QFT. Also remember the 9800pro? that era. but if remember the 5900 was a pretty good ocer cardDauntless wrote:
I wouldn't say never...Poseidon wrote:
I'll stick with my 8800 GTX. ATI will never be up to par with nVidia.
But certainly for the time being.
AA on ATI has always owned AA on nVidia - they use a different AA method.RDMC(2) wrote:
As I saw in different test with some kind of drivers, on Non AA test it beat the 8800GTS with only a little bit and vica versa, but when using AA on with the drivers that ATI deliver it had beaten the GTS by a mile.theknuck wrote:
hmm, more money, more power consumption, and beat out by 8800gts (640mb). kind of a no brainer here. lets move on.
Not worth the money. Uses more energy than the 8800GTS and some people have said that it performs about the same as a 8800GTS (640mb version).
correct me if I am wrong.
correct me if I am wrong.
Come on, guys, let me simplify the OP's link:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi … 000+series
I haven't been following ATI too often, but weren't these supposed to be GDDR4?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi … 000+series
I haven't been following ATI too often, but weren't these supposed to be GDDR4?
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-05-14 17:57:56)
The XTX ones are GDDR4unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Come on, guys, let me simplify the OP's link:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi … 000+series
I haven't been following ATI too often, but weren't these supposed to be GDDR4?
The ignorance in this post frightens me...Poseidon wrote:
I'll stick with my 8800 GTX. ATI will never be up to par with nVidia.
The only single setup that can beat the ATi X1950XTX are the 8800GTS/8800GTX. The 7950GX2 beats it but that is two cards in one. The X1950XTX in CF will match up and in some cases beat a single 8800GTX (and sometimes two in SLi) so lets not even go there.
I'm not sure where you've been but ATi has beaten nVidia for quite a while now...
I'd like to make two points here:
1) To all you tards saying "The 8800GTX SMOKES the 2900XT!!!" WELL NO SH*T!! It's not made to match up to the 8800GTX (though it does quite nicely). This is the 2900XT remember, not the 2900XTX... it's like comparing the GTS to the GTX.
2) To all you people dissing the 2900XT "blah blah the 8800GTS is still better blaaahhh", stop and think for a minute... AMD has released quite a few new features and technologies with these cards that need new drivers to utilize and take advantage of them. These drivers are not yet out, and they may wait until the 2900XTX is out before they release these drivers.
Rest assured that the 2900XTX will completely rape what nVidia has to offer.
1) The tread is "THE video card is out" - XTX version of 2900XT isn't...CrazeD wrote:
The ignorance in this post frightens me...Poseidon wrote:
I'll stick with my 8800 GTX. ATI will never be up to par with nVidia.
The only single setup that can beat the ATi X1950XTX are the 8800GTS/8800GTX. The 7950GX2 beats it but that is two cards in one. The X1950XTX in CF will match up and in some cases beat a single 8800GTX (and sometimes two in SLi) so lets not even go there.
I'm not sure where you've been but ATi has beaten nVidia for quite a while now...
I'd like to make two points here:
1) To all you tards saying "The 8800GTX SMOKES the 2900XT!!!" WELL NO SH*T!! It's not made to match up to the 8800GTX (though it does quite nicely). This is the 2900XT remember, not the 2900XTX... it's like comparing the GTS to the GTX.
2) To all you people dissing the 2900XT "blah blah the 8800GTS is still better blaaahhh", stop and think for a minute... AMD has released quite a few new features and technologies with these cards that need new drivers to utilize and take advantage of them. These drivers are not yet out, and they may wait until the 2900XTX is out before they release these drivers.
Rest assured that the 2900XTX will completely rape what nVidia has to offer.
2) So did Nvidia with 8800 months ago - Nvidias drivers are still beeing improved...
When XTX comes out Nvidias 8900 will be out too, futher more stamping ATi into the ground....
Rest assured that Nvidia is better than ATi, and that this thread is all about us Nvidia fanboys vs the ATi fanboys and that we will never agree....
How well an equal class graphics card from each developer performs depends entirely on the game !!!
e.g. in BF nvidia wins, while in the source engine (HL2, CS:S) ATi wins....
Last edited by ShawN_ (2007-05-15 01:47:13)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
I did read that the 2900 performs on par with a 8800GTX when the AA/AF is set to maximum....something to do with the memory (2900 = 512 bits vs 8800 = 384 bits, I think)
Link: http://www.ocworkbench.com/2007/asus/EAH2900XT/g1.htm
Link: http://www.ocworkbench.com/2007/asus/EAH2900XT/g1.htm
Driver 8.37.4.2 was the best performing so far and also the one all sites tested the HD2900XT with. Well, ATI released version 8.37.4.3 and all of a sudden the card falls back even behind the GTS 320. At least it now doesn't crash every second game anymore..._j5689_ wrote:
I heard somewhere that it is underperforming right now because of the drivers. Could be a lie though.
For ANY resolution of your choice: There must either be some bug or the 2900XT is just plain shit at AA/AF - it's not such a great DX9 card after all anyway, if you look at the specs compared to a X1950XTX, they're not that amazing unless you go into really high resolutions at more than 4Mpixels.
Go /wrists, ATI emo -.- Seriously... how ignorant can one be? In IT terms, half a years is like half a century.CrazeD wrote:
The ignorance in this post frightens me...Poseidon wrote:
I'll stick with my 8800 GTX. ATI will never be up to par with nVidia.
The only single setup that can beat the ATi X1950XTX are the 8800GTS/8800GTX. The 7950GX2 beats it but that is two cards in one. The X1950XTX in CF will match up and in some cases beat a single 8800GTX (and sometimes two in SLi) so lets not even go there.
I'm not sure where you've been but ATi has beaten nVidia for quite a while now...
I'd like to make two points here:
1) To all you tards saying "The 8800GTX SMOKES the 2900XT!!!" WELL NO SH*T!! It's not made to match up to the 8800GTX (though it does quite nicely). This is the 2900XT remember, not the 2900XTX... it's like comparing the GTS to the GTX.
2) To all you people dissing the 2900XT "blah blah the 8800GTS is still better blaaahhh", stop and think for a minute... AMD has released quite a few new features and technologies with these cards that need new drivers to utilize and take advantage of them. These drivers are not yet out, and they may wait until the 2900XTX is out before they release these drivers.
Rest assured that the 2900XTX will completely rape what nVidia has to offer.
1) Too little too late. Once the 8950 comes out it'll blow away the 2900XTX. Well, atleast from the previews.CrazeD wrote:
The ignorance in this post frightens me...Poseidon wrote:
I'll stick with my 8800 GTX. ATI will never be up to par with nVidia.
The only single setup that can beat the ATi X1950XTX are the 8800GTS/8800GTX. The 7950GX2 beats it but that is two cards in one. The X1950XTX in CF will match up and in some cases beat a single 8800GTX (and sometimes two in SLi) so lets not even go there.
I'm not sure where you've been but ATi has beaten nVidia for quite a while now...
I'd like to make two points here:
1) To all you tards saying "The 8800GTX SMOKES the 2900XT!!!" WELL NO SH*T!! It's not made to match up to the 8800GTX (though it does quite nicely). This is the 2900XT remember, not the 2900XTX... it's like comparing the GTS to the GTX.
2) To all you people dissing the 2900XT "blah blah the 8800GTS is still better blaaahhh", stop and think for a minute... AMD has released quite a few new features and technologies with these cards that need new drivers to utilize and take advantage of them. These drivers are not yet out, and they may wait until the 2900XTX is out before they release these drivers.
Rest assured that the 2900XTX will completely rape what nVidia has to offer.
2) I'd hope so. Otherwise it'd be a complete bust. Still, as I've said, for those power reqs, I'd rather just get a GTX. I think it's around the same? Not sure.
Edit: Since we have a an argument nazi around, I'll rearrange what I said.
Last edited by Poseidon (2007-05-15 11:26:24)
Poseidon, can you think? read? Have you ever had any education whatsoever? If you want to win an arguement, prove what he said wrong. He made two valid points there: People ARE comparing the 2900 to a card that isnt in its league, and considering how close it is in perfomance to the 8800gts NOW, proper drivers might actually give it an edge. Then you come happily skipping along with your extra power consumption arguement, completely ignoring what he actually said.
