- Oct 24, 2005
- 3,395
- 277
- 136
2900XT faster then the GTX now....
- Thread starter Zstream
- Start date
n7
Elite Member
- Jan 4, 2004
- 21,281
- 4
- 81
Err, no.
That's just one game bench...
My thread here links to X-bit's recent more comprehensive review: http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2062872&enterthread=y
That's just one game bench...
My thread here links to X-bit's recent more comprehensive review: http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2062872&enterthread=y
It's faster than the GTX at certain settings in a few games. The number of games that this happens in will likely increase with the next driver (due out in a week or so) but regardless, the XT is not going to be a widespread GTX killer.
Personally I think that when it comes down to shader-heavy, DX10 games like Crysis, the HD 2900XT will beat the GTX slightly. By the time these games are released, the drivers will be ironed out and those seem to be the kind of games the 2900XT will shine at. The weakness of the XT is texture power, and these games seem to stress the shaders more than the texture hardware.
Personally I think that when it comes down to shader-heavy, DX10 games like Crysis, the HD 2900XT will beat the GTX slightly. By the time these games are released, the drivers will be ironed out and those seem to be the kind of games the 2900XT will shine at. The weakness of the XT is texture power, and these games seem to stress the shaders more than the texture hardware.
lol, a man posts a review that confirms that ati is faster in dx10 benchmark, and you jump all over him...are you seeing different numbers on your IEs or FFs?
It's ONE benchmark where the XT is EQUAL to the GTX (1920x1200 and 1920x1200 4xAA are what matters. You can give a slight nod to the XT though for having a higher minimum framerate - which is what REALLY matters.)
If he had issued a statement such as "HD 2900XT is as fast as GTX in DX10 benchmark", then no one would have come down so hard on him. Instead, he made a blanket statement that made it seem like the HD 2900XT was faster than the GTX at everything.
Personally I believe the true battle will begin with newer drivers and real DX10 games. I don't think we can decide the DX10 battle yet based on one game with drivers that are clearly not optimized for DX10, on EITHER side.
Yes last I heard Nvidia was crying that it was too dx10 and did not allow for hardware aa. Lets hope this means interesting times ahead and maybe a real dx10 game.
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
Whoa whoa whoa..... "Yes last I heard..."???? That is all you have to say? Nothing about the thread title??? No troll accusations from you? Why not now? (Yes, I do realize that I am asking questions I already know the answer to.) But best to hear your story. I don't mean to pick on ya ronnn, but c'mon. Show a little neutrality once in a while to save face. hehe.
I am neutral, dx10 is a no show. We have one benchmark program and one game that runs better in dx9. Both are part of the nvidia promotional program. It did strike me as funny that nvidia would complain about their own partner.
Certainly neither the most accurate nor the most even-handed thread title.
This is all-to-expected behavior, however, when carefully selecting benchmarks and making broad, sweeping generalizations are the norm for the board.
Everyone's justification seems to be that the 'other' side does it, so they might as well too. Pretty poor reasoning and utterly counterproductive when it comes to building a community.
***
At any rate, to make my own broad, sweeping generalizations. There are so few current benchmarks that I've seen where the 2900xt outperforms the 8800gtx that I can't see suggesting that it is overall 'faster'. As with most GPUs in the same category, there is a little bit of back-and-forth, which seems to depend on how well the underlying architecture matches the game and how well the drivers have been optimized. However, I've seen precious few benchmarks where the 2900 trades blows with the gtx.
Moreover, given that there seems to be a general outcry with regard to the state of nVidia's Vista drivers for the 8-series, why wouldn't it be possible to see the 8800gtx pull ahead again once its drivers get 'better'. Of course, everyone can always cry "immature drivers" at the top of their lungs whenever they want. Heck, they may even be right sometimes.
Having said that DX10 was, is, and always has been the ultimate wild card. It may be a while before we really know where these cards will place when actually running DX10 titles. Vista is different, DX10 is different, the architectures are different. There is a lot to sort out on both sides.
I actually think that this is a strange and exciting time. The two major manufacturers have put out parts with vastly different architectures, much more so than in any recent time I can remember. On top of that, one of the major API's has gotten a huge overhaul.
May you live in interesting times, indeed!
This is all-to-expected behavior, however, when carefully selecting benchmarks and making broad, sweeping generalizations are the norm for the board.
Everyone's justification seems to be that the 'other' side does it, so they might as well too. Pretty poor reasoning and utterly counterproductive when it comes to building a community.
***
At any rate, to make my own broad, sweeping generalizations. There are so few current benchmarks that I've seen where the 2900xt outperforms the 8800gtx that I can't see suggesting that it is overall 'faster'. As with most GPUs in the same category, there is a little bit of back-and-forth, which seems to depend on how well the underlying architecture matches the game and how well the drivers have been optimized. However, I've seen precious few benchmarks where the 2900 trades blows with the gtx.
Moreover, given that there seems to be a general outcry with regard to the state of nVidia's Vista drivers for the 8-series, why wouldn't it be possible to see the 8800gtx pull ahead again once its drivers get 'better'. Of course, everyone can always cry "immature drivers" at the top of their lungs whenever they want. Heck, they may even be right sometimes.
Having said that DX10 was, is, and always has been the ultimate wild card. It may be a while before we really know where these cards will place when actually running DX10 titles. Vista is different, DX10 is different, the architectures are different. There is a lot to sort out on both sides.
I actually think that this is a strange and exciting time. The two major manufacturers have put out parts with vastly different architectures, much more so than in any recent time I can remember. On top of that, one of the major API's has gotten a huge overhaul.
May you live in interesting times, indeed!
ronnn -- you've nailed the precise problem with message boards: lack of proper context.
Tone is much harder to convey with written words than with spoken ones. Personally, I honestly thought that there was better than an 80% chance that the post was meant to be ironical. The trouble is, you don't truly know until the OP tells you.
Tone is much harder to convey with written words than with spoken ones. Personally, I honestly thought that there was better than an 80% chance that the post was meant to be ironical. The trouble is, you don't truly know until the OP tells you.
apoppin
Lifer
we look at the author and it .. well, fits
ti is controversial ... intentionally so ... and i think we have all done this ... if we want attention ... personally, i think the 'subject' or first post should have have a 'disclaimer' - " ... in one new DX10 benchmark"
anyway, we get to look at another benchmark while we prepare for our own tests ... maybe we could hook up a 3-way conference-call with our Noise princess so he could hear our Cards with the phone right next to the case
and how do WE get ahold of DX10 benchmarks? ... oh ... you need Vista
No one is pointing out the choice in motherboard that is an intel chipset that has built in X-Fire and probably better suited for the ati card? I doubt it matters, but it might *shrug*. At any rate this is one of the few that puts it above the gtx there's other dx10 benchs out there that shows it even with the GTS and behind the GTX so whatever. I'm getting bored of these back and forth results every site is having.
its more complex than that ... we're working on a story about the dx10 stuff out there. stay tuned.
anyway, what's the point in getting the radeon card if it does't even work as intended by it's creators, 'n you have to wait for software updates... that's pathetic.
geforce 8K all the way!
Well everything DX10 right now seems like they just put a DX10 layer over DX9 game, things like that never work the way they're meant to. If it was natively programed for DX10 I'm sure every dx10 card would run better than if it's just an overlay. It's almost like they're trying to emulate dx10 with an engine built for dx9. Takes a lot more for a system to emulate something than to run it natively.
What are you talking about? "work as intended by it's creators"?
oh and btw what kind of x1900xt is that in your sig? core600 mem1100?
the NORMAL 2d clocks are core500 memory1188 (2 x 594 = 1188)
NORMAL 3d clocks are core625 memory 1440 (2 x 720 = 1440)
how do u get core 600 mem 1100? is that an OC?
ocing the 2d clock may not improve 2d performance.
Lets have more dx10 - so I can buy a dx10 and vista. New hardware has got so boring - I found myself looking at lcd tv's. Now that does have shades of irony.
Lets have more dx10 - so I can buy a dx10 and vista. New hardware has got so boring - I found myself looking at lcd tv's. Now that does have shades of irony.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter