Whats with the hype of the X1900's?

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: Frostwake
The point here is - x1900xt was a great launch by Ati, being the fastest card at a much better price than the competition, so of course its worth buying one if you can (just as it was worth buying 7800GTX at the time), specially because performance will probably improve quite a bit in future drivers

I think its stupid to wait for G71 because

1 - We dont know how fast it will be, and if it will catch up with features with Ati
2 - We dont know which price it will be
3 - This is the most important one - has anyone forgot that r520/580 architeture supports GDDR4 ? Now why would they support something that will never get used? My hunch is that about a month after G71 appears, ati will launch some kind of r590 which = r580 with 700+ core/ 2.5~ ghz GDDR4 memory

Then people that waited for G71 would go "man i didnt think ati would release such a card this soon!!! im screwed"... thats why theres no point waiting for G71.. just like theres no point waiting for any card, as long as it doesnt come out 2 weeks from now or so

my 2 cents

Exacty. On G71 release day all the ATI fans will be saying 'Hey, wait, don't buy that card. ATI's new 1950XTX will be out soon and it will blow the doors off the G71." Then on 1950XTX release day someone will say wait for the G80. And so on and so on.

No matter how many times people say this though, there are some die-hard Nvidia fans here who are gonna keep repeating the "Wait for G71" mantra over and over.

 

[schtuga]

Both companies make great cards.
Between the 2 everyone should be able to find a great card /at the price point/budget they have.

It all comes to preference.
I won't argue ATI has better tech,but because they are so poorly managed I avoid them unless it's just a budget card for a backup rig,but will never tell anybody they are crazy for spending their money the way they want.

Buy what ever card you want and enjoy.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Overall- I certainly wouldn't expect a 32 pipe 750MHz part from nV, they don't need anything remotely close to that to throttle ATi in pretty much every bench- and it would be a complete waste of margins for them to do it unless they shipped it as an ultra expensive part. This situation is akin to when ATi was about to push out the R9800Pro, they didn't need any sort of major improvement- pushing for more would reduce yields and profitability. nVidia doesn't need mindshare right now, they have been king of the hill for too long to worry about it. A simple slight step above ATi in most benches and watch the cash roll in would be their best bet from a business standpoint.

I agree. All this talk of a 32-pipe monster card is just wishful thinking by Nvidia fans and they're setting themselves up for dissapointment. I think G71 is just going to be a 90nm die shrink of the G70 which will enable higher clock speeds. So the new cards will just be 512MB GTX's with an even higher clock speed (600-650MHz?). Should be just enough to give it the performance win over a 1900XTX, though it will still be lacking in features like HDR+AA.

I agree. All this talk of the X1900XTX dominance is just wishful thinking by ATI Dongle Boys. It's not a clear winner against last years GTX512 and a NVIDIA refresh should put is safely at the back of the line. The XTX was a nice card though it is still lacking features like VTF

While my response was dripping with sarcasm, look how easily it mirrors the quote above which was meant to be taken seriously.

Nice one Wreckage! I'm so sick of fanboism by now.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Overall- I certainly wouldn't expect a 32 pipe 750MHz part from nV, they don't need anything remotely close to that to throttle ATi in pretty much every bench- and it would be a complete waste of margins for them to do it unless they shipped it as an ultra expensive part. This situation is akin to when ATi was about to push out the R9800Pro, they didn't need any sort of major improvement- pushing for more would reduce yields and profitability. nVidia doesn't need mindshare right now, they have been king of the hill for too long to worry about it. A simple slight step above ATi in most benches and watch the cash roll in would be their best bet from a business standpoint.

I agree. All this talk of a 32-pipe monster card is just wishful thinking by Nvidia fans and they're setting themselves up for dissapointment. I think G71 is just going to be a 90nm die shrink of the G70 which will enable higher clock speeds. So the new cards will just be 512MB GTX's with an even higher clock speed (600-650MHz?). Should be just enough to give it the performance win over a 1900XTX, though it will still be lacking in features like HDR+AA.

I agree. All this talk of the X1900XTX dominance is just wishful thinking by ATI Dongle Boys. It's not a clear winner against last years GTX512 and a NVIDIA refresh should put is safely at the back of the line. The XTX was a nice card though it is still lacking features like VTF

While my response was dripping with sarcasm, look how easily it mirrors the quote above which was meant to be taken seriously.

you lose all credability with that post

You are not make any sense...............................................

