Monday, May 14, 2007

AMD HD 2900XT put Nvidia 8800 GTX to shame

Massive price/performance advantage , indeed.

26 Comments:

Blogger Roborat, Ph. D. said...

"AMD's HD2900XT put NVIDIA8800 to shame"

You're correct Sharikou. It's not right to gloat superiority over a declining and obviously struggling competition. Shame on you NVIDIA!

11:34 AM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Evil said...

Looks like Ph(ake)d can't read too well. Or has selective reasoning...


Note the review itself said

AMD has finally launched the long awaited ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT DirectX 10 video card. Its performance leaves it short of being named the king of the hill, but if you are willing to put up with extra heat and power consumption, it brings a long list of features and performs on the same level as the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS.


So Ph(ake)d how is that putting anything, ESPECIALLY the GTX to shame?

Now mind you a few posts ago you were ragging on Intel's power consumption, but yet no comment on AMD's MASSIVE power consumption here?

11:56 AM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Kevin said...

Evil, don't you get it? With all the power he saves using an AMD processor, he can afford the extra when it comes to an ATI video card.

(To write this post I allowed myself a brief moment in which to think like they do. It was very, very scary.)

12:00 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Evil said...

According to the last tests AMD's FASTEST desktop processor versus Intel's FASTEST desktop processor is only saving about 16 watts while under load.

The new AMD video card is sucking down 25w - 35w more than the 8800XTS which performance wise runs circles around the 2900XT....

So the Intel system with the Nvidia card is not only faster CPU wise, but also video card wise, and it's saving power too...

12:06 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger yomamafor2 said...

Not really.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/
Videocards/431/21/

12:29 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger symbiansn said...

The 3D engine shines in a few key areas, all crucial in shaping the game's atmosphere. It's got a huge draw distance, which leads to the palpable feeling that this is a big world. Lighting and shadowing are its other big strengths. For this benchmark we have the in-game settings at maximum (AA/AF enabled), Dynamic lighting was disabled as this feature is really for next-gen graphics cards performance wise.

From Guru3D.

Thus, they crippled whatever chances a next-gen 3D accelerator like 2900 XT had. What the point in running benchmarks where old-gen technologies like those of 8800GTX do better?

12:46 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Mo said...

Hey Sharikuku, the jokes on you. Selective reasoning is a very bad habit and you know it far too well.
How about these games where even the 8800GTS 320MB outdoes the 2900XT at FAR LESS power.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/503/9/
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/503/10/

It is a sad sad day for AMD.

12:47 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Bubba said...

From the article the Doctor linked to:

"the GeForce 8800 GTS is my recommendation over the Radeon HD 2900XT"

A mid range Nvidia card beats AMD's best

"While AMD has a much faster card than the ATI Radeon X1950XTX it can’t claim the title of fastest video card and most of the populace will declare that AMD has failed."

Yep.

"The problem with the 2900XT however begins and ends with power consumption and heat. Our test system consumed 326 watts under a normal gaming load and 184 watts at idle, that’s a lot of power for one video card folks."

Think about two of these in a Quad FX setup. Over a 1KW of heat, and still slower than a middle of the Intel system.

Thanks for the link Doctor!

12:51 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Bubba said...

Huh, sure is quiet around here.

The AMD fanboys must be stunned into silence. Even they realize the huge failure that R600 is.

Come on guys, shake it off. I need some entertainment!

1:41 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger abinstein said...

"Huh, sure is quiet around here.

The AMD fanboys must be stunned into silence. Even they realize the huge failure that R600 is."


It's quiet because few cares. The GTX market is less than 1% and even the GTS market is not big, but 2900XT clearly has better price/performance. Only hard-core fanboy would be foolish enough to prefer GTX/GTS over a much better price/performance R600.

2:12 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Owen said...

You obviously haven't read any other review.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM0MSw5LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

Read that. THEN tell me that the Radeon is faster.

2:39 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Evil said...

You mean just like the quad core desktop market?

Jebus, you AMD fanboi's really are deluded...

It's only important when AMD is winning, when Intel or NVidia is winning its either someone bought the vote or not important.


After you take into account all the power requirements and head pumped out by the AMD 2900XT, its quite clear even the 8800GTS is a good purchase.

After all, if the AMD fanboi's claim victory because the AMD cpu's IN SOME instances are saving a few watts over the Intel CPU's it only makes sense one should be able to say the same thing about the video cards...

No wonder you guys are the laughing stock of the CPU blog world...

Not only does your "leader" lie about his education, he quite clearly only posts what he wants, without looking at the truth....

2:41 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Mo said...

Abinstein, you're loosing it too.
8800GTS 640MB is $60-$70 cheaper than the 2900XT, it out performs majority of the gaming benchmarks. It does all that while consuming less power.
How can you say it's better lol?

What do you mean no one cares? You say it's 1% of the market and guess what, it's that 1% that frequents forums and such....Some of those are die hard AMD fanbois like yourself. But what can you say when your product is 7 months late and not even onpar with midrange 7 month old card.

2:42 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Evil said...

Owen said...
You obviously haven't read any other review.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM0MSw5LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

Read that. THEN tell me that the Radeon is faster.




OMG! NVidia owns HardOCP! They must! AMD technologies are ALWAYS faster than anything!

2:43 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger PENIX said...

I had expected AMD to stomp on Nvidia, just not this quickly. This is shocking. This throws off my whole investment calculations. Any other AMD investors thinking they need to buy sooner rather than later?

2:51 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger He said...

Only hard-core fanboy would be foolish enough to prefer GTX/GTS over a much better price/performance R600.

Wow, even in Sharikese.

2:51 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Evil said...

Kekekekekeeeekke

NVidia bodyslams AMD...

