HD 2900pro launch

[SniperDaws]

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...wyLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


Tell me what am i looking at here, your cards avg fps is 2fps higher than the 320mb and if you look closly the settings on the 2900XT arent as high. If that is the case how much slower is this cut down version going to be ?


EDIT: point 3 you say the card is a big deal because nothing offers this kind of performance for less than $300 but you state you have no idea how much the 2900pro will be in the US yet, and surely the 8800GTS 320mb version is less than $300?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...wyLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


Tell me what am i looking at here, your cards avg fps is 2fps higher than the 320mb and if you look closly the settings on the 2900XT arent as high. If that is the case how much slower is this cut down version going to be ?


EDIT: point 3 you say the card is a big deal because nothing offers this kind of performance for less than $300 but you state you have no idea how much the 2900pro will be in the US yet, and surely the 8800GTS 320mb version is less than $300?

I never said I had no idea on pricing. Again putting words into my mouth. If you're gonna try to make a valid argument DO NOT PUT WORDS INTO MY MOUTH!

The 8800GTS 320MB is barely priced below $300 and then it depends what manufacturer and what model. The HD2900Pro is expected to be less than that. Big deal? YES!

If you don't want to buy it fine. Don't come here and slap people in the face like you are doing because they find it to be a good deal on what could be a very good card.

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

 

[Murasame]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...wyLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


Tell me what am i looking at here, your cards avg fps is 2fps higher than the 320mb and if you look closly the settings on the 2900XT arent as high. If that is the case how much slower is this cut down version going to be ?


EDIT: point 3 you say the card is a big deal because nothing offers this kind of performance for less than $300 but you state you have no idea how much the 2900pro will be in the US yet, and surely the 8800GTS 320mb version is less than $300?

June 13th? Those are some pretty old drivers.

 

[gtsing]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
Is it ok if i talk now GT? ok thx


Oblivion is poorly coded everyone knows this, you can get mods with higher res backgrounds and make it look 10x better without a performance hit.

You obviously think im a fanboy because i have a weak 7600GT but im not, i just dont think there should be a thread thats misleading people into thinking there getting a powerhouse of a graphics card that by the end of next year wont be able to cut it.

Assuming you were talking about buying the 8800GTS over the 2900PRO in the below quote. I just got pissed because no one has ever even seen benchmarks of the 2900PRO and you just bash it with no real reason. But yeah, talk if you wish.

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
ok the price in the UK is like this

cheapest Radeon HD 2900Pro 512mb GDDR3 is £170.36
Cheapest 8800GTS 320mb is £179.63

I know which one i would buy if i was going to be buying right now.

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: Murasame

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...wyLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


Tell me what am i looking at here, your cards avg fps is 2fps higher than the 320mb and if you look closly the settings on the 2900XT arent as high. If that is the case how much slower is this cut down version going to be ?


EDIT: point 3 you say the card is a big deal because nothing offers this kind of performance for less than $300 but you state you have no idea how much the 2900pro will be in the US yet, and surely the 8800GTS 320mb version is less than $300?

June 13th? Those are some pretty old drivers.

EDITED:::: Yeah granted they are old drivers, but at the end of the day i still stick to the fact that i think you would be mental to buy this card now, because for around the same price you can buy a faster card, or you can wait a little while and buy the next ATI/Nvidia Offering which will give the DX10 performance everyone was expecting.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

Because the HD2900 will have 512MB memory, possible overclock to the HD2900Xt specs, and would also have the same GPU and features of the HD2900XT. So you get the HD2900XT performance for much less money. That's the big deal. It's all very possible.

Oh and it's supposed to be a single slot card although I have no pictures to confirm.

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

Because the HD2900 will have 512MB memory, possible overclock to the HD2900Xt specs, and would also have the same GPU and features of the HD2900XT. So you get the HD2900XT performance for much less money. That's the big deal. It's all very possible.

Oh and it's supposed to be a single slot card although I have no pictures to confirm.

Why not just buy an 8800GTS 320mb that you could still overclock aswell and would beat the 2900XT? Have you seen the Benchmarks between the 2900XT 512mb version against the 1GB version? Theres nothing in it what so ever,So Far anyway. wether this will come into play when half decent DX10 titles come out we'll have to wait and see but so far it pointless.

 

[Murasame]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

Because the HD2900 will have 512MB memory, possible overclock to the HD2900Xt specs, and would also have the same GPU and features of the HD2900XT. So you get the HD2900XT performance for much less money. That's the big deal. It's all very possible.

Oh and it's supposed to be a single slot card although I have no pictures to confirm.

