Printable View
Looks like you're the only fanboy here. I buy what's best on the market, a fanboy of performance but I know waffle, you're only a fanboy of a certain company. How can you talk about other fanboys when you're one of the most hardcore ones? Hypocritical much?Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
Honestly I'm not surprised at the low minimum frame coming from ATI, I think the lower memory BW and size plays an important part there @ 2500 resolution, I would much like to see how the Fermi cards compare to the SIX edition 5870 since memory size would be a smaller limiting factor then.
This is probably the most useless post in this whole thread. :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
I guess the 'zillion' number was enough to see it was a joke or exaggeration, nobody got that obviously and went berserk over it. Jesus.
nVidia has released benchmarks in cherry picked situations where they have the biggest advantage, and yet they still show minimal performance advantage over the 5870. the 5870 maxes out it's 1GB Vram at 2560x1600 8xAA, so of course it's performance will take a big hit. Let's see some benchmarks at more common situations like 1920x1200 4xAA and see what happens. Personally, I was planning on buying whichever one had better performance at release in October, but now I wish I had just bought the 5870 instead of waiting for this crap.
calm down mate you're forgetting this is the GTX470, it was never meant to wipe the floor with all AMD's offerings. There is still the 480 which should offer 15% (at least) more performance than the 5870. If priced right, I'm sure you won't be complaining about buying one :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by weston
Well 470's memory advantage isn't incredible (250mb) but it's there. However as far as I can understand the 470 is meant to be the middle ground between 5850 and 5870. Of course this is only relevant if it's priced that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by weston
They tested the GTX 480 in the video, not the 470. Unless you are talking about a different benchmark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
What video? I thought they were talking about the Warhead benchmark from the previous page.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavat23
That's the thing. It's not going to be priced right. Look at the size of this thing relative to the 5870. Now add to that Nvidia will use Physx, CUDA, and GPGPU capabilities to justify the higher price tag, and you've got yourself a card that's a ripoff for gamers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
Now that is something.Quote:
Originally Posted by ethomaz
Better minimum frame rates always piques my interest :)
Everybody got "it" that you were exaggereting.However your post clearly insinuated that market share difference between ati and nvidia is so much bigger that it made that graph irrelevant.Which of course was not true.Quote:
I guess the 'zillion' number was enough to see it was a joke or exaggeration, nobody got that obviously and went berserk over it. Jesus.
That is why people started posting clear numbers.Because you presented something that was not true ;-).
I hereby implie everyone to stop driver wars ,cos thats not the core of this thread.And i think we all agree strong fermi would be good for every CONSUMER, because thats what we are and siding furiously on side of some graphic card vendor is just stupid, because they want our money,and we want to spend as less as possible on greatest as possible.
One observation for folks is to try to stay with the facts and not feelings like "i hated it" "-Why?" "it was bad" and so on.
Are there any confirmed price leaks yet ? That is the thing thats most important right now i think.Performance wise we already now something at least.
Its pretty much established that 1GB isnt enough for 2560x1600 with 4xAA gaming, that is probably the reason for such low min fps(and probably skews whole result).Quote:
Neuromancer
From what i gather, every leak that we saw so far was with 2560x1600 ,im beginning to think thats something fishy around here.
I think it's much more interesting to see what the frame rates will be like in an in-game benchmark run with the use of FRAPS for example. Do that run for a minute or so, start at around a minute into the game and repeat 5 times to take the average. That's what I want to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuromancer
yeah they really try hard to reach limit of 5870 memory capacity looks like the same cr_p that amd pulled with 5870 vs gtx 295 they used same tactic and benched every game in extreme res which gave us false info i can't wait for quality review of this card specially an H review :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuromancer
Yeah, I can't wait for the H review also. If 5830 has perfect performance and has a Gold award..........Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
what a worthless comparison; neither card is able to provide playable FPS;Quote:
Originally Posted by ethomaz
run it a resolution/AA level which produces AT Least 35-40fps and then compare minFPS.
the only thing those screenies prove that more memory on a videocard only makes a difference at the highest resolution and high AA setting :clap: but as with all those memory card size comparison benchies you'll soon be at a level where the playable FPS is just too low; and having 14 or 15fps avg won't change anything. :up:
well you can judge yourself by looking at there benchs don't you ? btw 5830 doesn't have any non EOLed oponent so why not give it gold award ? performance is between 5850 and 5770 which it was supposed to be only bad thign is that amd priced it higher cause of 5870 pcbs soon custom pcbs will roll out and you gonna see much cheaper versions and believe me that card will be only one in 200 dolar price range as dx 11 card after few weeks lol and for a looong time
Well, yes. Trouble is, at this res, both cards perform like utter crap, so whats the point again? Unless you like playing at 15 fps average. And I think that min fps difference is gone as soon as you lower the res a bit or compare it to 2GB HD5870.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuromancer
Some guy at DH posted these, have you seen this before?
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/1312/aaaayo.jpg
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/4064/bbbbbbbn.jpg
thatQuote:
Originally Posted by jmke
if that happens (prices dropping to $200) then it's the only time 5830 could be considered for purchase. A $240 card can't be counted as a good card because "it's going to drop in price". The 5830 release sucks and as far as I know the only site to actually praise this launch was HardoCP. "perfect performance perfect price" lolzQuote:
Originally Posted by eric66
I love the Unigine graph. It almost looks like it's done by nV ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
what is with the sys info on those benchmarks
driver version looks odd
to much photoshop going around :shrug:
when i run that benchmark i get
Driver version: Catalyst 10.2 (8.702-100202a-095693C-ATI)
and the 10.3 beta
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showpost...16&postcount=1
love how they used score instead of fps same chinese numbers but with awesome bars :ROTF: difference was 2 fps as much i remember :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Yeah, that was probably the worst graph ever. Looks like a 100% increase from 5870 but in reality it's less than 10%.Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66