1600pro 256mb cards arrived - getting ready for crossfire

finally!
took the damn shop one week to get them to my place :slapass:
and when i opened the boxes i noticed that the cards arent sealed in their antistatic bags, then i felt they both are sticky on the backside and saw that theres something smeared onto the card... glue or something... and both cards have finger prints all over them... :stick:

either the shop guys played with those cards with dirty hands or the quality control team of sapphire doesnt wear gloves like they should and doesnt wash their hands after they finish their daily dozen pack of donuts :mad:

will post pics in some time, getting ready to set them up now.
the package looks really sweet, nice design, and the card has blue pcb.
the heatsink looks very unefficient though, and noisy too.
the memory is infineon 2.5ns from what i can tell, so they run at the exact same speed they are rated for, 400mhz(800ddr) :/
so there wont be a lot of headroom for ocing... i still hope i can reach 1ghz with a pencilmod though.

im going to post pics and results during the next hours :D
let me know what benchmarks/games and speeds you want me to run :)

Hmmm....I think tis been a while since we asked this of saaya :D

System specs please:up:

Perkam

weee

sabre i have to say that is by far the most informative post i've seen in a very long time :) Not to mentin that the megaman doing that dance seems to go very well with the comment :p:

Perkam

3d01 3d03 3d05 AQ3 PC04, PC05 3dmark2000 SP Java Mark , pi fast, super pi 512k, 1M, 2M, 4M, 8M, 16M, 32M, Aquamark2 Aquamark1 3Dmark99 PC03, PC02, Cinebench,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZX7891

3d01 3d03 3d05 AQ3 PC04, PC05 3dmark2000 SP Java Mark , pi fast, super pi 512k, 1M, 2M, 4M, 8M, 16M, 32M, Aquamark2 Aquamark1 3Dmark99 PC03, PC02, Cinebench,

---

lol!

Quote:

---

3d01 3d03 3d05 AQ3 PC05 F.E.A.R Quake4 CoD2

---

That sounds more reasonable :rolleyes:

Perkam

i dont have fear i think, but q4 and cod2, ok. and benches.

system specs:
3800+ venice
ati rd480 es board
sapphire x850xtpe
ati x850xt cf edition es

and of course the two sapphire 1600s
pics will be added in a few mins, but my throat still hurts and i feel dizzy and hot, i think i got a lil feever. prolly got too excited from all the hardware :p:
anyways, no benches for tonight i think.

all parts:
http://img422.imageshack.us/img422/9...etup3or.th.jpg


a gift from amd :D
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/8...tup13jk.th.jpg


sapphire 1600pro box, nice design!
notice that it still says you need 3 parts, a ccf mobo, a master card and a cf ready card, wich is confusing, because for 1600s and 1300s you dont need a master card...
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/9...tup27wr.th.jpg


front of the card:
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/9...tup31hn.th.jpg


notice the heatsink covering the upper memory chips. how in the h3ll is any air from the fan supposed to get blown through those fins? from an earodynamical standpoint this is ridiculous... :stick:
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/1...tup40qx.th.jpg


back of the card:
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/8...tup55js.th.jpg


sticky spots with finger prints on the back of the card :stick:
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/2...tup69lh.th.jpg http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/5...tup70cj.th.jpg
http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/2...up6b5wg.th.jpg http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/5...up7b3yf.th.jpg


all cards compared, those 1600 pros have a cute lil pcb :D its even 1cm shorter than a 6600gt
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/7...tup88im.th.jpg


x850s in cf
hope the mastercard isnt claustrophobic :D
i was scared it would choke with the slave card so close to it...
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/3...up105nz.th.jpg http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/2...tup92kb.th.jpg http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/8...up125db.th.jpg


1600s in cf, much more room :D
http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/2...up153ud.th.jpg http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/1...up145ob.th.jpg http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/1...up130ej.th.jpg

looking good saaya!

is that motherboard ever being released to public? That is so gorgeous

yeah, thats the sapphire crossfire board you can buy at newegg, but it has a white pcb i think?
the huuuge caps close to the memory look funky :D

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813154006
hmmm this board doesnt have crossfire though... :(

lol, ati xpress 200 board for 55$, only 2 ram slots though...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813190002

this ecs board has 2 pciE slots and the sticker on the nb says cross fire... but its with the normal 200 chipset? does this board support crossfire or not? :confused:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813135211

looks like theres only the dfi, the asus and the ecs crossfire boards, thats all?
only 3 boards and only one of them is a high end board...
kinda weird, whoever wants to go crossfire has a lot of money and wants a high end machine...
anyways, sorry, seems the board is not available yet...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

yeah, thats the sapphire crossfire board you can buy at newegg, but it has a white pcb i think?
the huuuge caps close to the memory look funky :D

---

The sapphire with white pcb has one pci-e :) It's like an enthusiast version of the ultra-d more than anything else...

Perkam

I wonder when the sapphire xfire board will be ready

me2, i thougt its already out... i recently heard "hey the sapphire board is finally available at newegg" and now it seems thats only the non crossfire board?
why the incredible delay? i held that sapphire non crossfire board in my own hands at cebit in march of this year, and they said it should be out soon...
i hope the xfire version of it will come out soon, its a really nice board so far! :)

the ecs board supposedly uses the rd480 chipset and supports crossfire, for 115$ its worth a try, who wants to go for it?
lets ask naser first, he reviewed that board last week iirc.

hmmmm
vdimm up to 3v, vcore up to 1.725v
it scored around the same as the dfi cf board and the dfi nf4 ultra-d in 2k1 2k3 2k5 and aq3 and in most games it was the same, in ut2004 even 10% faster than the dfi boards...
has a second bios chip you can plug in in case the bios corrupts...
it has sata2....
no stability issues... only drawback is that videocards might block the sata2 slots.

sounds very nice if you ask me...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

sabre i have to say that is by far the most informative post i've seen in a very long time :) Not to mentin that the megaman doing that dance seems to go very well with the comment :p:

Perkam

---

What can I say, I went above and beyond. :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

me2, i thougt its already out... i recently heard "hey the sapphire board is finally available at newegg" and now it seems thats only the non crossfire board?
why the incredible delay? i held that sapphire non crossfire board in my own hands at cebit in march of this year, and they said it should be out soon...
i hope the xfire version of it will come out soon, its a really nice board so far! :)

---

congrats! at last your cards at home :D
my x1300 was with same marks on pcb:mad:

and if you want sapphire xfire board: http://www.savastore.com/productinfo...07&rstrat=3130
enjoy!

and where you scores?:confused: ? :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LucusScott

My bet is the x850's in CF clobber the x1600's hehe :p:

---

no :banana::banana::banana::banana: considering x850's keep up with 7800gts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lightman

and if you want sapphire xfire board: http://www.savastore.com/productinfo...07&rstrat=3130
enjoy!

---

That board is out for a while now. I think saaya means the Sapphire PURE Innovation Crossfire: white pcb, red slots...

coz of off-topic I'll post a link of the pic - http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...ages/board.jpg
and the whole article - http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=6568

RX = single card, RD = crossfire

I wish that board would come out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by althes

I wish that board would come out.

---

I very much second that. With RD580 being 'not so far away', I hope Sapphire will keep the beautiful looks. Damn sexeh!

can't wait to see some results :) i asume it wil be in 6600gt range?

what's that gift by the way?:D :slobber:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lightman

congrats! at last your cards at home :D
my x1300 was with same marks on pcb:mad:

and if you want sapphire xfire board: http://www.savastore.com/productinfo...07&rstrat=3130
enjoy!

and where you scores?:confused: ? :p:

---

nice!
cheaper than the sapphire nopn crossfire innovation board, lol! :D

kutteke, only a venice 3800+ unfortunately... but hey, better than nothing! :D
finally got the system running, i had some problems with the board.
for some reason it booted with the card plugged into the upper slot initially but then it didnt boot anymore. i tried everything and finally found out the board tried to boot from the lower pciE slot wich seems to be the primary slot by default, and for some reason the primary secondary pciE slot setting got back to default...

Good to see you going saaya

yes!

we want some scores from you :D

i think lower pcie is master slot in xfire config

yeah, but it was set to have the higher slot as master... and it worked, i only had a card in the upper slot and it booted fine, restarted the system and no display and error code 78, 10secs nothing, then 2 fast beeps and error code 85 on the diangostic display on my board.
took me a while to figure out the card had to be put into the lower slot to boot properly again :slap:

thx althes, i have feever and my throat hurts and all, but i couldnt resis to play with this thing, best distraction from the pain for me :D hahah

anyways uploading pics to imageshack, only single card results so far. pics will get posted in a sec.

a64 winchester 3200+ at stock 10x200
2x256mb 2.5-3-3
1x sapphire x1600pro


2k1:
____500/800 17345_______500/900 17859___
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/8...04007km.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/3...04502nu.th.jpg



____500/800 17345_______600/800 17507___
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/8...04007km.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/3...04001gg.th.jpg



____500/800 17345_______600/900 18091___
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/8...04007km.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/5...04504wr.th.jpg

notice how upping the mem speed by 50mhz (100mhz ddr) gives 2x the boost compared to inreasing the core clock by 100mhz!