In a state of complete denial......jimmanycricket wrote:
Not by a mile, but the 2900 is alot cheaper then the 8800gtx and is still using poor drivers.Pernicious544 wrote:
The 2900 is a piece of shit, 8800 out performs it by a mile
lol. Woooooooooooooooooooooow. Just stop talking. It'll do you good.SargeV1.4 wrote:
Poseidon, can you think? read? Have you ever had any education whatsoever? If you want to win an arguement, prove what he said wrong. He made two valid points there: People ARE comparing the 2900 to a card that isnt in its league, and considering how close it is in perfomance to the 8800gts NOW, proper drivers might actually give it an edge. Then you come happily skipping along with your extra power consumption arguement, completely ignoring what he actually said.
The point I'm trying to put out is that I wouldn't buy it not because of it's performance, but because it requires 100 more watts of power when the GTS requires 100 less. It beats the GTS, sure. But for the power and temp that it goes to, I'd rather just get a GTX.
Now get off your high horse and start being able to have a discussion without insults.
priceless.Poseidon wrote:
Now get off your high horse and start being able to have a discussion without insults.
You really just don't get it. lol.SargeV1.4 wrote:
priceless.Poseidon wrote:
Now get off your high horse and start being able to have a discussion without insults.
Isn't the current 2900xt still an 80nm process? 65nm is just around the corner which should yeald better efficiency, also the xtx comes with 1GB of RAM!!!
Crossfire anyone?
I think you 8800 fanboys need to wait a while before you start waving the victory flag!
Crossfire anyone?
I think you 8800 fanboys need to wait a while before you start waving the victory flag!
Last edited by B1GBUD (2007-05-15 12:00:27)
I'd suggest everyone that hasn't, should go and read the entire Tom's Hardware review.
As someone else said, the 2900s have a bucket full of extra tech in them and the drivers are young. I seem to recall the 8800 drivers weren't all that hot when the cards first came out, and if you read the Toms Hardware review you will learn that nVidia released a new driver-set, that has improved the 8800 performance, just before the 2900s were 'officially released'.
And as B1gbud states, the xt is still on 80nm. 65nm will be on its way...
As someone else said, the 2900s have a bucket full of extra tech in them and the drivers are young. I seem to recall the 8800 drivers weren't all that hot when the cards first came out, and if you read the Toms Hardware review you will learn that nVidia released a new driver-set, that has improved the 8800 performance, just before the 2900s were 'officially released'.
And as B1gbud states, the xt is still on 80nm. 65nm will be on its way...
So because its cheaper its better? Not in your craziest dreams! The 8800 is still the best video card to date for gaming. Poor drivers? Nope, I got 100+ frames in Supreme Commander, and over 200 in FEAR with windows Xp. On Vista it still performs well with 70+ in SupCom and over 300 in FEAR (not a typo). You = incorrectjimmanycricket wrote:
Not by a mile, but the 2900 is alot cheaper then the 8800gtx and is still using poor drivers.Pernicious544 wrote:
The 2900 is a piece of shit, 8800 out performs it by a mile
Last edited by Pernicious544 (2007-05-16 02:14:50)
65nm needn't necessarily be an advantage, as we learned from AMD Brisbane cores which are 65nm and no whit faster than the 90nm ones Also, ATI really had the time to improve drivers, it more seems as if they just didn't care about them that much. Well, we'll see.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
I'd suggest everyone that hasn't, should go and read the entire Tom's Hardware review.
As someone else said, the 2900s have a bucket full of extra tech in them and the drivers are young. I seem to recall the 8800 drivers weren't all that hot when the cards first came out, and if you read the Toms Hardware review you will learn that nVidia released a new driver-set, that has improved the 8800 performance, just before the 2900s were 'officially released'.
And as B1gbud states, the xt is still on 80nm. 65nm will be on its way...
PS: Also nVidia will have 65nm chips sooner or later, aye?