*OFFICIAL* ATI Radeon X800 Pre-Launch Thread

[RussianSensation]

Ok I didn't like that "spanish" review for the following reasons:

1) questionable benchmark scores - 9800xt does "too well" in so many of the benches (ie. see Far Cry where it beats 6800Ultra at 1280x1024 4AA/8AF - YEAH RIGHT...I know sometimes the benchmarks are ran at different settings but here 9800xt barely gets 30FSP at equivalent detail setting, and in this review it gets a whopping 46% higher score..??!!!)

2) the performance difference between a 12 pipeline and 16 pipeline ati solution in some benches is almost nonexistent!!! This suggests that most of these games are cpu-limited => so why didnt they test the games at 1600x1200 4AA/8AF to show us more accurately the improvement of a 16 pipe solution over the slower version? The whole point is to stress the new videocards which they obviously didnt....

3) then they go on to show overclocking results of the 6800ultra and compare it in 3dmark03 score which no one cares about instead of real game benches that matter, and they do not overclock the ATI cards to make the comparison fair either.......

I am gonna wait for a better read....

 

[bunnyfubbles]

ie don't get flustered until you read the review from Anandtech, of which you still might or might not get flustered

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
ie don't get flustered until you read the review from Anandtech, of which you still might or might not get flustered

that's exactly what i am waiting for

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: Regs
Hah. I actually want to see Nvidia get back in the swing of things. Show us something that will sweep us off our feet.

Well, I actually don't care who, just as long as it impresses me. The 9700 core needs to go.

they did that for me, far cry looks AWESOME in PS3 AND is faster, stalker, another ps3 game will be out in september, it makes HL2 look like hooey.

i think ATI really screwed up not doing ps3.

 

[UlricT]

ummm... WHEN exactly did you see farcry with PS3.0? Its the crytek engine that got PS3.0 I suspect... and they released a tech. demo to Nvidia who plastered the net with screens.

NV40 is excellent tech. But none of the perf. gain that we see there is from PS3.0!

 

[Reliant]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: Regs
Hah. I actually want to see Nvidia get back in the swing of things. Show us something that will sweep us off our feet.

Well, I actually don't care who, just as long as it impresses me. The 9700 core needs to go.

they did that for me, far cry looks AWESOME in PS3 AND is faster, stalker, another ps3 game will be out in september, it makes HL2 look like hooey.

i think ATI really screwed up not doing ps3.

I thought that PS2 and PS3 looked the same, it was just that PS3 was more efficient at doing it?

 

[UlricT]

Originally posted by: Reliant

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: Regs
Hah. I actually want to see Nvidia get back in the swing of things. Show us something that will sweep us off our feet.

Well, I actually don't care who, just as long as it impresses me. The 9700 core needs to go.

they did that for me, far cry looks AWESOME in PS3 AND is faster, stalker, another ps3 game will be out in september, it makes HL2 look like hooey.

i think ATI really screwed up not doing ps3.

I thought that PS2 and PS3 looked the same, it was just that PS3 was more efficient at doing it?

basically...
more efficient --> faster at same code made in PS2.0 --> effects unviable in PS2.0 (due to speed issues) are doable in PS3.0

 

[Willian]

:shocked: I cant wait

 

[KDOG]

Great! now all we need is it in PCI Express!!

 

[LTC8K6]

PS3? I didn't know DX9c had been released.

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Now, what I do believe is that ATi may have a surprise in terms of offering more PS3/DX9.0c features than previously anticipated.

It really doesn't matter in practical terms for gamers . . . it's gonna be awhile before those features start to actually show up ingames (and don't bring up Far Cry - only it's lighting appears to use any PS3).

Whichever card you get - choose wisely - is gonna be so ou of date really soon as both ati and nVidia ramp up the core frequency of their respective cards . . . personally, i'm gonna pick the better performer that ALSO o/c's well.

that is actually incorrect.

according to cevat yerli of crytek PS3 lets them use displacement mapping to make textures "3D" from any angle along with making a quantum leap in the number of pixel shader instructions. this may be way overgeneralized as "just lighting" but then again we are talking about SHADERS here...

even with ATI's improvements you are looking at just over 1500, while PS3 does over 65,000.

 

[LTC8K6]

A: In current engine there are no visible difference between PS2.0 and PS3.0. PS3.0 is used automatically for per-pixel lighting depending on some conditions to improve speed of rendering.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Introducing Nalu and Ruby...in the FLESH:

Ruby...sorta...

BUT...this really is the REAL Nalu...

Just couldn't resist that last pic!

Okay, okay...time to get back on-topic!

 

[imported_justlam]

i'm most likely to stick to my ti4200 still. i wanna c bechmark (like 3dmark01/03) on these!!!

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Now, what I do believe is that ATi may have a surprise in terms of offering more PS3/DX9.0c features than previously anticipated.

It really doesn't matter in practical terms for gamers . . . it's gonna be awhile before those features start to actually show up ingames (and don't bring up Far Cry - only it's lighting appears to use any PS3).

Whichever card you get - choose wisely - is gonna be so ou of date really soon as both ati and nVidia ramp up the core frequency of their respective cards . . . personally, i'm gonna pick the better performer that ALSO o/c's well.

that is actually incorrect.

according to cevat yerli of crytek PS3 lets them use displacement mapping to make textures "3D" from any angle along with making a quantum leap in the number of pixel shader instructions. this may be way overgeneralized as "just lighting" but then again we are talking about SHADERS here...

even with ATI's improvements you are looking at just over 1500, while PS3 does over 65,000.

"incorrect"?

Depends on who you talk to . . .

:roll:


Lets clear up a few things?

After further analysis with Far Cry, it turns out the game isn?t quite the technological tour de force we suggested in part 1 of our 3D Performance with Far Cry article. In that article, we highlighted the game?s use of 2.0 shaders, and while these shaders are used in the game, it turns out that they?re not used as extensively as we suggested. In fact, from what we can tell, Far Cry mainly uses 1.1 shaders to achieve the jaw-dropping visuals we discussed in the intro. . . .

[their conclusion:] So what does Far Cry use 2.0 shaders for? Apparently just lighting, everything else is handled by 1.1 shaders.

Now you pick their argument apart . . . if you dare (try).

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Introducing Nalu and Ruby...in the FLESH:

Ruby...sorta...

BUT...this really is the REAL Nalu...

Just couldn't resist that last pic!

Okay, okay...time to get back on-topic!

Come on! No comments on the PICS???