2k3:
____500/800 6982________500/900 7331____
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/3...04004za.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/7...04507jw.th.jpg



____500/800 6982________600/800 7356___
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/3...04004za.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/5...04002ir.th.jpg



____500/800 6982________600/900 7829___
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/3...04004za.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/5...04502yo.th.jpg

in 2k3 upping the core 100mhz gives a slightly bigger boost than increasing the mem speed 50mhz (100mhz ddr)




2k5:
____500/800 3816________500/900 4026____
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/9...04004lg.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/4...04502mi.th.jpg



____500/800 3816________600/800 3995____
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/9...04004lg.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/5...04007yl.th.jpg



____500/800 3816________600/900 4262____
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/9...04004lg.th.jpg http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/1...04502ra.th.jpg

and surprisingly in 2k5 the mem bandwidth is more important again...




so its obvious those cards starve for mem bandwidth, wich makes me wonder why ati went the 128bit route and gave the xt some high end gddr3 memory instead of making at least the xt a 256bit card with slower and cheaper gddr2, wich would have resulted in the same if not more memory bandwidth...
for nvidias 6600s 128bit made sense, they performed very well nevertheless and 256bit would have brought them too close to the 6800 series, but for the 1600s it doesnt really make sense if you ask me...
theres a very wide gap beween the 1800s and the 1600s, both price and performence wise, a 1600 with 256bit would have closed that gap a decent bit, if not completely. now we have to wait for the 1700 to close that gap, but i guess it will still be 128bit and just with even faster gddr3 or even gddr4... wich i dont understand again... maybe ati gets gddr3/gddr4 that much cheaper if they buy a huge bunch that it makes more sense to use the latest high speed memory in a 128bt configuration rather than using older 256bit memory wich would give the same or more bandwidth...?


the 1600pros dont make any sense if you ask me
theese 1600 cards would have been 6600 killers back a year ago, but now they are too slow and cost too much to be a serious competition in crossfire for single cards like the 7800gt or a usefull replacement for a x850xt. the x850xt lacks sm3.0, but then again, is sm3.0 that important?
even the tp end cards struggle to perform with hdr and aa, and the 7800s cant eve run hdr with aa... so does a mid end card with sm3.0 make sense? if you ask me no, itll be too slow to perform good enough in future games tha really use hdr, and all those lil sm3 gimmicks weve seen arent worth to upgrade to sm3.0 yet if you ask me. if yo ant those gimmicks, go for it, otherwise i recommend a x850xt, or a x800gt or a 7800gt depending on what kind of performence your loking for and how much your willing to spend.
1600s in crossfire dont really make sense, at least not for the pros, and i dont think the xts will suddenly perform much better.
first i had hoped it was the pu holding them back in cf, but the 3ghz cf run from altes verifies what i already had a feeling about, those 1600 cards dont need a fast cpu... they remind me of my g4mx that didnt scale with cpu speed either as it was maxed out already.
and 1600s as single cards make sense as they beat the 6600s, but then again whos still buying 6600s?

the 1600s arent maxd out but they are close i bet. will run some tests with different cpu speed and some cf tests and post results tomorrow :)

horrible results, a 9800p would be about there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cirthix

horrible results, a 9800p would be about there

---

yeah... http://img459.imageshack.us/img459/6738/new1az.gif

(made this smiley just now, lets call it the always dissapointed saaya smiley :D)

Thanks for proving the point.
These cards shouldn't cost this must because they just arent worth it.
Running at 3ghz these x1600xt in cf should of been hitting 10k with ease.
They dont scale and really are maxed out.
I may get the dfi rdx200 board agin to see if you can run them in cf without a mastecard.

you think cf was still not enabled?
i think it was, but the fact that we are asking ourselves whether it was enabled at all or not alone proves the point of how slow these cards are better than anything else :D

im still going to play with the cards in cf, its interesting from a technology standpoint, but doesnt make any sense cost or performence wise...
as i said earlier, if there was a single card scoring as high as two 1600s in cf nobody would even look at it, its just the cf bonus that makes it interesting :D

well have some fun, I will be playing with my xfire in doom and cod tomorrow.

thx, sure will :D
lmk how it goes :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

nice!
cheaper than the sapphire nopn crossfire innovation board, lol! :D

kutteke, only a venice 3800+ unfortunately... but hey, better than nothing! :D
finally got the system running, i had some problems with the board.
for some reason it booted with the card plugged into the upper slot initially but then it didnt boot anymore. i tried everything and finally found out the board tried to boot from the lower pciE slot wich seems to be the primary slot by default, and for some reason the primary secondary pciE slot setting got back to default...

---

"only" :D
you do remember the step?
nice work though :)
by the way 25K '2001 would be nice, maybe a goal for you to set ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kutteke

"only" :D
you do remember the step?
nice work though :)
by the way 25K '2001 would be nice, maybe a goal for you to set ;)

---

sec, lemme open the box. im running the winnie for now because i didnt trust the engineering sample cf board and didnt want to lose this sweet venice from amd ^^

ada3800daa4bp
abble 0504epaw
1195157B50138

funny thing is it says 1.35v on the bottom of the ihs, cant remember to have seen this on another a64.

and 25k in 2k1... with a single card you mean?
going to post pics now, in 2k1 i get a LOWER score with cf than with a single card, lol :D

enabling crossfire worked fine, plugged in the second card, enabled dual gpu in bios, booted, new device found, reboot, and then some quick and easy steps:

go to the ati symbol in the task bar
http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/4079/17kv1.th.jpg

go to the 2nd primary card showing up and click extend desktop
http://img462.imageshack.us/img462/4322/26yc.th.jpg]

open the ccc and hit enable crossfire, done.
http://img277.imageshack.us/img277/3466/73rw.th.jpg

crossfire results... mixed felings.

2k1:
_____single 17345_________dual 16254_____
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/8...04007km.th.jpg http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/2...04005ud.th.jpg



2k3:
_____single 6982__________dual 9144______
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/3...04004za.th.jpg http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/2...04006gq.th.jpg



2k5:
_____single 3816__________dual 6451______
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/9...04004lg.th.jpg http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/1...04004av.th.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

sec, lemme open the box. im running the winnie for now because i didnt trust the engineering sample cf board and didnt want to lose this sweet venice from amd ^^

ada3800daa4bp
abble 0504epaw
1195157B50138

funny thing is it says 1.35v on the bottom of the ihs, cant remember to have seen this on another a64.

and 25k in 2k1... with a single card you mean?
going to post pics now, in 2k1 i get a LOWER score with cf than with a single card, lol :D

---

hehehe...finally making the right connections I see ;) I think it's time you send me all your equipment and I'll test if for you :p: BTW, that's a good cpu...hold on to it. Funny how quickly we forget..........
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/4...ycouple5lo.jpg

nice cpus s7

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cirthix

horrible results, a 9800p would be about there

---

in real games the x1600xt is between a 6800 and 6800gs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by althes

nice cpus s7

---

TYVM.....just a FYI...those two cpu's were the first Venices ever seen in the wild. I brought them here to XS and they created quite a stir....:p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s7e9h3n

TYVM.....just a FYI...those two cpu's were the first Venices ever seen in the wild. I brought them here to XS and they created quite a stir....:p:

---

yeah i still remember it... man thats quite some time ago isnt it?
good times... good times :D


sooo, time for a lil resume...
2k1: -6.3%
2k3: +31.0%
2k5: +69.5%

2k5 seems to scale really nicely, now lets se how games scale :)
i have to ad a few things though, the image quality on this card is notably worse than on my x850xtpe!
the dust/fog thatgets blown up in 2k5 return to proxycon, when the big resevoir falls down, is yellowish on this card :confused:
textures have a slightly worse image quality as well...
i guess that changing the settings in ccc can fix this, im running default, but to get the same top image quality as on x850 cards you will have to pay a little performence penalty.

something i didnt like about this sapphie cards is the weird noises they make sometimes.
does anybody lse expirience this?
they make a high pitch noise sometimes, it definately comes from the cards front sid, but i cant really tel where from exactly.
if the cpu tests in 2k3 or 2k5 are running this noise comes up all the time, and it makes a pulstating high pitch "feeeb" the faster the fps, the faster it goes. it does one feeb for each frame i the cpu test. it only happens betwen 1-4 fps, if its above that it either turns into a steady feeb or dissapears. really annoying...
and it sems other people also had some weird stuff smared on their cards?
wth is up with that? :stick: it appears theres some lousy quality control going on at sapphire as it seems their personell doesnt even wear antistatic gloves!?! i have a bunch of fingerprints on the back of both cards...

now, something even more concerning, the performence in 2k5 looks sweet, high fps... BUT thats not how it felt at some moments...
the fps was high enough to render the szene smoothly, 25fps and above, but it was stuttering notably... wich makes me tink that 2k5 uses alternate frame rednering, where one card runs one frame and the second the second frame. and somehow they got out of sync, and produced nearly identical frames for some time, so i got 25fps, but actually it was 12 identical or nearly identical frames.
so it was like having 12frames and just showing each frame twice, wich resulted in 25fps, but its not really 25fps...
this ws in gt3 in 2k5 btw

there was also some weird things in gt3 in 2k5, the flying boat was moving faster, then slower, then faser again, wich also indicates that both cards got out of sync or had problems to stay in sync.
this happened at the beginning of the game test.
it looked like both cards came out of syn and produced the same frames, then after half a second or a second it was running smoothly again but the fps dropped...

and in gt1, return to proxycon there were some weird things as well, in the szene the guy with the huge machine gun who blows away all the soldiers and boxes, theres a part where you see him from a frog perspective and the machine gun is flashing and has a huge flame bursting out, in this szene the lower 1/3 of the frame, below his machine gun, was suddenly dark, even though the machine gun flash had just lid up the upper part of the frame. this happened a few times and looks a little like in drago in 2k1 without vertical sync, where you see some partially rendered frames put on top of the previous frame, so a part of the frame is already more advanced in the szene than the other.
i ntoiced that with crossfire this partially frame thing happens more often.

this makes me thing that in 2k5s gt1 the cards are using sfr? and the cards got out of sync again...

its all a litle concerning, but then again, this will hopefully be fixed with new drivers.

where do i change what setting crossfire runs at?
where do i set it to do only super tiling or only sfr or afr?

sorry for the spelling, using another keyboard and it sux :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

sorry for the spelling, using another keyboard and it sux :P

---

2K5 is an easy answer
clocks that's all :)

hmm, either seems CF doesn't like not having a master card or there are alot of driver issues.

These results make me wanna go X850/X800 :(

I mean...6k on air isn't too hard for the gto with the vf-700, not to mention the perf in games matches the perf in 3d05...to think that it was me who was crazy about this from the beginning :(

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kutteke

2K5 is an easy answer
clocks that's all :)

---

dont get what you mean...

and sabrewolf, where is the link to games scaling 70-100% with crossfire? ;)

and yeah perkam, as i said earlier... the 1600s arent worth it... unless the price drops even more.
the original price before the recent price drop was ridiculous, its better now, but still not good enough...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

dont get what you mean...

and sabrewolf, where is the link to games scaling 70-100% with crossfire?
;)

---

3dmark05 is all about the gpu power :)
you should know that :slap:
you live on this forum :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kutteke

3dmark05 is all about the gpu power :)
you should know that :slap:
you live on this forum :D

---

But I gave him links to img's with 95+% improvement with cf :fact:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sabrewolf732

But I gave him links to img's with 95+% improvement with cf :fact:

---

95%?
it should be 200% :slapass:

j/k :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kutteke

95%?
it should be 200% :slapass:

j/k :D

---

you know what I meant :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kutteke

3dmark05 is all about the gpu power :)
you should know that :slap:
you live on this forum :D

---

i do know it, i just didnt get that you were trying to say this with your post :D

k, i mma run:
ati toyshop demo
ati asessin demo
ff11 bnchmark3
q4 demo
fear demo
bf2 demo
far cry hdr demo
d3 demo
sof2 demo
farbrausch 3d code demo

dont own a copy of hl2 plus i hate steam... so wont run hl2, sorry....

anything else you want me to run?

Every thread i saw , , , im So happily that i sell that biach [x1600xt core ddr2 4.8k 05 ~ 9 k 03 ] :(

nICE BY THE WAY .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athens[2004]

Every thread i saw , , , im So happily that i sell that biach [x1600xt core ddr2 4.8k 05 ~ 9 k 03 ] :(

nICE BY THE WAY .

---

The X1600pro looks very good for its price. This is not high end card here. The RV530 are to replaced the RV410 (x700) and its doing it. The X1600pro has the slower Gddr2 and it hurts it but can't complan about it at $129. Well will see the price drop when the RV560 comes out.

when rv560 comes out hopefully it has vcore changes thru software and it should be ddr3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnipingWaste

The X1600pro looks very good for its price. This is not high end card here. The RV530 are to replaced the RV410 (x700) and its doing it. The X1600pro has the slower Gddr2 and it hurts it but can't complan about it at $129. Well will see the price drop when the RV560 comes out.

---

yeah but who will go for a 1600 when the 1700 is out ^^

and replacing the x700 very well... dunno..
at stock speeds yeah, but x700 cards scale much better when oced afaik... both with oced vpu/mem as with oced cpus.
the 1600s are mem bandwidth circumsized and they dont care about cpu speed...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

yeah but who will go for a 1600 when the 1700 is out ^^

and replacing the x700 very well... dunno..
at stock speeds yeah, but x700 cards scale much better when oced afaik... both with oced vpu/mem as with oced cpus.
the 1600s are mem bandwidth circumsized and they dont care about cpu speed...

---

x1600's own x700's by far. It's not even close :stick:

saaya I posted single card x1600xt scores

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sabrewolf732

x1600's own x700's by far. It's not even close :stick:

---

so not true...

Ran this @ 450/540
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y35...hWelz/9215.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welz

so not true...

Ran this @ 450/540
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y35...hWelz/9215.jpg

---

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...ames-2005.html
when your x700pro owns a 6800 (let alone a 6600gt) let me know.

x1600xt:

1024x768 4x aa 16x af BF2:
63.9FPS

x700pro:
1024x768 4x aa 16x af BF2:
45.8FPS

It is like that for pretty much every game.

makes no sense to me...

you just said X700pro cant even come close to X1600 series...

Well my results right there are less than 1k off of althes results with X1600xt on AMD

IMO thats pretty "close" for a last gen card...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welz

makes no sense to me...

you just said X700pro cant even come close to X1600 series...

Well my results right there are less than 1k off of althes results with X1600xt on AMD

IMO thats pretty "close" for a last gen card...