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Frostwake
The point here is - x1900xt was a great launch by Ati, being the fastest card at a much better price than the competition, so of course its worth buying one if you can (just as it was worth buying 7800GTX at the time), specially because performance will probably improve quite a bit in future drivers

I think its stupid to wait for G71 because

1 - We dont know how fast it will be, and if it will catch up with features with Ati
2 - We dont know which price it will be
3 - This is the most important one - has anyone forgot that r520/580 architeture supports GDDR4 ? Now why would they support something that will never get used? My hunch is that about a month after G71 appears, ati will launch some kind of r590 which = r580 with 700+ core/ 2.5~ ghz GDDR4 memory

Then people that waited for G71 would go "man i didnt think ati would release such a card this soon!!! im screwed"... thats why theres no point waiting for G71.. just like theres no point waiting for any card, as long as it doesnt come out 2 weeks from now or so

my 2 cents

Yep, some NV fans are just a little upset, because NV doesnt have the fastest card available anymore, nor the more advanced. And they havent since the X1800XT came out.

I wouldnt wait if I was looking to buy a new card right now. No matter if it was reversed and ATi was coming out with a new card to go against NV's newest card. Just two weeks ago a friend asked me if I thought he should wait for the X1900, or get a X1800. I said dont wait, because they may be limited, and probably priced high for the first month or so. He bought a X1800, and I was wrong. He got it locally, so he just returned it. And got a X1900 for $40 more than he paid for the X1800. Sometimes it pays to wait, other times it doesnt. With NV's last fiasco of a release, and still sky high prices, I wouldnt bet that it will be widely available and priced anywhere close to the X1900's.

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Nice one Wreckage! I'm so sick of fanboism by now.

Lol. As if you and Wreckage were not fanboys. That's a good one.

You are not make any sense...............................................

:laugh: Another good one. You realize of course your sentence barely makes any sense since it's improper grammar. I'll cut you some slack though since I'm assuming English is not your first language.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: Frostwake
The point here is - x1900xt was a great launch by Ati, being the fastest card at a much better price than the competition, so of course its worth buying one if you can (just as it was worth buying 7800GTX at the time), specially because performance will probably improve quite a bit in future drivers

I think its stupid to wait for G71 because

1 - We dont know how fast it will be, and if it will catch up with features with Ati
2 - We dont know which price it will be
3 - This is the most important one - has anyone forgot that r520/580 architeture supports GDDR4 ? Now why would they support something that will never get used? My hunch is that about a month after G71 appears, ati will launch some kind of r590 which = r580 with 700+ core/ 2.5~ ghz GDDR4 memory

Then people that waited for G71 would go "man i didnt think ati would release such a card this soon!!! im screwed"... thats why theres no point waiting for G71.. just like theres no point waiting for any card, as long as it doesnt come out 2 weeks from now or so

my 2 cents

x1900xt is a great card for its price for shader heavy games. But if you play OpenGl / stencil shader heavy game more than shader heavy game, then you should wait for G71 or something newer.


If G71 come out with 32 pipelines then It'll have a more balanced performance across all games, not just shader heavy..

Though for the price <$500, x1900xt is no doubt an excellent card to buy.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: beggerking
x1900xt is a great card for its price for shader heavy games. But if you play OpenGl / stencil shader heavy game more than shader heavy game, then you should wait for G71 or something newer.

If G71 come out with 32 pipelines then It'll have a more balanced performance across all games, not just shader heavy..

Though for the price <$500, x1900xt is no doubt an excellent card to buy.

OpenGL is not the future; the future is DirectX and pixel shader heavy games. Doom3 and D3 engine games make up the bulk of stencil heavy games.

The whole point of the X1900 series is that in theory, it is a great card for future games where the shader load will only get heavier. On paper, X1900's design makes a lot of sense, and it closely mirrors the Xbox360's GPU design.

Regarding G71, I'm pretty sure it will be a 32 pipe card, and I have no question it will put up dominant numbers for older games. But for late 2005 games and onwards, I don't think G71 will be dominating anything; I think it will be a tight race.

Why can you guys not just bite the bullet and accept the fact that the X1900XTX is the king for now, and that the G71 will probably be the fastest thing when it debuts?

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: beggerking

Nice one Wreckage! I'm so sick of fanboism by now.

Lol. As if you and Wreckage were not fanboys. That's a good one.

You are not make any sense...............................................

:laugh: Another good one. You realize of course your sentence barely makes any sense since it's improper grammar. I'll cut you some slack though since I'm assuming English is not your first language.

I'm not. Read my posts and you'll know.

ya, you are not making any sense. How does 1 spelling error makes you assume my ethnity?

You are letting your ATI fanboyism polluting your common sense and your judgement. What a shame. I'm gonna cut you some slack by not calling you names.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Originally posted by: beggerking
x1900xt is a great card for its price for shader heavy games. But if you play OpenGl / stencil shader heavy game more than shader heavy game, then you should wait for G71 or something newer.

If G71 come out with 32 pipelines then It'll have a more balanced performance across all games, not just shader heavy..

Though for the price <$500, x1900xt is no doubt an excellent card to buy.

OpenGL is not the future; the future is DirectX and pixel shader heavy games. Doom3 and D3 engine games make up the bulk of stencil heavy games.

The whole point of the X1900 series is that in theory, it is a great card for future games where the shader load will only get heavier. On paper, X1900's design makes a lot of sense, and it closely mirrors the Xbox360's GPU design.

Regarding G71, I'm pretty sure it will be a 32 pipe card, and I have no question it will put up dominant numbers for older games. But for late 2005 games and onwards, I don't think G71 will be dominating anything; I think it will be a tight race.

Why can you guys not just bite the bullet and accept the fact that the X1900XTX is the king for now, and that the G71 will probably be the fastest thing when it debuts?

what you said is all true according to ATI, not general public / developers.

in general, students in colleges were taught to program in opengl rather than DX just a few month ago when my friend was in it, so what ATI said may or may not be true. But I would rather have a videocard that is fast in all games than to have one that is only fast in same.

only time will tell.

 

[5150Joker]

BF2 with 4x adaptive antialiasing and in-game AF (angle independent set in CCC): http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/1739/screen1361uc.jpg

With AAA + HQ AF turned on and everything in the game set to high, this thing easily outperforms my GTX. When I had my GTX I set half the settings on medium, no HQ AF and definitely not TRSSAA yet it still got lower fps than this card does with the aforementioned settings. Can't wait until the cpu I ordered is in stock so Dell can ship it.

 

[RobertR1]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
BF2 with 4x adaptive antialiasing and in-game AF (angle independent set in CCC): http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/1739/screen1361uc.jpg

With AAA + HQ AF turned on and everything in the game set to high, this thing easily outperforms my GTX. When I had my GTX I set half the settings on medium, no HQ AF and definitely not TRSSAA yet it still got lower fps than this card does with the aforementioned settings. Can't wait until the cpu I ordered is in stock so Dell can ship it.

Have you tried 6xAAA? The performance hit shouldn't be that much greater than 4xAAA

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: RobertR1

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
BF2 with 4x adaptive antialiasing and in-game AF (angle independent set in CCC): http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/1739/screen1361uc.jpg

With AAA + HQ AF turned on and everything in the game set to high, this thing easily outperforms my GTX. When I had my GTX I set half the settings on medium, no HQ AF and definitely not TRSSAA yet it still got lower fps than this card does with the aforementioned settings. Can't wait until the cpu I ordered is in stock so Dell can ship it.

Have you tried 6xAAA? The performance hit shouldn't be that much greater than 4xAAA

Not yet, I'm going to do a lot more benchmarking and playtesting when I get back home later today.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Originally posted by: beggerking
x1900xt is a great card for its price for shader heavy games. But if you play OpenGl / stencil shader heavy game more than shader heavy game, then you should wait for G71 or something newer.

If G71 come out with 32 pipelines then It'll have a more balanced performance across all games, not just shader heavy..

Though for the price <$500, x1900xt is no doubt an excellent card to buy.

OpenGL is not the future; the future is DirectX and pixel shader heavy games. Doom3 and D3 engine games make up the bulk of stencil heavy games.

The whole point of the X1900 series is that in theory, it is a great card for future games where the shader load will only get heavier. On paper, X1900's design makes a lot of sense, and it closely mirrors the Xbox360's GPU design.

Regarding G71, I'm pretty sure it will be a 32 pipe card, and I have no question it will put up dominant numbers for older games. But for late 2005 games and onwards, I don't think G71 will be dominating anything; I think it will be a tight race.

Why can you guys not just bite the bullet and accept the fact that the X1900XTX is the king for now, and that the G71 will probably be the fastest thing when it debuts?

what you said is all true according to ATI, not general public / developers.

in general, students in colleges were taught to program in opengl rather than DX just a few month ago when my friend was in it, so what ATI said may or may not be true. But I would rather have a videocard that is fast in all games than to have one that is only fast in same.

only time will tell.

Ati has spent some time analyzing 3d apps under development when designing the r5xx cards, as well as talking to game developers. Seeing how the cards were designed a few years ago and the shader-heavy design philosophy has been used increasingly in modern games, I'd say Ati has a pretty good idea where things are going. I code in OpenGL also, and I'd much rather code OpenGL than DX, but you cant deny the fact that the large majority of games are DX, not OpenGL. Likewise, it's clear as daylight that most if not all popular games today use shaders (yes, even Doom3). So it's a naive assumption that the g70 will have more balanced performance overall, when the majority of games are in fact becoming increasingly shader heavy.

 

[gsellis]

You guys are missing the serious issue with all of these one-up releases by ATI and nVidia. With each release, they are adding more letters and numbers. By Q208, I think the model names will be longer than a single line in a browser!

ATI XTX3900900))) XTXPEXXX TYPE-R OMGBBQJUSTADDWATERNOX150SHOTSUPERCHARGED

vs

nVidia ATI XTXXXX890078900 PEXXXGTXXX TYPE-GTP BBQOMGWENEEDLIQUIDNITROGENANDYOURDOGWANTSONE

Now back to your regularly scheduled denial and flamefest.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: munky
Ati has spent some time analyzing 3d apps under development when designing the r5xx cards, as well as talking to game developers. Seeing how the cards were designed a few years ago and the shader-heavy design philosophy has been used increasingly in modern games, I'd say Ati has a pretty good idea where things are going. I code in OpenGL also, and I'd much rather code OpenGL than DX, but you cant deny the fact that the large majority of games are DX, not OpenGL. Likewise, it's clear as daylight that most if not all popular games today use shaders (yes, even Doom3). So it's a naive assumption that the g70 will have more balanced performance overall, when the majority of games are in fact becoming increasingly shader heavy.

I was going to make a similar comment; "shaders" != DirectX. OpenGL programs can (and do) use fragment shaders, which exercise the same GPU hardware as DirectX pixel/vertex shaders. Shader-heavy OpenGL games should *also* run very well on R580.

ATI's OpenGL performance also seems to have improved considerably in the last six months or so. They're now neck-and-neck with NVIDIA (or even sometimes slightly ahead) in Doom3/Quake4 benchmarks, at least with AA/AF enabled.

 

[John Reynolds]

Anyone arguing that the bottleneck isn't the math performed on these pixels frankly has their head up their ass, for whatever reason (ignorance, fanboy-itis, etc.).

 

[tvdang7]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
i would think the return on the x1900 should be pretty damn, even in 6 weeks. I'm personally going to wait but i must admit, i am a bit worried based on the GTX 512 "launch".

The people who want ATI no matter what will buy X1900XTs, and rightly so. It's the best product they've put out since the 9700Pro.

The people who want to have the best card should wait, because the X1900XTX will not be it, or even close. The games that are shader limited are FEAR and FEAR between......errr, Few and Far between and the 7900s massive fillrate advantage, coupled with a large bandwidth advantage, should destroy the X1900XTX in all current games not spelled F-E-A-R.

what about the 9800 pro honestly every one had that card.

 

[fierydemise]

The great irony here is that this is reverse of what we saw a few months ago when we heard R520 was delayed. You had some people arguing that you can wait forever because there is always something better around the corner better to buy the best you can now, and you had other people saying better to wait because according to rumors there is a 32 pipe monster on the horizon. Now the people in the first group are in the second and the people in the second are in the first, this is really sad you guys, take a stand and keep it don't change it depending on how your company of choice is doing.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
i would think the return on the x1900 should be pretty damn, even in 6 weeks. I'm personally going to wait but i must admit, i am a bit worried based on the GTX 512 "launch".

