ATI R700 Preview

Printable View

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

07-15-2008, 07:08 AM
JohnJohn

Quote:

Originally Posted by mascaras

regards

Beautiful Thx a lot mate, hopefully this will stop warboy (and others with the intention) from thread craping.
07-15-2008, 07:48 AM
Cooper

how about you'll move it outside? both of you
07-15-2008, 07:54 AM
Neuuubeh

Sorry if I overlooked it and didnt see it, is there a benchmark between 4870x2 and gtx280 for folding or something similar? I mean gpgpu, non-gaming performance?
:welcome:
07-15-2008, 07:56 AM
Cooper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neuuubeh

Sorry if I overlooked it and didnt see it, is there a benchmark between 4870x2 and gtx280 for folding or something similar? I mean gpgpu, non-gaming performance?
:welcome:

not in this thread. Would be interesting indeed. Though it may not be quite accurate comparison since both clients are individually written for each GPU, so the overall outcome may not reflect actual hardware performance in case of bad/incomplete optimization.
07-15-2008, 07:58 AM
p2501

Yah it would interesting indeed, isn't it so that you can't use only one chip on an 3870x2? Would be nice if they fixed that, it would be a folding beast.
07-15-2008, 08:12 AM
NapalmV5

Quote:

Originally Posted by mascaras

regards

where the heck are the 2560 plasmas?!?!

just what the r700 begs for :(
07-15-2008, 08:13 AM
YMAA

Because of the way the folding client works, the nVidia GPU2 client pushes out way more PPD than a comparable Radeon. My 8800GTX does 4500PPD at 600 core/950 mem, a 9800GTX will do about 6000PPD. GTX 280 would probably do about 7000 PPD or more, but I haven't looked.

It's a major consideration for folding now that it's dropped in price like a proverbial rock.
07-15-2008, 08:15 AM
Cooper

Quote:

Originally Posted by p2501

Yah it would interesting indeed, isn't it so that you can't use only one chip on an 3870x2? Would be nice if they fixed that, it would be a folding beast.

AFAIk you have to run two GPU clients with X2 card. not sure though
07-15-2008, 08:20 AM
p2501

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cooper

AFAIk you have to run two GPU clients with X2 card. not sure though

If that would work then the whole thing gets interesting. Would be sad if one core is sitting around doing nothing... :shrug:
07-15-2008, 09:27 AM
m0da

DH uses 177.39 as well...

think they used older drivers because they dont re-test all the cards each time a new one comes out

i can't say this enough though: great job to amd for this... now I hope they're not having a party right now. They should be on their toes steadfastly designing and testing rv840 and r800. if they become complacent, they will go back down to nothing...
07-15-2008, 09:42 AM
MirageSys

I have to wonder if the r700 would be limited by a generation 1 PCIE16x slot... I would hope that will be one of the things they test.
07-15-2008, 09:50 AM
villa1n

Quote:

Originally Posted by mascaras

regards

Thank you!!
the voice of reason didn't seem to make it through, so now, the objective voice of observed FACT, can not really be contested. unless of course, the whole world is wrong, and its a conspiricy against the 280 ^^:up:
07-15-2008, 10:09 AM
LightSpeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shintai

So 4870X2 = 4870 CF. No magic :p:

Amazing they can keep the card cooled tho.

90W more than the 236W TDP 280GTX...And comsumption at that speed is as expected like 4870 CF. I´m just amazed they can cool it.

4870X2 = faster than 4870CF:)

and yeah, im amazed that they can cool this beast without sounding like the FX5800 as well:up:
07-15-2008, 10:12 AM
Solus Corvus

Nobody has any thoughts about Hynix versus Qimonda ram? I guess I will have to wait and see. I will probably be getting one of these cards unless nVidia can come up with something more compelling in that timeframe.
07-15-2008, 11:35 AM
Orbitech

Quote:

Originally Posted by annihilat0r

Er, I'd say 4870 wins in single-GPU solutions, costing only $299 and being really close to GTX 280 in most games, even surpassing it in some.

You are correct in saying that simply because in most benchmarks the R700 gets more FPS's it doesn't mean it's the better card. It is a multiple GPU solution and will have its problems. But ATI has gone a long way since Fury MAXX and actually 4870x2 could be the best multi-GPU solution of all; just look at Sampsa's microstuttering tests, according to them, MS should not be a problem it 4800 series CF or x2 systems.

So there ar a lot of factors when it comes to which card is better; like price (GTX 280 loses gorgeously) compatibility (R700 loses) and performance (GTX 280 loses). Which is the best card, then, can change from person to person but I doubt I'll see another person in the next 150 years claiming GTX 280 is a better buy than R700.

Count me in.. I'm the second and a loyal fan of single gpu solutions for the known reasons .. If SLI/x2 cards prove to be no PITA in the future then I'll go that route.. But for now I'm not covered.. Even if I have to pay paradox price/perf ratios like this round sometimes.. I still find GTX280 a wonderful chip in architectural terms but it definitely leaves a bad taste in the mouth the fact that Nvidia could have done way much better things with this round if they had die shrink it in the first place..
But in the vast majority of your post you hit right on target... Excellent post for the most part..
Now can we concentrate on the topic plz?
07-15-2008, 11:38 AM
perkam

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orbitech

I still find GTX280 a wonderful chip in architectural terms

This is the R700 thread...but...the GTX 280 is a behemoth of a chip. They taped out the 55nm 280 in May and it will be here by early September or late August. Those that don't want to step up (or can't) every 3 months would rather buy a 4870X2.

Perkam
07-15-2008, 02:30 PM
Sly Fox

Quote:

Originally Posted by MirageSys

I have to wonder if the r700 would be limited by a generation 1 PCIE16x slot... I would hope that will be one of the things they test.

Well... I was one of those crazies who put a 9800 Pro into a 4x AGP slot back in the day. Everyone said I was stupid and that it would be horrendously bottlenecked. Turned out... I got pretty much the same FPS as other 9800 Pro owners.

So I would think not, the PCIE1.1 slots should still provide adequate bandwidth for most games.

Sorry for the anecdotal evidence here, just voicing my opinion.
07-15-2008, 03:42 PM
perkam

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly Fox

Well... I was one of those crazies who put a 9800 Pro into a 4x AGP slot back in the day. Everyone said I was stupid and that it would be horrendously bottlenecked. Turned out... I got pretty much the same FPS as other 9800 Pro owners.

So I would think not, the PCIE1.1 slots should still provide adequate bandwidth for most games.

Sorry for the anecdotal evidence here, just voicing my opinion.

PCI-E 2.0 chips need pci-e 2.0 mobos unless you want to use them with half the pci-e bus bandwith.

Perakm
07-17-2008, 11:45 AM
GregUMR

Quote:

Originally Posted by perkam

PCI-E 2.0 chips need pci-e 2.0 mobos unless you want to use them with half the pci-e bus bandwith.

Perakm

While true, there has been no evidence that the bandwidth of a pci-e 1.1 16x slot will bottleneck this card. I think that's what a lot of us are waiting to see. I really doubt it, but that's just an opinion.
07-17-2008, 11:52 AM
Unbornchild

There has been no evidence of the contrary either. If you have it, link please.
07-17-2008, 11:54 AM
Sly Fox

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregUMR

While true, there has been no evidence that the bandwidth of a pci-e 1.1 16x slot will bottleneck this card. I think that's what a lot of us are waiting to see. I really doubt it, but that's just an opinion.

Just like when I told people I was putting a 9800 Pro into a 4x AGP slot and they said "OMG IT WON'T WORK!" "OMG IT WILL BE TOO BOTTLENECKED!" "BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!"

Put the card in... Worked fine, played games fine... Finished in benches a little below what people with 8x AGP got, no biggie. But of course, you NEED PCIE2.0 mach II.1 this time around, oh boy how you need it... Don't want to mess around here... Then there was the time I ran 3870 Crossfire with P35, that's right, 4x PCI-E 1.1 for the second card. Again, I was insane, it was foolish, unwise, wouldn't work right... Yet, the card worked and scaled just fine, finishing a little low on 3DMark06.

Now I'm sure we'll get to hear the old "it's not bandwidth, it's power!" Ah yes, because there won't be any... PCI-E power plugs on the card, perhaps room for 2 8pins even... But nah, gonna need that 2.0 :rolleyes:
07-17-2008, 12:42 PM
YukonTrooper

Depends on the situation. Game, resolution, AA/AF, etc. all come into play with the current gen of cards and PCI-e bandwidth. Tom's did a review where the 9800GX2 did just as well on PCI-e 1.0/1.1 16X, as it did with PCI-e 2.0 16X in 90% of situations. However, some games at higher resolutions saw improvements with the added bandwidth of PCI-e 2.0. The most glaring example was Flight Simulator, where it lost huge performance on PCI-e 1.0/1.1 16X, at 1920X1200 with AA/AF.

I'm getting an HD4870, but I'll also be picking up a P45 based board. I'm not leaving anything to chance. I game at 1920X1200 and I love eye candy.
07-17-2008, 01:15 PM
safan80

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yukon Trooper

I'm getting an HD4870, but I'll also be picking up a P45 based board. I'm not leaving anything to chance. I game at 1920X1200 and I love eye candy.

the P45 runs the 2 slots together at 8x and 8x if you want full speed get the X48.

http://compare.intel.com/pcc/showcha...&culture=en-US
07-17-2008, 11:58 PM
disruptfam

What slots does dfi x48 dk have? as in PCI-e 1.0,1.1 or 2.0
07-18-2008, 12:07 AM
Heretic

Quote:

Originally Posted by disruptfam

What slots does dfi x48 dk have? as in PCI-e 1.0,1.1 or 2.0

Quote:

Expansion Slots

*
2 PCI Express (Gen 2) x16 slots (PCIE 1 and PCIE 3)
- 2-way CrossFire at x16/x16 bandwidth
*
1 PCI Express x4 slot (PCIE 2)

That'd be 2.0

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