Exactly as Cmd said. The big deal is that these 2900pro's are speculated as being 2900xt's that didn't make the cut. So you are basically getting a 2900xt for far less money. Also the 512bit bus and 512MB memory also make a big impact. Though I have seen on I believe it was HIS' site where the 512 bit pro was said to be limited edition and that after those sold out the rest of the pro's would be 256bit. Also you can't say the 8800gts 320 is a better card as no one knows that.

Everyone in this thread is speculating at the chance to get a good card at a good price. No need to come in here throwing things around just because you speclate that its not as good as a card currently out.

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: Murasame

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

Because the HD2900 will have 512MB memory, possible overclock to the HD2900Xt specs, and would also have the same GPU and features of the HD2900XT. So you get the HD2900XT performance for much less money. That's the big deal. It's all very possible.

Oh and it's supposed to be a single slot card although I have no pictures to confirm.

Exactly as Cmd said. The big deal is that these 2900pro's are speculated as being 2900xt's that didn't make the cut. So you are basically getting a 2900xt for far less money. Also the 512bit bus and 512MB memory also make a big impact. Though I have seen on I believe it was HIS' site where the 512 bit pro was said to be limited edition and that after those sold out the rest of the pro's would be 256bit. Also you can't say the 8800gts 320 is a better card as no one knows that.

Everyone in this thread is speculating at the chance to get a good card at a good price. No need to come in here throwing things around just because you speclate that its not as good as a card currently out.

i can say that the 8800GTS 320mb is a better card because its as fast if not faster than the current 2900XT so a cut down version of the 2900XT (The 2900PRO) will be slightly slower hence not as good.

If the 2900Pro is faster than the 2900XT then ill buy 2 and sellotape them to my ears.


The Bottom Line

We hoped newer driver revisions would improve performance on the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. With the newer driver we used for this evaluation we did not see any ?magic? happen when it comes to real world gaming experiences at resolutions at and above 1600x1200. The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT is not even a match for even the much less expensive and much less power hungry 320 MB GeForce 8800 GTS.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...w2LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


Hmmmmm Thats intresting isnt it ?

i hope that after people read my posts they will now have somthing to think about before purchasing the 2900Pro.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

Because the HD2900 will have 512MB memory, possible overclock to the HD2900Xt specs, and would also have the same GPU and features of the HD2900XT. So you get the HD2900XT performance for much less money. That's the big deal. It's all very possible.

Oh and it's supposed to be a single slot card although I have no pictures to confirm.

Why not just buy an 8800GTS 320mb that you could still overclock aswell and would beat the 2900XT? Have you seen the Benchmarks between the 2900XT 512mb version against the 1GB version? Theres nothing in it what so ever,So Far anyway. wether this will come into play when half decent DX10 titles come out we'll have to wait and see but so far it pointless.

With new drivers the 8800GTS 320MB can't touch the HD2900 PERIOD!

 

[SniperDaws]

Ive said all i need to say. PERIOD!!!!!!!!!

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: Murasame

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

Because the HD2900 will have 512MB memory, possible overclock to the HD2900Xt specs, and would also have the same GPU and features of the HD2900XT. So you get the HD2900XT performance for much less money. That's the big deal. It's all very possible.

Oh and it's supposed to be a single slot card although I have no pictures to confirm.

Exactly as Cmd said. The big deal is that these 2900pro's are speculated as being 2900xt's that didn't make the cut. So you are basically getting a 2900xt for far less money. Also the 512bit bus and 512MB memory also make a big impact. Though I have seen on I believe it was HIS' site where the 512 bit pro was said to be limited edition and that after those sold out the rest of the pro's would be 256bit. Also you can't say the 8800gts 320 is a better card as no one knows that.

Everyone in this thread is speculating at the chance to get a good card at a good price. No need to come in here throwing things around just because you speclate that its not as good as a card currently out.

i can say that the 8800GTS 320mb is a better card because its as fast if not faster than the current 2900XT so a cut down version of the 2900XT (The 2900PRO) will be slightly slower hence not as good.

If the 2900Pro is faster than the 2900XT then ill buy 2 and sellotape them to my ears.


The Bottom Line

We hoped newer driver revisions would improve performance on the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. With the newer driver we used for this evaluation we did not see any ?magic? happen when it comes to real world gaming experiences at resolutions at and above 1600x1200. The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT is not even a match for even the much less expensive and much less power hungry 320 MB GeForce 8800 GTS.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...w2LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


Hmmmmm Thats intresting isnt it ?

i hope that after people read my posts they will now have somthing to think about before purchasing the 2900Pro.

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=680

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=681&p=11

http://www.elitebastards.com/c...7&limit=1&limitstart=4


All the reviews I linked are using the cat 7.8 driverset. They all show the HD2900XT handily besting the 8800GTS 640MB in most newer games including your previously quoted Oblivion. Furthermore in certain games the HD2900XT beats the 8800GTX.

