RV350 benchmarks ?

M

mboeller

Regular
I'm a little bit surprised that the RV350 benchies, floating around at nvnews.net have not been reposted here. So I will do it :D

Hey,

Just recieved some RV350 Pro benchies from a reliable source.
Strangely, it seems the core clock is of 375Mhz, instead of the standard 400Mhz. Not sure if ATI modified their specs or what. Or maybe the card is at that frequence by error. No idea...

---

Test Setup:

P4 3G, E7205, 1G Mem,
EV350: 378/303 (core/memeory, powetstrip measured)
Driver ver: 6.14.1.6307

---

RV350 Pro

3dmark03 1024 NoAAAF 3170
GT1 123.8
GT2 19.2
GT3 17.9
GT4 18.4
CPU Score 622
Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 893 MT/C
Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 1440 MT/C
Vertex Shader 9.8
Pixel Shader 2.0 25.9
Ragtroll 12.2

3dmark03 1280 NoAAAF 2285

Aquamark 2.1 1024 NoAAAF 62.1
1280 NoAAAF 39.8
1024 4xAA 8xAF Quality 27.9
1280 4xAA 8xAF Quality 18.4
1024 4xAA 8xAF Performance 34.5
1280 4xAA 8xAF Performance 22.7

Commanche 4 1024 NoAAAF 53.54
Demo 1280 NoAAAF 51.07
1024 4xAA 8xAF Quality 31.93
1280 4xAA 8xAF Quality 23.66
1024 4xAA 8xAF Performance 34.24
1280 4xAA 8xAF Performance 25.11

QuakeIII 1024 NoAAAF 245.2
Demo 1280 NoAAAF 166.3
1024 4xAA 8xAF Quality 130.2
1280 4xAA 8xAF Quality 86.3
1024 4xAA 8xAF Performance 136.5
1280 4xAA 8xAF Performance 88.5

SeriousSam2 1024 NoAAAF 78.7
Extreme Quality 1280 NoAAAF 70.6
The Grand 1024 4xAA 8xAF Quality 43.5
Cathedral 1280 4xAA 8xAF Quality 30.2
1024 4xAA 8xAF Performance 60.8
1280 4xAA 8xAF Performance 43.2

Leaked E3 640 Highquality 81.2
DoomIII Altha 1024 Highquality 40.4
V0.02 1280 Highquality 26.7

3dmark01 1024x768 11408
1280x1024 8850
1280 4XAA+8XAF Quality mode 4495

---

And in case anyone is interested, here is a little comparaison I added by finding other scores around the web.
Compared to a FX5600U & R9500P on a different setup:

Quake 3, 1024x768 + 4xAA & 8x AF ( balanced on the FX, performance on the Radeon)

R9500P: 148.1
R9600P: 136.5
FX5600U: 136.1


Uttar
Click to expand...
 
So much for more bandwidth making up for a lack of pixel fill rate. I hope that they undercut the 9500Pros price a bit.
 
Well, the comparison benchmarks are on "different setup"s, using a game whose performance is very largely determined by the system...I'm not sure why he included it at all.
 
I'm surprised people aren't all over these. :)

Will retail memory be only 300MHz?
 
I'm pretty sure that the 9600 is going to be slower than the 9500, but on the whole it may be a more balanced architecture and it will fit into ATI's low-mid-high scheme better.
 
Is there a reason that the 9600P wasn't just named the 9400P? *If* these numbers are true, it would've been a better choice and more in line with the relative performance numbers (we'll just ignore whatever the 9200 can do).
 
Isn't it going to be faster than the 9500, but slower than the 9500Pro?

Maybe they could call it the 9500Semi-Pro... :LOL:
 
MrBond said:
Is there a reason that the 9600P wasn't just named the 9400P? *If* these numbers are true, it would've been a better choice and more in line with the relative performance numbers (we'll just ignore whatever the 9200 can do).
Click to expand...

Marketing.
 
QUESTION.

Do you think ATi are witholding RV350 so that the initial crop of NV31/34 review samples are benchmarked against the 9500 Pro?

I was under the impression that the part had been ready for quite some time now.

MuFu.
 
I think ATI has some bean-counter with support of engineers figuring out the best price-point/performance-spec ratio to maximize profits now that they have some idea on how well the competition stacks up.
 
BRiT said:
I think ATI has some bean-counter with support of engineers figuring out the best price-point/performance-spec ratio to maximize profits now that they have some idea on how well the competition stacks up.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.
 
Maybe they are working on an "Aggressive" filtering implementation. Hell, why not a "Turbo" mode that uses solid shading while they're at it... :LOL:

MuFu.
 
MuFu said:
Maybe they are working on an "Aggressive" filtering implementation. Hell, why not a "Turbo" mode that uses solid shading while they're at it... :LOL:
Click to expand...

Yeah...I can see it now...the settings:

"Application----->Balanced------->Aggressive------->F*ck Textures Altogether"

:D
 
Re: QUESTION.

MuFu said:
Do you think ATi are witholding RV350 so that the initial crop of NV31/34 review samples are benchmarked against the 9500 Pro?
Click to expand...
Intriguing.

Or perhaps ATi waited on 5600U performance to set its 9600/P clock speeds? Hopefully they've revised their numbers slightly upwards, to push the 9600P numbers quoted above a tad higher, to 9500P levels.
 
Yeah, that's along the lines of what BRiT and Joe are suggesting. Both ideas seem feasible.

There must be a strong push to get 9600 non-Ultra costs down right now as well.

MuFu.
 
I'm the original poster of the thread at nV News.

I would have posted it here myself, but I wondered if anyone here would see it and repost it - and I'm way too lazy to do all that myself! :)

As I said in the original post, this is reliable info. I'd be very surprised if this source gave me wrong info.

The comparaison's non-RV350 numbers don't come from the source, however. It's just some numbers I've found on review sites.
Why did I post them, even though they're on a different setup?
Because otherwise, those scores wouldn't have made any type of sense.
And all the things I've given comparaisons for ( there are 2 or 3 others at nV News ) are things which are highly unlikely to be CPU limited.


Also, the sample was running at 375/600. I'd guess those are the real speeds. But if ATI increases it to remain competitive, then those scores might become incorrect.


Uttar
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
mobility 9800 benchmarks!
Replies
4
Views
3K
Dave Baumann
Dave Baumann
Back
Top