The people who want ATI no matter what will buy X1900XTs, and rightly so. It's the best product they've put out since the 9700Pro.

The people who want to have the best card should wait, because the X1900XTX will not be it, or even close. The games that are shader limited are FEAR and FEAR between......errr, Few and Far between and the 7900s massive fillrate advantage, coupled with a large bandwidth advantage, should destroy the X1900XTX in all current games not spelled F-E-A-R.

See 3 posts above...

We'll just wait and see who was right

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: munky
Ati has spent some time analyzing 3d apps under development when designing the r5xx cards, as well as talking to game developers. Seeing how the cards were designed a few years ago and the shader-heavy design philosophy has been used increasingly in modern games, I'd say Ati has a pretty good idea where things are going. I code in OpenGL also, and I'd much rather code OpenGL than DX, but you cant deny the fact that the large majority of games are DX, not OpenGL. Likewise, it's clear as daylight that most if not all popular games today use shaders (yes, even Doom3). So it's a naive assumption that the g70 will have more balanced performance overall, when the majority of games are in fact becoming increasingly shader heavy.

I was going to make a similar comment; "shaders" != DirectX. OpenGL programs can (and do) use fragment shaders, which exercise the same GPU hardware as DirectX pixel/vertex shaders. Shader-heavy OpenGL games should *also* run very well on R580.

ATI's OpenGL performance also seems to have improved considerably in the last six months or so. They're now neck-and-neck with NVIDIA (or even sometimes slightly ahead) in Doom3/Quake4 benchmarks, at least with AA/AF enabled.

From what I've read ATI still lags in OpenGL. you can defend ATI all you want ,but i'm not going into that argument again because its just a waste of time, I can't change your preference.

like I have said in another thread, IMHO I believe ATI will come out with a 24 or 32 texture processor card to match G71's supposely 32 pipeline in games w/o heavy shader use.

 

[Alaa]

nvidia will release a card to run future games when future games are there! i think unified arch. will be the future route anyway

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: beggerking
[
From what I've read ATI still lags in OpenGL. you can defend ATI all you want ,but i'm not going into that argument again because its just a waste of time, I can't change your preference.

like I have said in another thread, IMHO I believe ATI will come out with a 24 or 32 texture processor card to match G71's supposely 32 pipeline in games w/o heavy shader use.

You have been doing nothing but for the past two days all the while arguing the smallest, most insignificant points. You win, please retire.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: beggerking
From what I've read ATI still lags in OpenGL. you can defend ATI all you want ,but i'm not going into that argument again because its just a waste of time, I can't change your preference.

A little, but it's much, much closer now. To the point where it's hardly worth shifting your buying decision based on it unless ALL you play is a particular OpenGL game/games.

In AT's X1900 article, with AA/AF enabled in Quake4, the X1800XT is beating the 7800GTX 256MB, and the X1900XT is only slightly slower than the much more expensive 7800GTX "Ultra" 512MB. link. *shrug*

like I have said in another thread, IMHO I believe ATI will come out with a 24 or 32 texture processor card to match G71's supposely 32 pipeline in games w/o heavy shader use.

You're really, really stuck on this idea now.

I don't think they really *need* to (unless G71 is relatively cheap, highly clocked, and has 32 full pipelines, but R580 would still be competitive in shader-heavy games), and doing so would either increase transistor count (driving up costs and power/heat) or reduce the number of pixel/vertex shaders. From the looks of upcoming games like ES4: Oblivion and UT2K7, 'heavy shader use' is going to be the norm rather than the exception going forwards, although the way NVIDIA is doing it is clearly a safer bet for legacy/current software.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: beggerking
[
From what I've read ATI still lags in OpenGL. you can defend ATI all you want ,but i'm not going into that argument again because its just a waste of time, I can't change your preference.

like I have said in another thread, IMHO I believe ATI will come out with a 24 or 32 texture processor card to match G71's supposely 32 pipeline in games w/o heavy shader use.

You have been doing nothing but for the past two days all the while arguing the smallest, most insignificant points. You win, please retire.

and you have been going against me with comments like this. Do you have anything to contribute? if not, please retire.