Recent content by Slyne

For a while, a particularity of the Radeons that really bothered me was their minimal framerates in games (something that is far too rarely considered in reviews). It seems that Scott's review has finally put those concerns to rest. Not sure if the VLIW architecture itself or the drivers were...

Even the tessellation tests using the ATI SDK show a meager improvement between 5870 and 6970. Anyone has an explanation for the results?

Some synthetic tests have shown RV770 to perform below expectations, so I expect improvements there. Not sure that'll translate into games tho. The other thing is RV770 have the texture units attached to the multiprocessors, while R(V)6x0 have them decoupled. I'm pretty sure the drivers have to...

Who said HD4850 can reach a Gigaflop? (I am asking not hinting). This thread is more confusing the closer we get to the release date. It's even worse than G80. And now DT is insisting on 480SPs. Are they out of it...

As the former owner of an X800Pro, I totally agree. Pretty soon, I hit games where my card was just a tad insufficient and I would have slowdowns while the XT was perfectly fine. I've countless times regretted not waiting a month more before making my purchase. As for the main subject here...

Did I miss something or this the same link that was posted on last page?

Seems like the drivers need more work if those numbers are to be trusted.

Interestingly, they show a launch date of June 16,17,18 2008 for the 4870. Probably meaningless though (and why 3 launch dates?)

At some conference last month, which I am to lazy to find and link to, they announced that G92b was gonna be it for the 6-9 months to come.

I am not sure I like these bargraphs much: for instance in CoD4, the new card is beating the 9800GTX in min and avg frame rates, but losing to it for max framerates. To me, the unknown card is the obvious winner, and it's actually better if avg and max rates are not too different (makes for...

Why?

Thanks all for your answers, and sorry for missing the previous thread on this topic (I had found a few threads on PCIe specs, but not the one linked by Sinistar). Even articles (those I've read at least) on the subject are confused or avoiding details, so I'm happy to finally have an answer...

I've seen pointed-out again today (by Dave B, so I believe it) that a GPU cannot draw more than 75W from the PCIe slot, even if both are using PCIe 2.0 spec. But I'm sure I've read before that PCIe 2.0 supported channeling more power through the motherboard slot (some have said 150W, but nothing...

Ah, OK. Thanks! Thinking again, it seemed a sexy idea to be able to rely solely on NVIO for idle and video decoding, but under Vista there's still a bit of 3D acceleration required so that wouldn't cut it anyway.

It's my understanding that it doesn't, based on: http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2977.