The cause of the bug is irrelevant (it is a memory management issue on NV's part though, as has been noted previously when this topic has come up) the discrepancy exists regardless of the cause.
Classic nVidia FUD over 3870x2
- Thread starter digitalwanderer
- Start date
The cause of the bug is irrelevant (it is a memory management issue on NV's part though, as has been noted previously when this topic has come up) the discrepancy exists regardless of the cause.
Yes and that was the exact same benchmarks that were looked at, and there hasn't been any driver changes since lol. Come on, you are pulling and straws.
Actually, unless you can prove otherwise, we have to assume NV's memory management issues are still present. You can't just assume something has changed with ZERO evidence to support it. Just because it's disadvantageous and "should" be fixed doesn't mean it can or will be. For all we know it could be an architectural limitation and "not fixable".
well how about this at those settings all games in the test suite are unplayable to begin with. They are testing extremely none usable settings.
:sigh: and again, we're now talking about a new graphics card with potentially >twice the performance of the previously tested fastest card. Might be important to take that into consideration...
It isn't twice the speed, we see that in many other tests done by many other reviewers. If you want to cherry pick, look at [H] then tell me.
This threads gone downhill, and the prognosis is that it's all downhill from here.
We're talking about a product that is very driver dependant, whose drivers aren't yet mature. It's very reliant on driver releases etc to pick the performance up in games.
One point to note is: Games that are highly technically advanced, which are used for benchmarks, need these driver updates. Games which do not, don't matter so much, because the performance is sufficient anyway. Thats my justification for looking at getting an X2.
We're talking about a product that is very driver dependant, whose drivers aren't yet mature. It's very reliant on driver releases etc to pick the performance up in games.
One point to note is: Games that are highly technically advanced, which are used for benchmarks, need these driver updates. Games which do not, don't matter so much, because the performance is sufficient anyway. Thats my justification for looking at getting an X2.
Seems like there is some serious FUD efforts going down in this thread too.
Lol that's the first thing that occurred to me after the first few posts
Entertaining all around as usual.Notice I used the word *potentially*. I did not say "it is twice as fast".
However, in heavily-GPU-limited scenarios (like the one described here) is it so hard to imagine that it could be twice as fast? Remember, we're not talking aggregate performance across multiple display settings, we're talking about a specific instance of high resolution with very high AA.
Yes and it looks like a bug it happens even with games that didn't use AA in some instances and in some games with high levels of AA and res it doesn't happen, what does that tell us, 3 of the games they used in that benchmark where the hit was pernounced doesn't tell us much at all, since another few of the games gave different results
WIC DX10:
At res of 2560x1600 the ultra, the gtx the gt all lose to a HD 3870 now you turn on AA and AF they win
now wait at 1600x1200 this is the same case too. Hmm the difference is a 20% turn around.
COH: DX10
Geforces have a commanding lead at x8 aa and highest res
R6V
Lead diminsihes
Prey
lead diminishes and the geforces loss at the hieghest res and aa settings
Oblivion
lead diminishes and the geforces loss at the hieghest res and aa settings
Fear
lead diminishes and the geforces loss at the hieghest res and aa settings
COH DX9
Lead Diminishes but retain the top two spots
Anno
lead diminishes and the geforces loss at the hieghest res and aa settings
Now tell me what the difference is from Dx10 to Dx9 and why the variation in hits going to highest of settings? Does it have any clear correlation to anything or just random?
Now in the X2 benchmarks? Lets see
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2008/test_ati_radeon_hd_3870_x2/23/
WIC DX10:
The x2 notches top spot but otherwise no changes
COH: DX10
Geforces have a commanding lead at x8 aa and highest res
Prey
lead diminishes and the geforces loss at the hieghest res and aa settings
Oblivion
lead diminishes and the geforces loss at the hieghest res and aa settings
Fear
lead diminishes and the geforces loss at the hieghest res and aa settings
COH DX9
Lead Diminishes but retain the second and third spots
Anno
lead diminishes and the geforces loss at the hieghest res and aa settings
Ya know what the conclusion of this could be, AMD graphics cards suck at Dx10 nV's graphics cards suck at DX9 at very high settings
.So let me get this straight: you're knocking the 3870 for a "diminishing lead" over the higher-priced competition? A win is a win. No matter how you spin it.
