• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

First HD2900XT benchmarks are out

Man the XT pummels the GTS pretty bad in some of those tests. If it sells for the same price as GTS, nVidia is going to have to do some drastic price cuts to stay competitive.
 
I love it, but two things bug me.

1.) Anyone notice how the cooler is almost identical to the 8800 cooler?
A good thing, I like the 8800 cooler very much.

2.) What happened to this HDMI connector with HDMI audio?
A bad thing, I was really looking forward to this.
 
DT was implying that the street price for the XT will be $499, which is the MSRP for the 8800GTS. If so, that is pretty disappointing as I don't think I've EVER seen the GTS go for anywhere near that much.
 
wow, that made me horny. Thanks. 🙂

Even though AMD's stock might take a temporary hit from the news they're selling bonds, I know now they're not going to hell. This is good. 😉
 
Can we see how it compares to the GTX? Thats what really interests me.
I already know the 3DMarks will be close because I've seen some for a similarly-equipped system with a GTX...
 
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Can we see how it compares to the GTX? Thats what really interests me.
I already know the 3DMarks will be close because I've seen some for a similarly-equipped system with a GTX...
Click to expand...

For that we have to wait for the XTX, not the XT
 
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Cool, but I'd like to know a little bit more specifically than "maximum detail settings"
Click to expand...

Don't you think 1280x1024 is a little odd for testing such high-end cards?
Click to expand...

Not if they were running insane AA numbers. Look at those results, there's no way those cards should be getting results that low with such a resolution.
 
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Cool, but I'd like to know a little bit more specifically than "maximum detail settings"
Click to expand...

Don't you think 1280x1024 is a little odd for testing such high-end cards?
Click to expand...

The 512-bit bus card will plummel the 320-bit card even further at higher resolutions.
 
Originally posted by: aka1nas
Hehe, were you guys all staying up late for R600 news too? 😱
Click to expand...

No, I replaced a motherboard and placed it in another case. I can tell you the Silverstone LC20 is a real nice desktop case. The two Coolermaster 80mm LED fans in the back are really pumping the air out. I have a Zalman 7000 with a little bit of Arctic Silver Ceramique on a Clawhammer 754 3700+ and it's only around 35'C. My motherboard and Samsung HD are also cool. Man, I'm relieved.

 
1.) Anyone notice how the cooler is almost identical to the 8800 cooler?
A good thing, I like the 8800 cooler very much.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Not if they were running insane AA numbers.
Click to expand...
I wonder what AA level they were using? It's likely more than 4x but it has to be a setting that nVidia supports so I'm guessing it might be 8xMSAA.
 
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Cool, but I'd like to know a little bit more specifically than "maximum detail settings"
Click to expand...

Don't you think 1280x1024 is a little odd for testing such high-end cards?
Click to expand...

exactly what i thought. my 8800gts 320 plays every games maxed at 12x10 and its playable .i really don't see why they bothered to bench it at 12x10.

oh yeah lok in the comment they say they had no display capable of more than 12x10 available in the facility.
 
Originally posted by: tanishalfelven
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Cool, but I'd like to know a little bit more specifically than "maximum detail settings"
Click to expand...

Don't you think 1280x1024 is a little odd for testing such high-end cards?
Click to expand...

exactly what i thought. my 8800gts 320 plays every games maxed at 12x10 and its playable .i really don't see why they bothered to bench it at 12x10.

oh yeah lok in the comment they say they had no display capable of more than 12x10 available in the facility.
Click to expand...

Let's face it, AT video reviews are more or less a joke these days.
 
The workstation benches look very fishy to me.

Looks like the XT will perform on par with the GTX, trading blows almost all across the board methinks. Its sad how they compared a 8800GTS which although has an MSRP of $499, its street price is MUCH lower than that. Around ~$399 area give or take ~$50 dollars. The funny this is that the 640mb looks like its being phased out for something else. (8800GT?)

But all in all, the R600 looks promising, although total annihilation wouldve been even better.
 
Not a review really, but nice to see some info. Id like to know more about IQ, NV really stepped it up with their 8800 cards, and Id like to see them compared to each other. And numbers ran with IQ all the way up on both cards. Its not all about fps.

Originally posted by: aka1nas
DT was implying that the street price for the XT will be $499, which is the MSRP for the 8800GTS. If so, that is pretty disappointing as I don't think I've EVER seen the GTS go for anywhere near that much.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I dont like how they worded that. While in B&M stores, they're $500, you can get them much cheaper online.
 
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Originally posted by: tanishalfelven
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Cool, but I'd like to know a little bit more specifically than "maximum detail settings"
Click to expand...

Don't you think 1280x1024 is a little odd for testing such high-end cards?
Click to expand...

exactly what i thought. my 8800gts 320 plays every games maxed at 12x10 and its playable .i really don't see why they bothered to bench it at 12x10.

oh yeah lok in the comment they say they had no display capable of more than 12x10 available in the facility.
Click to expand...

Let's face it, AT video reviews are more or less a joke these days.
Click to expand...

Except that these benchmarks are from DT and not AT...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top