---

Imo, 3dmark (1 bench) doesn't count. Look at the link I posted. the x700pro gets beat by a good amount, thus it doesn't come close

Just wanna thank everyone here for input and results...made my final decision a lot easier :)

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...44#post1202044

All comments regarding this came be made in the above thread ;)

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Just wanna thank everyone here for input and results...made my final decision a lot easier :)

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...44#post1202044

All comments regarding this came be made in the above thread ;)

Perkam

---

x800 pro's pwn man.

http://service.futuremark.com/servle...&projectType=6
http://service.futuremark.com/servle...projectType=10
http://service.futuremark.com/servle...projectType=12

all with a 2.1GHz new castle and pc2700 ram at like 185 :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sabrewolf732

x800 pro's pwn man.

http://service.futuremark.com/servle...&projectType=6
http://service.futuremark.com/servle...projectType=10
http://service.futuremark.com/servle...projectType=12

all with a 2.1GHz new castle and pc2700 ram at like 185 :D

---

those links only show my own scores :stick:
neways this is mine http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8281618.. x800pro vivo agp to xt-pe giga bios, 543/609 air without pencil (benchable)

ok back ot :slapass:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biohead

those links only show my own scores :stick:
neways this is mine http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8281618.. x800pro vivo agp to xt-pe giga bios, 543/609 air without pencil (benchable)

ok back ot :slapass:

---

oops :p: :slap:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8773764
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=4366866
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1385574

My x800p must clock well or something. I hit like 575/560 on stock cooler, with a pci card blocking it :p:

k, the 1600s are definately good at replacing the x700s, i agree... my bad...
but crossfire 1600s arent worth it from what ive seen so far...


a little update, doesnt look very nice so far :/

ati toyshop demo
doesnt work with 1600s?

ati asessin demo
doesnt work with 1600s?

ff11 bnchmark3
now wth is this ffx1 bench about? :D
i never got what its about... i saw it on guru3d and thougt id give it a try.
its the ugliest and probably most unefficiently coded 3d app ive ever seen... and it doesnt even give you a score at the end, the score keeps climbing while you run the bench, and when the bench is over it shuts down and doesnt say what the final score was :stick:
was around 42xx with crossfire iirc...

q4 demo
havent run yet

fear demo
havent run yet

bf2 demo
havent run yet

far cry hdr demo
textures missing, lights missing, colors fcked up on single and dual 1600s

d3 demo
[color=red]havent run yet

sof2 demo
havent run yet

farbrausch 3d code demo
faster with 1 card than with 2 cards in cf
2cards:
Frames: 7320 - Time: 201992ms - Avg: 36.239 - Min: 4 - Max: 79
1card:
Frames: 7932 - Time: 201952ms - Avg: 39.277 - Min: 17 - Max: 79
that was in 40x480 iirc, will rerun at higher resolutions

Sascha, what drivers are you using? Your X1600's seem to be having problems with tons of demos/games.. rather odd.

cf only works with the 5.13...
and im using the finals, not the betas...

well those are tech demos, so its not a big deal, but yeah, its kinda weird...
whats really really pssing me off is that ccc takes 30seconds to load... no sht, 30 seconds! it wouldnt really matter if it would at least keep the settings saved, but it doesnt.... everytime i run something 3d and return to the dsktop the refresh rate gets set back to 75hz instead of 85hz, wich is really annoying since i use a crt monitor. then i set it back to 85hz and the gamma and brightness levels get set back to default :stick:
so everytime i run something 3d i later have to wait for 30secs to load ccc, set the refresh rate back to 85hz, then set the gamma and brightness back...
really annoying...

and yes, i am using the driver profile option.

running into more problems, i didnt know the doom3 demo doesnt let you benchmark using the timedemo. why not? the time demo is missing and the timedemo fucntion is appeaently disabled as i couldnt create a custom tiemdemo to bench with :stick:
so i used the intro where the shuttle lands on mars, wich worked ok.
its stuttering really bad when i watch it the frst time, just like the d3 timedemo i got better reslts when running it a second time, so thats what i did... shows how great the d3 engine works, you have to run everything twice to have the textures etc cached properly... :rolleyes:

anyways, here are the doom3 results:
2005-12-27 02:37:29 - Doom3
Frames: 4185 - Time: 90809ms - Avg: 46.086 - Min: 19 - Max: 113

2005-12-27 02:40:16 - Doom3
Frames: 4244 - Time: 89810ms - Avg: 47.255 - Min: 28 - Max: 113

as you can see the second run has MUCH better min fps and it had no real lag.
this is with 1024x768 no aa or af and quality set to high

EDIT: forgot the crossfire numbers:
2005-12-27 02:50:05 - Doom3
Frames: 6305 - Time: 90579ms - Avg: 69.608 - Min: 35 - Max: 136

2005-12-27 02:52:44 - Doom3
Frames: 6359 - Time: 90496ms - Avg: 70.268 - Min: 35 - Max: 136

i played d3 some more with crossfire enabled, and its not looking good... :/
you know theres something fishy when you see 129fps reported but can count the frames on the screen....
there is a second animated szene where you first se the mad mars scientist, thats the szene im talking about.
he was moving a little and talking and i could count the fps, was between 5 and 12, really bad stuttering, but reported fps by fraps and d3 itself were around 120... weird...
oh and there were lots of "frame artifacts" again, the thing i talked about earlier, most probably know it from drago in 2k1 where a part of the frame is more advanced in the szene than the rest of the frame.

Those pros really do suck

i dont think you can compae theese fps to the d3 timedemo althes, can somebody run the d3 timedemo and also record the fps from the d3 intro so we can compare them?

all you need is the latest fraps and enable benchmarking, then click on new game in d3 and hit f11 as soon as the animation starts showing the red triangle on a display moving into mars orbit. it looks 2f but its already in the 3d engine as you se when the focus moves away and its on a display in the mars control station.

hit f11 again as soon as the animation is over and you are now seeing everything from first person view through the character you play.
thats how i meassured intro fps.


althes, do you have similar problems with crossfire like i do?
high fps but stuttering szenes etc?

the frame artifact thing i was talking about is also present with a single card...
so its no crossfire thing...

and the other bug dopsnt necessarily have to be a crossfire thing either, maybe uncapping d3 from the 60fps limit and then going above 60fps causes the lags and stuttering i noticed? hmmm
gonna try it with my x850 and see if its the same

the fear results are weird... first i thougt cf wasn running, but i tested with 2k5 and it was def working...

left=single, right=crossfire
min fps/average fps/max fps

1600x1200 4/10/20 ___ 4/10/21
1280x960 7/17/38 ___ 8/17/40
1152x864 10/20/46 ___ 10/21/49
1024x768 11/25/47 ___ 12/25/61
800x600 15/35/86 ___ 13/35/91
640x480 20/47/122 ___ 22/48/126


the most important number imo is average fps:
1600x1200 10 ___ 10
1280x960 17 ___ 17
1152x864 20 ___ 21
1024x768 25 ___ 25
800x600 35 ___ 35
640x480 47 ___ 48

at min fps crossfire was 1fps faster sometimes 2fps, but thats not really changing anything... weird results eh?
maybe crssfire wasnt working for fear?

ok, here are the q4 results i got so far:
i benched the intro using fraps

1600x1200 high quality

2005-12-27 03:57:27 - Quake4
Frames: 6685 - Time: 190775ms - Avg: 35.041 - Min: 0 - Max: 62

2005-12-27 04:05:53 - Quake4
Frames: 5157 - Time: 192070ms - Avg: 26.850 - Min: 0 - Max: 61

1280x1024 high quality

2005-12-27 04:20:12 - Quake4
Frames: 8346 - Time: 189092ms - Avg: 44.137 - Min: 0 - Max: 62

2005-12-27 04:28:18 - Quake4
Frames: 6543 - Time: 189388ms - Avg: 34.548 - Min: 0 - Max: 62

1024x768 high quality

2005-12-27 04:39:06 - Quake4
Frames: 10212 - Time: 187948ms - Avg: 54.334 - Min: 1 - Max: 62

2005-12-27 04:45:36 - Quake4
Frames: 8425 - Time: 188052ms - Avg: 44.801 - Min: 4 - Max: 62

looks like it scaled best at 1600x1200 with around 30%...
maybe crossfire only scales well with aa and af?
but theese fps are pretty low, so aa and af would drop them even more...
or maybe im cpu lmited with my 2ghz a4?
imma try 2.5ghz

you're getting quite the weird results :slap:

can you run doom 3 timedemo @ 1024x768 in high quality mode on 1x1600pro @ 600/800? id really appreciate that... im trying to compare your result to a x1300pro

well the intros i am benching are more demanding than the timedemo i think.
when i walk around in q4 in 1024x768 im always around 40-60fps, most of the time around 50/60. and i cant disable the 60fps cap on q4, wich is really annoying...

but the intro benchmark gives me 44fps average... ingame average fps is 55 or higher, i dont know as i cant see how much above 60fps i could hit if this stupid limit wouldnt be there...

how come com_fixedtic -1 doesnt work in q4?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baracus2k

can you run doom 3 timedemo @ 1024x768 in high quality mode on 1x1600pro @ 600/800? id really appreciate that... im trying to compare your result to a x1300pro

---

as i said, the timedemo only works in the full version of doom3, and i dont have doom3... is there a way to get the timedemo working in the d3 demo version?
can you email me the demo001.demo from your doom3/base/demos folder?
maybe i can run it... saschakrohnremovethispart@yahoo.de

do you have farcry?

EDIT: the doom3 engine is designed for 60fps... if you remove the 60fps cap the game will overspeed... in the timedemos the cap is removed

EDIT 2: ok how about this.... FEAR stress test 1024x768 max details with softshadows with 1 card @ 600/800... just to make sure does the FEAR demo have the same stress test as the retail? the retail version stress test has some guys shooting at each other and then goes to some place with pipes and water then has some room blow up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baracus2k

do you have farcry?

EDIT: the doom3 engine is designed for 60fps... if you remove the 60fps cap the game will overspeed... in the timedemos the cap is removed

EDIT 2: ok how about this.... FEAR stress test 1024x768 max details with softshadows with 1 card @ 600/800... just to make sure does the FEAR demo have the same stress test as the retail? the retail version stress test has some guys shooting at each other and then goes to some place with pipes and water then has some room blow up

---

yes i have far cry and will bench it tomorow, if theres a specific setting youd like let me know

the doom engine isnt designed for 60fps, thats just a lock they applied to not run into bugs and anormalies at high fps like in quake3
and no, the game doesnt overspeed at all, who told you this?

lol, yes the fear demo stress test is the same as the fear retail stress test :D
and why 600/800? max oc theese cards do rockstable is 600/900, i ran it with one card at 500/800 already and posted the result:
minfps 11
average fps 25
max fps 57


here are bf2 results, i found out that a single player map usually always gives the same average fps if i play it. so i played two rounds with crossfire and one without it and both cf runs and both single card runs are almost identical.

here are the results:

2005-12-27 06:20:08 - BF2
Frames: 38742 - Time: 606718ms - Avg: 63.855 - Min: 0 - Max: 101

2005-12-27 06:51:05 - BF2
Frames: 33666 - Time: 599996ms - Avg: 56.110 - Min: 0 - Max: 80

a measly 12% boost... yuck... :/

oh, this was run with 2.5ghz and the mem to 200mhz
i only used 512mb memory but the game actually worked fine, the first round was always stuttering a litle, but the second round and following ran flawlessly smooth.
i found out that on this es board using 4 sticks somehow sets it to single channel... :confused:
so im back to two 256mb sticks :)

just found out that theres another sub menu in fear, my bad ^^
all the fear results are with 4aa and 16af! :D

fear is really fkced up though...
baracus2k, i ran 600/900 in 1024x768 for you again, with and without aa and af, and with all other settings enabled or set to maximum. and i found out that theres something weird going on.

when i just set the videocard setting to maximum 4aa and 16af gets applied.
in 1024x768 with 2.5ghz cpu power, 200mem and the card at 600/900 that gives me: 13/28/66 (min/av/max)

when i disabled aa and af, i get:
13/24/48 (min/av/max)
wich is lower than with 4aa and 16af????

so i enabld 4aa and 16af again and got this:
9/16/31
:confused2 even lower?
and the funny thing is aa is definately not applied correctly, the fog, the water reflections on the wall, and the flame textures are all pixeled heavily...

i first thought i had confused some settings, i but i closed fear and did the exact same thing 2 times now, and i keep getting the same results...

default = highest score, aa af disabled = lower, enable aa af again = even lower score :nuts:

i just reran 2k3 and 2k5 with 2.5ghz cpu clocks... no gain, nothing at all... :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

i just reran 2k3 and 2k5 with 2.5ghz cpu clocks... no gain, nothing at all... :/

---

In 2k3 you should see some gain with 500MHz more on CPU....:)

lol, my cpu speed is back to 2000mhz??? this board seems to like to reset everything to default ^^

My Laptop is even easily better than these cards!

I am not impressed :(

a single 7800gt costs as much as both x1600s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fhpchris

My Laptop is even easily better than these cards!

I am not impressed :(

a single 7800gt costs as much as both x1600s

---

i know... thats why i said 1600s in cf arent worth the money...
1600xts look btter, but whether they look good... i dont know, id say no, but you better ask althes.

ok, i set the cpu to 2.5ghz gain, maybe i forgot that i set it back?
anyways, i gained......... 50 points ^^

50 points for a 50mhz cpu boost... in crossfire!
now that should give you an idea how theese 1600s scale with cpu speed... and thats why althes couldnt even hit 10k in 2k5 with 3ghz.
this cards are just like g4mx cards when it comes to cpu power...

so the only way to boost their speed is vpu and mem speeds.
te 1600pros are very bandwidth cut, and even the gddr3 on the 1600xt doesnt help it THAT much as its 128bit...
and the core speed doesnt seem to have a big effect either on performence... only in havily gpu intense apps, and those apps run too slow on this card.

its a closed case, 1600s in crossfire make no sense...
and even the gddr3 wich ocs really nicely doesnt help to make the 1600xt an ocers card, because ocing doesnt mean upping the mhz, it mans upping the performence, and thats something wich the 160s are very limited in.

to bad... 256bit memory might do the trick...
this card would have bee a dream if it would have 256bit memory and 8x1 instead of 4x3 configuration of the vpu...
rv530 is half the size of r520 and i think 8x1 would have made it even smaller and cheaper to manufacturer, but would have performed better...

well, lets hope the 1700xt is a better performer! :D

And thats all folks.

your returning your cards?
imma send my cards back in a few days... was kinda fun, but the results are really dissapointing.

the average boost sems to be 30% from using crossfire with theese cards, and thats about the same boost you can get by ocing the videocard, almost all cards can do a 30% oc, and with higher cpu speed you can get even more of a boost... not with theese cards...

higher than 30% gains are def possible, butwith theese cards those gains are in unplayable framrates with and wthout crossfire...
hope the 1700s are out soon! :D

Yeah I sent the x1600pros back.
I will send back the xt's also not worth keeping them.
Futuremark doesnt even have them up to put in some scores.
I may do a mod with a pot to see it works.

fm has em in the orb, but they are hard to spot, i had some trouble finding them as well :D
but they dont make a difference betwen xt and pro iirc.