The Radeon HD 2900 XT is an inefficient power hog. Using the 2900 XT card will cost you more power than a GeForce 8800 GTX while delivering to you sub-8800 GTS performance. That is not a small difference in terms of performance per watt...

The Radeon HD 2900 XT looks to be wonderfully designed GPU architecture, but the ASIC being produced seems to be a terrible part. We can only hope we see the “next 2900” being produced at 65nm with a much more efficient ASIC design...


“A day late and a dollar short.” Cliché but accurate. The Radeon HD 2900 XT is late to the party and unfortunately is bringing with it performance that cannot compete. The GeForce 8800 GTS 640 MB is $50 cheaper, performs better, and draws a lot less power than the 2900 XT...


Penix is dreaming again. The 2900XT is a dud out of the gate.

2:57 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger R said...

“PENIX said...
I had expected AMD to stomp on Nvidia, just not this quickly. This is shocking. This throws off my whole investment calculations. Any other AMD investors thinking they need to buy sooner rather than later? “

I sold my stock today, (nice profit) I’m hoping for another pull back. I no longer have a dog in this hunt.
Btw, there is only one of two possible conclusions for the Intel/Amd pissing contest. Either K10 lives up to its performance claims or it don’t; either way some folks on this blog are going to look very silly.

3:47 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger IntelJugen_Das fanatic said...

Can i hook up my power amps to HD2900XT and get 5.1 surround sound?
Or do i need a decoder?

5:34 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger DaSickNinja said...

From all accounts, and by all, I mean the relatively nice ones like the new article from THG, the 2900 is quite mediocre. They cite it as hot, late, slow, needs better drivers, but in its defense, it still has cool untapped technology. Now with a 8 month handicap, exactly how is this card going to blood/frag/pwn NVIDIA?

5:46 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Randy Allen said...

The [H]ardOCP article is best, they don't just function on raw frame rates. But they summed it up well:- The 2900 offers performance below that of the 8800 GTS 640 and costs over $50 more. Who would buy that crap? The 8800 GTS 320 is selling for as low as $260 in some places, that's the best bang for the buck.

The 8800 GTX and 8800 Ultra are in a league of their own. People will remember this, so when Nvidia launches the Geforce 9 sometime in the future, and it does deliver the goods, people are going to buy it straight away. They're not going to wait for Ati with it's seven month delays!

7:04 PM, May 14, 2007  
Blogger Ho Ho said...

abinstein
"The GTX market is less than 1% and even the GTS market is not big, but 2900XT clearly has better price/performance"

Didn't NV just announce it had shipped millons of G80 GPUs? Also did you know you can get 640M GTS for around $350?

If GTX is 1% market then how big marketshare is XT targeting?


One review site said that with 750W PSU and case temperature of 52C it was impossible to get two XT's to work stable in CF. And people were complaining that C2 runs relatively hot. At least it doesn't need a 1kW PSU and insanely powerful ventilators to work stable.



penix
"Any other AMD investors thinking they need to buy sooner rather than later?"

I know one investor who bought a crapload of NV stocks. He didn't sell his AMD ones just yet, he wants to wait and see if he can sell them for the price he bought them a year ago.

12:03 AM, May 15, 2007  
Blogger pezal said...

For the time being for sure we can see that R2900XT is loss to Nvidia.. No doubt.. But, you intel fanboy must remember, R600 is designed for the future games that will used DX10 as an interface. At least this is what AMD/ATI said as below:

Unleash the Gaming Power of DirectX® 10
The ATI Radeon™ HD 2900 unleashes the power of DirectX® 10 with awesome performance, stunning visual effects, and more dynamic interactivity than ever before. Surpass reality with easy CrossFire™ scalability, built-in HDMI, and 5.1 surround audio for an immersive HD Gaming experience.


So, since all of the tests were done under DX9.0c, rather than it supposed to run under DX10, for me, we still can’t conclude that the 2900XT is totally get beaten by nvidia 8800GTX. I bet, combination of Barcelona+R600+AMD690chipset+HT3.0 this Q3 will boost AMD system performance to the higher level that unbeatable neither by Intel nor by Nvidia..

Go amd go go..

1:11 AM, May 15, 2007  
Blogger Paul said...

I would not say that! but I think that the R600 GPU shows amazing potential ATI-AMD have a winner here without touching stream, HDsound, Video decomp-comp, CTM drivers yet! .

Wait to they release the 65nm revision and some better drivers for DX-9c then its going to crank especially in the Crossfire with more than 2 cards..
Now you tie this to Phenom x4 and the industry is going to be revolutionized.. Microsoft won't be so crabby as we will all flock to Vista and its DX10 future.. look for Stream-API from MS to complete the AMD revolution.

2:06 AM, May 15, 2007  
Blogger Ho Ho said...

Interesting is that R600 is over half a year late and they still have awful driver quality. They had the time to dewbug them and make them work but they failed.

Who wants to bet if NV has its 65nm version of G80 out before Christmas this year or not? Remember, we are currently comparing 90nm G80 vs 80nm R600 and the first one being considerably better.

5:07 AM, May 15, 2007  
Blogger N4CR said...

Not really, only on the one you linked really. BUT - same thing with the x800xt. I bought one shortly after launch when the phantom edition came out and noone got one. They speed binned alot of PE's to x800xt cus they overclock easy peasy to PE levels.

Benchmarking side, the 6800u was beating it in everything apart from HL2 when I got it. Then over the space of about 5 months the X800xt came out top in everything by alot apart from doom3 pretty much. Drivers are what make ATI so good... like fine wine :)

This card will leapfrog as drivers progress most likely.

Long time no see sharikou-blog ^_^

3:14 PM, May 19, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home