I'm thinking these reveiws may be legit but with one major problem and that is they are probably using drivers with no true HD2900XT support. ATi will not let them have those drivers till the last day/hours before official release no doubt.
... So they spent millions in R&D to make a card that gets owned by their own last gen part? Yes, that must be it :roll:
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
It can take several days to do a full benchmark review. No good site is going to use drivers that just showed up in the mail that night.
It's funny how people are bashing NVIDIA for their drivers and then saying these poor XT benchmarks are the result of bad drivers. :laugh: As if it's ok.
This is like the 4th or 5th leak showing doom and gloom.
I have a feeling they won't be able to beat NVIDIA on price either as it would be much easier for NVIDIA to take a price cut on a card they have been selling for 7 months than for a card that just came out.
However, I take all of this with a grain of salt until Newegg has em in stock and official reviews are up on the major sites.
Even if these results are true, the testing methods used so far appear to be half-assed. It's a shame that most sites now seem to lean one way or another so an average of all the sites will have to be used for a realistic picture.
Well, Sampsa already confirmed that the HD2900XT is great at 3dmark but not so great at games... Since he has the card and a very good reputation, Ill take his word for it
Very sad for AMD
If all these leaked review prove fairly accurate. A whole bunch of people are going to have to apologize to DT.
Performance wise, it may be disappointing, but it could still be a very good buy depending on pricing.
Performance wise, it may be disappointing, but it could still be a very good buy depending on pricing.
Have to apologize? I think they'll just forget...and move on to a new target.
Concern for the consequences of one's words isn't exactly at the heart of most R600 discussions.
i gotta find $175 in 30 days for a step up!!!! help!!
nvm... ill wait til Q3 for $266 quad cores
nvm... ill wait til Q3 for $266 quad cores
I dont know what to make of this review.
In Farcry at 1600x1200, the HD 2900XT is slower than the X1950XTX, X1900XT, and the X1950 Pro?
In Fear the HD 2900XT is 2fps faster than the X1950XTX?
Prey seems pretty reasonable, as does Q4.
In X3 the HD 2900XT is slower than the X1900XTX, and X1950XTX.
I dont know if its driver issues, or a poor review. But something in this review doesnt add up well. Could very well be driver issues. Guess we'll have to wait for real reviews.
In Farcry at 1600x1200, the HD 2900XT is slower than the X1950XTX, X1900XT, and the X1950 Pro?
In Fear the HD 2900XT is 2fps faster than the X1950XTX?
Prey seems pretty reasonable, as does Q4.
In X3 the HD 2900XT is slower than the X1900XTX, and X1950XTX.
I dont know if its driver issues, or a poor review. But something in this review doesnt add up well. Could very well be driver issues. Guess we'll have to wait for real reviews.
Gosh, that was a suprise huh? Worse than last weeks leaks. 7 Months late and a billion dollars short.
I love how the 2900xt rules a GTX in 3dmark, afterall, we know that is more important than the games.
Before they used to gear drivers to 3dmark, now they actually engineer silicon for 3Dmark.
Anyway, I hope some of you support AMD?ATYI, they need the support.
I love how the 2900xt rules a GTX in 3dmark, afterall, we know that is more important than the games.
Before they used to gear drivers to 3dmark, now they actually engineer silicon for 3Dmark.
Anyway, I hope some of you support AMD?ATYI, they need the support.
I cant see a new card, being slower than a budget card from last generation. The HD 2900XT slower than a X1950 Pro? C'mon... its either a driver issues, or bad benchmark. That cant be the norm.
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Very sad for AMD
A lot of people were very shocked by how well the 8800 performed. I think AMD should stop worrying about the performance crown and just get a good solid card to market. I think they lost the high end with the delay anyways, but the battle for the mid and low end can still be fought successfully.
If their plan was to wait and launch the whole lineup at once, I think that has been a bad idea as well. NVIDIA has already launched and is selling their full DX10 lineup.
I suspect if we were to learn the true reason for the delay, it might shed some light on the situation. Either way it seems we will find out something real next week.
Originally posted by: n7
Anyone notice the inconsistencies being the norm & the performance being poor the norm in all these "fake" reviews.
I don't think any of the reviews are fake...the HD 2900s are just a bust overall.
Only saving grace will be how they're priced...
Or if they're not well priced...then i foresee disaster.
I am already realizing i'm going to likely have to get an 8800 GTX :roll:
I can't wait to get back to the shi!t that is nV's drivers...not
I think you're on to something here. The inconsistencies in performance doesn't necessarily negate the legitimacy of the numbers put forth by a website. Maybe it's an architectural flaw or just very, very immature drivers.
Either way, I'm starting to think all these fake reviews are looking more and more legitimate. Time will tell, but it's fun to speculate nonetheless. If these numbers turn out to be true, a lot of people are going to be owing Daily Tech a huge apology :laugh:
I can't believe some of you guys believe this to be true. You think the card is so bad that it is outperformed by a 19500XT? Please.
Maybe this is intentional from ATi so that by the time the card comes everyone is shocked by its awesomeness.
Maybe this is intentional from ATi so that by the time the card comes everyone is shocked by its awesomeness.
Originally posted by: Pugnate
I can't believe some of you guys believe this to be true. You think the card is so bad that it is outperformed by a 19500XT? Please.
Maybe this is intentional from ATi so that by the time the card comes everyone is shocked by its awesomeness.
I think you're joking, but if it is true that ATI did this intentionally, then the reviews are legitimate at THAT time given that both the software/hardware was provided by ATI.
We'll see when more reviews are made available, but it's possible that all these reviews with these weird numbers could be correct. ATI is trying out a new architecture and maybe it just doesn't translate well to the way some games run.
Originally posted by: Pugnate
I can't believe some of you guys believe this to be true. You think the card is so bad that it is outperformed by a 1950XT? Please.
Maybe this is intentional from ATi so that by the time the card comes everyone is shocked by its awesomeness.
Thats what bugs me too... If the card sits somewhere between the 8800GTS and GTX in DX9, and takes the crown in DX10, its perfectly acceptable.. but getting kicked by the last gen part? Not even the 5800FX was that bad
Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Originally posted by: Pugnate
I can't believe some of you guys believe this to be true. You think the card is so bad that it is outperformed by a 1950XT? Please.
Maybe this is intentional from ATi so that by the time the card comes everyone is shocked by its awesomeness.
Thats what bugs me too... If the card sits somewhere between the 8800GTS and GTX in DX9, and takes the crown in DX10, its perfectly acceptable.. but getting kicked by the last gen part? Not even the 5800FX was that bad
Wasn't it? I vaguely remember it getting beat by the 4 series in some scenarios...
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Originally posted by: Pugnate
I can't believe some of you guys believe this to be true. You think the card is so bad that it is outperformed by a 1950XT? Please.
Maybe this is intentional from ATi so that by the time the card comes everyone is shocked by its awesomeness.
Thats what bugs me too... If the card sits somewhere between the 8800GTS and GTX in DX9, and takes the crown in DX10, its perfectly acceptable.. but getting kicked by the last gen part? Not even the 5800FX was that bad
Wasn't it? I vaguely remember it getting beat by the 4 series in some scenarios...
I think the FX 5800 Ultra will go down in history as one of those mythical video cards that couldn't even render 2d and ate children. The more time elapses, the worse the story gets about the FX 5800 Ultra.
What a lot of people are forgetting though, is that it's competition was simply a beast. The FX 5800 Ultra wasn't necessarily a bad card, especially in DX8, it was just a horrible card compared to its competitor in DX9.
I think by the time my post ends, the 5800 story will have morphed into a story about how the card murdered kittens.
Originally posted by: sisq0kidd
Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Originally posted by: Pugnate
I can't believe some of you guys believe this to be true. You think the card is so bad that it is outperformed by a 1950XT? Please.
Maybe this is intentional from ATi so that by the time the card comes everyone is shocked by its awesomeness.
Thats what bugs me too... If the card sits somewhere between the 8800GTS and GTX in DX9, and takes the crown in DX10, its perfectly acceptable.. but getting kicked by the last gen part? Not even the 5800FX was that bad
Wasn't it? I vaguely remember it getting beat by the 4 series in some scenarios...
I think the FX 5800 Ultra will go down in history as one of those mythical video cards that couldn't even render 2d and ate children. The more time elapses, the worse the story gets about the FX 5800 Ultra.
What a lot of people are forgetting though, is that it's competition was simply a beast. The FX 5800 Ultra wasn't necessarily a bad card, especially in DX8, it was just a horrible card compared to its competitor in DX9.
I think by the time my post ends, the 5800 story will have morphed into a story about how the card murdered kittens.
:laugh:
Thanks for the laugh
I agree though... I remember seeing the reviews because I was looking to buy (and did) a 9700 PRO back then, and although the card was bad, it wasnt THAT atrocious... it was mostly joked about because of being a leaf blower too... I still remember the videos
It wouldnt surprise me if R600 turned out to be another 5800u.
It doesnt matter how many gajillions of dollars ATI spent on R&D, what matters is the final product that came out of that R&D. You guys honestly don't believe that Nvidia spent millions on the NV30 R&D just to have it become the laughing stock of the industry do you?
Sh1t happens, things dont pan out and something that company A thought would be successful turns out to be a flop. It's actually no different than NV30's 4x2 architecture compared to R300's 8x1 architecture. To this very day, Nvidia's CEO swears that even though NV30 was unsuccessful, it pushed GPU design in the right direction.
It doesnt matter how many gajillions of dollars ATI spent on R&D, what matters is the final product that came out of that R&D. You guys honestly don't believe that Nvidia spent millions on the NV30 R&D just to have it become the laughing stock of the industry do you?
Sh1t happens, things dont pan out and something that company A thought would be successful turns out to be a flop. It's actually no different than NV30's 4x2 architecture compared to R300's 8x1 architecture. To this very day, Nvidia's CEO swears that even though NV30 was unsuccessful, it pushed GPU design in the right direction.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter