Diamond HD 2900 XT 1GB DDR4 - benchmarks?

[wjmbsd]

Are there any benchmarks out there yet for the HD 2900 XT from Diamond (the $499 version w/ 1GB of DDR4)??? Anyone know when to expect to see some? Diamond says this is "The World's Fastest Graphics Card" and I was told by Maingear that the 1GB version of this card is much faster than even the Nvidia 8800 Ultra, at a fraction of the cost. What's the real story here? Thanks-

 

[Jakc]

Found one:
http://hardware.gotfrag.com/portal/story/38332/

Strange that they are so hard to find...

 

[blade85]

uhhh.....why does the results have a HD2900XTX in it?

 

[bum_jcrules]

Some are calling it that. It is still an XT but with GDDR4. I posted a link to Falcon Northwest as the owner Kelt Reeves posted an article regarding two systems he sent into PCMag for review. The one was a SLI 8800 Ultra and the other was CrossFire HD 2900 XT GDDR4. The CPU in the CrossFire system was clocked lower and it still beat the Ultra machine. He has called them XTX cards as well.

Here is a link to it:

http://www.falcon-nw.com/keltstake/ati_2900xtx.asp

 

[Jakc]

Actually, in the first link, they have both an XTX and a 1GB ddr4 version, and they perform differently.
I think what they may have done in the first review, is add earlier benchmarks with exactly the same hardware to the latest benchmarks of the 1GB ddr4.

 

[TonyStark]

Here's another review
Firing Squad: HD2900XT 1GB

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Some are calling it that. It is still an XT but with GDDR4. I posted a link to Falcon Northwest as the owner Kelt Reeves posted an article regarding two systems he sent into PCMag for review. The one was a SLI 8800 Ultra and the other was CrossFire HD 2900 XT GDDR4. The CPU in the CrossFire system was clocked lower and it still beat the Ultra machine. He has called them XTX cards as well.

Yeah I think some people just think that the 1GB of RAM = XTX, but really as you know of course, the clockspeeds aren't up to the XTX's numbers, so it's not quite the same.

the PCMag review talked about the HD2900XT throughout almost the whole review, but out of the two times the card appeared in the graphs/table it had one of each the HD2900XT and one HD2900XTX. I think for them the later was a brain-fart typo.

Now those that are contrasting an XTX with an XT 1GB, are either overclocking the XT1GB to rumoured XTX spec speed (can't finalize them I guess if they don't officially exist ), and then some others are benching the few early OEM boards like the one review above which has 2 XTXs, but they're with pre-release drivers, and they mentions the drivers are a hodgepodge, so I wouldn't say the XTXs would even perform like that now with all the improvement with AMD's drivers.

I think it's all semantics, but it's good for people to know the difference of course.

 

[sailer]

Some are calling it that. It is still an XT but with GDDR4. I posted a link to Falcon Northwest as the owner Kelt Reeves posted an article regarding two systems he sent into PCMag for review. The one was a SLI 8800 Ultra and the other was CrossFire HD 2900 XT GDDR4. The CPU in the CrossFire system was clocked lower and it still beat the Ultra machine. He has called them XTX cards as well.

Here is a link to it:

http://www.falcon-nw.com/keltstake/ati_2900xtx.asp

Yes, given that Falcon Northwest has no ax to grind with either company, they give a good reason for buying a 2900 XTX, if you can find one. As the GreatGrapeApe pointed out, there is a difference between XT and XTX cards, be that difference in clock speeds or elsewhere. So did FNW use a card that isn't readily available, or did they overclock a XT card, or did they make a mistake in naming the thing? I don't know, but I'd sure like to have one card of the same type they tested. It would be interesting.