Printable View
ALL DEFAULT CPU@1800Mhz 7900GT@default
3dmark 2003 7900GT SLI
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5507/7900gt19bo.jpg
in 3dmark 2003 only get score of a single 7900GT drivers issue
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/8721/7900gt25mx.jpg
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7779/7900gt36fk.jpg
nice results for default cloks (CPU//VGA)
Source: PCDVD
FINALLY!!! real bechmarks:banana: :banana: :toast: :woot:
get OC'ing and bump up those scores!
but still kinda slow for stock??
Yeah seriously get a dualie or somethin and OC them. Nvidia said these will match the 7800gtx in performance... but thats not what I am seeing?
Anyways if they OC good, thats great.
those scores r pretty high for the CPu at default.
even for SLI.
any chance wel get benches with a CPu above 3ghz?
btw what driver version used?
they are not mine , it was good if they were mine :) .
Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
;)
that is what i siad!
79GT stronger than 78GTX... and super easy to overclock...
and this SLI 06 score is about the single 79GTX512 score!
yes 2005 and 2006 scores are not of ' 7900GT SLI( think drivers issue) , only 3dmark 2003 score its of 7900Gt SLI
mm nice scores, but it appears to be an 7800GTX512 with speed bump
Would someone mind telling me what the '06 score was? All the pics are gone due to bandwidth limitations, and that's on several forums, lol.
heh, yea,Quote:
Originally Posted by Lando95
It's just easier to say "wow" and move on :slap: . Btw, you getting one of these lando?
I am going with either the x1900xt or the 7900gtx, we'll see how they perform against each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by wowza
I would still like to know the '06 score though :p:
links are dead. please rehost using a DECENT host...
pictures here
enjoy!
Those are really weak scores for SLI.
Look at the CPU :stick: Tell them to get a real CPU then I'll be interested. High clocked dual core is here and it's fast. SLI or anything for that matter with a 1.8ghz single core isn't even worth looking at.Quote:
Originally Posted by HKPolice
Yeah, on the original site they said there were some driver issues with the SLI.Quote:
Originally Posted by HKPolice
And I agree with you afireinside, that is one hella slow cpu to be benching those cards with.
Noooo the pictures! Someone rehost them please!
what he said ^^^^^^^ why not just stick them on XS as attachments boysQuote:
Originally Posted by eBoy0
What's the default core speed .. that's what I am interested in and I cannot see it anwhere ! Am i going blind and have missed it ?
Regards
Andy
pretty fast, ran my X1900 XTX at stock with cpu at 1800 mhz and i only got 8568.
Geez I didn't think I'd see the day when '05 is CPU limited so fast :slap:Quote:
Originally Posted by l337x3r1cx
Quote:
Originally Posted by eBoy0
It was only a few posts up too!!Quote:
Originally Posted by DeToNaToR.cl
not only cpu was a bottlenexk check the ram, 2.5-3-3-7 2x256mb.
how can a guy get this type of vga and test it on this poor rig.
makes me wonder
It looks like there is a driver issue because that score for SLI is wayy to slow..since the 7900gt is supposidly around the same speed as the 7800gtx or even faster.
lol you can say that again.. Sheesh a single 7900 would bottle up that system.. I wanna see some beches with a real processor, such as an FX-57 @ 4GHz or a Yonah, then we will have some good info :fact:Quote:
Originally Posted by afireinside
Those scores are so weak! I hope we see real 7900GT 3Dmarks soon.
Don't forget there is also GTX, then GTX OC version and yet another version with higher clocks.
Single card scores are fine for such a crappy system :p:.
hehehe, 7900GT worst than X1800XT !
hugs Marioace.
for who asked about the 7900GT specs.
i thought they were 24 pipes 450 core and mem i forgot :(
You test x1800xt on 1.8Ghz single core Venice, and value ram?Quote:
Originally Posted by OBR
8500 with that CPU is pretty impressive. If the score is infact single.
7900GT will fly with an FX-60. :)
8500@SLI enabled.Quote:
Originally Posted by korda
So about 6.5k-7k on single, but still impressive with that crapply setup.
I thought there were driver issues with SLI in 05/06? Anyway, not too long until we know for sure. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasparz
Give us the pics of 7900GTs themselves.
Haven`t yet seen `em.
i prefer seeing a 3dmark socre of a single 7900gt.
with these leaked SLi scores there are to many things that can influence the scores.
dunno if im right but i remember reading somewere that the Nvidia cards are quicker bottlenecked by a to slow CPu then the ATIs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lando95
the scores were this:
7900GT SLI -- 3dmark 2003 >>>23340 all default @CPU 1800Mhz /VGA default
7900GT --3dmark 2005 >>> 8580 (only get single 7900 score maybe drivers issue) all default @CPU a 1800Mhz //VGA default
7900GT --3dmark 2006 >> 4635 (only get single 7900 score maybe drivers issue) all default @CPU a 1800MHZ //VGA default
7900 GTX SpecificationQuote:
Originally Posted by Starscream
Core Clock: 650 MHz
Mem Clock: 1.6 GHz
Memory Bandwidth: 51.2 GB/s
Memory Size: 512 MB / 1024 MB
Pixel Pipes: 24
7900 GT
* PCIe native
* 450MHz core frequency
* 256-bit memory interface
* 42.2GB/sec. memory bandwidth
* 10.8B pixels/sec. fill rate
* 940M vertices/sec.
* 24 pixels per cycle
* Built in dual-link DVI support for 2560x1600 resolution
so the 3dm05 score is not SLi ? its only single ? if thats the case than that score isnt too bad at all as ive only hit 8475 on my single 7800GT oc'd with cpu @ 2.8 and i can go even further than that cause ram is holding me back but 8.5k on that setup mmm thats pretty nice if u ask meQuote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
it was all tests in SLI (2k3//2k5//2k6) but only 3dmark 2003 get SLI scores , in 3dmark 2005 and 2006 he only get the score of a single 7900GT , he think maybe a driver issue.
OK
now let`s see the cards themselves
i think MAYBE the 7900GTX come with 32 pipelines or anything else more , cause what make the 7900GTX more expensive 300$ than 7900GT??? only the cloks and memory? ? That make no sense or else ppl would buy 2x7900GT instead of a single 7900GTX for same price
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showpo...postcount=1613Quote:
Originally Posted by TaPaKaH
Fake or not, thats the question. :)
The 7900GT cooler looks a little tiny. And naked RAM? :cool:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaPaKaH
http://img234.imageshack.us/img234/9...ards8kl3ax.jpg
i got my doubts about that 7900GT pic.
ok the GPU is clocked alot lower then the GTX so ok a smaller cooler.
but no cooling on the ram?
could the difrent PCB (layout and size) of the GTX be only cause it has 256MB more ram?
cause i was thinking there would also be 512MB versions fo the GT.
that 7900gt pic is reaally weird, it should have the same pcb of the 7900gtx
Why do you think so? 7800GT---7800GTX different pcb.Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
7900GT cooler seem too small. :rolleyes:
ahahhaQuote:
Originally Posted by Willis
GTX = 24 pipes no ?
GT = 20 or 24 .. from the scores you have to say 20 but maybe the scores are borked ?
Still nothing definite :rolleyes: Arrgh !
Regards
Andy
I cant see the pics... :(
Quote:
Originally Posted by ^don.k's^
Me to
wow im not impressed yet, thats a very weak 3d05 score. I am scoring more with my 7800gt, over clocked of course but still. I want to see some real benches with a decent CPU and over clocked cards.
There is quite an easy way to compare graphic cards independently from the system that you are using, using the following calculation:Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
(Mem BW*Fill Rate*Vertices/sec)exp1/3 where all three parameters are expressed in 10exp9
The standard 7800GT (400/1000) will give you
(32.0*8.8*0.7)exp1/3 = 5.8
The 7800GTX (430/1200) gives
(38.4*11.3*0.86)exp1/3 = 7.2
The 7800GTX512 (550/1700)
(54.4*13.4*1.1)exp1/3 = 9.3
The 7900GT (450/1320)
(42.2*10.8*.9)exp1/3 = 7.5
The 7900GTX (650/1600)
(51.2*15.6*1.3)exp1/3 = 10.1
The 7900GT and 7900GTX figures are just based upon the info from Mascaras.
If these are correct, the conclusion is that the 7900GT is 4% faster as the basic 7800GTX and that the 7900GTX is 40% faster as the basic 7800GTX and 9% faster as the 7800GTX512.
yep, the info that i read in few sites is that 7900GTX is faster 8%-10% than 7800GTX 512Mb so you are correct:
G71, 7900 GTX is eight to ten per cent faster
Than 7800 GTX 512
Quote:
:
ASIAN partners are disappointed with the upcoming Geforce 7900 GTX cards. Most of the companies already have the samples and tested them but they are not happy with the performance. First tests indicate that in the best case scenario, Geforce 7900 GTX cards are eight to ten per cent faster than the last and rarely available Geforce 7800 GTX 512 card.
This means that 7900 GTX might get close to ATI's X1900 XTX card but it will lose in many of the benchmarks. We suspect that at 4X FSAA and eight or sixteen times Anisotropic filtering ATI X1900 XTX can still keep its crown, but we still have to see this. Asian partners placed limited quantities order for G71, 7900 GTX chips and they ordered less chips then they usually do, according to sources.
When Nvidia launched its flagship 7800 GTX 512 a true performance leader, the partners ordered thousands of chips and got a handful of them, while now even you can get thousands of chips, no one wants to risk buying a few thousands of them. However, we still think that Geforce 7900 GTX if priced aggressively have a chance to be a good seller as people like the Clan of McNvidia.
Sample 7900 GTX at 650MHz core should be distributed now as the launch day the 9th of March is getting closer. We know that Nvidia won't have any shortages of those chips as, for goodness sake, this chip will find its place in Sony Playstation 3 but at modest clocks. Sony literally wants millions of chips.
In "best case scenario"
would be funny if they actualy sell very well but the stores run out fo stock cause the partners themselves only bought low quantities of the cards and dont have enough cards to supply cause they screwed up :p:
what pics?Quote:
Originally Posted by ^don.k's^
---ASUS EN7900 GTX, pics e benchmarks...):
http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/9713/en79002dh.jpg
http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/7224/en790012no.jpg
http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/3122/en790020oo.jpg
---Leadtek 7900GT:
http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/1473/79001pz.jpg
http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/376/790000he.jpg
http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/2577/790013up.jpg
and look at response of ATI in prices:
ATI Readies Massive Price Slash – Sources.
ATI’s Radeon X1900 XTX to Cost $549
Quote:
:
ATI Technologies, a leading supplier of graphics processing units (GPUs), is expected to drop the prices on graphics cards featuring the Radeon X1000-series GPUs shortly following the release of the GeForce 7900-series products of arch-rival Nvidia Corp., X-bit labs has learnt.
The Markham, Ontario-based GPU supplier is projected to announce price slash on the Radeon X1900-, X1800-, X1600 and X1300-series products shortly, according to sources familiar with the plans of the graphics giant. The decrease of the prices will help ATI to more efficiently compete against Nvidia Corp.’s new products which release will spur lowering the prices across-the-board.
After the price-drop, the Radeon X1900 XTX – the current flagship of ATI – will cost $549, the Radeon X1900 XT will drop to $479, while the Radeon X1800 XT products with 512MB or 256MB should cost around $299 (512MB version will cost higher than that). Additionally, ATI is expected to introduce Radeon X1800 XL 512MB for $299 and drop the price of the Radeon X1800 XL 256MB.
Earlier it was reported that Nvidia’s yet to be released GeForce 7900 GTX 512MB graphics board – the future top-of-the-range part from Nvidia – has planned retail price tag of $499, whereas the GeForce 7900 GT is projected to be available for $299. The manufacturer’s suggested retail price of the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 will be down to $399, according to sources with knowledge of the matter.
Sources also confirmed the release of the Radeon X1800 GTO for the price-range of $199 - $249 and said that the Radeon X1600 XT as well as the X1600 Pro will have recommended pricing of $149 and $109 respectively this spring.
ATI Technologies officials did not comment on the news-story.
Everything you that's in your post has been posted before. And the benchmark pic is fake, it's just a 7800GXT at 490mhz core. 1.14 X 430mhz = 490mhz (that's where the 14% increase comes from).
where you saw that the benchamrk its fake and its a 7800GTX???? source ???
acording to this benchmarks cant be a 7800GTX :
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...dmark06_9.html
i think 9800Pro's have better coolers than that 7900GT. Gee, i think Nvidia is trying to save a few bucks on GT production as that just looks sad...
i had a 9800pro with the ATI reference cooler and that cooler sucked big time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Budwise
we dont even know if the pic of the 7900gt is real and if its real why it has such a small cooler.
so if its better or worse wel have to wait 1 more week.
It says upto 14% more speed. 1.14 X 430mhz = 490mhzQuote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
The picture is of an Asus 7800GTX TOP, I saw that nowhere I figured it out myself because I couldn't believe the 7900GTX will be THAT slow. So I did a quick calculation of 1.14 X 430mhz.
That 7900GTX benchmark and PCB pic are obvious fakes. You can clearly tell that the kingkong and Asus logos were photoshopped.
sounds like true, maybe it's some prototype picture? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by HKPolice
Quote:
Originally Posted by HKPolice
That 7900gt pcb looks identical to the 7800gt pcb. Now, the g71 has been simply called a die shrink right....? so maybe the same pcb COULD be used... Also the deimensions of the ddr3. Looks like the same as my 1900xt.
ATI has one card left under its sleeve in its response to the 7900GT with 24 pipes ;)
Perkam
real or fake??? :
http://img460.imageshack.us/img460/6...ret15tz0bn.jpg
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/9...ret22al3zd.jpg
source:nvnews.net
if thi is real this explain why 7900GTX its x2 the price f the 7900GT , cause have 48 pixel shader while 7900Gt only have 24
acording to this source th 7900GTX will have 48 pixel shaders (same as X1900XT/X) and 24 pipelines (more than X1900Xt/X)
and the 7600GT have 24 pixel shaders ALU its x2 of the X1600XT pixel shaders
mascaras as i can see this G71 chip was made on 2week 2006?
i'm amazed about die size G71, but why airclock is only 710-720Mhz?
marketing tricks ? :)Quote:
real or fake??? :
there was said 48 pixel shader ALU's wheras R580 has 48 pixel shader processors, that is not the same.
Nv's PS has 2 full alu's . i.e. 2 x 24 PS = 48 (full)ALU's
Ati's PS contains 1 full (and 1 mini) alu,so 1 x 48 PS = ^^.
But of course all that arithmetics are quite rough and not enough a representation of even r580 and g71 resp. calc. power.
Quote:
:
NVIDIA 7900GT and 7900GTX 3DMarks
The 90nm GeForce launch is almost upon us
Earlier today some preliminary benchmarks of GeForce 7900GT and GeForce 7900GTX were leaked onto the internet pending the March 9, 2006 launch.
System Configuration:
Athlon 64 FX-55
1GB DDR400 (2x512MB)
nForce4 motherboard
All tests were performed with a 1280x1024 resolution. The cards tested claimed 1.2ns DDR3 for both cards.
GeForce 7900GTX 512MB
650mhz core clock, 1600MHz memory clock
3dmark 03: 17800
3dmark 05: 7600
3dmark 06: 5200
GeForce 7900GT 256MB
450mhz core clock, 1300MHz memory clock
3dmark 03: 13800
3dmark 05: 7000
3dmark 06: 4550
For reference, 3dmark06 on a similar system scores approximately 4700 for a GeForce 7800GTX 512MB running at stock speeds.
We already had a fairly thorough look at GeForce 7900GT, GeForce 7900GTX, and GeForce 7600GT -- all expected to launch just a few days from now. The Quad SLI ready GeForce 7900GTX will launch on the 22nd of March.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=1121
ALL benchmarks with 1280x1024
very nice, a 7900GT in 3dmark 2006 almost same score as a 7800GTX 512mb :D
not bad at all. why not run the tests in 1024x768? hmm. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
1280X in 06 i understand but not why they run them at that res in 03 and 05.
cause the new 3dmark its 1280x1024 not like the old 3dmark 2005 1024x .
i scored a bit higher than those 7900GT scores with my old 7800GT overclocked to 510/1260. Not very impressive imo.
AFAIK and IIRC, the 7900GTX and 7900GT are both based on the G71.Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
So 7900GT will have some units/pipes disabled... that's all.
G73 is the 7600 series
Those 2005 scores are very low...
I have with a Opty 170 @ 2.2ghz (yes, only 2.2ghz) and my 7800GTX 512MB, 8.7k.
And the bench @ 1280x1024...
well, i dont know about alot of people, but im rather impressed by these, especially if released @ 299, if its considerably more than thta, not so attractive, but i think it will be one of the best budget cards ever, matching, and beating 7800GTX's, and coming close to 7800GTX512/7900GTX scores (not so much in games maybe, but who knows)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budwise
budwisew this 7900GT/GTX scores(3dmark 2003/2005/2006) are ALL DEFAULT and in 1280x1024 not 1024 ;)
try run a 3dmark with same resolution 1280x1024 and you will see ;)
The 7900GT DEFAULT in 3dmark 2005 1280x1024 resolution get 7000 marks , its same score that 7800GT DEFAULT get with 1024 resolution, so not bad and drivers are not the best yet ;)
and in 3dmark 2006 1280x1024 resolution and opteron single core:
7900GTX 512mb@DEFAULT------- 5200 marks
7800GTX 512Mb@DEFAULT ------ 4700 marks
7900GT 256Mb@DEFAULT ------4550 marks
realy impressive the 7900GT almost get same score as 7800GTX 512MB
im referring more to the 06 Score which runs at 1280 at default. The only thing i have as an advantage is dual core, yet i was also using older drivers. Lets just hope for those waiting to buy that these are moster overclockers :)
That GTX 512MB score its not that real...Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
In a Opteron 148 @ 2.86 i have 4956 in 2006...
With the cpu @ 2.6ghz like the one in review you have at least 4850 and not 4700...the real diference its 300 points and not 150. Its 100% more ;)
and now the scores of 7600GT simply amasing:
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b1...7600GT256M.jpg
- Geforce 7600 GT: 5708 3DMarks (faster than 2x 6600 GT em SLI) CPU AMD64 single core default and 7600GT default
source by blastarr and vrzone
Where are you from man ?
Oh, 128bit memory interface btw
im from portugal ( e tu es brasileiro? tudo bem? ) :toast:
1 more bench of 7600GT but already with core OC (560mhz/ memorys default)
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b1...z/7600gtoc.jpg
source by God_Lx
and 1 pic of EVGA 7600GT CO
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/1372/e76000gr.jpg
The core is clocked at 600MHz while the memory clicks at an astonishing 1580MHz. The RAM is branded as K4J52324QC-BC14, which should be set at 700MHz (DDR3-1400), but as this is an EVGA OC card, 780MHz (1560MHz) shouldn't be beyond reach.
next friday or monday i will receive a EVGA 7900GT than i post my benchmarks with my opty 148 ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
stupid question but can you also bench it at 7800GTX speeds?
this to see if how much more efficient the new GPU is.
