Radeon HD 2900 Pro / HD 2900 GT

[JPB]

Will only be available in limited quantities

We've been told by a reliable source that the new Radeon HD 2900Pro will only be available in limited quantities, due to the fact that it's actually Radeon HD 2900XT GPU's that haven't meet the grade.

This is hardly surprising, but you'd think that AMD had more than a few thousand of these chips laying around, although since we don't know the ammount of GPU's they get per wafer, it's hard to say if htis is the case or not.

Some manufacturers will get less than 5,000 of the new cards, so if you're looking at getting one of these, you better be fast, as they'll most likely sell out quite quickly.

This is also the reason why AMD haven't been making any noise about having a new card available, since it's no point in promoting something that will only be available for a very limited time.

The good news is what you get in the box is a fully fledged GPU with no feature cutting, it's just clocked a little bit slower. If you're really lucky, you might be able to get one of these cards up to the same speed as the stock HD 2900XT's, but don't count on it.

Link

__________________________________________________________

FOLLOWING OUR story about ATI Radeon HD 2900 Pro boards tipping up, here, we have found more and more graphics cards based on cheaper iterations of R600 chip appearing in e-tail and retail stores.

A search of Geizhals.at reveals that Sapphire is offering two 2900Pro boards. One features 512MB of memory, like the GeCube one, but the second one sports full 1GB of frame buffer memory. In both cases, Sapphire uses GDDR3. The chips used on the 1GB board should prove quite friendly overclock monsters.


The retail box of upcoming 2900GT card is located at Sapphire's website. It is obvious now that the official launch is on Monday or Tuesday

Beside the 2900Pro, one of our sharp-eyed readers also spotted a 2900GT from Sapphire. We're unsure of the specs here, but now it is for sure that it will come with only 256MB of local memory, most probably with a 256-bit interface. Judging by the pricing of 2900Pro, we would not be surprised if the 2900GT retails at around £150, making this card quite a deal.

Regardless of what you might think about the R600 marchitecture, even with the 256-bit interface these cards are a bargain for an asking price of just a little above 200 Euro, including VAT (or way below, as far as the 2900GT is concerned). Seeing the current prices of 2600XT and 8600GTS cards, these will be a great buy once highly-demanding DX9 and DX10 titles appear. If ATI has kept 320 scalar shaders for the 256MB model as well, with decent overclock capabilities, 2900GT could prove quite a premium for those that are seeking most performance for least possible sum of money.

Lastly, as far as we know, both 2900Pro and 2900GT sport a PCB identical to the one found in the Radeon HD 2900XT, so both 8-pin and 6-pin connectors are present. But with these cut-down boards consuming 150 Watts and less, we wonder if the second rail (8-pin) with its 75-125W rail is needed or it is just a neat feature for overclockers? Only time will tell. µ

2900 GT

 

[tuteja1986]

they said the same with X1950XT when the 8800GTX was about to be released !!

the X1950XT is still living and kicking untill 8800gt comes out or x2900pro :!

 

[SniperDaws]

if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800 GTS.

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800 GTS.

x2900pro is suppose to be $250 below meaning its going to be kick ass card for midrange market :! replacing the X1950xt 256mb. Also no you don't have to be serious fanboy to buy XT over 8800GTS.

2900XT beating the up the 8800GTS and slowly keeping up with 8800GTX in games like :
bioshock
Battlefield 2142
F.E.A.R. Extraction Point
Half-Life 2: Episode One
Prey
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion
X3: Reunion
Company of Heroes DX9
Medal of honor Airborne

Problem with 2900XT is that :
It consume same amount of power as a 8800U
Its need AA driver level support support like chuck patch for alot of unreal 3.0 games that aren't supporting AA :!
Developers are letting games gold with ATI tweaking and fixing. World in conflict , Bioshock and Lost planet all went gold with bug stopper if the user owned ATI card. They got the Bioshock ATI bug sloved pretty fast with help with 2K Australia.

Now i would like ATI to do :
fix performance for World in Conflict
fix performance for Quake War ET
Add AA driver support for Unreal 3.0. Like all the Nvidia user has to do is rename exe file of bioshock , medal of honor Airbourne to R6Vegas_Game.exe to enable AA support.

 

[JPB]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800
GTS.

I was curious as to which was better also a few weeks ago. So I went to 9 different site's that reviewed the HD 2900 XT , 8800 GTS , 8800 GTX cards. Did a little comparison for average fps in all games tested. I picked the most popular games. Here is what I came up with...




1920x1200 resolution

------------------------2900XT-----8800Ultra---8800GTX---8800GTS

Battlefield 2142----------75-----------81--------- 73------51
Call Of Juarez------------37-----------37----------35------29
Far Cry------------------124----------122---------116-----84
Far Cry 4xAA------------161----------150--------143----103
Far Cry HDR--------------72------------94---------90------73
Far Cry HDR 16x---------84----------103---------95-------78
Fear------------------------42-----------60---------45------36
GRAW----------------------40-----------62--------58-------41
Episode 1------------------81----------123-------116-------85
Prey------------------------52-----------65--------60 ------44
Tomb Raider Legend-----40-----------62---------60-------43
SC Double Agent---------55-----------62---------57-------46
Oblivion--------------------71----------91---------85--------66
Oblivion HDR--------------50-----------70--------65--------47
Tiberium Wars------------30-----------30---------30-------30
Company Of Hero's------75-----------88---------80-------54
Supreme Commander---26-----------57--------53--------37
MOH Airborne-------------62----------------------64--------46
Bioshock------------------41-----------------------47--------33



Average FPS Total

* HD 2900 XT ----66 fps
* 8800 Ultra-------80 fps
* 8800GTX--------74 fps
* 8800GTS---------55 fps

Bioshock and MOH Airborne is not used in Average FPS Total.

I only used benchmarks for 1920x1200 resolution. If AA or AF was used, it is listed with the game. MOH Airborne and Bioshock the 8800 Ultra wasnt selected cause I could not find a review for it. Most games didnt use AA or AF because at this resolution...most times its not needed for IQ.

To me, It looks like since its priced a few $'s less ...the HD 2900 XT has better overall average fps through the list of games. Which does make it not pointless.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: JPB

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800
GTS.

I was curious as to which was better also a few weeks ago. So I went to 9 different site's that reviewed the HD 2900 XT , 8800 GTS , 8800 GTX cards. Did a little comparison for average fps in all games tested. I picked the most popular games. Here is what I came up with...




1920x1200 resolution

------------------------2900XT-----8800Ultra---8800GTX---8800GTS

Battlefield 2142----------75-----------81--------- 73------51
Call Of Juarez------------37-----------37----------35------29
Far Cry------------------124----------122---------116-----84
Far Cry 4xAA------------161----------150--------143----103
Far Cry HDR--------------72------------94---------90------73
Far Cry HDR 16x---------84----------103---------95-------78
Fear------------------------42-----------60---------45------36
GRAW----------------------40-----------62--------58-------41
Episode 1------------------81----------123-------116-------85
Prey------------------------52-----------65--------60 ------44
Tomb Raider Legend-----40-----------62---------60-------43
SC Double Agent---------55-----------62---------57-------46
Oblivion--------------------71----------91---------85--------66
Oblivion HDR--------------50-----------70--------65--------47
Tiberium Wars------------30-----------30---------30-------30
Company Of Hero's------75-----------88---------80-------54
Supreme Commander---26-----------57--------53--------37
MOH Airborne-------------62----------------------64--------46
Bioshock------------------41-----------------------47--------33



Average FPS Total

* HD 2900 XT ----66 fps
* 8800 Ultra-------80 fps
* 8800GTX--------74 fps
* 8800GTS---------55 fps

Bioshock and MOH Airborne is not used in Average FPS Total.

I only used benchmarks for 1920x1200 resolution. If AA or AF was used, it is listed with the game. MOH Airborne and Bioshock the 8800 Ultra wasnt selected cause I could not find a review for it. Most games didnt use AA or AF because at this resolution...most times its not needed for IQ.

To me, It looks like since its priced a few $'s less ...the HD 2900 XT has better overall average fps through the list of games. Which does make it not pointless.

Thank you for posting that. Seems like people's impressions of the 2900XT include decreasing performance over time, rather than its actual increase in performance from drivers.

I have a 2900XT, the only complaint I have against it is that it runs a little warm. In most computers, this wouldn't be a problem, but I live in Phoenix AZ. I keep my AC at about 80 during the summer, this makes the ambient temperature for my 2900XT quite warm.

 

[JPB]

Thank you for posting that. Seems like people's impressions of the 2900XT include decreasing performance over time, rather than its actual increase in performance from drivers.

I have a 2900XT, the only complaint I have against it is that it runs a little warm. In most computers, this wouldn't be a problem, but I live in Phoenix AZ. I keep my AC at about 80 during the summer, this makes the ambient temperature for my 2900XT quite warm.

What are your temp's at idle and load? I have been considering this card myself.

 

[gtsing]

2900Pro releases on September 30th right? Hopefully these cards will stay on stock for a couple of days so I can get one with my new computer. I'll be sad if I don't.🙁

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800 GTS.

I was tempted to say something like, "you'd have to be a serious nvidia fanboy to post something like this", but that wouldn't be constructive. besides, jpb said it much better than I could have. Keep in mind that the 2900 pro is going to be priced against the 8800 gts 320. Even if you prefer nvidia then you should be excited about 2900 pro b/c it will likely drive down 8800 gts prices to compete. Realistically it will probably be slightly slower than 8800gts 320 at lower resolutions but a lot faster at higher resolutions.

 

[aiya24]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800 GTS.

I was tempted to say something like, "you'd have to be a serious nvidia fanboy to post something like this", but that wouldn't be constructive. besides, jpb said it much better than I could have. Keep in mind that the 2900 pro is going to be priced against the 8800 gts 320. Even if you prefer nvidia then you should be excited about 2900 pro b/c it will likely drive down 8800 gts prices to compete. Realistically it will probably be slightly slower than 8800gts 320 at lower resolutions but a lot faster at higher resolutions.

thats what i'm thinking too. i feel cursed sometimes with my 2407WFP :frown: 😀

 

[Blacklash]

Originally posted by: JPB
Most games didnt use AA or AF because at this resolution...most times its not needed for IQ.

I strongly disagree with that, and to each their own. I never use less than 4xAA|8xAF and more often 4xAA|16xAF. Naturally, if the game doesn't support AA + HDR I can not use it.

IMO the 8800GTS 640MB is a much more balanced card, while the HD 2900XT is all over the place in performance. It will excel in games like "Rainbow 6 Vegas" then utterly tank in "Gothic 3" or "NWN 2". The point isn't the particular games themselves and rather the cards wildly fluctuating performance.

I'd suggest folks get GTS 640MB and push it up to 580-660 on the core. Buy one from Evga or XFX. They allow user overclocking and support HSF removal|replacement.

 

[Arc337]

🙁 I was hoping we would have some fun trying to unlock pipes, but it's just underclocked.

I miss the old days

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Blacklash

Originally posted by: JPB
Most games didnt use AA or AF because at this resolution...most times its not needed for IQ.

I strongly disagree with that, and to each their own. I never use less than 4xAA|8xAF and more often 4xAA|16xAF. Naturally, if the game doesn't support AA + HDR I can not use it.

IMO the 8800GTS 640MB is a much more balanced card, while the HD 2900XT is all over the place in performance. It will excel in games like "Rainbow 6 Vegas" then utterly tank in "Gothic 3" or "NWN 2". The point isn't the particular games themselves and rather the cards wildly fluctuating performance.

