HD2900XT came today!!!

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: xAMD4Lifex

Originally posted by: swtethan
When I max out everything, I get 250fps or so


16QAA 16xAF maxed all 1280x1024

Wow, your e-penis is huge now. Want a cookie?

go away, troll

you're the troll, you just had to come in here and say stuff like you did. Bragging about your Nvidia card. We're happy for you...now let people interested in the 2900xt get some real user feedback. :disgust:

its a comparison of the cards, obviously he cannot power the card, i want to see how it performs also. How can you see if something is right when you have nothing to compare it to?

2 6 pin connectors or 1 6pin and an adapter is ALL that is needed to power the card.

The issue is how you presented your numbers. Making it seem like you were putting him and the card he bought down.

I apologize to the OP if that was the case. <3 its all love.

 

[Lord Banshee]

yes sorry 5500 is correct either way it is a $2000 pro card that kills any gamer card config in opengl apps that take advantage of the pro features.

 

[swtethan]

I guess we'll find out when he returns

 

[superbooga]

Originally posted by: VERTIGGO
CPU Limited im sorry, geez lol

Unfortunately that's probably not true. Try it w/o AA. The likely reason is the simple fact that AA is implemented in shaders, and there's a huge performance hit with WTF AA. The results with WTF AA turned on will truly make you go WTF?

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life2_vst/page5.asp

No offense, but a 3800+ with a x800xt pe scores 101 fps at 1280x1024 4xAA. You are scoring in the area of a card 2 generations behind, with only the benefit of 8x vs 4x AA!

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life2_vst/page6.asp

160 fps.. There goes the CPU limited argument.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: superbooga

Originally posted by: VERTIGGO
CPU Limited im sorry, geez lol

Unfortunately that's probably not true. Try it w/o AA. The likely reason is the simple fact that AA is implemented in shaders, and there's a huge performance hit with WTF AA. The results with WTF AA turned on will truly make you go WTF?

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life2_vst/page5.asp

No offense, but a 3800+ with a x800xt pe scores 101 fps at 1280x1024 4xAA. You are scoring in the area of a card 2 generations behind, with only the benefit of 8x vs 4x AA!

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life2_vst/page6.asp

160 fps.. There goes the CPU limited argument.

I don't know if this is drivers or not, but I hope this is NOT going to be how it works forever... AA used to be almost free to a certain extent at lower resolutions.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: nullpointerus

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: nullpointerus

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: fern420

Originally posted by: Matt2
The card should have came with a 2x4 pin to 1x6 pin (using only 3 of the four connections on each 4 pin molex) adapter. Use the 6 pin your PSU has plus the adapter that *should* have come with the card.

If it did not come with an adapter, then I am just going to laugh my ass off.

from all the pictures ive seen at newegg and zip they dont, only a few brands seem to even come with the molex to 6 pin adapters. i think ati forgot that most of us dont have 8 pin connectors on our power supply or if we do its only one.

LMAO :laugh:

Are you serious? So they expect everyone that buys this card to have a PSU that has an extra 8-pin connector? Either that or they expect everyone to buy a new PSU.

-1 for every vendor who doesnt supply the adapter that will be needed by a huge portion of HD2900XT owners.

EDIT: OP, you're going to have to buy one of those adapters. You can probably find one at Fry's. I cvan't believe they wouldnt give you an adapter. My 7800GTs and X1900XTX came with one and they only needed one 6 pin connection.

Two six-pins will work, and they're more common (than a spare 8-pin connection) on that range of PSUs. But with 2x 6-pin, you can't overclock or even use overdrive, IIRC, so it's still something of a mess--just a smaller mess than you're making it out to be.

I know 2x6 pin will work, but a lot of people only have 1x6 pin. Or do I just have an out of date PSU?

Basically what they're saying when they dont include a 6 pin adapter is that you should have a SLI certified PSU.

Isn't that what I said? Or am *I* missing something?

I have no idea what we're talking about anymore. I'm more confused than you are.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: nullpointerus

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: nullpointerus

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: fern420

Originally posted by: Matt2
The card should have came with a 2x4 pin to 1x6 pin (using only 3 of the four connections on each 4 pin molex) adapter. Use the 6 pin your PSU has plus the adapter that *should* have come with the card.

If it did not come with an adapter, then I am just going to laugh my ass off.

from all the pictures ive seen at newegg and zip they dont, only a few brands seem to even come with the molex to 6 pin adapters. i think ati forgot that most of us dont have 8 pin connectors on our power supply or if we do its only one.

LMAO :laugh:

Are you serious? So they expect everyone that buys this card to have a PSU that has an extra 8-pin connector? Either that or they expect everyone to buy a new PSU.

-1 for every vendor who doesnt supply the adapter that will be needed by a huge portion of HD2900XT owners.

EDIT: OP, you're going to have to buy one of those adapters. You can probably find one at Fry's. I cvan't believe they wouldnt give you an adapter. My 7800GTs and X1900XTX came with one and they only needed one 6 pin connection.

Two six-pins will work, and they're more common (than a spare 8-pin connection) on that range of PSUs. But with 2x 6-pin, you can't overclock or even use overdrive, IIRC, so it's still something of a mess--just a smaller mess than you're making it out to be.

I know 2x6 pin will work, but a lot of people only have 1x6 pin. Or do I just have an out of date PSU?

Basically what they're saying when they dont include a 6 pin adapter is that you should have a SLI certified PSU.

Isn't that what I said? Or am *I* missing something?

I have no idea what we're talking about anymore. I'm more confused than you are.

I think I get it...they just don't include the adapter to convert 2x Molex to PCI-E power connector. Other cards provide this and don't use 2 connectors at all. BTW: I was wondering. Is the 8pin connector on the card the same as an EPS connector on a mobo? If so they do sell adapters for that and you could use one of those and have overclocking features enabled.

 

[VERTIGGO]

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee
PLEASE PLEASE Run this benchmark, SPECViewPref 9.03) on a single screen active only and vsync off and default setting http://www.spec.org/gpc/downloadindex.html.

DT showed results suppressing a quadrofx 5600 and seeing not one review site used this benchmark makes me think AMD/ATI turned off those nice pro features for the retail drivers

Again please please

downloading...

and swtethan, I thought his cookie joke was funny, but I didn't mind your posting at all. If the GTS is actually faster I want to know the truth. I just hope those adapters come quickly. I just want to get some realistic numbers out there for you guys.

 

[VERTIGGO]

Originally posted by: superbooga

Originally posted by: VERTIGGO
CPU Limited im sorry, geez lol

Unfortunately that's probably not true. Try it w/o AA. The likely reason is the simple fact that AA is implemented in shaders, and there's a huge performance hit with WTF AA. The results with WTF AA turned on will truly make you go WTF?

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life2_vst/page5.asp

No offense, but a 3800+ with a x800xt pe scores 101 fps at 1280x1024 4xAA. You are scoring in the area of a card 2 generations behind, with only the benefit of 8x vs 4x AA!

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life2_vst/page6.asp

160 fps.. There goes the CPU limited argument.

An honest rebuttal I can take, but those statements, especially the second, are not quite honest. 160 fps is with the lowest resolution, and I'm running an extreme version of 8xQAAA which has never been seen before, so I don't think it really compares.

However, you are right that even underclocked it needs some tuning up.
This whole thing reminds me of games like Far Cry that never seem to improve very much even with generations and generations. I do need more cutting edge benchmarks.

 

[superbooga]

Originally posted by: VERTIGGO

Originally posted by: superbooga

Originally posted by: VERTIGGO
CPU Limited im sorry, geez lol

Unfortunately that's probably not true. Try it w/o AA. The likely reason is the simple fact that AA is implemented in shaders, and there's a huge performance hit with WTF AA. The results with WTF AA turned on will truly make you go WTF?

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life2_vst/page5.asp

No offense, but a 3800+ with a x800xt pe scores 101 fps at 1280x1024 4xAA. You are scoring in the area of a card 2 generations behind, with only the benefit of 8x vs 4x AA!

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life2_vst/page6.asp

160 fps.. There goes the CPU limited argument.

An honest rebuttal I can take, but those statements, especially the second, are not quite honest. 160 fps is with the lowest resolution, and I'm running an extreme version of 8xQAAA which has never been seen before, so I don't think it really compares.

However, you are right that even underclocked it needs some tuning up.
This whole thing reminds me of games like Far Cry that never seem to improve very much even with generations and generations. I do need more cutting edge benchmarks.

You said you were CPU limited. Your CPU should score 180 fps if you were really CPU limited.

Yes, you are using a special 8xQAAA that is very slow. However, at this moment it's quality is inferior to Nvidia's CSAA modes. So there's nothing special about the mode you're using, except that it's very very slow.

 

[VERTIGGO]

I'm quite clueless as to the meaning of this, but this is what I got from "run all" on SPEC VIEWPERF 9.0:

Remember, 2D clocks, 1280x1024, 4xAA, 16xAF

Run All Summary

---------- SUM_RESULTS\3DSMAX\SUMMARY.TXT
3dsmax-04 Weighted Geometric Mean = 10.44

---------- SUM_RESULTS\CATIA\SUMMARY.TXT
catia-02 Weighted Geometric Mean = 9.886

---------- SUM_RESULTS\ENSIGHT\SUMMARY.TXT
ensight-03 Weighted Geometric Mean = 13.44

---------- SUM_RESULTS\LIGHT\SUMMARY.TXT
light-08 Weighted Geometric Mean = 11.38

---------- SUM_RESULTS\MAYA\SUMMARY.TXT
maya-02 Weighted Geometric Mean = 21.09

---------- SUM_RESULTS\PROE\SUMMARY.TXT
proe-04 Weighted Geometric Mean = 7.319

---------- SUM_RESULTS\SW\SUMMARY.TXT
sw-01 Weighted Geometric Mean = 14.76

---------- SUM_RESULTS\TCVIS\SUMMARY.TXT
tcvis-01 Weighted Geometric Mean = 4.330

---------- SUM_RESULTS\UGNX\SUMMARY.TXT
ugnx-01 Weighted Geometric Mean = 5.371


ALSO, FEAR TIMEDEMO same settings:
MIN 37
AVG 60
MAX 123
0% <25
25 < 8% < 40
40 < 92%

 

[Dent0n]

So you bought a 2900XT to play CS and CoH?

I do not understand why anyone wants this card. The people who do buy it seem to be afraid to really test it with modern games.

 

[yacoub]

I'm not sure how inability equates to being afraid?

 

[yacoub]

Originally posted by: superbooga

You said you were CPU limited. Your CPU should score 180 fps if you were really CPU limited.

That's interesting how you can tell him what he should be scoring considering you don't know all the details of his test rig nor test environment. For example, what other software he is running in the background. So don't make such gaping assumptions as though they're fact.

 

[Lord Banshee]

Originally posted by: VERTIGGO
I'm quite clueless as to the meaning of this, but this is what I got from "run all" on SPEC VIEWPERF 9.0:

Remember, 2D clocks, 1280x1024, 4xAA, 16xAF

Run All Summary

---------- SUM_RESULTS\3DSMAX\SUMMARY.TXT
3dsmax-04 Weighted Geometric Mean = 10.44

---------- SUM_RESULTS\CATIA\SUMMARY.TXT
catia-02 Weighted Geometric Mean = 9.886

---------- SUM_RESULTS\ENSIGHT\SUMMARY.TXT
ensight-03 Weighted Geometric Mean = 13.44

---------- SUM_RESULTS\LIGHT\SUMMARY.TXT
light-08 Weighted Geometric Mean = 11.38

---------- SUM_RESULTS\MAYA\SUMMARY.TXT
maya-02 Weighted Geometric Mean = 21.09

---------- SUM_RESULTS\PROE\SUMMARY.TXT
proe-04 Weighted Geometric Mean = 7.319

---------- SUM_RESULTS\SW\SUMMARY.TXT
sw-01 Weighted Geometric Mean = 14.76

---------- SUM_RESULTS\TCVIS\SUMMARY.TXT
tcvis-01 Weighted Geometric Mean = 4.330

---------- SUM_RESULTS\UGNX\SUMMARY.TXT
ugnx-01 Weighted Geometric Mean = 5.371


ALSO, FEAR TIMEDEMO same settings:
MIN 37
AVG 60
MAX 123
0% <25
25 < 8% < 40
40 < 92%

-----------

Thanks man and BOOOO!!! to AMD/ATI i really thought they were trying to kill NVIDIA's pro card , damn retail drivers.

Oh well know i have no reason what so ever not to get a 8800GTS-640

Thanks again for running the benchmark, feel free to rerun it if you get the 3d clocks working correctly but i don't think the scores will change too much.

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: VERTIGGO
CPU Limited im sorry, geez lol

OP, why do you continue to post these benchmarks? You're obviously running underclocked because the card refuses to run at full speed without both power connectors populated.

This is even affirmed with your statement in the original post:

Funny thing is, i get a "performance warning", and "Your graphics card may not be properly supported... PSU... clock speeds reduced... please make sure appropriate cables are connected."

You're wasting your own time running these benchmarks... so wait until you get your adapters, then rerun them.

 

[Pugnate]

Congrats on your new card though.

 

[manowar821]

WTF happened to this thread?

Also, fix your power issues and CPU, then try again.

 

[superbooga]

Originally posted by: yacoub

Originally posted by: superbooga

You said you were CPU limited. Your CPU should score 180 fps if you were really CPU limited.

That's interesting how you can tell him what he should be scoring considering you don't know all the details of his test rig nor test environment. For example, what other software he is running in the background. So don't make such gaping assumptions as though they're fact.

Because I've ran the same test on a 2.6 GHz AMD before w/ a 6600GT and 7800GTX, and I know what the CPU limitations for that benchmark are, and they are consistent with what other people find.

You can assume people run benchmarks with minimal applications running in the background. Shouldn't matter anyways, because this test is very benign, even on something like a 2.0 GHz P4. Also, this test produces extremely consistent results. Based on the visuals, it is clear that it doesn't take much of a CPU to score a high fps.

I'm not trying to give him an exact figure on what fps he should be getting. The simple fact is, a score of 114 fps at 1280x1024 is a downright TERRIBLE score for CS:S for a computer as fast as his. And there's probably nothing wrong with his system, it's that the new AA modes on the 2900XT are next to useless at this moment. If you look at Hardocp's review, they couldn't go above 4xAA in any of their tests. And this is the same site that put the x1950xtx above the 7950gx2, because the 1950xtx could do 6xAA in their game tests while the 7950gx2 could only do 4xAA with inferior AF.