Radeon HD 2900 XT vs. 320MB 8800 GTS

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

06-13-2007, 11:47 AM
sladesurfer

Radeon HD 2900 XT vs. 320MB 8800 GTS

Quote:

We are going to make this evaluation short, sweet and to the point since we have already performed a major evaluation of the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. Please read that evaluation first to get the lowdown on the new ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT video card and all the specifications therein.

Quote:

We are going to jump straight to gaming on the next page. For system setup specifications look here. We are using the latest drivers officially supplied by ATI which are known as 8.37.4.2, these drivers have all the performance tweaks that are found in 8.38 which have been rolled up into Cat 7.5.

Quote:

We hoped newer driver revisions would improve performance on the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. With the newer driver we used for this evaluation we did not see any “magic” happen when it comes to real world gaming experiences at resolutions at and above 1600x1200. The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT is not even a match for even the much less expensive and much less power hungry 320 MB GeForce 8800 GTS.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...50aHVzaWFzdA==
06-13-2007, 12:00 PM
gdogg

Quote:

Originally Posted by sladesurfer

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...50aHVzaWFzdA==

Date of artical Wednesday, June 13, 2007

How long has 7.5 been out now, and they are using old beta.

PURE TRASH AGAIN!

[H] if off my off my list of "good" review sites for good now.

Let all start making reviews, hand picking games that suck for one or the other card only, then call the card trash, w00t, aint it grand.
06-13-2007, 12:03 PM
Shintai

(waits for first post with 7.6 driver will fix, or new games will work much better and somethign with DX10)
06-13-2007, 12:05 PM
gdogg

Also, I can run cs source, with everything maxed with in game settings, thats 8XMSAA , etc @ 1900X1080, and get 150-200+FPS in all the cs source servers I have tried.

Kind of makes me wonder, where all these :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty numbers in reviews are coming from, cause I just don't see them.
06-13-2007, 12:07 PM
sladesurfer

Quote:

Originally Posted by gdogg

Also, I can run cs source, with everything maxed with in game settings, thats 8XMSAA , etc @ 1900X1080, and get 150-200+FPS in all the cs source servers I have tried.

I have a 7800 gt and running 1600 x 1050 all maxed with in game settings with no lag on CSS :D
06-13-2007, 12:07 PM
saaya

ouch, well how long can it take to get the driver performing properly?
or maybe there isnt anything performance left to tweak out of the card? : /
06-13-2007, 12:09 PM
jimmyz

used a pre production card also along with the beta drivers. i guess it would be too hard to get a retail card with official drivers.
06-13-2007, 12:10 PM
sladesurfer

bigger memory and more expensive 2900 XT cannot even match a 320 mb gts on high resolution :(
06-13-2007, 12:11 PM
gdogg

Quote:

Originally Posted by sladesurfer

I have a 7800 gt and running 1600 x 1050 all maxed with in game settings with no lag on CSS :D

I just upgraded from 2 7800 gt's in sli, they would crash when tryin to do 1900X1080.

But I was also limited to 4XMSAA under vista x64 (single card under this os, no nice drivers)
06-13-2007, 12:51 PM
ahmad

That is a worthless review. With the older drivers the 2900xt was beating the 640mb and even the gtx in oblivion and stalker.

[H]ard garbage.
06-13-2007, 12:54 PM
v_rr

Quote:

Originally Posted by sladesurfer

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...50aHVzaWFzdA==

ahahaha those guys are just the most Byased people in the World.
Die [H]

Stalker with Cat. 7.5 improved 100% it´s performance and they say that there no diference between a beta driver and oficial Cat. 7.5
:rofl: :rofl: :ROTF:

They only needed to do a download oficialy from ATI site in 1 minute and install the driver in 5 minutes, but they prefer to use a beta driver that no longer exists :rofl:
06-13-2007, 12:56 PM
gdogg

yup they have a [h]ardon for nV lol
06-13-2007, 01:04 PM
zerazax

These are the same people whose review of the core 2 duo and p35 is quite well known..
06-13-2007, 01:10 PM
XS Janus

It's a sad day for amd-ati that even a thread like this can be formed, no matter how bad the review was!

I hope that this whole situation jupmstarts them soon!
06-13-2007, 01:10 PM
EvlUndrWareNome

this is as bad as anandtech selling out to intel.
06-13-2007, 01:12 PM
Eastcoasthandle

-the card he used is not a retail version
-using old drivers
-did not OC the video card
:ROTF:

Isn't this the same guy that reviewed C2D and concluded to wait for AMD price cuts?
06-13-2007, 01:19 PM
Jacky

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvlUndrWareNome

this is as bad as anandtech selling out to intel.

rofl pls do not compare anandtech to [H] ...
06-13-2007, 01:23 PM
aintz

Quote:

Originally Posted by sladesurfer

I have a 7800 gt and running 1600 x 1050 all maxed with in game settings with no lag on CSS :D

thats not even possible buddy. unless no lag means 50fps for you.

H sucks. why compare cards with different price tags.
06-13-2007, 01:28 PM
sladesurfer

Quote:

Originally Posted by aintz

thats not even possible buddy. unless no lag means 50fps for you.

H sucks. why compare cards with different price tags.

Well, I dont really know the exact FPS but i coud care less about the numbers. All i know is, im playing everything maxed out @ 1600 x 1050 with no lag @css:)
06-13-2007, 01:47 PM
DilTech

Quote:

Originally Posted by gdogg

Also, I can run cs source, with everything maxed with in game settings, thats 8XMSAA , etc @ 1900X1080, and get 150-200+FPS in all the cs source servers I have tried.

Kind of makes me wonder, where all these :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty numbers in reviews are coming from, cause I just don't see them.

