RV670 ---------Radeon HD 3870 card high res photo

[nonameo]

Let's just hope AMD put something on the new revision to help with AA.

 

[votelibertarian35]

no one cares about 3mark scores....Good God, can Futuremark change their benchmark so it defaults at 4x AA so it can expose the crappy graphics cards for what they are?

I like to run 1680x1050 res and I barely like to play without any AA...if people don't stop posting non-AA 3dmark benches I hope the program is just not used anymore and scrapped.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: votelibertarian35
no one cares about 3mark scores....Good God, can Futuremark change their benchmark so it defaults at 4x AA so it can expose the crappy graphics cards for what they are?

I like to run 1680x1050 res and I barely like to play without any AA...if people don't stop posting non-AA 3dmark benches I hope the program is just not used anymore and scrapped.

For the next version of 3D Mark I say they make some AA by default. That would solve this issue.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: votelibertarian35
no one cares about 3mark scores....Good God, can Futuremark change their benchmark so it defaults at 4x AA so it can expose the crappy graphics cards for what they are?

I like to run 1680x1050 res and I barely like to play without any AA...if people don't stop posting non-AA 3dmark benches I hope the program is just not used anymore and scrapped.

For the next version of 3D Mark I say they make some AA by default. That would solve this issue.

isn't it a part of the DX10.1 standard?

 

[JPB]

OP updated in bold text.

 

[BFG10K]

Let's just hope AMD put something on the new revision to help with AA.

According to Fudzilla AA is faster and uses less memory bandwidth while AF IQ has improved too.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: votelibertarian35
no one cares about 3mark scores....Good God, can Futuremark change their benchmark so it defaults at 4x AA so it can expose the crappy graphics cards for what they are?

I like to run 1680x1050 res and I barely like to play without any AA...if people don't stop posting non-AA 3dmark benches I hope the program is just not used anymore and scrapped.

For the next version of 3D Mark I say they make some AA by default. That would solve this issue.

And while they're at it, make them take the cpu score out of the equation, so at least I have a general idea that it takes a fast video card to score 10k, and not a lousy 8600gts with 8 cpu cores.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: votelibertarian35
no one cares about 3mark scores....Good God, can Futuremark change their benchmark so it defaults at 4x AA so it can expose the crappy graphics cards for what they are?

I like to run 1680x1050 res and I barely like to play without any AA...if people don't stop posting non-AA 3dmark benches I hope the program is just not used anymore and scrapped.

For the next version of 3D Mark I say they make some AA by default. That would solve this issue.

3DMark08 is expected soon, isn't it?

3DMark06 finally went to 12x10 resolution and i believe there is some filtering used ... that is improvement over 3DMark05

 

[ayabe]

I am really, really eager to how two of these in Xfire pan out with Phenom and the new chipset.

If they can get these out at $250 I would for the first time consider a dual GPU setup for my new rig. With close to 2900xt performance, two of these for $500 would murder a GTX.

 

[Snakexor]

Originally posted by: ayabe
I am really, really eager to how two of these in Xfire pan out with Phenom and the new chipset.

If they can get these out at $250 I would for the first time consider a dual GPU setup for my new rig. With close to 2900xt performance, two of these for $500 would murder a GTX.

I am in the same boat. Unfortunately its a lot of contingencies: Phenom must perform, run cool and o/c; rd790 must perform, run cool, and o/c; and rv670 must perform, run cool, and o/c.

If all that happens, however, I will definately be going back to AMD for my whole rig.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: ayabe
I am really, really eager to how two of these in Xfire pan out with Phenom and the new chipset.

If they can get these out at $250 I would for the first time consider a dual GPU setup for my new rig. With close to 2900xt performance, two of these for $500 would murder a GTX.

i would just try it with my current 2900xt ... for $250 ... if it is really almost 'just as fast' ... i still would consider it with an OC'd 2900pro but i can't find one for MSRP

and i start to think .. if the 2950p will performs close to a 2900xt for $250, what can we expect from the new flagship 2950xtx?

XTC ... or another r600 debacle when nvidia releases their new GPU?

 

[babcom]

Jeez, Fudzilla - first they say RV670/2950 is 55nm, then they say it's 65nm.
AFAIK it's 55nm. Would I be right?

 

[bryanW1995]

what about 2950xt? are they just planning to skip that? I thought that the high-end was going to be 2950x2xt or something like that.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

This sounds awesome. It also sounds like I'll be getting a video card for my birthday or christmas!

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: babcom
Jeez, Fudzilla - first they say RV670/2950 is 55nm, then they say it's 65nm.
AFAIK it's 55nm. Would I be right?

Yeah, I noticed that too. 55nm was the last I heard.

 

[bryanW1995]

in the DT article the other day they quoted TSMC as saying that rv670 would be 55nm.

 

[Avalon]

If by "improved AA performance", I wonder if they mean they added back dedicated AA hardware? One could hope. I'm almost completely sold on this card. When rebates start popping up for them, I can see a version of RV670 hitting the $200 price point, all while beating the 8800GT (or so it would look).

 

[bryanW1995]

well, if the rumored 8800gt prices are any indication, nvidia's reign of terror could soon be over...

 

[JPB]

Updates in bold !

 

[Munky]

Looks promising! I might just be getting a new card or two for my b-day. Haven't seen this kind of midrange performance potential since the 6600gt, and it's about time after a year of disappointments...

 

[lopri]

Not sure how this card can be exciting from performance point of view? All signs indicate the performance equal to or less than 2900 XT. Power/Thermal is a different issue and I welcome it whole-heartedly, though.

 

[Munky]

If they fix the huge performance hit when using AA, then it will be an exciting midrange card IMO. But I'm also interested in other factors, such as overclocking potential of the 750mhz Pro model, and the cost of the 850mhz+ XT model, assuming these rumors are true.

 

[Cookie Monster]

AA performance cannot be fixed unless AMD decided to change their hardware to have AA resolve done on the ROPs, then its a different story. But i dont think the latter is the case.

I would like to be proved wrong though

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: munky
If they fix the huge performance hit when using AA, then it will be an exciting midrange card IMO. But I'm also interested in other factors, such as overclocking potential of the 750mhz Pro model, and the cost of the 850mhz+ XT model, assuming these rumors are true.

You have to realize that there is no "huge performance hit" for enabling AA at the resolution this Card is aimed at ... the 16x10 LCD crowd and lower resolutions.

If you have 19x12 you are not even looking at it - except for X-Fire

 

[BFG10K]

AA performance cannot be fixed unless AMD decided to change their hardware to have AA resolve done on the ROPs, then its a different story. But i dont think the latter is the case.

With such big process shrinks I'd imagine they have plenty of space to add that back in. Maybe not ROPs per-se but they could beef up the AA resolve on the shaders so it'll still be programmable but run faster.