Printable View
HD 5970
http://tweakers.net/ext/i/imagelarge/1256810379.jpg
http://tweakers.net/ext/i/imagelarge/1256810380.jpg
http://tweakers.net/ext/i/imagelarge/1256810381.jpg
http://tweakers.net/ext/i/imagelarge/1256810383.jpg
http://tweakers.net/ext/i/imagelarge/1256810384.jpg
http://tweakers.net/ext/i/imagelarge/1256810385.jpg
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=12606
27191 06 score? that is higher than 2 5870s with cpu @ 4.4
might be drivers thenQuote:
Originally Posted by billdavis
Huh? My i7 920 @4.4Ghz with a HD4870X2 hit 27495 already and 25791 @4.0Ghz, how come 2x5870 @4.4Ghz is lower? Plus this is a dual GPU, I'm definitely not impressed at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by billdavis
it's probably because they were using the modified 9.9 drivers instead of the 9.11 drivers the 5970 reviewer is using.Quote:
Originally Posted by billdavis
27191 in 06 is not that high. I am in the 21000 zone in 06 with a 3870X2 and a Q9650.
I like that they moved the power connectors closer together however. Did not make sense having them a few inches apart for nothing and it did not look good. I like it this way much better! :up:
Our source who wishes to be known as DJ (kind of ironic that Nvidia leaks come for a source named CJ!) tells us that ATI is pretty confident that they will win this round of GPU war with Nvidia’s Fermi architecture. He goes on to say, that ATI have something special up their sleeve, but are waiting for Nvidia to release their cards first. All I can say is that although the above information may be correct in due time, but at the moment it should only be taken as unconfirmed rumor so as to avoid flamewars in forums around the net over who wins this round between ATI and Nvidia.
now thisis interesting
Pretty simple IMO.
Even if Fermi ends up being faster than 5870, 5870x2 will bury it alive. That's it.
But Nvidia will get to keep their GPGPU computing market! Hey, they really wanted to, they can keep it for all I care...
i don't think 5970 is something special lol this thing is something we never heard before if its true
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16184/1/
The line that drew my attention is: "this dual card will officially be the fastest card on the market, but only until Nvidia unveils its dual Fermi card that is also expected by early December."
Does Fuad even believe in this? Fermi is supposed to have a paper launch for the single card in December, and he proposes a dual card? I don't even know, sounds like BS.
dual Fermi isn't happening anyway since that would be over 450w.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
If you remember, ATI claimed, that SidePort will be unlocked in 4870X2 to beat NVs card. Well any unlocked SidePorts? The reason, that they will have the fastest card is that NV has gone wrong with the new architecture. Not impressed at all from this X2 card.
That was more of speculations back then, no? I just remember them saying that it could be activated, but it would bring no performance gains at that time. Some vendors even left out the SidePort on their cards, so don’t think it was ever planned to activate it after launch. But who knows, things could have changed with 5xxx. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
ATI never claimed that!Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
They said,the benches they did show it increased power consumption but didn't increase performance so no need to activate it.
i think with both companies being able to build a card that maxes out the power of a single slot, we should see an efficiency war and soon frames per W will be an important chart in reviews.
i also think ATI should give us a 5890 2GB with 384bit ram
Won't get 384bit memory bus without a new chip design. ATi probably isn't going to do that, at least not right away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
it already is in the ATi Radeon HD x7xx series and whatever Nvidia's 9600GT equivalent will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
The preview from that site has been pulled off due to demand by AMD, which claimed that the poor performance evident on those tests was because of a BIOS and early driver issue.
I have Warhead and Farcry 2 results (in addition to the synth bench results from above, same CPU, i7 920@4ghz):
FC2 102 fps avg, settings unknown
Crysis Warhead Level: Ambush
1920x1200
2xAA
Enthusiast settings
Min FPS 20, Max FPS 43
Avg FPS 34
You have a link to AMD statement about this?
What's graphic card you have?
edit : Ok i see the statement!
no no this info is not from me, from the article the above screenshots were taken from. just for the record I have a 5870 :D
What's your Crysis numbers with those settings?Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
And Stalker?
http://ww.pcinpact.com/affichage/538...ench/76975.htm
I don't have Warhead unfortunately. I could check FC2 scores if they included the settings. But I believe those settings are 19x12 Ultra High 8xAA. In which case the avg FPS of 100 makes sense but is somewhat underwhelming; because with a 3.4ghz 920 and stock 5870 I get about 65 FPS. The guys' CPU is 4ghz contrary to my 3.4Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
of course there are a lot of different timedemos for FC2 but I believe this should be the "action" demo which is the most commonly used.
+ just checked the Clear Sky bench you linked, I don't have it either but the min fps of 12 (for an avg fps of 45) seems too low. :down:
I recently tested.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
Specs in sig.
This is playing the whole first level.
4 x AA:
http://www.blindnero.com/pictures/cr...-vsync-off.jpg
- 4xAA 1600x1200 vsync=off
FRAPS
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
28276, 827437, 9, 56, 34.173- 4xAA 1920x1200 vsync=off
FRAPS
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
28972, 947491, 10, 51, 30.578
well it even said it was pulled from bad perf from driver + bios... just chill and wait=)