I'd suggest folks get GTS 640MB and push it up to 580-660 on the core. Buy one from Evga or XFX. They allow user overclocking and support HSF removal|replacement.

One reason the 2900xt is all over the place is because it's architecture is more sensitive to how well the driver can optimize the code for the hardware. The other reason is because it lacks HW AA resolve, and this hurts performance with AA. But make no mistake about it, the 2900xt is a more advanced design than the g80 and has more potential than the 8800gts when from a hardware perspective. Whether it will achieve its full potential during its useful lifetime is another question altogether.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

Originally posted by: aiya24

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800 GTS.

I was tempted to say something like, "you'd have to be a serious nvidia fanboy to post something like this", but that wouldn't be constructive. besides, jpb said it much better than I could have. Keep in mind that the 2900 pro is going to be priced against the 8800 gts 320. Even if you prefer nvidia then you should be excited about 2900 pro b/c it will likely drive down 8800 gts prices to compete. Realistically it will probably be slightly slower than 8800gts 320 at lower resolutions but a lot faster at higher resolutions.

thats what i'm thinking too. i feel cursed sometimes with my 2407WFP :frown: 😀

OH i feel so sad for you. tell you i'll do you a favor. send me your 2407 and i'll send you my 20" benq. evil;

 

[bryanW1995]

no no NO! he needs a 19" hanns G monitor to better take advantage of his gpu. Huh, imagine that, I happen to have a 19" hanns G right here...

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: aiya24

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800 GTS.

I was tempted to say something like, "you'd have to be a serious nvidia fanboy to post something like this", but that wouldn't be constructive. besides, jpb said it much better than I could have. Keep in mind that the 2900 pro is going to be priced against the 8800 gts 320. Even if you prefer nvidia then you should be excited about 2900 pro b/c it will likely drive down 8800 gts prices to compete. Realistically it will probably be slightly slower than 8800gts 320 at lower resolutions but a lot faster at higher resolutions.

thats what i'm thinking too. i feel cursed sometimes with my 2407WFP :frown: 😀

seriously, though, you need to ditch that x1900 asap. You should be able to sell it for at least $100, maybe up to $125. If you can get a 2900pro for around $200 then you'd have a nice, cheap upgrade. 🙂

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: JPB

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
if its slower than the 2900XT then whats the point? the 2900 series is a white elephant, you'd have to be a serious ATI fanboy to buy an XT over a 8800
GTS.

I was curious as to which was better also a few weeks ago. So I went to 9 different site's that reviewed the HD 2900 XT , 8800 GTS , 8800 GTX cards. Did a little comparison for average fps in all games tested. I picked the most popular games. Here is what I came up with...




1920x1200 resolution

------------------------2900XT-----8800Ultra---8800GTX---8800GTS

Battlefield 2142----------75-----------81--------- 73------51
Call Of Juarez------------37-----------37----------35------29
Far Cry------------------124----------122---------116-----84
Far Cry 4xAA------------161----------150--------143----103
Far Cry HDR--------------72------------94---------90------73
Far Cry HDR 16x---------84----------103---------95-------78
Fear------------------------42-----------60---------45------36
GRAW----------------------40-----------62--------58-------41
Episode 1------------------81----------123-------116-------85
Prey------------------------52-----------65--------60 ------44
Tomb Raider Legend-----40-----------62---------60-------43
SC Double Agent---------55-----------62---------57-------46
Oblivion--------------------71----------91---------85--------66
Oblivion HDR--------------50-----------70--------65--------47
Tiberium Wars------------30-----------30---------30-------30
Company Of Hero's------75-----------88---------80-------54
Supreme Commander---26-----------57--------53--------37
MOH Airborne-------------62----------------------64--------46
Bioshock------------------41-----------------------47--------33



Average FPS Total

* HD 2900 XT ----66 fps
* 8800 Ultra-------80 fps
* 8800GTX--------74 fps
* 8800GTS---------55 fps

Bioshock and MOH Airborne is not used in Average FPS Total.

I only used benchmarks for 1920x1200 resolution. If AA or AF was used, it is listed with the game. MOH Airborne and Bioshock the 8800 Ultra wasnt selected cause I could not find a review for it. Most games didnt use AA or AF because at this resolution...most times its not needed for IQ.

To me, It looks like since its priced a few $'s less ...the HD 2900 XT has better overall average fps through the list of games. Which does make it not pointless.

62 fps in MoH:A with a 2900XT at 1920x1200 is wishful thinking.

 

[JPB]

62 fps in MoH:A with a 2900XT at 1920x1200 is wishful thinking.

Why is it wishful thinking ?

2900 XT Benched at 61.8 fps in MOH Airborne at 1920x1200

Little quote from that article ...

The higher-end graphics cards such as the GeForce 8800 GTS were impressive, offering playable performance all the way up to 1920x1200. The GeForce 8800 GTS (640MB) rendered an average of 45.6fps at the highest tested resolution, while the Radeon HD 2900XT managed 61.8fps and the GeForce 8800 GTX 64.4fps, which was most impressive.

 

[Beowulf]

Matt2 actually owns a 2900XT and doesn't get 60fps with 1920x1200 in high quality. Just check his posts in the MoH:A thread. Also legion hardware originally claimed they benchmarked it in DX10 and got bashed for MoH:A not even running on DX10. I see they changed it from DX10 to DX9.

 

[StopSign]

I've seen R600-based cards labeled as "R600 GT" and "R600 XL". On the surface, they both have the same clocks, so I don't know if they're the same cards just labeled differently. Where did I see these cards? I'm not going to say. They're both engineering samples. I also don't know how they perform since I didn't look at the numbers myself.

Please don't ask me for any more information than that.

 

[nullpointerus]

Originally posted by: JPB

62 fps in MoH:A with a 2900XT at 1920x1200 is wishful thinking.

Why is it wishful thinking ?

2900 XT Benched at 61.8 fps in MOH Airborne at 1920x1200

Little quote from that article ...

The higher-end graphics cards such as the GeForce 8800 GTS were impressive, offering playable performance all the way up to 1920x1200. The GeForce 8800 GTS (640MB) rendered an average of 45.6fps at the highest tested resolution, while the Radeon HD 2900XT managed 61.8fps and the GeForce 8800 GTX 64.4fps, which was most impressive.

Whether or not it's wishful thinking depends on your expectations. Keeping a smooth 60fps during firefights required lowering details to medium and resolution to 1280x800 on my PC. Yet if you are talking about 60fps average through a benchmarking script of some kind, that seems plausible depending on what the benchmark is really rendering. Of course, the bug that Matt2 experiences throws both expectations out the window because performance tanks to unplayable levels even at 1280x800.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

I doubt that. What do you consider "Unplayable levels"?

 

[JPB]

With the rig in my sig. When I play MOH:A my fps usually drop to 20 and no less. 80% of the time I average 39 which to me is very playable since this game isnt that fast paced. This is at 1440x900 resolution with all details in game max. My cpu is stock clocks also.

Since matt2's fps sometimes drops to the teen's or single digits, lead me to believe he has some other problem, than the gpu itself.

Here are my screenshot's from another thread. Which like I said, this is very playable for me.

Pic 1
Pic 2
Pic 3
Pic 4
Pic 5
Pic 6
Pic 7
Pic 8
Pic 9
Pic 10
Pic 11
Pic 12
Pic 13

 

[Matt2]

Where can I upload a FRAPs video to?

I'm tired of talking about my 2900XT's struggles in MoH:A and want to actually show you guys.

 

[bryanW1995]

You might want to try the ati or moa forums to see if others have experienced the same slowdown. thank god I don't play anything newer than civ4 on my computer...