it was with 256MB cards.Quote:
I wonder if macci's crossfire result in 3dmark05 was with two 512MB cards ?
Not sure how 'optimized' the driver was. I have a feeling that there is room for improvement.
Printable View
it was with 256MB cards.Quote:
I wonder if macci's crossfire result in 3dmark05 was with two 512MB cards ?
Not sure how 'optimized' the driver was. I have a feeling that there is room for improvement.
Guys guys!
Haven't we learned by now that nvidia usually can up their performance by several % with the drivers? I remember the mad flame the "leafblower" had to face about crappy performance, yet today the distance between that and 9800 pro is quite small.
Besides nvidia is like half a cycle ahead of ati.
sorry for OT..
Really? Do you mean the original 5800 or 5900?Quote:
I remember the mad flame the "leafblower" had to face about crappy performance, yet today the distance between that and 9800 pro is quite small.
Some Mark05 top results I found w/ a quick search:
9800PRO => 3700-3900 3DMarks
5950 => 1700-1800 3DMarks
5900U => 1300-1400 3DMarks
5800 => ~1000 3DMarks
Of course its not the one and only perfomance indicator but I'd say there is a clear difference between those cards.
Please stop making fools of yourselves. R520 won't score 15k in 3DMark05 because the limiting factor ain't the graphics cards but the CPU.
In regards to FX 5800/5800U v 9700 and 5900U / 5950U v 9800Pro and 9800XT macci's examples hits the nail on the head, because the FX range are terrible at DX9 compared to ATi, so here it is not a few percent but a massive percentage.
Lucky for nvidia at that time that there were hardly any DX9 games about. Nobody played that Lara Croft game websites loved to bench with, HL2 got delayed and only Far Cry crucified the FX range ( still a great game that ).
With DX7 and DX8 and also OpenGL of course the FX managed to get pushed and polished into something that was only a few percent behind, but it was still behind.
As a side note en FX 5950 has now reached 30k in 2001, nice work by that person. :toast:
I still think the fast shaders of Ati will help it in futuremark beat 7800, and to be honest macci's crossfire result with X850 was done by, er macci of course, whilst that result was done by someone I do not know. If you take out macci I wonder how close it would have got ? I think we haver an apples to oranges comparision here.
Maybe the crucial factor is actually how far they overclock, and of course that at present is the great unknown - will 90nm new process beat 110nm cheaper but well known process ... you have to say probably it will.
Regards
Andy
:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampsa
Regards
Andy
let me get this straight, 7800GTX has how many pipelines? 7800ultra has 32 pipes?
edit: Nvidia is not the best card in 05.. check 03 with this setup!
Thats a bit harsh comment dont you think? =)Quote:
Please stop making fools of yourselves. R520 won't score 15k in 3DMark05 because the limiting factor ain't the graphics cards but the CPU.
But it seems that you might have some first hand experience with certain fast dual cards? ;)
is the rumor that this card has turbo cache true?
that way , it will be like a 512mb card.
also, the ram on the card is rated for 1400mhz. how come it wont go to at least 1350? :confused:
Here's your efficiency of crossfire: http://www.hkepc.com/hwdb/ati-crossfire-5.htmQuote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Now tell me what is more efficient. Certainly not crossfire.
What do you mean with this? they had an Ultra to test or they simply overclocked (on air) one of the 7800GTX they had laying around there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Troman
What does that "is silent ultra arrived the 501/1375 superelevation rate" mean?
The Ultra will arrive at those clocks?
Hmm, the ATi still won 3 of 4 benches ... I don't think it really matters what your 'ratio' or 'effeciency' is ... what it all comes down to is which one is faster :banana:Quote:
Originally Posted by HaLDoL
You do realise he was using 3Dmark*05* not 3Dmark*01* don't you??? I won't even bother to explain, you've been here long enough. Dolt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampsa
Well that's that. NVIDIA's next gen card offers little more than what a X850XT PE can do on air. And here I was hoping for a new architecture giving something like 80% improvement over the last gen from a single card.
ATI should have no problem beating this. NVIDIA shot performance in favor of availability, it would seem.
MetalStorm, I'm quite sure that Sampsa understands were talking about Mark05 and he also very much means what he is saying in his post. Mark05 is CPU limited with the new cards running in Dual mode. There is a point where your getting bigger gains by upping the CPU speed rather than video speed.
You do realise that Sampsa has held the world record in 3DMark05? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by MetalStorm
Your post would be like waving Michael Schumacher into the side of the road, walking over to his car, shaking your head at him and telling him how to drive fast ;)
I would say with a prerelease motherboard and crossfire drivers that efficiency is looking quite good, compared to Sli which is now fairly established.
But for me dual graphics is just not worth the money anyway. I feel we should get a discount for buying the 2 cards instead of paying 50$ on top of the 2 graphics cards sli tax or a board that is essentially the same and getting less than 2x the performance ( yeas iknow you can mod but I'm talking about what they offer not what we take with our greasy mitts :) . I guess ati will actually have a different board for the non crosfire so they will have a better excuse.
i really hope it will be possible to unlock the extra pipes if ati is not impressed with nvidias showing. An equivilent to the modable 9500 the 520 generation would get my drool going. yes I am a cheap overclocker.
Hmmm.... I really dont know. The 7800GTX looks more un-attractive the more I hear about it. 430 --> 500 is bad. Sorry. I was expecting closer to 550.
3 vs 3 ? Eh ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Troman
3DMark 05 ATi nVidia
Single 5882 5617
Dual 9747 9513
By your definition, 2 X850XT own 2 Ultra ... ;)
Like I said, the X850XT won 3 of the 4 tests. I'm sure by final release Crossfire performance in '03 will be much better :p: SLi has been around awhile, had time to mature. Crossfire hasn't even launched yet ...
I just read this thread. Pretty good thread actually.
Looks like we have about 50/50 as far as the users. Half ATI people and Half NIVIDIA suporters, kinda funny:D
OPP
hehe, indeed OPP :)
score seems low to me ?
If that was the highest OC on that FX-57, I'm not selling my FX-55.... :mad:
i personally dont think the person who reviewed pushed the cpu and vc's very hard....after all it would really suck if you destroyed pre-release samples
What is the best score we can get out of a overclocked ATI X850XT stock cooler straight out of the box?
I have no Idea but it would be nice to compare.
OPP
Im actually quite impressed with the overclock results. over 9k overclocked on 24 pipes, wasn't the rumoured ATi R520 score around 10k with 32 pipes?
let me remember you guys that the comparison you are doing with the 6800ultras in sli and the x850xt in crossfire isnt even close or fair, remember the first nvidia sli drivers they sucked big time, compare 1st drivers with 1st drivers and you'll see that ati has the better hand.
i still think this is slow, cpu=limiting factor, well there are goin to be x2 on amd right?? plus some insane oc with ln2, 3dmark05 isnt that cpu dependant.