Originally posted by: thilan29
HOLY MOTHER OF..........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IF that is for real (and is not just an ingame cinematic)...WOW. :Q
I hope GoW on my 8800 will look like that.
That's not GoW; that's Battlefield: Bad Company.
R600 doesn't consume 300W !!! these report are lies and AMD came out and said R600 they are demonstrating at GDC consume 200W each. Also ATI didn't want to delay the R600 GPU... it was AMD's Henri Richard insistence.
MmmSkyscraper
Diamond Member
- Jul 6, 2004
- 9,472
- 1
- 76
HardOCP lost all credibility when they said AMD X2 were as good as Core 2 Duos, but apart from that...
Having trouble? Heh... At this point I bet it will be a good 50% faster, but its so late it doesnt matter anyway
Having trouble? Heh... At this point I bet it will be a good 50% faster, but its so late it doesnt matter anyway
No they didn't. They announced an April release. That was their only firm announcement on a release date. Yes, they certainly did intend to launch in January at one time, but it was never actually announced.
Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Originally posted by: jim1976
Wait a minute..
If I can see correctly this is an I-will server board with dual Xeons if I'm not mistaken..
Who on earth would try an X-fire on a server board? Is this a fake one or an OEM version and they are BS us?
You may remember I linked to an AMD interview recently where Ruiz said AMD were focussed on strong server performance.
The thing is, AMD may be ***TOO FOCUSSED*** on server performance and not focussed enough on consumer performance.
I fear that so far as AMD is concerned, R600 is merely a data cruncher to accelerate servers and not a GPU...
Oh well, at least the fanatics will have a physical representation of their e-penis egos...
Nm...
Originally posted by: gersson
Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Originally posted by: jim1976
Wait a minute..
If I can see correctly this is an I-will server board with dual Xeons if I'm not mistaken..
Who on earth would try an X-fire on a server board? Is this a fake one or an OEM version and they are BS us?
You may remember I linked to an AMD interview recently where Ruiz said AMD were focussed on strong server performance.
The thing is, AMD may be ***TOO FOCUSSED*** on server performance and not focussed enough on consumer performance.
I fear that so far as AMD is concerned, R600 is merely a data cruncher to accelerate servers and not a GPU...
Oh well, at least the fanatics will have a physical representation of their e-penis egos...
OMG you are as annoying as your avatar...
Can you not be such an nvidia fanboy. It makes you look stoopid.
Agreed
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
At this point the R600 is the Duke Nukem Forever of video cards. It's takes 300w or 200W. It's a foot long or it's not. It's coming out in December 2006 or July 2007. It will beat the 8800 or it won't. Whatever, by the time they do get it out the door it will be outdated.
while 300w certainly could be incorrect, did you read how that statment was worded?
"In the configuration demoed in San Francisco, each R600 is said to have used 200W..."
i'm not sure that's any kind of a "difinitive" statement...
besides, 300w is better. @ 200w it would be hard for me to get the word "porn" in the subtitle
You do realize that this has nothing to do with the purchase of a high end psu don't you? Anyone that doesn't invest on a good psu and risks his high end rig is irrational to say the least.. Thtat's not the point.. The point is your electricity bill every month...
Not really. A video card is only drawing maximum power when engaged in some sort of 3D rendering. For web browsing, word processing and other 2D functions, the card is using significantly less electricity. In the case of the 8800GTX, that can mean an average of 100 watts less at idle than during gaming. So if you take the number of hours spent actually playing games per month and divide that by 10, you'll come up with the number of kilowatt hours used while in 3D mode.
The average residential cost in the US in 2006 per kilowatt-hour was 9.86¢. This means that if you spent the national average of 8 hours a week gaming, your total cost per month would be $3.15 minus whatever the cost you were paying with your previous, less power hungry card. All in all, it would amount to a very small price to pay considering the increased level of graphics you would be enjoying.
Creig of course this applies to a small change in bill.. Nobody is trying to accuse ATI here for being the only company that charges our bill. But for some even this change is significant.. We do have O/C systems and certainly many of our house devices consume much more electric power than our PCs.. The point is that ATI is generally not so "power friendly and efficient" as it is obvious from the last generations compared to nVIDIA in general with some exceptions.. And while this does not make much of a difference overall, they should be looking for better solutions..
Despite that many of the users don't just use their GPU for gaming, but for other applications as well that require 3D mode..
I think a rational user is not trying to bash ATI for it's power requirements, but if I am to choose between two similar products, performance/spec wise, then I'd definately go the nVIDIA way..
Oh, I don't disagree. Given two video cards that offer identical performance in all respects except power consumption, I'd take the one that uses less electricity as well. The nice thing is that less power consumption also means less heat generated.
And some people do use their cards for things other than gaming (3D rendering, F@H, etc) which can mean hours, days or even months of having the GPU run flat out at 100% useage. In these instances, the electricity consumption will be much higher.
I just wanted to point out that, for the average user, the monthly electric bill shouldn't really be a factor in choosing a video card.
And some people do use their cards for things other than gaming (3D rendering, F@H, etc) which can mean hours, days or even months of having the GPU run flat out at 100% useage. In these instances, the electricity consumption will be much higher.
I just wanted to point out that, for the average user, the monthly electric bill shouldn't really be a factor in choosing a video card.
Originally posted by: 40sTheme
Originally posted by: thilan29
HOLY MOTHER OF..........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IF that is for real (and is not just an ingame cinematic)...WOW. :Q
I hope GoW on my 8800 will look like that.
That's not GoW; that's Battlefield: Bad Company.
Is that a brand new game or a sequel to something else?? Still...it looks amazing if that's in-game screens.
schneiderguy
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2006
- 10,801
- 91
- 91
Originally posted by: thilan29
Originally posted by: 40sTheme
Originally posted by: thilan29
HOLY MOTHER OF..........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IF that is for real (and is not just an ingame cinematic)...WOW. :Q
I hope GoW on my 8800 will look like that.
That's not GoW; that's Battlefield: Bad Company.
Is that a brand new game or a sequel to something else?? Still...it looks amazing if that's in-game screens.
It's the sequel to the console versions of BF2, AFAIK it's not coming to the PC
I disagree. I'm sure there will be quite a few disgruntled parents who won't buy AMD products again after searching their house for the radiant heater that seemed to have been left on 24/7 only to discover it was little Johnny's AMD based computer chewing through the power like there was no tomorrow.
Praxis1452
Platinum Member
- Jan 31, 2006
- 2,197
- 0
- 0
umm ok so you triple creigs calculations. 8x3=24 hours at 100w. hmm... $10.
R600=$650... 10/650=1/65.
oh shut up. Your sure of ****** is what. quite a few disgruntled parents? If parents are spending $650 on a vid card. $10 will not be much. In fact 300W isn't a radiant heater. when I use my oil heater 600W is barely warm. I have to go to 900W to actually warm my room.
900W 24/7 is $21 bucks a week at 9.86 cents a kw hour.
btw I'll bet r600 is going to use closer to 200W. they respun for a reason. If so 20W more than your precious 8800GTX though the gap will widen with 8900gtx though it still might increase because of clockspeed.
gstanfor you never change. gI used to want to reply to every post you make since it's almost always full of crap. sadly I've realized that your mostly worthless.
You know, not all countries in the world enjoy the same cheap energy prices the USA does. AMD has traditionally been very big in those countries because they offer value for money. People accustomed to thinking they can just buy AMD and be assured of a cheap purchase price, long platform life and low running costs vs the competition are in for a rude awakening, and AMD will see their marketshare evaporate at as a result (its already happening on the CPU side thanks to AMD's incessant socket changing fetish).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter