MMM
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 166

Thread: ATI Aiming For R300 Deja-Vu: Officially Launches 4800 Campaign

  1. #126
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    I prefer gaming numbers over vantage or 3dmark. The 2 just gets boring too fast compared to a game
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  2. #127
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by perkam View Post
    I would never take a tone that pessismistic against an Nvidia fan, because there are rumours out there that the 4870 might end up being $349 due to GDDR5 cost.

    In addiiton, the slides show 20-40% and you need to half those to get the unbiased marks, so 10-20% at max.

    The GTX 260 is cause for worry for ATI, as well as a reasonably priced 9900GTX in July.

    ATI, by no means, has it easy, but neither does Nvidia. I just go around and dispell the myths until the reviews come out

    Perkam
    I never said anybody had it easy. But I'm not so sure the HD 4870 and GTX 260 are going to be priced anywhere close, no matter what the performance is.

    Obviously the GT200 GPU costs $100-120 supposedly, which already means prices must be high just to break even. And the GTX 260 has 896MB of memory - it may be GDDR3, but that's still a lot of memory and it is fairly fast GDDR3 (2GHz). I would think that it is likely 512MB of slow GDDR5, as found on the 4870, wouldn't be more expensive than 896MB of fairly fast GDDR3, as found on the 260. So I wouldn't cite memory costs being something AMD has to worry about, at least versus the GTX 260.

    IMO, if GTX 260 is anywhere close to the HD 4870 in price, then AMD has really won the battle. nVidia simply isn't going to win with a card selling for $400 or less that is based on the largest GPU in history, has a huge/complex PCB, 896MB of memory, and a huge cooler.

    AMD should worry more about G92b than GTX 260 IMO, but I don't think they need to worry about 9900GTX capturing the performance crown in that market from the 4870. ATI has to worry most IMO about competition to the much weaker 4850 model, which may be pushed down to $150 if nVidia prices G92b competitively.
    Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
    If that was intended to me, I will be so pleased when I'll show you all that Quad@4Ghz plus 8800GT@stock surpasses 15k (as as I manage to be able to run 3dmark2006 on Vista, OpenAl problems FTL).
    And that means what exactly? I've said 3D Mark 06 is useless, I couldn't care less if the HD 4850 got 0 in 3D Mark 06. Vantage + games matter, and in Vantage, HD 4850 is outscoring 9800GTX by a margin.

  3. #128
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    I prefer gaming numbers over vantage or 3dmark. The 2 just gets boring too fast compared to a game
    What we have so far, games related:
    http://diybbs.pconline.com.cn/topic.jsp?tid=8725790
    http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7854.html
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    And AMD is only a CPU manufactor due to stolen technology and making clones.

  4. #129
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by v_rr View Post
    Nvidia First 55nm Desktop Graphics; GeForce 9800 GT
    http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/Nvid...0_GT/5714.html


    it prety obvious
    G92b can only increase core/shader clock. There are no arquitectural changes. Overclock one G92 and you get G92b in performance numbers.
    Actualy by this, the clocks look similar to a standart 8800GT:
    http://www.nordichardware.com/image3.php?id=5193


    3dmark 2006 gives you that, but vantage in Xtreme setings gives X2800 (tested by a user in this forum). Xtreme setings are high resolution with AA and AF. 3dmark 2006 give 1280 res, no AA, no AF.
    In 3dmark 2006 GTX280 gives 17K = far from reality. Vey far. GTX280 is much faster then that
    Games:
    http://diybbs.pconline.com.cn/topic.jsp?tid=8725790

    As stated earlier we are working on speculation, but till now any speculation gives HD 4850 = 8800GT. Only 3dmark 2006, but the same 3dmark 2006 give you GTX280 scoring very low numbers, when everyone know thats far from reality.

    If we move to 3dmark Vantage Xtreme it gives HD 4850 far from 8800GT and gives GTX280 far from any other cards. Pretty obvious that vantage Xtreme setings is being more acurate then 3dmark 2006 and GTX280 proves that.
    At last you made a very very good point. I don't disagree with anything you said on this post. I specially agree with you about your Vantage interpretation, and is nice to know you agree with me about HD4850=8800GT @ 3dmark2006, at least for know.
    (and thanks for the clarification about 9800GT, although we still don't know their final clocks, and although I really think they should have made architectural improvements with G92b in order to have a better product to fight the HD48xx and at the same time give a bit more performance @ low prices, kind of going with ATIs philosophy)

    Quote Originally Posted by perkam View Post
    lol You're not a fanboy...yet

    There are millions of Nvidia fans. I am an AMD/ATI fan, have been for a long time (or at least for as long as they have been the underdogs). You become a fanboy when you disregard the achievements of the other side completely, and begin to make statements over and over again, out of the context of the thread, and without proof.

    And no it wasn't intended to you I'm sure an 8800GT does very well, and will give run the 4850 a run for its money, but the 4850 is no slouch and will be very worth the price, especially for all those benchers out there.

    Perkam
    Well, as long as ATI is the underdog and as long as I see statements defending them that are far from reality, (this 4ghz qx9650@2006 sure did that ) I'll keep trying to make things clear, so it might seem sometimes that I am nV biased, but I think I am not. I would really love to see a nice HD4850 performing nicely in games, but that doesn't make me stay away from reality and say it currently compares to 9800GTX @ 2006, which is clearly false, at least for now
    Vantage seems to bring the fields a bit more interesting, so let's just see more results.

    Quote Originally Posted by v_rr View Post
    Show us 8800GT scoring X2800 in 3dmark Vantagem extreme setings
    I would love to, but I don't have a 1900x1200 display, don't know if I'll be able to do that

    regards
    Last edited by Luka_Aveiro; 06-13-2008 at 08:54 AM. Reason: quote post #127
    Are we there yet?

  5. #130
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    472
    Quote Originally Posted by v_rr View Post
    What we have so far, games related:
    http://diybbs.pconline.com.cn/topic.jsp?tid=8725790
    Hmm, odd graph... says 3870X2 scores 24.26 but the bar is shorter than 22.99.

    System Specs: * i7 2700K @ 4.8 Ghz * Zalman CPNS9900-A LED * Asus Maximus IV Extreme -Z * 16 GB Corsair Dominator GT CMT16GX3M4X2133C9 * Sapphire HD7970 crossfire * Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatality Pro [PCI-E] * Corsair AX 1200W * WDC WD1002FAEX + WDC WD1002FAEX * Optiarc AD 5240S * Dell U3010 @ 2560 x 1600 [DVI-D] * Steelseries 7G * Logitech G9 * Steelseries SX * Coolermaster Stacker STC T01 * Logitech Z-5500 * Sennheiser HD598 * Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1*

  6. #131
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Extelleron View Post
    IMO, if GTX 260 is anywhere close to the HD 4870 in price, then AMD has really won the battle. nVidia simply isn't going to win with a card selling for $400 or less that is based on the largest GPU in history, has a huge/complex PCB, 896MB of memory, and a huge cooler.
    I don't quite understand this, what do you mean by 'win' ?

    If you mean 'win the price/performance battle', then this doesn't make sense, and if you meant 'win more money from customers' then who cares [if they don't] ?

  7. #132
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by Xello View Post
    I don't quite understand this, what do you mean by 'win' ?

    If you mean 'win the price/performance battle', then this doesn't make sense, and if you meant 'win more money from customers' then who cares [if they don't] ?


    The purpose of a business is to make money. So if one business makes more than the other, the one making more money is winning.

    If GTX 260 has to go down to $350 or less in price to compete with the 4870, nVidia will be making a lot less money than AMD will be, even if they are pricing it at $249 or $279.

    Price/Performance, that remains to be seen. I think HD 4870 will win that war because I don't think GTX 260 will drop below $399, at least not any time soon. And it definitely won't go below $350. With the 4870 AMD has more room to manuever; they can price at $249 and still make money.

  8. #133
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,838
    i dont see the point of the 4870. most ppl will just pay a bit extra for the gtx 260, or save money and get the 4850 which is essentially just an underclocked 4870.
    DFI P965-S/core 2 quad q6600@3.2ghz/4gb gskill ddr2 @ 800mhz cas 4/xfx gtx 260/ silverstone op650/thermaltake xaser 3 case/razer lachesis

  9. #134
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    170
    Well 2x lower mems clock is quite a big underclocking

  10. #135
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbornchild View Post
    Hmm, odd graph... says 3870X2 scores 24.26 but the bar is shorter than 22.99.

    hum, the graph looks ok to me, provided that the numbers are right. the length of the graph is min+avg+max fps.

    3870x2: 3,45 + 13,98 + 24,26 = 41,69
    3870: 7,61 + 15,83 + 22,99 = 46,34

    so 3870>3870x2 according to these numbers, exactly what the graphs show.
    1. Asus P5Q-E / Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @~3612 MHz (8,5x425) / 2x2GB OCZ Platinum XTC (PC2-8000U, CL5) / EVGA GeForce GTX 570 / Crucial M4 128GB, WD Caviar Blue 640GB, WD Caviar SE16 320GB, WD Caviar SE 160GB / be quiet! Dark Power Pro P7 550W / Thermaltake Tsunami VA3000BWA / LG L227WT / Teufel Concept E Magnum 5.1 // SysProfile


    2. Asus A8N-SLI / AMD Athlon 64 4000+ @~2640 MHz (12x220) / 1024 MB Corsair CMX TwinX 3200C2, 2.5-3-3-6 1T / Club3D GeForce 7800GT @463/1120 MHz / Crucial M4 64GB, Hitachi Deskstar 40GB / be quiet! Blackline P5 470W

  11. #136
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    rutgers
    Posts
    465
    Quote Originally Posted by grimREEFER View Post
    i dont see the point of the 4870. most ppl will just pay a bit extra for the gtx 260, or save money and get the 4850 which is essentially just an underclocked 4870.
    4850 is likely bottlenecked by bandwidth in quite a few scenarios

  12. #137
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by kemist View Post
    4850 is likely bottlenecked by bandwidth in quite a few scenarios
    And also limited by it's default clocks...
    Are we there yet?

  13. #138
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    1,940
    Quote Originally Posted by grimREEFER View Post
    i dont see the point of the 4870. most ppl will just pay a bit extra for the gtx 260, or save money and get the 4850 which is essentially just an underclocked 4870.
    4870 has 2 times the memory bandwith and 125 mhz higher core + GDDR5, i don'T see how the 4850 is just an underclocked 4870, no way you can clock the 50s as high as the 70s
    Core i7 2600k|HD 6950|8GB RipJawsX|2x 128gb Samsung SSD 830 Raid0|Asus Sabertooth P67
    Seasonic X-560|Corsair 650D|2x WD Red 3TB Raid1|WD Green 3TB|Asus Xonar Essence STX


    Core i3 2100|HD 7770|8GB RipJawsX|128gb Samsung SSD 830|Asrock Z77 Pro4-M
    Bequiet! E9 400W|Fractal Design Arc Mini|3x Hitachi 7k1000.C|Asus Xonar DX


    Dell Latitude E6410|Core i7 620m|8gb DDR3|WXGA+ Screen|Nvidia Quadro NVS3100
    256gb Samsung PB22-J|Intel Wireless 6300|Sierra Aircard MC8781|WD Scorpio Blue 1TB


    Harman Kardon HK1200|Vienna Acoustics Brandnew|AKG K240 Monitor 600ohm|Sony CDP 228ESD

  14. #139
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,788
    Quote Originally Posted by generics_user View Post
    4870 has 2 times the memory bandwith and 125 mhz higher core + GDDR5, i don'T see how the 4850 is just an underclocked 4870, no way you can clock the 50s as high as the 70s
    Unless the 4850 is simply a 4870 with lower BIN GDDR3 memory, and a lowered clock speed, with a smaller cooler.
    Asus Rampage II Gene | Core i7 920 | 6*2GB Mushkin 998729 | BFG GTX280 OCX | Auzentech X-Fi Forte | Corsair VX550
    —Life is too short to be bound by the moral, ethical and legal constraints imposed on us by modern day society.

  15. #140
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Extelleron View Post
    If GTX 260 has to go down to $350 or less in price to compete with the 4870, nVidia will be making a lot less money than AMD will be, even if they are pricing it at $249 or $279.
    Yeah, at the end of the day though in an all-out price war considering the financial situations of both sides i think the mean green nv team have that one wrapped up.

    Personally i just want my card, at lowest price possible, i'll worry about the company's bank balance later

  16. #141
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    EU, Baltics
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Extelleron View Post
    nVidia simply isn't going to win with a card selling for $400 or less that is based on the largest GPU in history, has a huge/complex PCB, 896MB of memory, and a huge cooler.
    Hmm, but how many gamers and other pc users buy stuff which one's with bigger numbers and size... Size is what matters in so many people eyes... Or price, if it's bigger then card is better...

  17. #142
    Live Long And Overclock
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    14,058
    I wouldn't start comparing the 4850s to the 4870s just yet. Wait for actual launch and actual numbers. As Luke pointed out, the GDDR5 memory difference makes it far too difficult to make guesstimations

    Perkam

  18. #143
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Netherlands, Friesland
    Posts
    2,244
    I believe this one is not posted yet.
    http://www.madpixelz.net/nv/
    >i5-3570K
    >Asrock Z77E-ITX Wifi
    >Asus GTX 670 Mini
    >Cooltek Coolcube Black
    >CM Silent Pro M700
    >Crucial M4 128Gb Msata
    >Cooler Master Seidon 120M
    Hell yes its a mini-ITX gaming rig!

  19. #144
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,485
    Quote Originally Posted by ownage View Post
    I believe this one is not posted yet.
    http://www.madpixelz.net/nv/
    it was allready :p

  20. #145
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    3,012
    Quote Originally Posted by ownage View Post
    I believe this one is not posted yet.
    http://www.madpixelz.net/nv/
    oh boy that made my day!! for $400 a 4850 crossfire might be fun to try out finally put all this microstuddering to the test form myself.
    CPU: Intel Core i7 3930K @ 4.5GHz
    Mobo: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
    RAM: 32GB (8x4GB) Patriot Viper EX @ 1866mhz
    GPU: EVGA GTX Titan (1087Boost/6700Mem)
    Physx: Evga GTX 560 2GB
    Sound: Creative XFI Titanium
    Case: Modded 700D
    PSU: Corsair 1200AX (Fully Sleeved)
    Storage: 2x120GB OCZ Vertex 3's in RAID 0 + WD 600GB V-Raptor + Seagate 1TB
    Cooling: XSPC Raystorm, 2x MCP 655's, FrozenQ Warp Drive, EX360+MCR240+EX120 Rad's

  21. #146
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Netherlands, Friesland
    Posts
    2,244
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet331 View Post
    it was allready :p
    Hmm, stupid search option is worthless
    >i5-3570K
    >Asrock Z77E-ITX Wifi
    >Asus GTX 670 Mini
    >Cooltek Coolcube Black
    >CM Silent Pro M700
    >Crucial M4 128Gb Msata
    >Cooler Master Seidon 120M
    Hell yes its a mini-ITX gaming rig!

  22. #147
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    British Columbia, Canada
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by ownage View Post
    I believe this one is not posted yet.
    http://www.madpixelz.net/nv/
    lmao
    Antec 900
    Corsair TX750
    Gigabyte EP45 UD3P
    Q9550 E0 500x8 4.0 GHZ 1.360v
    ECO A.L.C Cooler with Gentle Typhoon PushPull
    Kingston HyperX T1 5-5-5-18 1:1
    XFX Radeon 6950 @ 880/1300 (Shader unlocked)
    WD Caviar Black 2 x 640GB - Short Stroked 120GB RAID0 128KB Stripe - 540GB RAID1

  23. #148
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    1000 Elysian Park Ave
    Posts
    2,669
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    I prefer gaming numbers over vantage or 3dmark. The 2 just gets boring too fast compared to a game
    + Folding PPD, who cares about that slideshow
    i3-8100 | GTX 970
    Ryzen 5 1600 | RX 580
    Assume nothing; Question everything

  24. #149
    Xtreme Guru adamsleath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,803
    there will be so many card options on the market...3000 series probly drop in price a bit plus g92b, plus new 4xxx and gtx's...
    i7 3610QM 1.2-3.2GHz

  25. #150
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,984

    Ryzen 9 3900X w/ NH-U14s on MSI X570 Unify
    32 GB Patriot Viper Steel 3733 CL14 (1.51v)
    RX 5700 XT w/ 2x 120mm fan mod (2 GHz)
    Tons of NVMe & SATA SSDs
    LG 27GL850 + Asus MG279Q
    Meshify C white

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •