Going by your rationality that being behind in performance is being late, yes Conroe was 3 years behind...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Either way, the R600 is late... How late from their initial plan, no one knows, but it's DEFINITELY late.
Printable View
Going by your rationality that being behind in performance is being late, yes Conroe was 3 years behind...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Either way, the R600 is late... How late from their initial plan, no one knows, but it's DEFINITELY late.
i read some info that there are also standard o'c-ed cards due to be released?Any confirmation on that?
A64 didnt beat the P4 right out of the box with a huge margin. It first really manifested with the X2 series.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Also, Unless AMD GPUs got a process advantage over nVidia. Then its still nothing even remotely equal to the A64/P4 moniker.
I hate nVidias sole power with the 829$ Ultra :(
ok by that same logic, amd's next chip is already a year late :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Radeon HD 2900XT needs 750W+Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...=791&Itemid=34
1kw-1.5kw PSU for CF:p:
lol..... no.... definitely not gonna be that bad....Quote:
Originally Posted by milkcafe
look at this thread to see what you can run with a 500w psu....
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=141505
the difference in power consumption between 8800 GTX and Radeon 2900 will not be 250+ W, so... no... you won't need a 750 W PSU for it...
Yup you are right. It was exactly like the Conroe/AMD 64 TODAY (as some people claim, I do not know for sure)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
People were saying their P4C's at moderate overclocks with HT were FAR more responsive and smoother in windows and disappointed with Clawhammers overclocked to around 2.2ghz-2.6ghz. Funny we have the same argument today but no one acknowledges yesterday.
If you consider capacitor aging, then yea you should get a 800w~ for 1 2900xt.Quote:
Originally Posted by milkcafe
It's not that 2900xt needs 750w. I bet i could run it fine on a Tagan 580w fine, but not for long term.
Does the MCW60 waterblock fit on the new 2900 series?
I was talking about performance...Quote:
Originally Posted by GMX
Also P4s with HT was more responsive compared to singlecore A64. It was alittle cheat method to experience the creamy smoothness of smp/dualcores on a singlecore.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by GMX
That's the sort of comment has the PSU companies are laughing all the way to giga-watt land...:stick:
A single HD 2900XT will NOT need a 750/800w PSU, even after capacitor aging. I would be surprised if it needed any more than a quality 550w, seeing that you can run a single 8800GTX system off a 400w PSU and a pair off a 620w Corsair, NOT that I'm recommending doing either. My choice? 600w for the single and 800 for CF. ;)
Totally agree. If max power consumption can be even 300W for the card. Well other hardware in the case will be under 300W total unless you have a highly OC'ed quad then sure needing a bigger PSU might do you good. CF will need a bigger one but surely a 850W will do you more then good on dual core systems, quad core a 1k PSU would be your ideal solution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie P
Lets see about that after a few months or a year. I've experienced it myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie P
Ohh funny that my AXP system which use to have a Antec TP 480w couldn't handle the overclock anymore. I wonder why :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
If you refuse to consider aging, then you are a fool
HD 2900XT looks like a very powerful board, but if its power consumption is as big as rumored... crap.
nice to hear official statements from AMD-ATI saying power consumption will be a big focus from now on though.
/*OT. worrying to see people still think P4 was better than A64, single cores or not*/
Facts. It WAS smoother and responsive. It got beaten in benchmarks. Not as much as Conroe beat A64. A P4C at 3.8ghz is about equal to A64 around 2.6-7ghz. How many Clawhammers in 2003/2004 clocked to that very easily?Quote:
Originally Posted by alayashu
I could say the same thing but its probably not "over". Conroe is better than A64. *waits for the all the guys that kneel to their A64 and treat it like god"
Off Topic:Quote:
Originally Posted by GMX
Sweet! So having less performance but better response while loaded at 100% because it couldn't keep itself busy means it was better. I should have reminded my friend that when he was getting ~40fps in CS:S with his 3.6GHz P4 and I was getting 80FPS with my Opteron at 2.8. "who cares that when you're in a big firefight that your machine lags, when you're running prime you can do other stuff and doesn't feel like you are doing anything!!!" :rolleyes:
Great point... I think GMX lost another bout. :slap:Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedld9
the 3.8 was, averaging most tests, about as fast as a 2.4 K8, but consumed more energy.Quote:
A P4C at 3.8ghz is about equal to A64 around 2.6-7ghz. How many Clawhammers in 2003/2004 clocked to that very easily?
In rendering, the P4 3.73 ExtremeEdition was a tad slower than a 2ghz K8 btw, for a best-case pro-K8 real world scenario.
leave netburst rest in peace, it was a big failure in every aspect(performance/consumption-heat/etc)
ehem, HD 2900 topic...?
Did you have a 2.8Ghz Opteron in 2004?Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedld9
I really doubt we need a 1000W PSU for CF. Its simply a matter on how many Amps the PSU can do on the 12V rails. And how efficient it is.
I would say a good 650W would do it.
But its in the red zone.
Again, 11 days left till we hopefully know performance and power consumption.
How does making dinner while playing with your new R600 sound? Apparently the card gets hot enough to boil water...
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...d=803&Itemid=1
What happened to that top to bottom R600 family launch? Where is the 2900XL?
I really hope thats wrong. But on the other hand. We got something like a 8800 cooler that needs to remove about 50% more heat.Quote:
Originally Posted by cantankerous
But again..its FUDzilla..
Did I say I was ignoring aging? No. I was just saying that there's no need to make as much of a point of it as you seem to suggest.Quote:
Originally Posted by GMX
As for the AXP overclock, can you prove it was the PSU at fault? Possibility it could have been the mobo, or CPU? How can you be sure? And also, I think you're kidding yourself if you think the TP 480w was anything other than a 'budget' PSU in the first place.
Back on subject, I really don't think that the power consumption of the 2900XT is gonna as shocking as is being made out. And, if it's because of the extra stress DX10 puts on the card, I wouldn't be surprised if the 8800GTX's power consumption goes up a bit as well with the DX10 usage.
Final point, I want independant benches!! :fact:
If the 8800GTX puts out 178W so to say at max and the 2900XT can use a max of 225W (max the power connectors will do with the 2x 6-Pins). The 8800GTX has 26.4% less heat than the 2900XT or the 2900XT has 20.9% more heat than the 8800GTX.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
But the 8800GTX aint 178W..its far far from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by deathman20
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...roundup_6.html