ATI RADEON HD 2900 XT STOMPS 8800 GTX

[evolucion8]

The HD 2900XT isn"t far behind of the 8800GTX, but bear in mind that the HD 2900XT is to compete witrh the 8800GTS which do very nicely, at least on 60% of games.

 

[GEOrifle]

Originally posted by: Regs
Xbox 360 = 400.00 dollars
X2900 = 400.00 dollars.


Hmmm....

You are right, at $400 you can buy XBox360 and play all games as on PC with XBox
compactible adapter for PC Keyboard+Mouse. I have same thing on PS2, just as PC.
I guess PCmania losing interest.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: Wreckage
"legitreviews" LOL. Illegit

Rainbow Six with no AA. Clearly this thread is meant as a joke or something.

I can find reviews that show the GTS320 a $260 card beating the 2900, maybe there should be a thread about that?

You can't run RB6:V with AA, genius. It doesn't work on any card.

sounds like some awesome code work 😱

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: apoppin
anand's review said the same thing:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2988&p=31

the bottom line is that R600 is not perfect nor is it a failure. The HD 2900 XT competes well with the 640MB 8800 GTS, though the 8800 GTS 320MB does have a price/performance advantage over both in all but the highest resolutions and AA settings under most current games. There are features we like about the hardware and we would love to see exploited. There is potential there, especially for Xbox 360 ports, to really shine...

get ready ... set ... go ... there will be a LOT of Xbox360 ports to PC coming ... some will be crap ... some will be games you want to play on PC 😉

Or on my Xbox360 about 6months to a year previous to the PC release hehe.

Seriously there's no reason for a game properly coded to perform poorly on Nvidia hardware vs ATI unless the developer makes it perform poorly.

 

[allies]

First of all, Vegas isn't UE3. Second of all, most of the games that are "big games" for the PC this year aren't ports from 360. World in Conflict, Hellgate: London, Crysis, Bioshock (developer has stated they have 2 different teams working on each version), etc. But, by the time these games come out, we'll have 8900GTX vs HD2950XT(X). Hopefully with a die shrink and maybe some tweaks we'll have a stronger competitor, while being less power hungry. Nvidia has the opportunity to put some serious hurt on AMD though... and I think they will (didn't have to come out with a refresh of the 8800GTX right away since no real competition for 7 months). This added time will make for a serious refresh in my opinion. Only time will tell. I wish AMD/ATI the best though, as I hope to make a new build around Christmas for all the nice games that are coming out this fall.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: allies
First of all, Vegas isn't UE3. Second of all, most of the games that are "big games" for the PC this year aren't ports from 360. World in Conflict, Hellgate: London, Crysis, Bioshock (developer has stated they have 2 different teams working on each version), etc. But, by the time these games come out, we'll have 8900GTX vs HD2950XT(X). Hopefully with a die shrink and maybe some tweaks we'll have a stronger competitor, while being less power hungry. Nvidia has the opportunity to put some serious hurt on AMD though... and I think they will (didn't have to come out with a refresh of the 8800GTX right away since no real competition for 7 months). This added time will make for a serious refresh in my opinion. Only time will tell. I wish AMD/ATI the best though, as I hope to make a new build around Christmas for all the nice games that are coming out this fall.

Unless those said games are delayed yet another time. I'm holding off as well, until there is a true DX10 game available that takes advantage of a DX10 card I don't see reason to have one.

 

[Keysplayr]

Six months or more of pent up ATI fans gone all postal. I guess we were bound to see a few threads like this. Just didn't expect it from nemisis. They need to grab onto any sliver or shread they can lay their mouse pointers on. I can't blame them, I'd be irritable too having to wait so long for something like this to happen.

Take it easy nem, you'll blow something.. 😉

In all fairness though, the 2900XT was meant to compete with GTS. The 65nm version XTX should compete with a GTX. I know, I know. Too late and it has become moot.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: allies
First of all, Vegas isn't UE3. Second of all, most of the games that are "big games" for the PC this year aren't ports from 360. World in Conflict, Hellgate: London, Crysis, Bioshock (developer has stated they have 2 different teams working on each version), etc. But, by the time these games come out, we'll have 8900GTX vs HD2950XT(X). Hopefully with a die shrink and maybe some tweaks we'll have a stronger competitor, while being less power hungry. Nvidia has the opportunity to put some serious hurt on AMD though... and I think they will (didn't have to come out with a refresh of the 8800GTX right away since no real competition for 7 months). This added time will make for a serious refresh in my opinion. Only time will tell. I wish AMD/ATI the best though, as I hope to make a new build around Christmas for all the nice games that are coming out this fall.

Unless those said games are delayed yet another time. I'm holding off as well, until there is a true DX10 game available that takes advantage of a DX10 card I don't see reason to have one.

Is rocking in DX9 games a good enough reason? In case you didn't know, these cards (G80's & R600's) do play DX9 games also. Much better than previous DX9 hardware. Both in IQ and performance. /end sarcasm 😀

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: apoppin
anand's review said the same thing:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2988&p=31

the bottom line is that R600 is not perfect nor is it a failure. The HD 2900 XT competes well with the 640MB 8800 GTS, though the 8800 GTS 320MB does have a price/performance advantage over both in all but the highest resolutions and AA settings under most current games. There are features we like about the hardware and we would love to see exploited. There is potential there, especially for Xbox 360 ports, to really shine...

get ready ... set ... go ... there will be a LOT of Xbox360 ports to PC coming ... some will be crap ... some will be games you want to play on PC 😉

Or on my Xbox360 about 6months to a year previous to the PC release hehe.

Seriously there's no reason for a game properly coded to perform poorly on Nvidia hardware vs ATI unless the developer makes it perform poorly.

take it up with derek ... that's what HE said 😛

some people actually like RS:Vegas on PC
:Q

i know 😛

but there will "likely" be some xbox ports to PC that will be good
===================

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Six months or more of pent up ATI fans gone all postal. I guess we were bound to see a few threads like this. Just didn't expect it from nemisis. They need to grab onto any sliver or shread they can lay their mouse pointers on. I can't blame them, I'd be irritable too having to wait so long for something like this to happen.

Take it easy nem, you'll blow something.. 😉

In all fairness though, the 2900XT was meant to compete with GTS. The 65nm version XTX should compete with a GTX. I know, I know. Too late and it has become moot.

if i was buying a card today . ... i mean right now ... on a budget ... i'd get the 320MB GTS for less money

if i wanted the best [not 'ultra' best], i get an OC'able GTX

OR ... possibly 2-HD2900xts for X-fire

the HD2900XT is my "dark horse" *pick* ...

i am *betting* that i drops to below GTS pricing .... and with a better 'feature' set and game bundle ... and that drivers continue to improve as least as well as the GTS did over the last 6 months

i am further betting that the DX10 performance will be much better than the GTS ...


that's "why" it is called a "dark horse" ...
i *know* it is a *dark horse* choice

😉

i might be buying a $350 VIDEO card ... not making a proposal to get married 😛

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: apoppin
anand's review said the same thing:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2988&p=31

the bottom line is that R600 is not perfect nor is it a failure. The HD 2900 XT competes well with the 640MB 8800 GTS, though the 8800 GTS 320MB does have a price/performance advantage over both in all but the highest resolutions and AA settings under most current games. There are features we like about the hardware and we would love to see exploited. There is potential there, especially for Xbox 360 ports, to really shine...

get ready ... set ... go ... there will be a LOT of Xbox360 ports to PC coming ... some will be crap ... some will be games you want to play on PC 😉

Or on my Xbox360 about 6months to a year previous to the PC release hehe.

Seriously there's no reason for a game properly coded to perform poorly on Nvidia hardware vs ATI unless the developer makes it perform poorly.

take it up with derek ... that's what HE said 😛

some people actually like RS:Vegas on PC
:Q

i know 😛

but there will "likely" be some xbox ports to PC that will be good
===================

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Six months or more of pent up ATI fans gone all postal. I guess we were bound to see a few threads like this. Just didn't expect it from nemisis. They need to grab onto any sliver or shread they can lay their mouse pointers on. I can't blame them, I'd be irritable too having to wait so long for something like this to happen.

