first r420 review leak

Johnny Rotten said:
Most benches that are genuinely cpu limited have frames per second differences of tenths to maybe one or two. The margin there is very nearly 10%. That is a significant delta for being 'cpu limited'.
Click to expand...

Sigh.

I give up.

Well, maybe not.

Is it a large difference for a 100% CPU LIMITED situation on the Pro? Yes.

Am I claiming this is 100% CPU LIMITED?! NO.

Sheesh...

Do YOU think it's more like 100% GPU limited on the Pro at these settings?

You do realize it could be something like like, 75% CPU limited on the Pro, and 95% CPU Limited on the XT, right?
 
DaveBaumann said:
The margin there is very nearly 10%. That is a significant delta for being 'cpu limited'.
Click to expand...
Not if the theoretical performance difference is closer to 50%.
Click to expand...
True dat...

It is interesting to consider the rather wierd roll reversal between ATi and Nvidia and last generation to this generation. Nvidia went more ATi and ATi went more Nvidia... at least looking at it from last years hardware designs.

*8* *12* or *16*.. which one is closest to the real deal? 8)
 
The Rebelion level (FarCry) i think is very CPU limited... afaik there are a lot of guys shooting and running around, so there are a lot of IA and physics calculations.

Indoor levels are more gfx limited.
 
On a side note, besides the fact that Breed is a TWIMTBP game, what makes that game interesting for benchmarking ?

Real question i just dont knpw if that game is shader intensive or not, or why it is valuable for tests.
 
What I find interesting is that the general vibe from the Nvidia fans is one of optimism that Nvidia performs well and provides good value and that this generation is not another washout. The feeling I get from the ATI camp is that they'd be disappointed unless ATI destroys NVIDIA by at least 10-25% in all situations with better AA/AF, IQ, shader performance, etc etc.

Granted that Nvidia is coming from behind so this is expected but it's kind of amusing anyway. Looks like I'll be getting a sweet card this fall and I don't care who makes it :D
 
mreman4k said:
I wonder if they will bench with using Temporal AA on the ATI cards?
Click to expand...

Doesn't make a difference if they are. It runs the same speed and won't show up in screenshots. Likely, they'll just say that 'there was no visible effect and it can't be proven with screenshots'... :rolleyes:
 
DaveBaumann said:
The margin there is very nearly 10%. That is a significant delta for being 'cpu limited'.
Click to expand...
Not if the theoretical performance difference is closer to 50%.
Click to expand...

:oops:

Theoretical performance difference near 50%, Dave? Now I cant wait to see what odd pipeline scheme ATI came up with this time around. I guess there is some merit to the 8 Extreme pipelines after all, then?
 
Joe DeFuria said:
Is it a large difference for a 100% CPU LIMITED situation on the Pro? Yes.

Am I claiming this is 100% CPU LIMITED?! NO.

Sheesh...

Do YOU think it's more like 100% GPU limited on the Pro at these settings?

You do realize it could be something like like, 75% CPU limited on the Pro, and 95% CPU Limited on the XT, right?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I dont have enough empirical evidence of a standard Far Cry demo over a variety of cpu/gpu platforms to really make that decision. My point is that typically and historically cpu limited games dont show those kind of delta's. Typically and historically we havent had to breakdown demos to determine what portion of a single demo is cpu constrained or gpu constained. Perhaps this demo requires that kind of analysis/breakdown. Or perhaps there are other issues at work.

At any rate a more comprehensive suite of tests will give us a fuller picture.
 
LeStoffer said:
DaveBaumann said:
The margin there is very nearly 10%. That is a significant delta for being 'cpu limited'.
Click to expand...
Not if the theoretical performance difference is closer to 50%.
Click to expand...

:oops:

Theoretical performance difference near 50%, Dave? Now I cant wait to see what odd pipeline scheme ATI came up with this time around. I guess there is some merit to the 8 Extreme pipelines after all, then?
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't the theoretical performance of the XT be 50% greater than the pro? 12 pipes vs 16, plus a higher clock speed. Or do you think that Dave meant 50% greater than the 6800?
 
LeStoffer said:
DaveBaumann said:
The margin there is very nearly 10%. That is a significant delta for being 'cpu limited'.
Click to expand...
Not if the theoretical performance difference is closer to 50%.
Click to expand...

:oops:

Theoretical performance difference near 50%, Dave?
Click to expand...
X800 XT has 33% more pipes than X800 Pro , as well as higher clockspeed


Edit: oops, AlphaWolf already said basically the same thing
 
AlphaWolf said:
Why wouldn't the theoretical performance of the XT be 50% greater than the pro? 12 pipes vs 16, plus a higher clock speed. Or do you think that Dave meant 50% greater than the 6800?
Click to expand...

Ooops, I assumed that Dave was comparing XT vs 6800, but apparently that wasn't the case. Thanks for the correction...
 
Well, it now seems pretty clear -

This seems like 9800 Pro vs 5950 all over again, except the NV40 legitimately performs on almost equal footing with the X800 Pro...

X800 Pro looks like a fucking steal for 299.99 though...

X800 XT looks like it will be an extremely poor price-performance ratio for those that want the fastest card possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
The first Evil Within still has remarkably sophisticated lighting
Replies
2
Views
1K
Phantom88
P
iroboto
  • Locked
Are current games less effectively executed than previous generations? *spawn
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
M
What was your first post on B3D?
2
Replies
27
Views
5K
homerdog
homerdog
tabs
Hearthstone
Replies
1
Views
859
tabs
tabs
Cyan
Are actually teraflops the correct metric to measure GPU compute power on consoles?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
25K
Cyan
Cyan
Back
Top