You're playing CS:S and bragging about frame-rates? The x1950xtx could match you on that one. ;) Well, other than 8xMSAA, but could do it with 6x.

You're playing a 3 and a half year old game that was easy on videocards when it released. I know, I played it with a 6800GT just fine at 1680x1050.

Try loading up stalker yourself and you'll see the exact performance problems they're talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahmad

That is a worthless review. With the older drivers the 2900xt was beating the 640mb and even the gtx in oblivion and stalker.

[H]ard garbage.

In no way has the HD 2900XT beaten the 8800's in s.t.a.l.k.e.r.... It's currently the huge Achilles heel of the HD2900xt. [h] isn't the only site to have had to turn off Full Dynamic Lighting to make it playable for it either, just to make it fair for ATi guru3d currently will only bench the game with dynamic lighting off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by v_rr

ahahaha those guys are just the most Byased people in the World.
Die [H]

Stalker with Cat. 7.5 improved 100% it´s performance and they say that there no diference between a beta driver and oficial Cat. 7.5
:rofl: :rofl: :ROTF:

They only needed to do a download oficialy from ATI site in 1 minute and install the driver in 5 minutes, but they prefer to use a beta driver that no longer exists :rofl:

Boosted stalker 100%? Let's see a link from a notable site on that one, because ironically enough I haven't heard a word about that, and I've been personally watching the whole driver situation pan out.

As for [H] using this driver, perhaps they had the article already written, and the editor just took that long to finish checking it to put it up? The driver did only come out less than 2 weeks ago, now consider how long it takes to run all of these tests, write up the article, get the editor to check it, then get it posted. It's possible the driver came out in the middle of testing as well.

Either way, the 8.37.4.2 driver was notoriously buggy from the get-go, you can run a simple search thru the guru3d driver forums and find that out. Some games HDR didn't function properly(serious sam 2 being the most notable), Oblivion had issues as well, and it broke AA in a few titles as well. Search it yourself.

Now, I'm not defending [h] here, but the straws people are clinching for have holes in them. :yepp:
06-13-2007, 01:53 PM
Eastcoasthandle

Quote:

Originally Posted by DilTech

You're playing CS:S and bragging about frame-rates? The x1950xtx could match you on that one. ;) Well, other than 8xMSAA, but could do it with 6x.

You're playing a 3 and a half year old game that was easy on videocards when it released. I know, I played it with a 6800GT just fine at 1680x1050.

Try loading up stalker yourself and you'll see the exact performance problems they're talking about.

In no way has the HD 2900XT beaten the 8800's in s.t.a.l.k.e.r.... It's currently the huge Achilles heel of the HD2900xt. [h] isn't the only site to have had to turn off Full Dynamic Lighting to make it playable for it either, just to make it fair for ATi guru3d currently will only bench the game with dynamic lighting off.

Boosted stalker 100%? Let's see a link from a notable site on that one, because ironically enough I haven't heard a word about that, and I've been personally watching the whole driver situation pan out.

As for [H] using this driver, perhaps they had the article already written, and the editor just took that long to finish checking it to put it up? The driver did only come out less than 2 weeks ago, now consider how long it takes to run all of these tests, write up the article, get the editor to check it, then get it posted. It's possible the driver came out in the middle of testing as well.

Either way, the 8.37.4.2 driver was notoriously buggy from the get-go, you can run a simple search thru the guru3d driver forums and find that out. Some games HDR didn't function properly(serious sam 2 being the most notable), Oblivion had issues as well, and it broke AA in a few titles as well. Search it yourself.

Now, I'm not defending [h] here, but the straws people are clinching for have holes in them. :yepp:

The only person grasping for straws is you. He already stated that the video card used was not a retail version. ;) Add to that old beta drivers and you have yourself a review that's not worth merit IMO :yepp:
06-13-2007, 02:02 PM
Syn.

Wait.... why are people still looking at other web sites for info on 2900XT when we have our own people posting pure factually correct information right here in XS forums?

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=142955
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=144198
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=144645
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=146577
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=147392
06-13-2007, 02:05 PM
aintz

Quote:

Originally Posted by sladesurfer

Well, I dont really know the exact FPS but i coud care less about the numbers. All i know is, im playing everything maxed out @ 1600 x 1050 with no lag @css:)

and i play at 1440*900 with a x1950 pro at almost max with lag :eek:
06-13-2007, 02:07 PM
XS2K

DilTech has a point though,my friend has a Powercolor X2900XT and he didn't experienced 100% increase in performance with Catalyst 7.5 I can tell you that for sure....
Ok,so the video card he used was not a retail version so that means what?I don't think he would use such a card if it had big problems compared to the retail version...
Don't get me wrong I hope X2900XT will PWN 8800GTS/X as* with the next driver but in reality miracles like that don't happen or they are very few...
06-13-2007, 02:10 PM
Eastcoasthandle

Quote:

Originally Posted by XS2K

DilTech has a point though,my friend has a Powercolor X2900XT and he didn't experienced 100% increase in performance with Catalyst 7.5 I can tell you that for sure....
Ok,so the video card he used was not a retail version so that means what?I don't think he would use such a card if it had big problems compared to the retail version...
Don't get me wrong I hope X2900XT will PWN 8800GTS/X as* with the next driver but in reality miracles like that don't happen or they are very few...

The review never used current drivers, not even to bench mark them against their own tests, that's what matters here. I'm sorry but 1 driver release doesn't mean 100% increase in performance in all games between XP/Vista. Nor is the XT intended to compete against the GTX. And, as syn. already posted why are you taking information in a review when there are already people here on this forum who have the card (w/current drivers)?

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page