Take it easy nem, you'll blow something.. 😉

In all fairness though, the 2900XT was meant to compete with GTS. The 65nm version XTX should compete with a GTX. I know, I know. Too late and it has become moot.

if i was buying a card today . ... i mean right now ... on a budget ... i'd get the 320MB GTS for less money

if i wanted the best [not 'ultra' best], i get an OC'able GTX

OR ... possibly 2-HD2900xts for X-fire

the HD2900XT is my "dark horse" *pick* ...

i am *betting* that i drops to below GTS pricing .... and with a better 'feature' set and game bundle ... and that drivers continue to improve as least as well as the GTS did over the last 6 months

i am further betting that the DX10 performance will be much better than the GTS ...


that's "why" it is called a "dark horse" ...
i *know* it is a *dark horse* choice

😉

i might be buying a $350 VIDEO card ... not making a proposal to get married 😛

If the 320MB fits your bill, (games you play, resolutions, screen size to allow for 320MB, etc. etc.) then by all means. It seems to be a "killer" deal! I went 640 due to my 1680x1050 LCD res. I felt less than comfortable with 320 for "my" needs. You're at 1400x900? Correct me if I'm wrong? But if so, 320 would be a very nice fit for you.

As far as O/C'able GTX's, well, you know YMMV even from cards with GPU's from the same bin. But o/c'ing a GTX hardly seems necessary.

2 HD2900XT's in CF? urmm... You're asking for a very hot, hungry system. If I were you, I'd wait it out until 65nm comes to town for the R600/6xx before even thinking CF. But that's me.

No need to bet it will fall below GTS pricing. It will fall exactly where it's price belongs. The price has to justify lower performance, hotter temps, high noise levels, and a good deal more power consumption. So yes, I know we will see $300 HD2900XT's VERY soon.

You call it "dark-horse" but I'm thinking of calling it something else at this point. Let your imagination run wild with that one. 😀

 

[apoppin]

yes keys .. it is you


and i like that

🙂



but i am not buying a video card today ... i am waiting to see if the xt drops the gts 320 price ... if then ... i may pounce on XT instead of gts

why?

... not because i am i backing a loser ... but i believe ... in a couple of months XT will decisively beat the 640MB GTS

 

[Rage187]

a brand new card beats a 6-8 month old card in a few console ports?

stop the press!

 

[terentenet]

Originally posted by: MadBoris
Do you think before you post OP?

If ATI's top end card at release(7 months late) wasn't better in atleast one game, then this card would really suck monkey balls. As it is, it just gently teases them. 😉
Hurray for ATI, their is a few games to buy the card for where performance is great.

But you can also get HUGE 3d mark 06 scores!!

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Rage187
a brand new card beats a 6-8 month old card in a few console ports?

stop the press!

and it continues to do so with an ever-widening performance delta over the GTS

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: apoppin
yes keys .. it is you


and i like that

Me too bud. Me to.

🙂



but i am not buying a video card today ... i am waiting to see if the xt drops the gts 320 price ... if then ... i may pounce on XT instead of gts

why?

... not because i am i backing a loser ... but i believe ... in a couple of months XT will decisively beat the 640MB GTS

That could very well be. We just have to hope that it is truly drivers, and not architecture that limits the R600. It sure as hell has the memory bandwidth, no doubt. The thing to be seen is, can this core design truly be made to shine. I was reading about the difference in shader approaches used. Scalar, and Superscalar used by G80 and R600 respectively. If the shaders in R600 are truly as programmable as they are touted to be, then maybe workarounds can be accomplished, number of clocks per calculation can be reduced. Because I think that is what is killing this core. The number of clocks it takes to do the most commonly used calculations. Anyway, here is hoping that if you do actually get the R600, you won't have spent your money in veign hoping for miracles.

I believe G80 has much untapped mileage in it. I saw a smidgeon of a "DX10" demo or patched game. Was it Call of Juarez? Not entirely sure, but the G80 did rather well against R600, which I believe many are touting dominant DX10 performance for R600 as it was designed with DX10 in mind more so than DX9. I realize Call of Juarez probably only has some small slice of DX10 functionality in the patch and probably not even worth considering. Meh, DX10 will be here soon enough. I just really do not want to go to Vista until at least SP1. Please don't make me. ::::sniffle::::

😛

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Six months or more of pent up ATI fans gone all postal. I guess we were bound to see a few threads like this. Just didn't expect it from nemisis. They need to grab onto any sliver or shread they can lay their mouse pointers on. I can't blame them, I'd be irritable too having to wait so long for something like this to happen.

Take it easy nem, you'll blow something.. 😉

In all fairness though, the 2900XT was meant to compete with GTS. The 65nm version XTX should compete with a GTX. I know, I know. Too late and it has become moot.

Thank gawd you are here to pimp nvidia by accusing ati fans of going postal. Some things never change. :thumbsup:

Right now the 2900xt looks better in most ways than the 640mb gts, but is loud and uses more power. Driver improvements will likely make the 2900xt look even better, but that won't help power usage. So as most reviewers say, things are a mixed bag - but not as grim as the keys and the nv team would suggest. Still is nice to hear they have finally realized subtle iq differences do count.

lets get some dx10 gamining goodness to make these cards work.

 

[Nightmare225]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Rage187
a brand new card beats a 6-8 month old card in a few console ports?

stop the press!

and it continues to do so with an ever-widening performance delta over the GTS

Like Lost Planet, right? :laugh:

http://translate.google.com/translate?u...=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

Enjoy!

Basically, the XT gets pummeled by even the GTS...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: apoppin
yes keys .. it is you


and i like that

Me too bud. Me to.

🙂



but i am not buying a video card today ... i am waiting to see if the xt drops the gts 320 price ... if then ... i may pounce on XT instead of gts

why?

... not because i am i backing a loser ... but i believe ... in a couple of months XT will decisively beat the 640MB GTS

That could very well be. We just have to hope that it is truly drivers, and not architecture that limits the R600. It sure as hell has the memory bandwidth, no doubt. The thing to be seen is, can this core design truly be made to shine. I was reading about the difference in shader approaches used. Scalar, and Superscalar used by G80 and R600 respectively. If the shaders in R600 are truly as programmable as they are touted to be, then maybe workarounds can be accomplished, number of clocks per calculation can be reduced. Because I think that is what is killing this core. The number of clocks it takes to do the most commonly used calculations. Anyway, here is hoping that if you do actually get the R600, you won't have spent your money in veign hoping for miracles.

I believe G80 has much untapped mileage in it. I saw a smidgeon of a "DX10" demo or patched game. Was it Call of Juarez? Not entirely sure, but the G80 did rather well against R600, which I believe many are touting dominant DX10 performance for R600 as it was designed with DX10 in mind more so than DX9. I realize Call of Juarez probably only has some small slice of DX10 functionality in the patch and probably not even worth considering. Meh, DX10 will be here soon enough. I just really do not want to go to Vista until at least SP1. Please don't make me. ::::sniffle::::

😛

i believe - even without SP1 ... Vista is much improved ... there are drivers being written and rewritten constantly

and you do have plenty of 'oomph' in your rig to overcome any current Vista gaming shortcomings over XP

finally ... it is just our different PoV

IF *i* had purchased a brand new GTX ... i might not be too "impressed" with the HDXT, either

since i am thinking of upgrading ... and i DO have an upgrade path ... finally ... the XT - on Day 1 is looking attractive to me ...

i believe it's price will soon fall to below that of the 320MB GTS and yet it will outperform the 640MB GTS ... soon enough

so yeah ... i might be picking a 'dark horse' ... yo just decided to go with the "proven winner"

what i might be doing is more "exciting" ... i think

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Six months or more of pent up ATI fans gone all postal. I guess we were bound to see a few threads like this. Just didn't expect it from nemisis. They need to grab onto any sliver or shread they can lay their mouse pointers on. I can't blame them, I'd be irritable too having to wait so long for something like this to happen.

Take it easy nem, you'll blow something.. 😉

In all fairness though, the 2900XT was meant to compete with GTS. The 65nm version XTX should compete with a GTX. I know, I know. Too late and it has become moot.

Thank gawd you are here to pimp nvidia by accusing ati fans of going postal. Some things never change. :thumbsup:

Right now the 2900xt looks better in most ways than the 640mb gts, but is loud and uses more power. Driver improvements will likely make the 2900xt look even better, but that won't help power usage. So as most reviewers say, things are a mixed bag - but not as grim as the keys and the nv team would suggest. Still is nice to hear they have finally realized subtle iq differences do count.

lets get some dx10 gamining goodness to make these cards work.

