r700 benchmarks

[rangers]

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=588&pageid=3

 

[spathotan]

Nice heatsink. The power plugs are in the DUMBEST position ever, what the hell? Also those benchmarks are somewhat dissapointing in some aspects, but like the wrap up says drivers are to blame. Also the HD playback seems be fall behind the GTX 280 which is odd being that this is an ATI strong point.

 

[rangers]

crysis is the only game that the 280 is on top but i expect that to change with better drivers

 

[San Pedro]

Seemed pretty good to me. A little above 4870 CF performance.

 

[waver_01]

why did they use catalyst 8.6??

 

[dagger]

Nice heatsink. The power plugs are in the DUMBEST position ever, what the hell?

Lol, what's wrong with them? I'm sure it'll come with molex adaptors like all others.

 

[4745454b]

I looked at the CoD4 benchie, then went back to page one to find out what I could about the card. From what I see, the rumor mill is wrong, as it states that there is 1GB of memory on each side of the card, with each GPU having its own GB. People have been talking about how it was supposed to be 2GB shared, but that doesn't seem to be the case. (bummer)

Pardon me, now that I've read about the card, I'm going back to read benchies.

 

[4745454b]

Nice heatsink. The power plugs are in the DUMBEST position ever, what the hell? Also those benchmarks are somewhat dissapointing in some aspects, but like the wrap up says drivers are to blame. Also the HD playback seems be fall behind the GTX 280 which is odd being that this is an ATI strong point.

It would have been nice to see the power plugs curved. They aren't in a bad position, but because they aren't curved, you're going to need a bit more cord length. You have to remember that they were measuring CPU usage for DVD play back, so the lower the number the better. The CPU usage WAS/IS lower for the r700 compared to the GTX280. This is a good thing.

Honestly, I'm not surprised by these numbers. A single 4870 can come close to the GTX280, so I would expect 2 of them to do even better. A shame that Crysis is still lower, but most games do better on r700 then the GTX280, so big deal. As long as the r700 comes out at a lower price then the GTX280, the pressure should still be on. Even if the price was the same, the r700 is better due to the increase in performance.

 

[cokenbeer]

Those benchmarks look awesome! I decided a few weeks ago to wait for the 4870X2 and it seems like it's gonna pay off.

As for the one low point, crysis, it definitely looks to be a driver issue considering the fact that a single 4870 is close to the cf and x2 in performance. I can't wait to see some more previews/reviews for this card!

 

[mathiasschnell]

I'm pretty impressed. Aside from temperature and the imminent power needs, it seems like the R700 soundly trounces the GTX 280 by at least 25% in almost everything (Crysis excluded of course). But then again, ATI cards have almost always been very hot and power hungry, yet still handle it very well, and no one's really complained about it much in the past.

Factor in that this is an ES, there's still better drivers to come, factory OC's, custom coolers, etc, etc. and I could see things just getting better and better.

 

[ovaltineplease]

Turn..up...antialiasing..settings...... -_- stop.. the...fluff...testing...

Identical fps to 4870 CF is not something to get excited about; i'm pretty disappointed with this card so far. This was supposed to have 180% scaling of 4870 CF, it is quite evident that either AMD or this website is blatantly lying about there figures.

Drivers shouldn't even be relevant if the gpu is using the advanced communication technology that its supposed to. Looks like its bottlenecked by something if it is.


That Crysis test is a joke too, 1280*768?

I'm sorry to rain on anyone's parade, but there is a lot lacking from this preview; namely TEST PLATFORM??? 3.2ghz CPU?? It seems pretty obvious that in the Crysis test the CPU must be bottlenecking the r700 and the 4870CF because their performance should be way higher and the playable resolution should be higher too.

Blah, i'm really questioning whether this is legit or not - wait for a real review because I think the testing method has to be gimping the r700, and if its not im really disappointed. :/

 

[satanpro]

This is much better than I had expected. I would like to see more previews with newer drivers though. Why they used 8.6 is a mystery to me. And like ovaltine says, the Crysys test is something of an anomaly... I wonder why.

 

[royalcrown]

First of all, this "review" smells fake...and I'll take 1 card and avoid the crossfire crap and 2 slot sucking cards, so even if it isn't faster than crossfire, i'd still get it.

 

[WR2]

First of all, this "review" smells fake...

The Crysis preview results are close enough to the results AnandTech published in their preview to make me think it's probably not fake.

 

[mathiasschnell]

Turn..up...antialiasing..settings...... -_- stop.. the...fluff...testing...

Identical fps to 4870 CF is not something to get excited about; i'm pretty disappointed with this card so far. This was supposed to have 180% scaling of 4870 CF, it is quite evident that either AMD or this website is blatantly lying about there figures.

Drivers shouldn't even be relevant if the gpu is using the advanced communication technology that its supposed to. Looks like its bottlenecked by something if it is.


That Crysis test is a joke too, 1280*768?

I'm sorry to rain on anyone's parade, but there is a lot lacking from this preview; namely TEST PLATFORM??? 3.2ghz CPU?? It seems pretty obvious that in the Crysis test the CPU must be bottlenecking the r700 and the 4870CF because their performance should be way higher and the playable resolution should be higher too.

Blah, i'm really questioning whether this is legit or not - wait for a real review because I think the testing method has to be gimping the r700, and if its not im really disappointed. :/

Dude... the tests were all at 1920x1200 & 2560 x 1600, 4xAA (8xAA for HL2), 16xAF, except for the Crysis one. That's already pretty high, what more do you want?

 

[WR2]

 

[ovaltineplease]

Dude... the tests were all at 1920x1200 & 2560 x 1600, 4xAA (8xAA for HL2), 16xAF, except for the Crysis one. That's already pretty high, what more do you want?

A 3.8-4.0 ghz benchmark at 1920*1200 that is standard like in every other review site.

Do you even know anyone who actually plays Crysis at 1280*768 res?

 

[jjokubauskas]

A 3.8-4.0 ghz benchmark at 1920*1200 that is standard like in every other review site.

Do you even know anyone who actually plays Crysis at 1280*768 res?

ud be surprised. i do because its the only way i can use medium settings on my 7800GTX 256mb(dont laugh). but it still looks ok cuz i use a crt (22" NEC)

 

[L1qu1d]

The GX2 is still the strongest in Crysis:| lol Too bad Crysis sucks. I was hoping it would do alittle better in COD4, I mean the GX2 is over the 280 in COD4.

I'm going to wait for official benchmarks and hope that we'll see better benchmarks.

 

[hannibal]

Most importan thing at this moment is that the card seams to be stable. Ofcource, there was only few games, that they were allowed to test, but in anyway this seems to work ;-)
The improvement was said to be 18% not 180... So it seems to be guite near what ATI said before, maybe a little bitt less.
Next I would like to see what are sound levels when you compare single 4870, cf 4870 and 4870x2. I like the speed, but wakuum cleaner is not what I wan to hear when I play games...

 

[rangers]

so what do you thinks going on with crysis

 

[mathiasschnell]

so what do you thinks going on with crysis

One acronym: TWIMTBP

That is all.

 

[dagger]

Another new release with hyped up expectations turned bust. It seems like everyone believed it'd scale as a single gpu. If you put that idea aside, it's not that bad.