Please tell me again why the 8800GTS with less memory and lower performance need be even mentioned in this thread.

 

[Murasame]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: Murasame

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

Because the HD2900 will have 512MB memory, possible overclock to the HD2900Xt specs, and would also have the same GPU and features of the HD2900XT. So you get the HD2900XT performance for much less money. That's the big deal. It's all very possible.

Oh and it's supposed to be a single slot card although I have no pictures to confirm.

Exactly as Cmd said. The big deal is that these 2900pro's are speculated as being 2900xt's that didn't make the cut. So you are basically getting a 2900xt for far less money. Also the 512bit bus and 512MB memory also make a big impact. Though I have seen on I believe it was HIS' site where the 512 bit pro was said to be limited edition and that after those sold out the rest of the pro's would be 256bit. Also you can't say the 8800gts 320 is a better card as no one knows that.

Everyone in this thread is speculating at the chance to get a good card at a good price. No need to come in here throwing things around just because you speclate that its not as good as a card currently out.

i can say that the 8800GTS 320mb is a better card because its as fast if not faster than the current 2900XT so a cut down version of the 2900XT (The 2900PRO) will be slightly slower hence not as good.

If the 2900Pro is faster than the 2900XT then ill buy 2 and sellotape them to my ears.


The Bottom Line

We hoped newer driver revisions would improve performance on the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. With the newer driver we used for this evaluation we did not see any ?magic? happen when it comes to real world gaming experiences at resolutions at and above 1600x1200. The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT is not even a match for even the much less expensive and much less power hungry 320 MB GeForce 8800 GTS.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...w2LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


Hmmmmm Thats intresting isnt it ?

i hope that after people read my posts they will now have somthing to think about before purchasing the 2900Pro.

wait did you just post a quote from that June 13th review? Also do you have a personal vendetta against this card?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Murasame

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: Murasame

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Old drivers, but you didn't even listen to what I said. I said Oblivion with the texture packs...they didn't use the 4096x4096 LOD textures and all that.

Even the creator of the LOD pack says that running it on a card with lower than 512MB of memory would be disasterous. He even has an uncompressed version that needs the 768MB GTX to run well.

But if thats the performance without the lod textures and all that then whats it like with.............EVEN SLOWER i think youll find then, which makes the 2900Pro even slower still, so please tell me why are you trying to tell me that the 2900pro is a better choice over the 8800GTS 320mb when neither card has 768mb of ram.

Because the HD2900 will have 512MB memory, possible overclock to the HD2900Xt specs, and would also have the same GPU and features of the HD2900XT. So you get the HD2900XT performance for much less money. That's the big deal. It's all very possible.

Oh and it's supposed to be a single slot card although I have no pictures to confirm.

Exactly as Cmd said. The big deal is that these 2900pro's are speculated as being 2900xt's that didn't make the cut. So you are basically getting a 2900xt for far less money. Also the 512bit bus and 512MB memory also make a big impact. Though I have seen on I believe it was HIS' site where the 512 bit pro was said to be limited edition and that after those sold out the rest of the pro's would be 256bit. Also you can't say the 8800gts 320 is a better card as no one knows that.

Everyone in this thread is speculating at the chance to get a good card at a good price. No need to come in here throwing things around just because you speclate that its not as good as a card currently out.

i can say that the 8800GTS 320mb is a better card because its as fast if not faster than the current 2900XT so a cut down version of the 2900XT (The 2900PRO) will be slightly slower hence not as good.

If the 2900Pro is faster than the 2900XT then ill buy 2 and sellotape them to my ears.


The Bottom Line

We hoped newer driver revisions would improve performance on the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. With the newer driver we used for this evaluation we did not see any ?magic? happen when it comes to real world gaming experiences at resolutions at and above 1600x1200. The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT is not even a match for even the much less expensive and much less power hungry 320 MB GeForce 8800 GTS.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...w2LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


Hmmmmm Thats intresting isnt it ?

i hope that after people read my posts they will now have somthing to think about before purchasing the 2900Pro.

wait did you just post a quote from that June 13th review? Also do you have a personal vendetta against this card?

read my links... HD2900Xt beating 8800GTS 640MB (faster than 320MB) and in some cases even beats 8800GTX. Ho hum...this guy is a hopeless case who reads harcocp...would expect nothing less than fanboyism.

 

[Murasame]

Yeah I already know the 2900xt beats gts 320, 640 and sometimes gtx. Was wondering why he kept citing that old article. Well I just hope the pro is $250 or less and comes out Monday cause I want one.

 

[bryanW1995]

sniper, can I borrow your 7600gt to go play kotor?

