUs, which is kinda lame IMO... it's practically going back to the pixel pipeline days where the amount of pipes you had basically dictated how much performance you could expect alone. I used to balk at cards with 12 pixel pipes when there were 16 pipe cards out, but how - with the competition using 24 TMUs - could they use only 16? Like, not even 20 at least???

Why be 10 feet away when you can just be close enough to smack the back of your competitions head... it's not like they didn't have enough real estate to put more TMU's... it was only freaking 700million+ transistors.
July 4, 2007 3:38:04 PM

Quote:
Also, if you look, on that chart, the cpu is actually running slower on the ATI rig. I dont think nVidia can make good drivers :roll: , and theres no hope for them at the very top of the top :roll: , Theyve had their cards out for how long? And how long have everyone waited? :roll: And they cant take the crown? As if newer drivers could help... OK, Im being sarcastic here.


First JD I was not offering drivers as an excuse for Nvidia. There is no excuse why anyone who forks over a thousand plus dollars for an sli or xfire setup for graphics not getting solid drivers that allow there multi gpu setup to perform better than a single card.
I was pointing out that this very small benchmark zeros in on Nvidia's known weakness. Even then the results are very suspect.
It is hard to question benchmarks because you don't know what kind of time demo they used etc., but 3dmark can be compared. Why did they score 12267 on 3dmark06 at default but all kinds of people have results with sli'd gtx's on orb ranging from 15000-17000 under Vista (Link)? I'm not sure if the link will work if you have not used ORB.

If these new 1 gig cards are all that xfired ATI needs to get them out to some real review sites.
July 4, 2007 4:01:25 PM

Define 'lately'..... I found the may 14th results a bit weak in many respects.

Don't cherry-pick out of the top of the FUD tree....
July 4, 2007 4:14:04 PM

It might have something to do with:
- ATI hardware actually being better than Nvidia's
- ATI drivers better than Nvidia's
- or the fact that as such high-res, an extra 256 Mb of VRAM makes all the difference...
July 4, 2007 4:28:07 PM

I'm really getting tired of fud bois. Show me the money. Find me ONE benchmark that supports that theory.
July 4, 2007 4:36:54 PM

It's one game, and only under certain conditions. Using XP, even with the latest drivers a xfire setup rarely even comes within spitting distance of an SLI setup. It's most likely just crappy, unoptomized drivers from the boys at Nvidia coupled with CoH being optomized for ATI hardware. Whoop-dee-doo. You can't really make sweeping statements such as yours on such a weak factual basis.
July 4, 2007 5:15:28 PM

well those benchmarks don't seem right

I score 11970 under vista with a single card and only a dualcore, so a second card is only gonna get me roughly 400 extra points, seem way off to me.
July 4, 2007 5:17:22 PM

Pardon me, but this is a DIRECT X 10 fight, not an xp one. And as far as i can see direct x 9 games dont matter anymore, it is like saying that a country with conventional weapons will beat one with inferior conventional weapons that has developed energy weapons or the neutron bomb. I am not saying that the 2900 is the bee's knees but if it can do it once... 512bit versus 324 bit. In the new arena that is the only one that matters. dx9 benchmarks are useless for dx 10 game performance. I don't hate nVidia but you are not going to play this one down. They won, just like nVidia won the last fight. We will see if this is just a company of heroes fluke but i doubt it. As i recall in dx9company of heroes, crossfire does not even work. So right now it is anyones guess what will happen.
July 4, 2007 5:26:05 PM

It's a Vista SLI vs Crossfire fight. Nowhere I see it mentioned they were running DX10 Company of Heroes (as for prey there's no DX10 patch). And honestly, if they were running DX10 @ 2560 x 1600 I doubt they would make it to 32 FPS even with SLI working, allthough it could be remotely possible. Not trying to start a flame war here but I see no evidence of DX10.
July 4, 2007 5:32:08 PM

Current Nvidia drivers don't support SLI under Direct X10, so enabling it could hurt performance. Even if ATI can manage to outperform the 8800GTX in Direct X10, they're already in trouble as Nvidia has every intention of releasing the 9800GTX before the end of the year; ATI won't even get a refresh in before then.
July 4, 2007 5:36:16 PM

Oh sorry did not read the whole article, and rating my posts scares me so very much, but who gives a fuck, it is in vista, where dx 10 will be so if you cant even get the old tech to work... I dont care who does what, ATI won and you cant stand it. Fanboi. I personally think that nVidia are currently the card to buy but i *hate* how their driver controls are set out so i am buying the ati. always used ATI and i am getting it for less than i can get the nVidia, so be cross with my post and give it a low score cause you don't like the fact that for once nVidia lost 1 fight, queer. You dont have to like my opinion and you can always click the ignore tab dumbass.
July 4, 2007 5:40:26 PM

I hope it does not happen but we will have to wait and see. Don't you mean 8900? or is the G90 coming?
July 4, 2007 5:43:49 PM

Yup, stalker is as well coded as total annihilation. But i think when you are in Russia support is hard to come by ESP on vapourware.
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 5:57:38 PM

No1sFanboy, this isnt/wasnt aimed at you. I agree with you 100%. My sarcasm runs high at this cause of all the fanboyism. Here we have 2 great cards, with the same problem. No excuses, thats a fact, as I said, I agree. The drivers suck. nVidia drivers SUCK. ATI drivers are getting better on a newer product, BUT theu SUCK. DX10 is killing them both. I know this came from FUaD, but he had a blurb about how Intel has hell to pay to get Larrabee off the ground. Starting from scratch with no drivers, and no in the wild users. DX10 is new folks, Vista is new folks. DX10 as of now isnt really even DX10, and Vista NEEDS SP1 as we all know. So get over it, nVidia is shaming a fine card in the GTX as ATI does as well in the 2900. You CAN disagree, whomever you are , but this is whats happening. Paying a grand for this is a shame. And I mean for either company, as both cards and drivers have their own problems. The ATI fanboys are much more aware of this than the nVidia fanboys, only because the stink the green fanboys made about the 2900, so man up green team, it looks as tho the GTX in SLI on Vista SUCKS. Now, like the ATI boys, pray for better drivers
July 4, 2007 6:02:19 PM

