x1900xt scored 9004 marks stock, 9688 overclocked

I will wait untill guys like you buy one to test. I am waiting for scores from the likes of members from XS. Any scores pre-nda can not be verified and in fact arent allowed due to NDA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geforce4ti4200

sad that your x1800xt PE is faster than the x1900xt! Clocks of the x1900xt is 650/1550 I think. Although I expect the x1900xt to overclock to where your x1800xt does.


"your math skills are lacking, a 100% increase in pipes would be 48 pipes."


I think I was comparing x1900xt vs. 7900gtx :p:


".. but i don't understand how peoples can post bench of the X1900XT with score lower of a X1800XT PE bios.. If they will give bad score.. they should look what's the score of a x1800... how can be this under
10k.. when a x1800xt is better of that.."

The clocks of the x1900xt are lower than the x1800xt PE


"This guy is a moron. I score over 10,000 in 3dmark05 with an X1800XT, the X1900XT will be much faster than 9000..."


This remains to be seen. I will refrain from predictions, I am only going by facts and figures, not speculation. The fact is he got 9000 marks. Is this a good score or not? Untill more people test it, we dont know.

---

GEFORCE, Can you read?

Quote:

---

qft lol. But seriously this guy's card wasn't clocked how it was supposed to be. right now he's at 600/700 and breaking 11.2k, that's lower than stock people. stock is 625/725 so 11.5k should be cake with his 3GHz opty. Which is exactly what hexus predicted. 11.5K stock so gf4 basically FUBARED his thread title, it should be 11.2K at less than stock XD

---

His x1900xt WAS NOT AT THE RIGHT CLOCKS (he was at 500/600 when he got the 9k, he should be 625/725), even at less then the stock clocks he now gets 11.2K what is there to not understand? God damn you're dense

I have not seen him say anywhere what clocks he was, only that he said his 9k was stock. I am not going to argue. I will wait and see in a few more days what people on xtreme systems can do with x1900xt's

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geforce4ti4200

I have not seen him say anywhere what clocks he was, only that he said his 9k was stock. I am not going to argue. I will wait and see in a few more days what people on xtreme systems can do with x1900xt's

---

DUDE GO READ HIS THREAD ON HARD. this thread should be locked, you're spreading fud. :nono:

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=100

:rolleyes:

http://www.supload.com/free/x1900.jpg/view/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sabrewolf732

DUDE GO READ HIS THREAD ON HARD. this thread should be locked, you're spreading fud. :nono:

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=100

:rolleyes:

http://www.supload.com/free/x1900.jpg/view/

---

agreed

with his clocks at 600/700 he got pretty impressive fear results. All on max, 4x AA 16x AF

http://www.supload.com/free/16x12-softoff.jpg/view/

As a FYI, those scores are about the same as 7800GTX 512MB SLI scores in FEAR :D

Its a pity we can't instigate forum rules against stupidity.

impressive when the core and memory are clocked to the proper frequency, it is plain as day.

come on GeForce, even you have to admit you jumped the gun a bit, the whole premise of your thread (Meh not impressive! ATI's x1900xt was a few months late and can only match the 7800gtx!) is based on poor investigation and running with an erroneous bench, maybe a small retraction with an apology is in order..........


baldy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bldegle2

impressive when the core and memory are clocked to the proper frequency, it is plain as day.

come on GeForce, even you have to admit you jumped the gun a bit, the whole premise of your thread (Meh not impressive! ATI's x1900xt was a few months late and can only match the 7800gtx!) is based on poor investigation and running with an erroneous bench, maybe a small retraction with an apology is in order..........


baldy

---

Qft. I think he put it the best.

Quote:

---

As a FYI, those scores are about the same as 7800GTX 512MB SLI scores in FEAR

---

and those scores still aren't at stock clocks :eek: Still 25MHz slower core/50MHz slower mem :eek: Gforce 4, I retract all my mean statements. But come on, you got to admit this thread was crappy. In fear the x1900xt is beating 2x 7800gtx 512's in sli. You have to admit that is impressive as hell, not even the 7900 will beat it if all the 7900 is 33% more pipes and 33% more clocks.

so wait the x1900xt declocked is beating 2 x 512gtx's, not the reg clcoked x1900xt or even the xtx!? wow the xtx is gonna rip

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by `SippY

so wait the x1900xt declocked is beating 2 x 512gtx's, not the reg clcoked x1900xt or even the xtx!? wow the xtx is gonna rip

---

In fear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sabrewolf732

In fear.

---

yea thats what i meant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by `SippY

so wait the x1900xt declocked is beating 2 x 512gtx's, not the reg clcoked x1900xt or even the xtx!? wow the xtx is gonna rip

---

But still minimum framerates below 30fps... :rolleyes: ...and that´s not getting better when enabling softshadows.

Any CF-results would be nice.