You have a 7600 gt b/c you don't play graphics-intensive games at high resolutions. If you did, you'd have an 8800 or 2900 (I think I know which one). If you play at high resolutions, the 2900xt (and 8800gts 640 for that matter) has a huge advantage over the 320 mb 8800. The same thing will go for the 2900 pro. You can overclock the 8800/320 by as much as you want, that still won't make up for its inherint lack of memory. The 2900 pro, based upon the published specs, should be at worst an equal card to the 8800 gts 320mb. At best it should be a significant improvement. If it is in the 200-250 range, how does anybody lose? Nvidia will almost certainly reduce prices on the 8800/320 card; everybody wins. Except immature nvidia fanboys who will possibly be worried that their profits will drop from 2 billion this quarter to 1.9999 billion...

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
sniper, can I borrow your 7600gt to go play kotor?

You have a 7600 gt b/c you don't play graphics-intensive games at high resolutions. If you did, you'd have an 8800 or 2900 (I think I know which one). If you play at high resolutions, the 2900xt (and 8800gts 640 for that matter) has a huge advantage over the 320 mb 8800. The same thing will go for the 2900 pro. You can overclock the 8800/320 by as much as you want, that still won't make up for its inherint lack of memory. The 2900 pro, based upon the published specs, should be at worst an equal card to the 8800 gts 320mb. At best it should be a significant improvement. If it is in the 200-250 range, how does anybody lose? Nvidia will almost certainly reduce prices on the 8800/320 card; everybody wins. Except immature nvidia fanboys who will possibly be worried that their profits will drop from 2 billion this quarter to 1.9999 billion...

QFT

Thank you Bryan :beer:

 

[SniperDaws]

I did notice that non of those games were DX10 so not a such a good set of benchies really are they considering DX10 is what its all about nowadays, or would you like to try and show me up with your XT wupping the 8800 with a few DX7 or 8 Benchies.......and after reading a few other of your posts i think its you who is the fanboy dont you think.

 

[SniperDaws]

ive already said i have a weak 7600GT, but me having a weak arse card has nothing to do with the fact that its pointless buying a 2900pro Now!

 

[Murasame]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
I did notice that non of those games were DX10 so not a such a good set of benchies really are they considering DX10 is what its all about nowadays, or would you like to try and show me up with your XT wupping the 8800 with a few DX7 or 8 Benchies.......and after reading a few other of your posts i think its you who is the fanboy dont you think.

Well the way you came into this thread didn't exactly give the "I'm completely not a nvidia fanboy" vibe. Not saying you are, just saying the way you have shown yourself in this thread kind of gives off that vibe.

 

[SniperDaws]

Except immature nvidia fanboys who will possibly be worried that their profits will drop from 2 billion this quarter to 1.9999 billion...

That is the best line ive ever read, im not sad enough to know the profits of a graphic card company.

Quoting his own posts

World in Conflict

World in Conflict is another new and exciting game, but unlike Bioshock and Medal of Honour: Airborne which are first person shooters, this is an RTS title. Like Supreme Commander we have found World in Conflict to be very demanding and this is another game that really only plays well with GeForce 8800 based graphics cards. As you can see, with the very high visual quality settings enabled the Radeon HD 2900XT performance was quite poor.

X3

You would think that because the Radeon HD 2900XT was so dominant with the no AA/AF settings enabled, turning them on would not hurt it all that much, but it did! The 8xAA/16xAF settings killed the Radeon HD 2900XT once again, effectively halving its performance at 1920x1200. This not only make the Radeon much slower than it was originally, it was also slower than both the GeForce 8800 GTS and GTX graphics cards.

Conclusion

Out of the nine games we tested the Radeon HD 2900XT clearly won two of them while the GeForce 8800 GTS won three. The other four games were close enough to call a tie meaning either the Radeon HD 2900XT or the GeForce 8800 GTS will deliver pretty much the same performance. Given that we did test a range of games, some of which were very new, this does place the Radeon HD 2900XT in a sticky position. The good news is that newer games such as Bioshock and Medal of Honour: Airborne played exceptionally well on the Radeon HD 2900XT

Would you like me to continue? These are all from your links.

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=680&p=11
Read away people. so instead of trying to be clever read the facts first.


i can see there is no talking sense to you fanboys, enjoy your cards gentlemen.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
I did notice that non of those games were DX10 so not a such a good set of benchies really are they considering DX10 is what its all about nowadays, or would you like to try and show me up with your XT wupping the 8800 with a few DX7 or 8 Benchies.......and after reading a few other of your posts i think its you who is the fanboy dont you think.

They tested Bioshock in DX10 :roll:

World in Conflict?

There were NO DX7 or 8 titles in any of the reviews. Just give up...seriously.

They also tested Call of Juraez which is DX10 too.

 

[SniperDaws]

Hang on Sorry i didnt go.........


Ho hum...this guy is a hopeless case who reads nonsense...would expect nothing less than fanboyism