Great to see that you're hear to keep me in line bud. But did you really truly "see" the review HardOCP did? That was a crowd pleaser review if I ever saw one. Not only displayed "Best playable settings" on a good amount of games, but also "Apples to Apples" let er rip benches. Please ronnn, "looks better in most ways"???? Go look at ten different reviews and post the conclusion from each review here. Then tell me how it looks better in most ways. WTF????? No need for me to pimp anything here dude. You got a knife in your back from AMD, and your pissed off about it. Don't take it out on me.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: apoppin
yes keys .. it is you


and i like that

Me too bud. Me to.

🙂



but i am not buying a video card today ... i am waiting to see if the xt drops the gts 320 price ... if then ... i may pounce on XT instead of gts

why?

... not because i am i backing a loser ... but i believe ... in a couple of months XT will decisively beat the 640MB GTS

That could very well be. We just have to hope that it is truly drivers, and not architecture that limits the R600. It sure as hell has the memory bandwidth, no doubt. The thing to be seen is, can this core design truly be made to shine. I was reading about the difference in shader approaches used. Scalar, and Superscalar used by G80 and R600 respectively. If the shaders in R600 are truly as programmable as they are touted to be, then maybe workarounds can be accomplished, number of clocks per calculation can be reduced. Because I think that is what is killing this core. The number of clocks it takes to do the most commonly used calculations. Anyway, here is hoping that if you do actually get the R600, you won't have spent your money in veign hoping for miracles.

I believe G80 has much untapped mileage in it. I saw a smidgeon of a "DX10" demo or patched game. Was it Call of Juarez? Not entirely sure, but the G80 did rather well against R600, which I believe many are touting dominant DX10 performance for R600 as it was designed with DX10 in mind more so than DX9. I realize Call of Juarez probably only has some small slice of DX10 functionality in the patch and probably not even worth considering. Meh, DX10 will be here soon enough. I just really do not want to go to Vista until at least SP1. Please don't make me. ::::sniffle::::

😛

i believe - even without SP1 ... Vista is much improved ... there are drivers being written and rewritten constantly

and you do have plenty of 'oomph' in your rig to overcome any current Vista gaming shortcomings over XP

finally ... it is just our different PoV

IF *i* had purchased a brand new GTX ... i might not be too "impressed" with the HDXT, either

since i am thinking of upgrading ... and i DO have an upgrade path ... finally ... the XT - on Day 1 is looking attractive to me ...

i believe it's price will soon fall to below that of the 320MB GTS and yet it will outperform the 640MB GTS ... soon enough

so yeah ... i might be picking a 'dark horse' ... yo just decided to go with the "proven winner"

what i might be doing is more "exciting" ... i think

Well, if your thinking about doing it for kicks, then I can totally understand the "challenge" that you would be presenting yourself. Your a gamblin man, a ramblin man. You like to do the off the wall thing and see if it pays off. I get it. Sounds like a blast.

No, really. 😉

😀

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: apoppin
yes keys .. it is you


and i like that

Me too bud. Me to.

🙂



but i am not buying a video card today ... i am waiting to see if the xt drops the gts 320 price ... if then ... i may pounce on XT instead of gts

why?

... not because i am i backing a loser ... but i believe ... in a couple of months XT will decisively beat the 640MB GTS

That could very well be. We just have to hope that it is truly drivers, and not architecture that limits the R600. It sure as hell has the memory bandwidth, no doubt. The thing to be seen is, can this core design truly be made to shine. I was reading about the difference in shader approaches used. Scalar, and Superscalar used by G80 and R600 respectively. If the shaders in R600 are truly as programmable as they are touted to be, then maybe workarounds can be accomplished, number of clocks per calculation can be reduced. Because I think that is what is killing this core. The number of clocks it takes to do the most commonly used calculations. Anyway, here is hoping that if you do actually get the R600, you won't have spent your money in veign hoping for miracles.

I believe G80 has much untapped mileage in it. I saw a smidgeon of a "DX10" demo or patched game. Was it Call of Juarez? Not entirely sure, but the G80 did rather well against R600, which I believe many are touting dominant DX10 performance for R600 as it was designed with DX10 in mind more so than DX9. I realize Call of Juarez probably only has some small slice of DX10 functionality in the patch and probably not even worth considering. Meh, DX10 will be here soon enough. I just really do not want to go to Vista until at least SP1. Please don't make me. ::::sniffle::::

😛

i believe - even without SP1 ... Vista is much improved ... there are drivers being written and rewritten constantly

and you do have plenty of 'oomph' in your rig to overcome any current Vista gaming shortcomings over XP

finally ... it is just our different PoV

IF *i* had purchased a brand new GTX ... i might not be too "impressed" with the HDXT, either

since i am thinking of upgrading ... and i DO have an upgrade path ... finally ... the XT - on Day 1 is looking attractive to me ...

i believe it's price will soon fall to below that of the 320MB GTS and yet it will outperform the 640MB GTS ... soon enough

so yeah ... i might be picking a 'dark horse' ... yo just decided to go with the "proven winner"

what i might be doing is more "exciting" ... i think

Well, if your thinking about doing it for kicks, then I can totally understand the "challenge" that you would be presenting yourself. Your a gamblin man, a ramblin man. You like to do the off the wall thing and see if it pays off. I get it. Sounds like a blast.

No, really. 😉

😀

no not for 'kicks'

i'd call it "backing a dark horse" as a potential overall winner in its class 😉

i believe - from what i have read . ...

.. and i *tossed out* the HardOCP review as utter biased fanboy ProNvidia barf-garbage ... along with a couple of Pro-AMD "glowing reviews" like THG that are ridiculous in the extreme as the conclusions don't match the benches -

including anands review .. that there is "true potential" in THIS GPU ... not "just" the refresh

we'll see

whether or not i get my hands on one 😛

 

[TanisHalfElven]

Originally posted by: GEOrifle

Originally posted by: Regs
Xbox 360 = 400.00 dollars
X2900 = 400.00 dollars.


Hmmm....

You are right, at $400 you can buy XBox360 and play all games as on PC with XBox
compactible adapter for PC Keyboard+Mouse. I have same thing on PS2, just as PC.
I guess PCmania losing interest.

or better yet. buy a 360 AND a upper-midrange card like the 8800gts 320 (what i did). enjoy best of both worlds

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: allies
First of all, Vegas isn't UE3. Second of all, most of the games that are "big games" for the PC this year aren't ports from 360. World in Conflict, Hellgate: London, Crysis, Bioshock (developer has stated they have 2 different teams working on each version), etc. But, by the time these games come out, we'll have 8900GTX vs HD2950XT(X). Hopefully with a die shrink and maybe some tweaks we'll have a stronger competitor, while being less power hungry. Nvidia has the opportunity to put some serious hurt on AMD though... and I think they will (didn't have to come out with a refresh of the 8800GTX right away since no real competition for 7 months). This added time will make for a serious refresh in my opinion. Only time will tell. I wish AMD/ATI the best though, as I hope to make a new build around Christmas for all the nice games that are coming out this fall.

Unless those said games are delayed yet another time. I'm holding off as well, until there is a true DX10 game available that takes advantage of a DX10 card I don't see reason to have one.

Is rocking in DX9 games a good enough reason? In case you didn't know, these cards (G80's & R600's) do play DX9 games also. Much better than previous DX9 hardware. Both in IQ and performance. /end sarcasm 😀

Well, I play at max AA/AF with my x1900 at 1280x1024 since that's my monitor's res. Feels fine to me. Faster may be nice, but why? The game won't play different. Yes I know you were being sarcastic, but by the time DX10 matters you won't even want a 8800 ror a 2900.

 

[Keysplayr]

I was just fooling around. If 1280x1024 is your cap, then you are very set. Fine card the 1900XT, a fine card.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Six months or more of pent up ATI fans gone all postal. I guess we were bound to see a few threads like this. Just didn't expect it from nemisis. They need to grab onto any sliver or shread they can lay their mouse pointers on. I can't blame them, I'd be irritable too having to wait so long for something like this to happen.

Take it easy nem, you'll blow something.. 😉

In all fairness though, the 2900XT was meant to compete with GTS. The 65nm version XTX should compete with a GTX. I know, I know. Too late and it has become moot.

I was just getting annoyed because of the lack of new games used in the 2900 XT reviews. I am sick of seeing Quake 4, Prey, Doom 3 used in reviews because it's boring and they are outdated! :disgust:

There is one hardware review site which usually feature a wide selection of games for benchmarking but they have not done a 2900 XT review just yet, come on Xbit Labs!