first r420 review leak

[surfhurleydude]

I have this odd feeling that if you're interested in Doom 3, or any games based off of its engine, the X800 series is not for you.

Let me guess : "c0z nViDiA rulezzz teh OEPNGL!!11!!", right?

No, because the X800 series does not have much of a lead in regular circumstances, and this leads me to believe that the NV40 will easily be able to pull ahead in Doom 3 where its pipelines function in z-stencil mode of 32x0...Unless of course the X800 series does the same.

 

[Ardrid]

Radeon X800 Platinum : 525 MHz core clock, 1120 MHz GDDR3, 16 pixel pipelines, US$499
Radeon X800 Pro : 475 MHz core clock, 900 MHz GDDR, 12 pixel pipelines, US$299

Interesting ATI Pro 475/900/12 matching NV Ultra 400/1100/16 shows a superior architecture for ATI but ATI XT 525/1120/16 not much better?

Can we really make that call though? If the Pro were running at 400MHz, then I would say yes, without a doubt. But it is clocked higher. There could be better bandwidth efficiency though. And of course we have the whole "extreme" business that has yet to be sorted out.

 

[Stryyder]

Those scores are really odd. The X800XT has 47% more fillrate and 24% more memory bandwidth, and yet with AA/AF, situations one would expect it to scream past the X800 Pro, it's only barely faster? Does anyone else find that just a bit odd, even at 1280x1024? At 1600x1200 the expected performance delta between the two cards shows up in force, but 1280? Weird..... Who'd have thought 1280 would be cpu limited.

Someone got an Athlon 64?

I don't think Tom ever benchmarks on AMD as he is as Intel biased as he is Nvidia biased IMHO.

 

[trinibwoy]

I have this odd feeling that if you're interested in Doom 3, or any games based off of its engine, the X800 series is not for you.

Let me guess : "c0z nViDiA rulezzz teh OEPNGL!!11!!", right?

ummmmm anager....you gettin a bit too excited there man. hurley was expressing a 'feeling' not that 'nViDiA rulezzz teh OEPNGL!!'.

gotta get me a big fanb0y umbrella for this one

 

[3dilettante]

Aren't we getting to the point of turning on each other like rabid wolves about two days early?

I feel it's too early and the snippets too fragmentary to come to any conclusions.

There's way too many details we don't know that could really alter how the cards might be evaluated.

 

[DemoCoder]

Radeon X800 Platinum : 525 MHz core clock, 1120 MHz GDDR3, 16 pixel pipelines, US$499
Radeon X800 Pro : 475 MHz core clock, 900 MHz GDDR, 12 pixel pipelines, US$299

Interesting ATI Pro 475/900/12 matching NV Ultra 400/1100/16 shows a superior architecture for ATI but ATI XT 525/1120/16 not much better?

Superior? How come when NVidia was going for high clocks but ATI was doing well with low clocks and high-parallelism (4pipe NV vs 8pipe ATI), it was ATI with the superior architecture (wide shallow pipes), and now that ATI has gone more for high clocks again it signals the superiority of ATI?

Is AMD with its good per-clock performance vs Intel P4 better? Performance and cost is what matters, not the architecture that was used to achieve it.

 

[DemoCoder]

6800U Extreme Edition benchmark?
http://www.pcwelt.de/tests/hardware-tests/grafikkarte/39764/

 

[jvd]

Those scores are really odd. The X800XT has 47% more fillrate and 24% more memory bandwidth, and yet with AA/AF, situations one would expect it to scream past the X800 Pro, it's only barely faster? Does anyone else find that just a bit odd, even at 1280x1024? At 1600x1200 the expected performance delta between the two cards shows up in force, but 1280? Weird..... Who'd have thought 1280 would be cpu limited.

Someone got an Athlon 64?

I don't think Tom ever benchmarks on AMD as he is as Intel biased as he is Nvidia biased IMHO.

yes like when he found out that p3 1.1 gig chip was bad and forced intel to recal it was being bias towards amd .

 

[ChrisW]

Well, so far we have:
Breed_________TWIMTBP
FarCry________TWIMTBP
Call of Duty____TWIMTBP
Aquamark______benchmark of a TWIMTBP game
X2 the Threat___TWIMTBP

Let's see if he benchmarks any non "TWIMTBP" games.

 

[Wunderchu]

Radeon X800 Platinum : 525 MHz core clock, 1120 MHz GDDR3, 16 pixel pipelines, US$499
Radeon X800 Pro : 475 MHz core clock, 900 MHz GDDR, 12 pixel pipelines, US$299

Interesting ATI Pro 475/900/12 matching NV Ultra 400/1100/16 shows a superior architecture for ATI but ATI XT 525/1120/16 not much better?

Superior? How come when NVidia was going for high clocks but ATI was doing well with low clocks and high-parallelism (4pipe NV vs 8pipe ATI), it was ATI with the superior architecture (wide shallow pipes), and now that ATI has gone more for high clocks again it signals the superiority of ATI?

Is AMD with its good per-clock performance vs Intel P4 better? Performance and cost is what matters, not the architecture that was used to achieve it.

"efficient" would perhaps be a better word

 

[Ardrid]

Those scores are really odd. The X800XT has 47% more fillrate and 24% more memory bandwidth, and yet with AA/AF, situations one would expect it to scream past the X800 Pro, it's only barely faster? Does anyone else find that just a bit odd, even at 1280x1024? At 1600x1200 the expected performance delta between the two cards shows up in force, but 1280? Weird..... Who'd have thought 1280 would be cpu limited.

Someone got an Athlon 64?

I don't think Tom ever benchmarks on AMD as he is as Intel biased as he is Nvidia biased IMHO.

yes like when he found out that p3 1.1 gig chip was bad and forced intel to recal it was being bias towards amd .

Yes, but that was back when Tom was actually involved with the site. THG has since degraded.

 

[DemoCoder]

Are there any non-TWIMTBP titles in existence?

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

I think I'll wait to see if Nvidia is "optimising" for benchmarks as before by looking at what kind of performance people get in custom game benchmarks.

And it's not like Tom's is a bastion of good benchmark methodology.

 

[Kombatant]

Ok, question for you bright folk... don't you think it's time we started benchmarking at resolutions above 1600x1200?

 

[Ulukay]

http://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?p=646488#post646488

have fun

 

[jvd]

Radeon X800 Platinum : 525 MHz core clock, 1120 MHz GDDR3, 16 pixel pipelines, US$499
Radeon X800 Pro : 475 MHz core clock, 900 MHz GDDR, 12 pixel pipelines, US$299

Interesting ATI Pro 475/900/12 matching NV Ultra 400/1100/16 shows a superior architecture for ATI but ATI XT 525/1120/16 not much better?

Superior? How come when NVidia was going for high clocks but ATI was doing well with low clocks and high-parallelism (4pipe NV vs 8pipe ATI), it was ATI with the superior architecture (wide shallow pipes), and now that ATI has gone more for high clocks again it signals the superiority of ATI?

Is AMD with its good per-clock performance vs Intel P4 better? Performance and cost is what matters, not the architecture that was used to achieve it.

well for one thing it looks like ati has the faster card (although barely) unlike the nv30 which was clocked almost 200mhz faster and was much slower than the r300

 

[Wunderchu]

6800U Extreme Edition benchmark?
http://www.pcwelt.de/tests/hardware-tests/grafikkarte/39764/

IMO , likely fake ... i.e.: sub. 10000 for 3DMark03 ?

 

[dr3amz]

look at it this way - if those toms results are good, then the XT is what, nearly 17-25% FASTER than the 6800 with 4xAA and 8xAF!

THATS F*CKING GOOD!

and you already know who has the superior IQ too.

 

[Ardrid]

Talk about one hell of a leak!

 

[jimmyjames123]

Looks like there is going to be a price war going on soon. Good stuff!