I'm fine !
I wonder what ATI has on its sleeves...
yep, i think they wiil launch soon X1900XL and X1800GTO and they slash the prices for all cards
ATI Readies Massive Price Slash – Sources.
ATI’s Radeon X1900 XTX to Cost $549
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/d...303052240.htmlQuote:
:
ATI Technologies, a leading supplier of graphics processing units (GPUs), is expected to drop the prices on graphics cards featuring the Radeon X1000-series GPUs shortly following the release of the GeForce 7900-series products of arch-rival Nvidia Corp., X-bit labs has learnt.
The Markham, Ontario-based GPU supplier is projected to announce price slash on the Radeon X1900-, X1800-, X1600 and X1300-series products shortly, according to sources familiar with the plans of the graphics giant. The decrease of the prices will help ATI to more efficiently compete against Nvidia Corp.’s new products which release will spur lowering the prices across-the-board.
After the price-drop, the Radeon X1900 XTX – the current flagship of ATI – will cost $549, the Radeon X1900 XT will drop to $479, while the Radeon X1800 XT products with 512MB or 256MB should cost around $299 (512MB version will cost higher than that). Additionally, ATI is expected to introduce Radeon X1800 XL 512MB for $299 and drop the price of the Radeon X1800 XL 256MB.
Earlier it was reported that Nvidia’s yet to be released GeForce 7900 GTX 512MB graphics board – the future top-of-the-range part from Nvidia – has planned retail price tag of $499, whereas the GeForce 7900 GT is projected to be available for $299. The manufacturer’s suggested retail price of the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 will be down to $399, according to sources with knowledge of the matter.
Sources also confirmed the release of the Radeon X1800 GTO for the price-range of $199 - $249 and said that the Radeon X1600 XT as well as the X1600 Pro will have recommended pricing of $149 and $109 respectively this spring.
ATI Technologies officials did not comment on the news-story.
Quote:
:
Prices Are Now In Effect @ Newegg:
X1900XTX $499: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102671
X1900XT $449: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102003
X1800XT $349: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814161171
X1800XL $299: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102610
The difference being that those are now retail prices, not OEM...oem might be even lower. International Prices may drop more slowly. But this happened pretty fast after the announcement for the price cuts
I'm not "The Source" :P The source is right there -> http://forums.hardwarezone.com/showt...z#post17699970
There is both false and true info there.Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
The PS ALU is correct only for the G71. The G70 has the same 48 ALU units as the G71 and the R580 has 96 ALU units. The chart used on the number of PS units for the G70 and not the number of ALUs and they used only the number of PS units of the R580 and not the number of ALU units.
The RV530 should be 24 PS ALUs and the texture pipelines are wrong too.
http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/2230/3d053zs.jpg
http://coolaler.kj.idv.tw/albatron7900gtx/1.gif
3DMark06 @ Default:
http://coolaler.kj.idv.tw/albatron7900gtx/4.gif
3DMark05 @ Default
http://coolaler.kj.idv.tw/albatron7900gtx/5.gif
3DMark03 @ Default
http://coolaler.kj.idv.tw/albatron7900gtx/6.gif
3DMark01 @ Default
http://coolaler.kj.idv.tw/albatron7900gtx/7.gif
http://www.techzonept.com/showthread...=84394&page=26Quote:
:
84.17 used alone 20~30% growth (fear)
The fisrt is 3dmark03 at all default setting, the second is 3dmark05 at 1600x1200 and 4AA.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1144410503
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1144413763
This should be fun now sli 7900gts
Did a slight bump from 559 to 565 and ended up with this..
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1144504213
I would love to see you hit 40k
BFG 7900s SLI'd..Not too sure about that cpu score.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1144929928
Stock-cooler & stock volts.
XFX 7900GT
X2 3800+
1024MB Corsair Value RAM (CRAP)
3DMark05
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/3809/101187ez.jpg
3DMark05
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/5225/56100jq.jpg