Dude! Honestly, relax. First of all I didn't rate your post, as like I said was not starting a flame war. As for fanboy, I did not want to get into this, but you are about the biggest 2900 whore on the forum :D  . As soon as something negative is said about it you come out and basically say: It's the greatest and even though it does not perform yet it will one day so I'm getting it regardless.512 bit FTW!! As for DX9 games not mattering, 100% of the games available TODAY are DX9 with the exception of a few patches, so where do you get of saying that. That is just plain ridiculous. Also, here's a link to a review done late June:

http://hardware.gotfrag.com/portal/story/38332/?spage=1...

As you can see these marvelous 2900xt's don't perform too well under dx10 even in crossfire @ much lower resolutions then stated in the benchies in this thread. Even in DX9 under vista @ 1920 x 1200 it gets about HALF the FPS as is reported here @ 2560 x 1600. So what is up with that?? I can imagine the DX9 driver part improved the situation to stated values but that is it and even that is a stretch IMO.
I don't give a damn that nvidia lost a fight and even if I was a queer I still wouldn't, probably even less actually, I'd be more worried about my hair and would have called you a bitch by now. What you don't seem to get is that what's reasonable for ATI is also reasonable for nvidia, which is waiting for drivers (allthough they might move a bit faster). Personally, I don't have SLI nor Vista so for me this is a moot point, where for others this is of greater concern.
Like I said, it's a victory for ATI, however not one of hardware but of driver support. Kudos to them. Booo nvidia.

me out


*edit* I noticed you now have two votes. Still not me though.
July 4, 2007 6:13:27 PM

Quote:
I hope it does not happen but we will have to wait and see. Don't you mean 8900? or is the G90 coming?
Nvidia has said they intend on releasing G90 in Q4; I'll be putting one in my system on release day. :D 
July 4, 2007 6:18:09 PM

Quote:
I´m not too excited yet. I´ve seen a crossfire setup (1950 pros) beat a 8800 before in DX9 Need for Speed. Last time it was an error thanks to the way the frame rates are measured using fraps. Once Anand, THG or another site does an in-depth review of it, i believe it.
It´s not that i don´t want the X2900 to succeed, technological i prefer it over the 8800 any day, but i´m very skeptical and the crowd that want´s to see the 2900 succeed will take any opportunity they get to twist and exaggerate the truth - just like the hardcore 8800 idiots.


I have 2 1650xt's in crossfire, i also use vista, the performance, i have so far noticed, hasnt decreased with vista but i havent noticed any improvements either. The only complaint i have is WHY cant i turn crossfire off?????? when i do it goes to a black screen with liek a flashing cursor like in dos and doesnt come back.

When i reboot it says its still in crossfire mode. Also when i do manage to turn them of, it wont turn abck on again!!! Not been fixed with any driver updates by ati, i use catalyst 7.5 and when i installed 7.6 none of my games would play and always crashed before they where acutaly loaded.

Crossfire is good and im glad i got it, but they need to fix this problem.

Cheers
July 4, 2007 6:22:11 PM

Cool sorry, i did not really read anything here properly just glanced and replied.

And CRAP! G90 already? what the hell is ATI going to do to fix this one....

Just as i get something good (gonna be here any day now(I am starting to think that not eating to get funding is not such a great idea)) nVidia comes and trashes my party.

Yup i would suck anyone of you off for another 2900xt. Me love you long time 2900xt make you holla.

The 2 votes are cause i pissed two nVidia fanbois off. Some guy with an ice skull as his pic and someone else i cant remember.

I would ALSO suck the nicer looking ones on this forum off for an 8800 (GTX ONLY)(ultra if you are slightly less attractive) so there.

I am going to start up a site called 'www.rimjob4RAM.org'
July 4, 2007 6:55:53 PM

Hey man, if it gets me a good frame rate i would do it... :)  (not really)
July 4, 2007 7:01:05 PM

2900pro 65nm and the 2950xt/xtx 65nm should all be out by the end of this year.. the PRO probably willl be for sure.

Personally I think the 80nm/65nm is the 2900xt's biggest weakness its just too much atm.

Could be a ton of reasons for the x-fire performance rocking. 256mb more and GDDR4 at very fast speeds may be one reason. But it probably is all drivers, with issues and crap.
July 4, 2007 7:30:49 PM

Who the hell owns TWO HD 2900XTs?

Not many people will go crossfire so ATI needs to step up their single card game. They need to get a new version out with a better filtering performance so we can turn on AA and AF!
a b U Graphics card
July 4, 2007 7:53:56 PM

Quote:
While it does look good for ATI at first look then I went over the benchmarks. These arent the HD2900XT's. The benchmark linked from PC Mag states HD2900XTX's. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2147064,00.asp


Huh?

The Benchmark and the article keeps refering to HD2900XT cards. No mention of XTX from what I saw.

Quote:
That said ATI may well have a monster GPU on the way. The differance between the HD2900XT and the HD2900XTX is 80nm v/s 65nm.


No 65nm XTX sofar. If anything a refresh like an R650 or R670 would get another name (like HD2950).
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!