Greetz, Flox

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sabrewolf732

if all the 7900 is 33% more pipes and 33% more clocks.

---

i think the 33% more clocks will make a bigger difference than the 33% more pipes, with the only exception being in 3dmark06.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAMMAN

i think the 33% more clocks will make a bigger difference than the 33% more pipes, with the only exception being in 3dmark06.

---

:nono: That's not how performance increases work. If the pipelines and pipes are increased to a factor of 33%, that does not gaurantee 33% more performance. It will almost gauranteed be less than 33%. It cannot be more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flox

But still minimum framerates below 30fps... :rolleyes: ...and that´s not getting better when enabling softshadows.

Any CF-results would be nice.

Greetz, Flox

---

26fps min still ain't nowhere near bad, especially 1600x1200 4x AA and 16x af, in fear, on a single card. That's damn close to amazing.

It'll be interesting to see if a refresh part that mainly just ups the potential shading performance by 3 works across the majority of todays games. I guess it's Ati's way of saying out with the old and in with the new, rather than the traditional approach of nvidia's of adding a little bit extra of everything. Mind you even nvidia are saving on the ROPS.

Dave Baumann at B3D tested a x3ALU X1600XT using the same architecture and that came out very well indeed, even in UT2004 which is an "older" generation game

Maybe we should be thinking ahead to the Vista "DX10" WGF or whatever it is called graphics card generation ( G80 and R620 ? ) rather than worrying too much about these refresh parts. I think my trusty 6800GS Sli will last me out till then.

Regards

Andy

Well well....
So, as predicted or foreseen, Benching utilities will be soon out of use.....

X1900XT is a monster, when tested in "Heavy" games...:)
That's good news....:)

Another fact, ATI seems to have a better SM 3.0 implementation than Nvidia on 7XXX series.......

Have a question :
Would x64 games will be improved with the X64 architecture ??
Have tested far Cry on ATI on Windows64 and it's amazingly beautiful...:)
It rocks....!

Have those new cards been created to fit the new x64 architecture??
R580 series and G71...
Or will it simply be 64 bits drivers??

Better yet, if ATI's better with "heavy" games, with the extra load of graphics and detail...in x64 games....
ithink ATI will be ahead......:confused:
Hope for it....:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sabrewolf732

26fps min still ain't nowhere near bad, especially 1600x1200 4x AA and 16x af, in fear, on a single card. That's damn close to amazing.

---

Sure, but IMHO such a card implies playing at max settings using ALL features.

Dropping below 30fps (and this is for sure during intensive combat scenes where you need smooth gameplay) is not the way it´s meant to be played... ;)

I don´t blame anyone for that, it´s just a pity not to be able to use the full potential of my 24"-TFT with the newest of the new cards...but perhaps with 2 of them?? ;)

Greetz, Flox

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flox

Sure, but IMHO such a card implies playing at max settings using ALL features.

Dropping below 30fps (and this is for sure during intensive combat scenes where you need smooth gameplay) is not the way it´s meant to be played... ;)

I don´t blame anyone for that, it´s just a pity not to be able to use the full potential of my 24"-TFT with the newest of the new cards...but perhaps with 2 of them?? ;)

Greetz, Flox

---

no its a pitty these great cards are being taken advantage of by these companys releasing :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty coded games,like cod2, fear...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flox

Sure, but IMHO such a card implies playing at max settings using ALL features.

Dropping below 30fps (and this is for sure during intensive combat scenes where you need smooth gameplay) is not the way it´s meant to be played... ;)

I don´t blame anyone for that, it´s just a pity not to be able to use the full potential of my 24"-TFT with the newest of the new cards...but perhaps with 2 of them?? ;)

Greetz, Flox

---

2 x1900xt's will rape fear.

http://www.supload.com/free/19x14-softoff.jpg/view/

there's 1900x1400 or whatever the hell it is lol, thats with 4x aa and 16x af too, all settings maxxed. Do you even need aa at that high a res? Maybe 2x at most. Im thinkin 2x 1900xt's will make that playable with 35fps min

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newbie_User

Another fact, ATI seems to have a better SM 3.0 implementation than Nvidia on 7XXX series.......

---

O RLY? I hope you remember Atis fabulous SM3.0 on the X1800. It can't even complete all the tests in 3dmark06. Its not compatible with "Shader Particles (SM 3.0)".

GG Ati

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sabrewolf732

there's 1900x1400 or whatever the hell it is lol, thats with 4x aa and 16x af too, all settings maxxed. Do you even need aa at that high a res?

---

I´m playing at 1920x1200 on a 24"-display...and if you ever did that, you´ll never want to miss it again! :p:

Even at this resolution, 4x AA is a nice to have. Sure you can play without, but it´s quite a difference. Same with filtering...blurry textures don´t look good on high res either...

Greetz, Flox