View Full Version : Amd 2900xt
Anyone have one / experience with one?
I am thinking about buying one. The performance is getting better and better with every driver release, and now that it cleans the 8800GTS 640 across the board for the same price, it's looking better than ever.
Anyone have one / experience with one?
I am thinking about buying one. The performance is getting better and better with every driver release, and now that it cleans the 8800GTS 640 across the board for the same price, it's looking better than ever.
Does it? I have not read anything recent on the card.
Does it? I have not read anything recent on the card.
It performs far better than it did at release; here is a semi-update article. Aside from buggy games, it clearly outperforms the 8800GTS 640 by quite a bit.
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1744&Itemid=40
YARDofSTUF
08-02-07, 11:33 AM
Does it still require a nuclear reactor for power?
Does it still require a nuclear reactor for power?
210 watts. :rockin: :D
If you had like a 550 or so you'd be fine. Honestly though, it needs the power because of how large the GPU is. Technically speaking (on paper), the card is actually very impressive. I still think there is quite a bit of performance to come with driver updates.
Not to mention, they're switching to 65nm in a month which should both run cooler and require less power.
YARDofSTUF
08-02-07, 11:40 AM
210 watts. :rockin: :D
If you had like a 550 or so you'd be fine. Honestly though, it needs the power because of how large the GPU is. Technically speaking (on paper), the card is actually very impressive. I still think there is quite a bit of performance to come with driver updates.
Not to mention, they're switching to 65nm in a month which should both run cooler and require less power.
Maybe it'll be decent, be nice to see more newer reviews on it, that one seems funny with how their clock speed changes here and there.
Sava700
08-02-07, 11:48 AM
210 watts. :rockin: :D
If you had like a 550 or so you'd be fine. Honestly though, it needs the power because of how large the GPU is. Technically speaking (on paper), the card is actually very impressive. I still think there is quite a bit of performance to come with driver updates.
Not to mention, they're switching to 65nm in a month which should both run cooler and require less power.
Ok wait, is this the same card as the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT 512mb?
Ok wait, is this the same card as the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT 512mb?
That's what it is. They have a 1GB version, but so far it's worthless.
Sava700
08-02-07, 12:27 PM
That's what it is. They have a 1GB version, but so far it's worthless.
Ok, then you might want to check out this
http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/431/
The reviews you saw just are not true. I've seen this card first hand also and I can tell you right now compared to the GTS its crap.
Okay, so here's how the verdict goes. AMD-ATI has had a very rough time launching this product. It was delayed and delayed and then delayed again. Obviously when you have 700 million transistors in a product, yet don't see the performance you expect, you try and solve tweak things. Now let's be fair here. Everybody was expecting and hoping for a product that would wipe the floor clean with NVIDIA's GeForce 8800 GTX/Ultra. That's just not the case. Performance wise the Radeon HD 2900 XT has a very hard time coming even close to these product in a lot of scenarios.
It is what it is, and the HD 2900 XT performance wise ended up in the lower to mid part of the high-end segment. Sometimes it has a hard time keeping up with a 320MB 8800 GTS, and in other scenarios we see performance close or equal to the GeForce 8800 GTX. Now that would be weird if we all had to pay 600 USD/EUR for it. AMD knows this, and knows it very well. This is why, and honestly this is fantastic, the product is launched at a 399 MSRP. Now I have been talking with a lot of board partners already and here in Europe the product will launch at 350 EUR; and that's just golden.
Also for power when you look at it System under load you have it hitting 400watts vs the 8800Ultra card at around 371 according to the above review..thats a big difference.
And to be honest ATI hasn't caught up with Nvidia for drivers yet as Nvidia has really been kicking out some nice ones here lately for both XP and Vista.
I wouldn't pass up a GTS for this card, but then again I wouldn't get either I'd go for the GTX for the extra cash..its worth it.:thumb:
Sava700
08-02-07, 12:28 PM
Also keep in mind your matching a 512mb card against a 640mb card, to me the numbers say it all plus just lookin through that review with those two and others in graphics you can clearly see whats better...sure some of the scores reflect the ATI card higher but look at what your gaining.... scores? Hell I'm more interested in Gaming performance and I've seen both in action.
Also keep in mind your matching a 512mb card against a 640mb card, to me the numbers say it all plus just lookin through that review with those two and others in graphics you can clearly see whats better...sure some of the scores reflect the ATI card higher but look at what your gaining.... scores? Hell I'm more interested in Gaming performance and I've seen both in action.
Good sir, that review is from May 12, 2007. They were losing to not only the 8800GTS 640s, but also the X1950XTXs, ATis previous generation card.
The review I posted was with the Catalyst 7.7, the newest available.
It is very important to read the review dates right now with the 2900XTs.
Btw, on paper, the 2900XT blows the 8800GTS away aside from the extra 100MB of memory.
Sava700
08-02-07, 03:23 PM
Good sir, that review is from May 12, 2007. They were losing to not only the 8800GTS 640s, but also the X1950XTXs, ATis previous generation card.
The review I posted was with the Catalyst 7.7, the newest available.
It is very important to read the review dates right now with the 2900XTs.
Btw, on paper, the 2900XT blows the 8800GTS away aside from the extra 100MB of memory.
the drivers are not going to make that much of a difference. Your looking a large amount of memory difference you HAVE to keep aside. The review is old but it stands true to what the results show.. if you don't believe me run over to guru3d's forums and read up on it..hell even post a thread like this one i'm sure you will get alot of the same results as I just put up.
I'm not trying to sell ya a Nvidia card..just trying to help you make the right decision. :thumb:
YARDofSTUF
08-02-07, 04:47 PM
....Drivers can make all that difference, nvidia did it once in the geforce mx days.
I'd like to see more newer reviews.
Sava700
08-02-07, 04:58 PM
....Drivers can make all that difference, nvidia did it once in the geforce mx days.
I'd like to see more newer reviews.
agreed.
with that Joel..just make sure you really read up on it before buying! :thumb:
agreed.
with that Joel..just make sure you really read up on it before buying! :thumb:
Aye thanks for the info.. If you look through the review I posted, you'll see that they compare the Catalyst 7.7s to the 7.6, and the difference is fairly substantial across the board (10% or so if I remember correctly).
That said, I too would like to find more newer reviews. It's unfortunate the drivers sucked as bad as they did when the card was reviewed. You have to think though, if you're still seeing increases that much on a single release, there is still a bit of performance to come out of the card.
Sava700
08-02-07, 06:51 PM
Aye thanks for the info.. If you look through the review I posted, you'll see that they compare the Catalyst 7.7s to the 7.6, and the difference is fairly substantial across the board (10% or so if I remember correctly).
That said, I too would like to find more newer reviews. It's unfortunate the drivers sucked as bad as they did when the card was reviewed. You have to think though, if you're still seeing increases that much on a single release, there is still a bit of performance to come out of the card.
The drivers used in guru3d's review back then were ATI Catalyst 8.37.4.2 47323 and the NVIDIA ForceWare 158.22, You go now and look both companies have released drivers since then but Nvidia has released far more in the means of enhancements and "upgrades" towards making improvements in Vista not to mention way better IQ in XP.
But that card along with a reference counterpart(8800 GTS 640) both prob show performance and IQ increases with any driver release or what sometimes happens even on a newer dated release I've seen cards go the other way. So just cause the drivers are newer don't always mean they are the best and each work different with different cards and systems.
I say look at the whole picture... loook at the watt usage, amount of Ram, Amount of bench results of which results higher overall, and which is cheaper(this sometimes means just that "crap card").
The drivers used in guru3d's review back then were ATI Catalyst 8.37.4.2 47323 and the NVIDIA ForceWare 158.22, You go now and look both companies have released drivers since then but Nvidia has released far more in the means of enhancements and "upgrades" towards making improvements in Vista not to mention way better IQ in XP.
But that card along with a reference counterpart(8800 GTS 640) both prob show performance and IQ increases with any driver release or what sometimes happens even on a newer dated release I've seen cards go the other way. So just cause the drivers are newer don't always mean they are the best and each work different with different cards and systems.
I say look at the whole picture... loook at the watt usage, amount of Ram, Amount of bench results of which results higher overall, and which is cheaper(this sometimes means just that "crap card").
Well, they're both the same price (~$389). The power usage is a very good point, but I have a more than capable PSU and don't pay for electricity here (office.. It's included in the rent), lol.
I don't know.. I've always found ATi image quality better than nVidia, and I've heard the Vista drivers are better for the ATi than nVidia right now.
Also, you really cannot trust the old reviews.. They're all from the same month and driver versions the card released with. Only the new ones, from mid-July on should be counted.
So no one has one?
Sava700
08-02-07, 10:15 PM
So no one has one?
well I did say I've seen one in action and I've seen the GTS in action....
the GTS hands down for IQ and performance... :thumb:
Well since no one else had one, I figured I'd get one and chime in since if nothing else, it's not much worse than the 8800GTS (;.
Problem is, I got it.. Plugged it in and everything, then turn it on: there are artifacts ALL over the screen, even on post. Segments of colored dots, looked like GPU issues to me - once that starts you can't get into the OS or anything as it'll crash.
So I RMA that one, and the second one comes in. Get it all hooked up and 10 minutes later it's doing the same thing. Here's where it gets odd though. I noticed with the first card that if you touched it in the right place, it would boot fine without any artifacts, however after a few minutes it would revert back and you wouldn't be able to boot. This made me wonder - I know it isn't a wide-spread heat issue as it does it directly on a cold boot.
I just took the HS off and put it back on. Right after that it worked for a minute, but then reverted. I just played with it a little and now it's working (posting with it in there) and I just ran a few games for a few minutes to stress test it.. Ran without issue.
So the question then is what is causing it to artifact and crap on a cold boot when, once touched in the right place, it'll play games no problem (basically the card isn't dead)? What's moving? Perhaps, when it stops working after 10 minutes something is heating up and moving, or the fan is moving and it causes something to move. I'm not sure but I know the card is fine, and I know that this is the second card doing this so the next one probably would too.
Opinions ftw.
Sava700
08-11-07, 09:48 AM
Well since no one else had one, I figured I'd get one and chime in since if nothing else, it's not much worse than the 8800GTS (;.
Problem is, I got it.. Plugged it in and everything, then turn it on: there are artifacts ALL over the screen, even on post. Segments of colored dots, looked like GPU issues to me - once that starts you can't get into the OS or anything as it'll crash.
So I RMA that one, and the second one comes in. Get it all hooked up and 10 minutes later it's doing the same thing. Here's where it gets odd though. I noticed with the first card that if you touched it in the right place, it would boot fine without any artifacts, however after a few minutes it would revert back and you wouldn't be able to boot. This made me wonder - I know it isn't a wide-spread heat issue as it does it directly on a cold boot.
I just took the HS off and put it back on. Right after that it worked for a minute, but then reverted. I just played with it a little and now it's working (posting with it in there) and I just ran a few games for a few minutes to stress test it.. Ran without issue.
So the question then is what is causing it to artifact and crap on a cold boot when, once touched in the right place, it'll play games no problem (basically the card isn't dead)? What's moving? Perhaps, when it stops working after 10 minutes something is heating up and moving, or the fan is moving and it causes something to move. I'm not sure but I know the card is fine, and I know that this is the second card doing this so the next one probably would too.
Opinions ftw.
I wouldn't expect anything less from ATI.... sorry thats not much help but thats my opinion on it as I already tried to convince you which way to go.
I wouldn't expect anything less from ATI.... sorry thats not much help but thats my opinion on it as I already tried to convince you which way to go.
You didn't give any reason to get the 8800GTS over the 2900XT, aside from "it's better." As the new reviews are showing, this is not the case.
The video card has been stable since the last post, so I think it might be good to go. Man does it rip up every game I've thrown at it. The latest beta drivers catalyst 7.8) increase adaptive antialiasing performance like, 5 times. No joke.
Sava700
08-11-07, 07:00 PM
You didn't give any reason to get the 8800GTS over the 2900XT, aside from "it's better." As the new reviews are showing, this is not the case.
The video card has been stable since the last post, so I think it might be good to go. Man does it rip up every game I've thrown at it. The latest beta drivers catalyst 7.8) increase adaptive antialiasing performance like, 5 times. No joke.
lol well to each his own... and there are some 162.50 WHQL's out the other day that are giving a nice boost in IQ and Performance for nvidia ;)
I would not put a 2900 XT in my primary gaming machine.
I would not put a 2900 XT in my primary gaming machine.
But they look so cool!
Seriously though, out of all the reviews I've seen, the 2900XT does the worst compared to the 8800GTS on [H]'s review. Also, the 7.8s do help with the 2900XTs biggest problem, applying antialiasing.. Not to mention it's about the same as the 8800GTS after a month or two. Just wait a few more months and we'll see how it stacks up then.
What's a good benchmark to try on this thing.
Sava700
08-12-07, 03:08 PM
But they look so cool!
Seriously though, out of all the reviews I've seen, the 2900XT does the worst compared to the 8800GTS on [H]'s review. Also, the 7.8s do help with the 2900XTs biggest problem, applying antialiasing.. Not to mention it's about the same as the 8800GTS after a month or two. Just wait a few more months and we'll see how it stacks up then.
What's a good benchmark to try on this thing.
well I read the reviews as well.. alot of them also as I've said before I've seen them in person perform and the 8800GTS out does it 2 to 1.
Nvidia trumps ATI just as Intel trumps AMD right now.. there is no getting around it.
well I read the reviews as well.. alot of them also as I've said before I've seen them in person perform and the 8800GTS out does it 2 to 1.
Nvidia trumps ATI just as Intel trumps AMD right now.. there is no getting around it.
I've read almost every review I could find, both with older drivers and with newer drivers. From what I can tell, the 2900XT was never too far behind the 8800 series, and is now consistently catching up and in quite a few cases beating the 8800GTS640, the card's direct competitor.
Honestly, here's how I look at it:
Nvidia came out with the 8800 series several months ago (I think 6 or 7 maybe?), whereas the 2900XT came out a month or two ago. Power requirements aside, I think we can both agree that even when the 2900XT loses to the 8800GTS, it's not far behind.
Now the 2900XT is newer, has wider memory bandwidth, and more shaders (albeit slower shaders). The problem is the drivers are both buggy and immature. This will of course change with time.
In some benchmarks (DX10 Rainbox Six Vegas, for example (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/503/8/) [that's a good review to flip through, by the way]), the 2900XT absolutely cleans up the competition. Is the card really so odd that it can perform so well in some games, but lose or barely beat ATis last generation top-dog, the X1950XTX?
I don't think so.. It all comes down to drivers at this point.
But they look so cool!
Seriously though, out of all the reviews I've seen, the 2900XT does the worst compared to the 8800GTS on [H]'s review. Also, the 7.8s do help with the 2900XTs biggest problem, applying antialiasing.. Not to mention it's about the same as the 8800GTS after a month or two. Just wait a few more months and we'll see how it stacks up then.
What's a good benchmark to try on this thing.
This is an attitude many ATI fans are holding onto "Just wait, drivers will fix it"
The problem is, drivers won't fix it. It was delayed in the first place by several months, ATI had a lot of time to fine tune drivers before the video card was actually released. It was released in May, it is now August. There have been 4 major driver releases since then, no major improvements have been realized. The problem isn't in the drivers, the problem is in the hardware.
Scroll down to the bottom of this page and read the first paragraph under "But you have to wait for new drivers!" - http://hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM2MCwxMywsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=
Sava700
08-12-07, 08:27 PM
nvm
No, I have the right review, I wanted Joel to read that first paragraph under "But you have to wait for new drivers!", it applies to the entire HD 2000 series. I will quote it here:
No. We don't. This cycle of releasing a late-to-market product with substandard software support and expecting consumers to sit about patiently awaiting new drivers to miraculously make the hardware worth the money they paid for it is pure nonsense. For this evaluation we went through two different driver revisions.
The problem isn't the drivers, they are not going to "fix it".
Sava700
08-12-07, 08:36 PM
No, I have the right review, I wanted Joel to read that first paragraph under "But you have to wait for new drivers!", it applies to the entire HD 2000 series. I will quote it here:
The problem isn't the drivers, they are not going to "fix it".
ohh ok well if thats the case yeah you are exactly correct, Nvidia is guilty too but at least they are one step ahead it seems with a new driver release every two weeks and beta's once a week.
I'm not so worried about the frequency of releases, ATI is very good on that end. I am more so concerned about the fact that the R600 was delayed a very long time, in which they had plenty of time to tweak drivers, yet it is very slow compared to the competition when it was released and in the past 4 months has not shown much improvement. People forget how delayed the R600 actually was.
Oh no, another review following the trend: http://www.mvktech.net/content/view/3641/39/1/0/
YARDofSTUF
08-13-07, 08:44 PM
Oh no, another review following the trend: http://www.mvktech.net/content/view/3641/39/1/0/
Thats unreadable, ****, they cant label their pages?
good or bad review?
Thats unreadable, ****, they cant label their pages?
good or bad review?
Bad review layout, I agree.
2900XT won 85% of the time against the 8800GTS640.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.