http://pic.digital-info.net/autumn/7800GTX/005.jpg
http://pic.digital-info.net/autumn/7800GTX/007.jpg
http://pic.digital-info.net/autumn/7800GTX/002.jpg
More and More
Printable View
13K in SLI at stock speeds, that's actually quite good. I think that with some good cooling this card has a huge heatroom for overclocking. They probably clocked it a bit low to keep the card cool with it's mighty 32 pipelines so I expect some awesome overclocking.
Also nice to see the FX57 in action :)
Nice! :slobber:
wow, thats a pretty nice score! I'm assuming that everything was mildly oc'd... thanks for the screenies!
Nice HTT, that is fricken amazing, now all i need is a real nice printer to print my own $.
LOL Unimpressed...by a mile. Supposed to be at least 15k stock.....cant even muster 2x7.5k ??
Perkam
Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
ati's amr doesnt double performance either if thats what ur getting at....
:with: whats up with the low score? cpu is clocked to hell, graphics cards stock speeds?Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggy McShades
You cant say that yet ;) remember, this is two G70s...and the 15k by macci is two X850XTs ;)
Seeing the efficiency of two X850XTs, two R520s will do at least 15k stock...perhaps more.
Perkam
http://www.digital-info.net/vbb/show...4839#post24839
7800 was at stock (430/1200)
9000 was at 500/1300
13000 was at stock in SLI
the card oced to around 500/1300 on stock cooling, not bad for an early card!
but it took a 2.9ghz fx to push the 7800gtx to the 7800 3dmarks in 2k5 it is supposed to score... and considering that this is a next gen card and atis current gen cards score the same in CrossFire as two of those cards in sli im really surprised how nvidia is planning to stay on top of everything in the next months...
what are the temps of those cards like? I see lots of fans on that setup lol :confused: :slobber:
the cpu has a 160 mhz oc, clocked to hell?Quote:
Originally Posted by pha|anx
Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
where teh two x850xt's overclocked ? the 7800gtx's are at stock so 13k seems about right. but i have to agree if r520 is all ati says two will definatly do better than 13k
I was referring to the fsb & multi used... and on initial glance I thought it was just an FX-55... lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Stuperman
:slap:
The X850XTs were cascade cooled and at insane clocks. These cards are not.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
@phalanx
that is a pretty sick HTT, not bad for a FX-55 on air, but I would imagine that a FX-57 could do 3ghz on air like nothing.
For the first review Nvidia isn't going to send out bad clocking cards. Certainly if they know they are going to lose this battle from ATI they want to make sure every benchmark with their cards shows otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
This is a double thread (see: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=65922 ) so maybe it's better to close this one.
I think they're going to have something else up their sleeve. I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of unexpected things come out. ;)
i merged both threads :)
wow 9k on a little overclock seems awesome!!!!
im sure 10k with a little watter and v-mod would be easy now that would be sick single card performance without cascade or ln2
________
Yamaha tx16w specifications
I wonder if macci's crossfire result in 3dmark05 was with two 512MB cards ? SLi ( and maybe AMR ) cards both share the same framebuffer so amount and speed of memory on the cards might be very important for such high scores and from the look of the results this card is still using 256MB of 1200MHz GDDR3 RAM. Hence maybe the low scores. 3dmark05 is also vertex limited to some extent, so maybe the pixel pipelines were waiting for vertex information and not very efficient.
I am guessing that a better representation of how 7800 performs compared to r420 and 6800 is to look at the 3dmark03 nature fps and see what improvement there would be there.
I'm not an expert on multi card RAM useage though so maybe macci Opp or Shamino can tell us how SLI / AMR varies with speed of ram ( or amount of RAM if macci can confirm whether the cards he used were 256 or 512MB examples in Canada ? )
Regards
Andy
macci used 256mb card as far as i know, also remember that macci was also on beta drivers or really un-optimized drivers with arm
not impressed at all i wanted 10k 3dmark05 stock at least, the bad thing is that ati with this kinda performance by nvidia might enabled only 24 pipes :( not 32.
nvidia should show the 7800ultras right now :)
I think macci used Catalyst 5.6 drivers and they weren't beta or un-optimized.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro_oc.cl
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.
Just ran 3D05 with my X800XT clocked up to X850XTPE and scored 6592, cat 5.6 drivers, so the G70 is roughly 1200 points ahead of ATI's current flagship card, not hugely impressive, although it does take a fair ammount of extra power to get 1200 extra marks in 05. Still, I cant say I'd be prepared to sell my X800XT to get 1, and (probably) lose a fair ammount of cash in the process. Of course drivers will hopefully improve that score a bit, and if they do, I'd be more inclined to upgrade.
It's odd to me that there arn't very many people impressed.
We have Macci's single card World record score of 9500 something which was done on LN2.
Now we have this G70 which looks to me that it could be pretty close to Macci's score, only the G70 can do it on stock air cooling, in the right hands.
That seems pretty good to me.
OPP
Faster in what? 1 synthetic benchmark that runed on low graph qulaity , low res and with no AA and litle AF. You realize that these cards are made to play games. Noone plays games on settings we benchmark. Once you enable all the graphic features and up the resolution it's a big question who is faster. And remeber unlike ATI driver support ,Nvidia does optimize they drivers for games so performance between 2 is almost same. Sure Nvidia beats ATI in some games and ATi whoops then in other.Quote:
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
Faster is not realy a good term here. Let's have a GLMark and see who is faster there :nono:
same here gamer, my fx-55 0.13n still be with me :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer
Perkam stated that crossfire was more efficient, I proved him wrong, so it does matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by LilGator
you have a good point there, but they talked so much about how good their g70 would be that they created false expectatives (maybe we were to optimistic).Quote:
Originally Posted by OPPAINTER
if im not mistaken ati said r520 would double an x850xt so if that's right give 6k in 3dmar05 to x850xt default, and you have 12k 3dmark05 for the r520 on stock :) thats what ati said
If the price is about right, then it seems like a nice card to me. 9K on stock cooling is really nice. (even if it was with an fx 57 at 2,9).
Like everyone i'm looking forward to seeing R520, my guess is it'll score 8,5k in 05. If ATi is going to do what i suspect they will do is just make the card good enough to beat nvidia with a nice margin.
I'm actually more interested about performance with AA & AF. The reason I would buy one of the cards is for gaming with highest image quality possible at reasonable FPS rates.
This is all very interesting, indeed nvidia did well to release the new 7800gtx SLI in time for ATI's crossfire. I foresee that Shamino will break 16k with it.
Iam not quite up to date with the new nvidia cards.. is 7800GTX the best card in the new series?
if the GTX is not their top of the line card... does that mean it would go for sale at $399 USD? So in other words, the GTX will replace the 6800GT? If i'm right... I cannot wait until i have lots of money to buy new stuff :)
7800 Ultra @ $499?
7800 GTX @ $399?
7800 plain @ $299?
2x plain 7800 could be nice...
this is competition is good though, it feels like it's been awhile since the companies were so close with each other
now i am very anxious to see what the r520 scores
from my understanding it is not...Quote:
Originally Posted by dpa
Is this new series AGP/PCI-E? I don't see reason from going NF3 > NF4 yet.
If the 7800GTX is not the top of the line card in the G70 series, why in the hell are we comparing it to the top of the line ATi card? The fact that it beats it by a fair margin, says good things about what to expect from the faster cards using the G70. Other things to look at are the lower power consumption, 100-110W, which is lower than what the 6600GT uses at idle. Also the new process, 90nm, should allow for higher overclocks and lower temps. At least theoretically...
The 7800GTX will be the top card, then the 7800GT, then the 7800.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
where does the Ultra fit in then? Surely nvidia won't kill such a good marketing tool. They've had the ultra name since the geforce2
They've said that GTX is the new name for Ultra.
Notice the 6600 series didn't have one...they don't cherish it that much.
Also, should the need ever come up, I'm sure they could come out with an Ultra based off the fact that these clock up to 500MHz on the stock cooler. In such instance where the X900 initially only has 24 pipes but beats out the GTX only slightly, they could make an Ultra and then a 7900 series to compete with the 32 pipe version.
But for now the top dog is the GTX.
*Drumroll* I agree with you Perkam.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
for once
:D
kool stuff i was hopefull when i saw the 7800 for 299. Any specs on the 7800?
I think this is actually very good, especially seeing as R520 is quite a ways away... Now if nVidia's smart, they could release a 7800 Ultra that would beat a R520. nVidia has a time advantage here, now all they need to do is use it wisely.
Usama aka Ferrari Freak
do you think the 7800GTX has unlockable pipes?
i hope not. hope they don't physically sever the pipes with lasers.
Well I think they like the letter "X".Quote:
Originally Posted by b0bd0le
I'm guessing this stands for Xtreme, just like some memory and Websites I know of;)
See what we started:D
Everbody uses "X"treme these days.
I think Frank from XR came up with that one, "Xtreme Tek Werkz"
OPP
From what I've read the consensus is that nVidia is saving the Ultra name for a 32 pipe X900XTPE beater. Probably to be released after the R520 drops, and I think that will be an interesting battle, I like ATI, but these are not bad cards and will be hard to beat.
At this rate graphics cards are going to be releases slower and slower beacuse everyone wants to wait for the other guy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by b0bd0le
thats not even close to real prices i think.
top of the line (officialy) is the 7800gtx.
the 2 ways i believe nvidia could beat ati:
1 lower prices (in a price/performance ratio)
2 availability
one interesting thing is that the ati mobos are supposed to be cheaper that nf4 sli or normal nf4 so you have to take that into the equation (if you wanna go sli or crossfire)
well really before the R520 comes out NVIDIA can charge whatever they want for their top end card. But when it releases, NVIDIA is going to have to substantially lower the price on it. By then ATI will know what they need to run their card at to beat NVIDIA's, and it won't take much considering the very modest clockspeeds.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro_oc.cl
:eek: Uh oh...I think I just found out what I'm saving my money for :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by TheInq
Perkam
Yeah, that's what I heard as well ... 7800GTX > 7800GT > 7800.
Where's that taken from? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Looks like the 500MHz clock that those guys got was at the lower end of the spectrum for air cooling. Indications coming out that some overclocks might be a lot higher. So forgetting number of pipes arguments and Ultra this that and the other, this card might respond very well to lots of volts and lots of cooling.
In regards to 3dmark05 I would not take it as a good indication of performance across the board. It is vertex limited to some extent, also Sampsa and Macci seem to indicate that with nvidia's Sli solution the cpu has to do a lot of work, maybe why the 13 200 score is only 65-70% the score of the single card. It might be bandwidth limited as well.
I'd rather see an 03 score to be honest to compare it to 6800 or X850/X800.
With the Fx-57 coming out next week as well we might be seeing a rapid increase in scoress for this range of cards in the comming weeks. people are just reading too much into one bench. When have general sites ever been able to overclock well after all ? ;) :D
Regards
Andy
Around 7k - 7,5k ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by OPPAINTER
3 shops here in Australia will have them end of next week, Asking price for a 7800GTW is $809 to $879 Aussie $ including delivery.
http://www.nintek.com.au/x/Scripts/p...idproduct=1867
Other sites are taking orders, no actual link yet.
Edit: My x850xtpe gets 6,400 stock, 7,200 overclokcing only the video card on stock cooler. That is on a DFI NF4 and 3200+, 1gb Adata ddr400.
Funny as one sees only what he wants. At the end end of the Inq story ATI respond with a faster card to NVIDIA's Ultra :slap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Troman
This looks interesting but I still give ati the advantage cause they use 90nm while nvidia is stuck with older 110nm tech
Hehe, there was a news about a Leadtek 7800 gtx board that was the first listed overhere, price was 539€ or something near. Now the news is gone and they say it's because NVIDIA "asked" them to do so.
Thats like $600 us dollars, very expensive id say. Makes the $250-300 6800gt seem like a good deal and frankly even that is more than enough
The way i see it, you're an NVIDIA fanboy (not trying to offense) and try to please yourself by making them shine by pure speculation. I am loyal to no brand and buy from who serves me best for the best price in the range i can afford.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troman
That's why i'll let you speculate, i'll wait for real world results.
calm down guys :buddies:
troman, ati and nvidia can both change the clockspeeds of the cards if they need it to adjust to the competing products, they have both done that :)
Well having had a good read through this thread (good one this is!!), I thought I'd add my two pence.
This card is a stop-gap for nvidia to keep up with ATI until they can produce their new core on 90nm. 110nm ssaves in costs for the moment.
I think that the GTX will be beaten by the r520, then nvidia will release an Ultra, then ATI will enable all 32 pipes.
Now if ATI have sorted out their yields then ATI will then kick ass with the r520. IF they sort out the (rumoured) bad yields.
I think that nvidia's next GPU will then be more revolutionary than this one (they can't do it every gen can they?? ;) ).
Having said that...it all looks to be going the way of a Unified shader architecture at the moment (well according to Microsoft and Longhorn)....so the ATI Xboxcard will give ATI the edge in the next big push of cards.
Whatever happens and whichever card you get it will be fast and it will play all your games well.
Then it leaves me to buy my 2nd GT at a nice cheap price and I'm happy :)
Well looking forward to it all, that's for sure :D
Seriously, that BS. Remember the days of P4E Prescott 90nm vs Athlon64 Clawhammer 130nm? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Geforce4ti4200
a bit of price speculation at toms: http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews...31_110037.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by b0bd0le
"Sources mentioned that pricing of 7800 cards should be in line with the 6800 series and come in between $550 and $600 for the GTX model. But the almost traditional short supply of the new generation processors is likely to significantly inflate the price of 7800 cards."
I could have sworn i read at theinquirer.net $639 but can't find it. That could mean one really expensive ultra. I wish the two companies would start competing a bit more in price.
Yeha there seems to be an unsaid said between the two to keep the prices right up there. Still if you want the best, the fastest and the newest stuff out there: you will always pay up front for it :(Quote:
Originally Posted by 7he]-[0rr0r
mathias, chill! :p:
kempez815, welcome to XtremeSystems :toast:
about 90nm vs 110nm... its even 90nm low-k vs 110nm, so the 90nm is even more advanced and should offer even higher clockspeeds and power savings than 110nm.
but the problem is yields... if the yields are bad at 90nm, and they seem to be, then 110nm will make more sence...
its 24 pipes now and 32 pipes later, you can either build a 32 pipe vpu in 90nm and enable 24 pipes now and the rest later, by then the yields should have improved. or you can build a 24 pipe chip in 110nm (32 pipes in 110nm would be waaay too large) wich will give you good yields from the start but low clockspeeds i guess, and then go for a 90nm 32 pipe later.
ati went for 90nm 32pipes right away, wich is giving them a hard time yield wise right now, but clockspeeds should be high and they can be the king of the hill with the few 32 working pipe cards right now, and will impove the 90nm yields over time and have a perfect chip for the next months.
nvidia went for a 110nm 24 pipe chip right now, wich is giving them much better yields, but worse clockspeeds. they can probably produce masses of g70 chips and produce them cheap, however they wont be the fastest chips around right now. over the next months they will go for a 90nm 32 pipe chip as well (more pipes if you take into consideration that they will most likely go for a unified shader pipeline architecture, but meassuring it in the old ways of pixel pipes it will be equivalent to a 32 pipe chip)
to some point nvidia is smart for having waited until tsmc had mastered their 90nm low-k process some more and only recently started working with tsmc on 90nm with their next gen chip. it probably saved them some pain with getting good yields in 90nm, BUT it will still take them quite some time to get good 90nm yields and they will be laging behind ati in the 90nm process and probably also in 65nm process after that.
so basically it looks like nvidia went for high yields and the ability to sell loads of cheap chips and play it save, while ati went for a more risky route wich will most likely make them the king of the hill with their chip for at least the next few months. since they have more time tweaking 90nm and will already have a resfresh of r520 aka r580 when nvidia gets their first 32 pipe chip out, they should be able to beat nvidias 32 chip in a few months as well.
it reminds me of the amd and intel situation, nvidia goes for the intel strategy, play it save and make sure you can supply the market with loads of chips you can manufacture at low costs, while ati goes the amd way of pokering high and mostly focussing on high end chips that are more expensive to manufacture and cost more, but are slightly faster than the competing solutions (FX and A64 X2)
to me it looks like nvidia will lose more market share... but its a poker game and you never know what cards they are holding in their hands :D
and if ati should not be able to improve their yields and supply enough chips to the market nvidia will be there with cheap good performing chips and will be able to gain a lot of market share back.
id say ati is in advantage though at the current situation and within the next few months fom what i know atm.
For me it will all come down to price. If there is a low $400 card that has SLI and can overclock to GTX and beyond, ill make the jump. Otherwise I will wait until nVidia goes 90nm before I upgrade.
The thing is, G70 isn´t a big improvement over NV40, but, the time ati is taking to release R520, by the time it´s out, (maybe september?) nVidia should have something higher clocked around and it should be fine.
Unless R520 comes in like a month and can score 9-10k stock, i don´t see a problem for nvidia. Tough i agree G70 isn´t very advanced technologically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
define cheap :)
also yields problems are just roumors as far as i know
Thanks mate.....I came here from www.sysxtreme.com (|3ourne reccomended me). I know this place has the best OC'ers in the world so I thought I'd join and take a look. Its a bit overwhelming with my little OC and OK system, but ah well...I'm here to learn :)Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Ah well....yeah I agree on the 90nm vs 110nm...but I think once they both move onto 90nm then things will even out. Nvidia has played this round safe tho...but there will still be a market there.
Lets be honest tho: the top-end market is like a pathetic share of the market, although both sodes want to be on top at the top....its the lower end/integrated share that these two get the serious money from (Intel pwn there).
I think that all this competition is good for us end-users ;)
Thinner core=less resistance=better clocks, cooler silicone and easier OC'ing?? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Troman
NP, hope its about right (in a very simple way ;) )Quote:
Originally Posted by Troman
Yeah it seems that ATI has contracted out the manufactoring process but they are having trouble with getting sufficient yields of the chips with all 32pipes fully functioning. I'm sure they'll sort it tho...then the race is, as they say: on :)
i LOVE the comments from you guys about the performance of the X850 based on one man's benchmark results. He used extreme cooling to push those cards beyond what half the members of this board could ever hope for. Bench it on air obtaining your max oc and then tell us what your crossfire score is.
Put one of the new Nvidia's under the same treatment (given it doesnt have any coldbugs) and I bet you will see similar, if not better results.
I guess i have to take back the fanboy part and apologize then, still i don't agree with your speculative interpretation tho.Quote:
Originally Posted by Troman