x2900XTX Pics and Benchmarks

[NoPeace]

You must be registered to see links

Next, we got hold of some preliminary benchmarks figures of the R600 XTX card with core clock at 800MHz vs a GeForce 8800 GTX card. Using a Core 2 Extreme 2.93GHz processor on an Intel 975X board, the 3DMark06 score at 1600x1200 resolution is 97xx on the R600XTX compared to 95xx on the 8800GTX. Seems like R600XTX is running slightly faster than 8800GTX on the early release of drivers for R600. AMD is still working hard on the drivers and there are some more performance left to unlock. However, the DX10 benchmarking war between ATi and NVIDIA has not started yet. The targeted display driver version for launch in May is 8.361 or later (Catalyst 7.4 or 7.5).

Only 200marks faster and running much hotter... I would like to see what the 8800Ultra/8900GTX will do compared to the x2900XTX.

NoPeace - out

 

[kip0130]

oh very nice so this means the 8800's have competition!

 

[Sardaukar]

I think.. that this may have royally screwed the AMD/ATI grouping if it cant get much better.. especially since this was based on the 80nm that the 8800's are on and its pulling 1 gig of memory. The 65 had better be damn better, because if it isnt the maket is going to veer real far away form any AMD/ATI cards until they get their theoretical 'poop' straight.



Ugh, almost depressing to see the stats on their 80nm 1 gig x2900xtx.

Almost wish AMD had gone ahead with their 65nm's instead of working on the 80 dual cores still... really gave them a sucker bunch when intel jumped the gun like they did, almost a year of straight losses.. minus the price drops that has been put on the AMD x2 chips.. have you seen the prices they are hitting? damned near 100 bucks for an x2 4200 O.O the 4600 had a -38% price drop just this week.. freakin spooky on whats happening with the market.

 

[NoPeace]

I think.. that this may have royally screwed the AMD/ATI grouping if it cant get much better.. especially since this was based on the 80nm that the 8800's are on and its pulling 1 gig of memory. The 65 had better be damn better, because if it isnt the maket is going to veer real far away form any AMD/ATI cards until they get their theoretical 'poop' straight.

8800s are actually on 90nm. They was thinking of doing the 8900s with a 80nm die shrink and the 9800s with a 65nm die shrink.

The 65nm version of the x2900s should just make it run cooler and lower the power usage as right now the 80nm are drawing 240w! 100w more then a 8800GTX.

So you are looking at a small fraction of performance for nearly double heat output and power drain. That's the major reason why I do not want one.

So this is going to hurt AMD a lot if the can't get the 65nm going. nVidia will release an upgraded version of the 8800GTX which should be just as good as this card from the current looks of it, but it will use much less power and of course be quieter.

It'll be like the x1900XTX vs 7900GTX again but ATI wont have the edge of better video quality this time around.

Ugh, almost depressing to see the stats on their 80nm 1 gig x2900xtx.

Almost wish AMD had gone ahead with their 65nm's instead of working on the 80 dual cores still... really gave them a sucker bunch when intel jumped the gun like they did, almost a year of straight losses.. minus the price drops that has been put on the AMD x2 chips.. have you seen the prices they are hitting? damned near 100 bucks for an x2 4200 O.O the 4600 had a -38% price drop just this week.. freakin spooky on whats happening with the market.

It was 90nm that the where obsessed over. =P

AMD should have done 65nm long ago but took it's time. I wonder how much money they lost because of it?

Sure the 90nm A64's owned the PD's but when the C2D came out they couldn't do anything against it as 90nm used to much power in comparisons.

Now they are finally at the same level as Intel and it just took them a year of losses to do so. Hopefully when the K10's come out it'll bring a better light on AMD.

NoPeace - out

 

[SantaClaus1]

this thread is pointless
this is the 80 nm version
and drivers r in alpha stage
same with the 8800 gtx when the first benchmarks appeared with alpha drivers they were upto 10% slower then benchmarks now

cant do anything with these benchmarks
useless

 

[whitemist]

Its better then nothing i gotta say both ati and amd have been lacking behind, unless they have some grand plan that will blow nivida out of the water, they really need to get back on the fast track.

 

[NoPeace]

this thread is pointless
this is the 80 nm version
and drivers r in alpha stage
same with the 8800 gtx when the first benchmarks appeared with alpha drivers they were upto 10% slower then benchmarks now

cant do anything with these benchmarks
useless

Well according to a lot of reports the 80nm version is going to be the first released versions with the 65nm latter on.

And the drivers are working beta ones.

So with driver optimization it will be faster but not much faster. 10% is doable but even with a 10% boost it's still not much faster then what it is already over the G80 core.

Not to mention an enhanced version of the G80 will be released and it will probably yield the same results as the R600.

And true synthetic benchmarks are useless, but they do test the power of the card and see what it is capable of doing. Higher the card is in them the better they typically do in games. It's a good baseline indication of how the card will perform compared to others.

You know how the G80 performs in games and it scores in the 95xx range. And you know how much of a difference in performance that other cards are from what they score. So you can conclude the average performance of what the R600 will be by knowing that it scores in the 97xx range.

Not to mention, if you buy these cards you will be running synthetics anyways. It's just what 90+% of the people who buys them do. So they will want to know what it does in 3DMark 06.

I myself would want to know what it does in 3DMark 03 as that's my favourite synthetic benchmark.

Its better then nothing i gotta say both ati and amd have been lacking behind, unless they have some grand plan that will blow nivida out of the water, they really need to get back on the fast track.

Yes they are lacking. They was spoused to release this card back in November but AMD bought ATI and it delayed it till end of January. Then what? They decided that the damn card was stupidly demanding and decided to make it on 65nm process and that just slapped them in the face because the yields are to low to be of good usage. So what did they do? They pushed their end of February launch back even future to buy them some more time to work out the problems with the 65nm process and to have a marketing gimmick of them launching all of their ranges of cards at once.

What does all that mean? nVidia will have 6 months to monopolize the market. They have the faster cards out in the high end market. Causing AMD to loose all the business from there. Not only that. They are the only company with DX10 products. That gives nVidia 100% of the DX10 market. Not only that. All of the upcomming DX10 games will run better on the nVidia cards since they are only able to be developed on nVidia cards so they can make the full use of them and not the AMD ones.

The same thing happen back when you first had DX9. ATI was the first out and it took nVidia ages to compete. All the DX9 games were made on the ATI hardware and the first wave of DX9 games came out it was no shocker that ATI had the best DX9 cards.

And if that isn't worse. nVidia is planning on launching a card that is sposed to be as good if not better then the R600 and then going to drop the prices of their current cards. This only means there is going to be an even harder time for AMD as they will have to rely on their marketing department to make the stuff sound better then what it is.

AMD just took to long to get out the R600 as how nVidia took to long to get out the FX 5800 Ultra. AMD will probably have the better overall products but the fact of the mater still remains. All the new DX10 games will be optimized for nVidia hardware.

ATI won the last gen of graphics and this gen goes to nVidia due to AMD lack of getting the product out in time. We can only hope they can get the R700 out at a reasonable time as the G90 might be here this summer and the G100 early next year.

NoPeace - out

 

[whitemist]

I couldn't have said that better myself. I started out with a Geforce 2 mx card and an Amd processor. I like them both and right after that i got a Radeon 9200 and Iintel Pentium 4, After that it was a PNY Geforce FX 5900 SE and then a Geforce PNY 7600 gs and now finally a Geforce 8800. Nvidia has come a long way and so has ATI. They have both been neck and neck since the 7000 series, but now after the release im a little disappointed that they are letting Nivida take the market. THe only thing i believe Nvidia should have done was worked on their 8800 some more, maybe up it a little more since they have all the time in the world. Its not ATI fault for merging that cant be help but, it is their fault for making some really bad mistakes about the new R600 from what we are hearing.

Im going to stick with Nvidia for awhile not because its the only one out but, because i spent alot of money on this card and ATI has nothing to show for it. Im not shooting ATI down because, all these results are just trials they are not official spec for the R600 and until the official spec come out Im not going to nail down ATI for releasing a sh**ty card.

Also BTW its the R600 series sounds like a beast:
Suppose to be the heaviest card ever
SUcks up Alot of power more then my 8800
So far these are the GPU i know of:

1. 
   These are the only ones i know:
   
2. X2900 XTX2
3. X2600 PRO
4. X2900 XL
5. X2900 XT
6. X2900 GTO
7. X2900 XTX
8. X2600 PRO
9. X2300 LE
10. X2300 XT

 

[NoPeace]

I couldn't have said that better myself. I started out with a Geforce 2 mx card and an Amd processor. I like them both and right after that i got a Radeon 9200 and Iintel Pentium 4, After that it was a PNY Geforce FX 5900 SE and then a Geforce PNY 7600 gs and now finally a Geforce 8800. Nvidia has come a long way and so has ATI. They have both been neck and neck since the 7000 series, but now after the release im a little disappointed that they are letting Nivida take the market. THe only thing i believe Nvidia should have done was worked on their 8800 some more, maybe up it a little more since they have all the time in the world. Its not ATI fault for merging that cant be help but, it is their fault for making some really bad mistakes about the new R600 from what we are hearing.

There was a time gap where ATi just owned nVidia. The 9k series just owened both the GeForce 4 and FX series. O.O

The 9700Pro just dominated everything including the 5950 Ultra which was released nearly a year latter. Not to mention the 9800Pro/XT (an inproved version of the 9700Pro) just made things even worse for nVidia. :icon6:

And who has to say that nVidia isn't doing anything with the 8800? They are planning to release the 8800 Ultra (or 8900GTX) version when the R600 comes out to spoil things. Also there is going to be a 8950GX2 as their is already water blocks made for it. (I wonder for messed up there and let the block slip out?)

Also the 8900/8950 should be a 80nm version of the 8800GTX and the next gen G90 should be a 65nm version.

So yeah. They have been doing things with it. =P

Im going to stick with Nvidia for awhile not because its the only one out but, because i spent alot of money on this card and ATI has nothing to show for it. Im not shooting ATI down because, all these results are just trials they are not official spec for the R600 and until the official spec come out Im not going to nail down ATI for releasing a sh**ty card.

It's not going to be a crappy card no matter what. Just it's a case of too little to late. If it came out on time it would have owned the market. But now since it's late and nVidia had time to make something equally as good it just wont have a huge impact on the market. Especially if they can't get the 65nm up and going because at those heat/power levels it makes more since to just go SLI with 8800's.

Also BTW its the R600 series sounds like a beast:
Suppose to be the heaviest card ever
SUcks up Alot of power more then my 8800
So far these are the GPU i know of:

1. 
   These are the only ones i know:
   
2. X2900 XTX2
3. X2600 PRO
4. X2900 XL
5. X2900 XT
6. X2900 GTO
7. X2900 XTX
8. X2600 PRO
9. X2300 LE
10. X2300 XT

The XTX2 wont happen until they get the 65nm up and running. The 80nm is just too damn hot to run without dual slot cooling and not to mention having a card pull 400w+ on it's own just isn't cool. =P

And the GTO wont happen until the fall. You need time to collect enough defective chips to make a GTO product. =P

Though at the rate they are making defective 65nm chips it might just come sooner. :icon6:

NoPeace - out

 

[whitemist]

Hahaha yah, i wish it could have been a neck and neck race, that would have been exciteing. What would be nice, would be that ati gets the card out and i can start seeing some real results, im getting tired of what im hearing vs the true facts. I still kinda wish that ati went with the 80 vs the 65 even if you need alittle extra to run it; im sure ati could come up with some cheap million dollar idea that would fix the power and heat problem but, w/e im sure the 65 will do its job. ALso your right 400w+ is way to much, you might as wel buy everyone a gaming rig.

I guess in the end we will have to see im happy with the 8800 now, im sure the R600 will be a beast but, in the end we will have to see what really happens.

EDIT: BTW: i wonder why TSMC doesnt go in order? Why go from the 90nm to the 65nm? What about 85, 80 ,75 ,70? O and Nopeace why did nvidia and ati back TSMC with the 65mn?

 

[Sardaukar]

90, 80, 65, 45, 36 and on and on I think i got the 36 right.. cant remember. It's not dealing with just rough size and downsizing it.. its a heotrical theory in practice for the sizes they are manufacturing.. it is a complete waste to go from a 90 to 85, 80, 75, 70 if they can make the jump easier from 80 straight to 65, there would be no improved negligble difference between an 80 to a 75/70..


To push things forward, the jumps need to be there.. and theres alot of other processes to be called upon on their numbering scheme.. To be honest, I am too tired to bother researchign it again, but tommorow after ive gotten some rest I will post up a link on some studies for it.

 

[NoPeace]

Hahaha yah, i wish it could have been a neck and neck race, that would have been exciteing. What would be nice, would be that ati gets the card out and i can start seeing some real results, im getting tired of what im hearing vs the true facts. I still kinda wish that ati went with the 80 vs the 65 even if you need alittle extra to run it; im sure ati could come up with some cheap million dollar idea that would fix the power and heat problem but, w/e im sure the 65 will do its job. ALso your right 400w+ is way to much, you might as wel buy everyone a gaming rig.

Yeah neck to neck races are fun to see. Thats how it was last year. =P
x1800XT > 7800GTX 512 > x1900XTX > 7900GTX > 7950GX2 > x1950XTX

One right after another. The only problem with that is. If you buy one. You are fucked as the next one comes out in a month. :icon6:

I got a 7800GTX and the 7800GTX 512mb came out 2 weeks latter. Then I got the 7900GTX and the 7950GX2 came out soon after. I then got a x1900XTX and the x1950XTX came out 2 weeks latter. -.-

Been though 6 video cards in the last 14 months. =P

Now you have the 8800GTX and it's been top for 6 months with no new releases. Kind of sucks.

And 65nm was the $1m idea. It just isn't working out like how they wanted to.

So you will soon see a GPU race.

Right now you have the 8800GTX. When the R600 comes it will be better but nVidia will release the 8800Ultra/8900GTX. And once nVidia gets the G80 down to 80nm and the R600 working at 65nm you will see the dual GPU boards.

Then soon after you will see the G90. A higher clocked G80 on 65nm and then who knows what. R700 should be out soon and then the G100.

I guess in the end we will have to see im happy with the 8800 now, im sure the R600 will be a beast but, in the end we will have to see what really happens.

Yeah it's just a waiting game and to be honest I'm getting sick of it. Last year there was just a month or two wait. Now it's 6 months waits.

EDIT: BTW: i wonder why TSMC doesnt go in order? Why go from the 90nm to the 65nm? What about 85, 80 ,75 ,70? O and Nopeace why did nvidia and ati back TSMC with the 65mn?

It's a matter of if it's worth it or not.

120nm to 90nm requires a major overhaul of the chip but gives large improvements. Anything above 90nm will still require the overhaul but doesn't give ideal performance.

That is why it went to 90nm.

With 80nm. It doesn't require a huge overhaul. Just some tweaks and you are sorted with a decent power and heat loss.

So the effort of 85nm isn't really worth it.

Going down below 80 will require a lot of work and the work just doesn't sit well with the gains. So going down to 65nm you will have to do lots of works but at that level you will have loads of gains.

It's just a matter of finding the sweet spot for performance to cost ratio.

And it just happends that 120nm, 90nm, 80nm, 65nm, and 45nm are the spots.

NoPeace - out

 

[whitemist]

I got a 7800GTX and the 7800GTX 512mb came out 2 weeks latter. Then I got the 7900GTX and the 7950GX2 came out soon after. I then got a x1900XTX and the x1950XTX came out 2 weeks latter. -.-

Been though 6 video cards in the last 14 months. =P

That is the one thing i hate about computers or atleast graphic cards the most. You buy a new card that tops all others and as soon as you walk out the door of the store your card was just succeeded, i hate that!

It's a matter of if it's worth it or not.

120nm to 90nm requires a major overhaul of the chip but gives large improvements. Anything above 90nm will still require the overhaul but doesn't give ideal performance.

That is why it went to 90nm.

With 80nm. It doesn't require a huge overhaul. Just some tweaks and you are sorted with a decent power and heat loss.

So the effort of 85nm isn't really worth it.

Going down below 80 will require a lot of work and the work just doesn't sit well with the gains. So going down to 65nm you will have to do lots of works but at that level you will have loads of gains.

It's just a matter of finding the sweet spot for performance to cost ratio.

And it just happends that 120nm, 90nm, 80nm, 65nm, and 45nm are the spots.

Yah, i see that now, isnt it the smaller it gets the more heat and and energy it will cost to power the chip, thats one hell of an engineering problem.

In the end i guess ill just buy another 8800 and some how make room for it to run it in sli mode so i wont feel so bad when the R600 hundred comes out or the 8800Ultra/8900GTX.

 

[SantaClaus1]

Yah, i see that now, isnt it the smaller it gets the more heat and and energy it will cost to power the chip, thats one hell of an engineering problem.
.

the lower the nm the lower the heat and energy required

 

[NoPeace]

That is the one thing i hate about computers or atleast graphic cards the most. You buy a new card that tops all others and as soon as you walk out the door of the store your card was just succeeded, i hate that!

Yeah that sucks. Either a new one comes out every month and you pick one up and it's out dated. Or you wait and find out that no new ones comes out for 6 months and you go and get one to see a new card comes out in a month.

No matter what. Something new always comes out.

At least with EVGA you can trade up your card if something new comes out in 90 days.

Yah, i see that now, isnt it the smaller it gets the more heat and and energy it will cost to power the chip, thats one hell of an engineering problem.

Opposite. Since they are smaller they need less heat and energy to power.

R600 at 80nm uses 240w.
R600 at 65nm should use 120w.

Though the smaller it goes the more heat per square mm is produced but then again. You don't use enough transistors to get that high.

In the end i guess ill just buy another 8800 and some how make room for it to run it in sli mode so i wont feel so bad when the R600 hundred comes out or the 8800Ultra/8900GTX.

Just make sure you have a good CPU to power SLI.

NoPeace - out