Sound_Card
Regular
[H] did not test with a single HD 3870.
But boy I wish they did, because [H] is always right and everyone is wrong.
Were we talking about price? Or are ya adding that in to to your original statement now?
[H] did not test with a single HD 3870.
But boy I wish they did, because [H] is always right and everyone is wrong.
so we were talking about the x2 anyways...
hmm thats why I said "cherry pick" can't see the sarcasm in writing I know, but it was pretty blatant in that one I thought
Even if you ignore the superior pricing of the 3870 series, you still have the performance win! Look, there's no way you can spin this to make things look good for NV. The 3870 is faster than anything NV has when you throw 8xAA into the picture, end story.
how so in Dx10 it was the opposite when going on x8 AA actually any AA modes, the geforces had less penelty hit (end tend to enjoy a nice lead), only in Dx9 games did, nV's penelty hit was larger then ATi's. Read the results again, that was what I was trying to point out.
Let's break this down.
DX10 titles:
Bioshock - 8800 GT has a slight lead (1 or 2 FPS) - did not test with AA
Call of Juarez - 3870 has a slight lead (up to twice as fast @ 1920x1200 w/4xAA) - 8xAA not tested
Company of Heroes - 3870 has a slight lead at all but the very lowest settings - 8xAA not tested
Crysis is a mixed bag - 3870 wins at higher resolutions and with AA (except @ 1280x1024) - 8xAA not tested
Lost Planet is a mixed bag also - same trend as Crysis and with 8xAA 3870 is again in the lead
Your assertions are in conflict with reality.
For folks wanting to try the HD 3870 X2, wait on this, or other like revisions-
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33915340
It squashes two of my complaints @ once; heat and noise.
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33915340
It squashes two of my complaints @ once; heat and noise.
That Gecube card really is a nice piece of kit. Between that and Asus' dual-fan X2 it looks like there's some nice variety among the X2s already on the market, with more to come.
jimmyjames123
Regular
Those slides are percent differences, not differences in frames per second. How fast do you think a 3870 will go at 2560x1600 w/ 8xAA? 10fps? It is pretty silly and misleading to compare % differences when it's probably not playable in the first place.
you should look at the x2 review the tests are more comparable to what we were talking about
COH
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2008/test_ati_radeon_hd_3870_x2/20/
Hmm Dx10 much faster for the geforces with x8 aa
Crysis
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2008/test_ati_radeon_hd_3870_x2/21/
Better for the geforces again
LP better for the geforces again
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2008/test_ati_radeon_hd_3870_x2/22/
with AA, the radeon's just flat out die (driver problems) at the highest res
WIC
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2008/test_ati_radeon_hd_3870_x2/23/
you see the % loss for the radeon going to x4 AA in this game its quite large, more then a 50% drop. for the geforces its a bit less at least for the ultra and gtx around 30, now for the gt (new one) yeah its probable hitting a bandwidth bottleneck, same for the the hd3870, but for the x2 it just takes a pounding, still playable on that card though barely...
but all these games these cards are unplayalbe at these settings on pretty much all the games in this suite, so what are we talking about? I pointed this out earlier, its a moot point when you have FPS around 10 don't you think? Or do you play games that are lagging? So what are you saying telling games to come out at these reses and x8AA when they are unplayable mean that the radeons have an advantage? I mean is it really like that? No one has an advantage can't run with em. Now in LP and COH and COJ, the AA hit varies from the other titles, that tells me driver improvement in one way or form can fix the performance for the AA hit to some degree (don't know where the bottlenecks lie, while kinda do, and that would be some instances where the drop takes place, but only in a couple of those games), but I don't see nV really looking into the fix right now (not top priority), cause most new games aren't playable at that res and AA level at least on these cards.
Last edited by a moderator: