What do you expect for R650

What do you expect for HD Radeon X2950XTX

  • Faster then G80Ultra about 25-35% percent overall

    Votes: 23 16.4%

  • Faster then G80Ultra about 15-20% percent overall

    Votes: 18 12.9%

  • Faster then G80Ultra about 5-10% percent overall

    Votes: 18 12.9%

  • About same as G80Ultra

    Votes: 16 11.4%

  • Slower thenll G80Ultra about 5-10% percent overall

    Votes: 10 7.1%

  • Slower then G80Ultra about 15-25% percent overall

    Votes: 9 6.4%

  • I cannot guess right now

    Votes: 46 32.9%
  • Total voters
    140
Arun said:
The holiday season is irrelevant here. If you release in December, you won't have any OEM deals, nor full channel presence. So December or January. It just doesn't really matter.

The reason why early Q1 is important is the Notebook Refresh cycle btw; not the full new platform, just the refresh where the CPUs will be replaced by Penryns and the GPU MXMs might get replaced too. If you miss that Q1 cycle, then you at least need to make the Q2 one - but there's still a substantial amount of share (guess: 20%+?) that you would lose compared to the scenario where you had both cycles in the pocket.

It looks like G92 and G98 will make that Q1 cycle, but G96 won't. This might give an advantage to AMD's 55nm RV630. It's easy to see missing the holidays as a doom scenario, but IMO, that's certainly not the right way to look at it. From a channel desktop POV, maybe partially so, but not in any other way that I can tell.
Click to expand...




G92/G94/G96/G98:D
 
vertex_shader said:
Not possible.
Click to expand...

I'm sure quite a few people said the exact same thing prior to NV30 and R300, that both products were impossible for their respective companies.

IE - Prior to NV30 most people would have said it's impossible for NV to produce a bad 3D card (although having lived through NV1 and the two TNT cards, I'm not one of them.)

And prior to R300, everyone would have said it was impossible to ATI to totally spank Nvidia.

I'm sure many also considered what G80 turned out to be impossible if someone had said a half year in advance that it would completely and totally dominate the high end.

So, I guess you could say it's "not possible" for anything to be "not possible." :p

Regards,
SB
 
Silent_Buddha said:
I'm sure quite a few people said the exact same thing prior to NV30 and R300, that both products were impossible for their respective companies.

IE - Prior to NV30 most people would have said it's impossible for NV to produce a bad 3D card (although having lived through NV1 and the two TNT cards, I'm not one of them.)

And prior to R300, everyone would have said it was impossible to ATI to totally spank Nvidia.

I'm sure many also considered what G80 turned out to be impossible if someone had said a half year in advance that it would completely and totally dominate the high end.

So, I guess you could say it's "not possible" for anything to be "not possible." :p

Regards,
SB
Click to expand...

R300 vs NV30 was another story, i think the situation now its totally different because AMD strugling money wise and with products too almost every segment, mobil GPU's, discrete GPU's, workstation CPU's, desptop CPU's, steam computing, i see no real competiation just "we can't compete we try sell it cheap" strategy, in steam computing they are f***** up the early lead.

In the future not looks great either, because products what delayed already,
everyone can see what will be Intel step when finally AMD release Barcelona and Phenom, same will happen in GPU segment too, when finally AMD release something NV can easy counter with a OC'ed GPU (not even a shrinked one needed), R600 has more weak point than only lack of TMU's, the game still missing in action what make r600 shine,Bioshock dx9/dx10 performance review without AA AMD fastest card with 1gb gddr4 memory (hd2900xt) ~20% slower than NV 4th fastest card with 320mb (8800gts), hd2900xt 1gb only faster as the 8800gts 320mb in resolutions where avarage frame not enough to play the game smooth (don't forget hd2900xt 1gb cost twice as the 8800gts320mb), slowly r600 turn as a bigger mistake than nv30 was.

I'm sure rv670 at 65nm not coming out because its lack of performance, at 55nm AMD hope higher clockspeed, less leakage and can bruteforce the GPU clockspeed to the moon, this is why start run AMOK again with half-node process.
 
vertex_shader said:
shine,Bioshock dx9/dx10 performance review without AA AMD fastest card with 1gb gddr4 memory (hd2900xt) ~20% slower than NV 4th fastest card with 320mb (8800gts), hd2900xt 1gb only faster as the 8800gts 320mb in resolutions where avarage frame not enough to play the game smooth (don't forget hd2900xt 1gb cost twice as the 8800gts320mb), slowly r600 turn as a bigger mistake than nv30 was.
Click to expand...

That article show numbers completly diferent from 2 other reviews, so sorry but anyone will take that as example.

Wait for other reviews and newer driver from ATI and Nvidia. The Nvidia drivers used in that review are completly useless in many other games with corruption in image. They are not WHQL.

A completly bugy driver never, but never should be used in any review.
 
v_rr said:
That article show numbers completly diferent from 2 other reviews, so sorry but anyone will take that as example.

Wait for other reviews and newer driver from ATI and Nvidia. The Nvidia drivers used in that review are completly useless in many other games with corruption in image. They are not WHQL.

A completly bugy driver never, but never should be used in any review.
Click to expand...

Drivers WHQL certification can't sell hw because 95% of the users not even know whats that, 3% not care, so 2% of the users think the same as AMD.

ATi hotfix driver not WHQL either, and this time they worked with the dev's. (hotfix suggest this).

The reality is 90% of the games optimized for NV cards, when the game coming out the beta driver is there too what runs the game better than older drivers and most of the times bug free, but sometimes cause problems with other games.
ATi side you need to wait 2-3 months and than maybe you get some more frame and user able to play the game bug free.

Most of the users choice NV strategy and when new beta cause problems in other games than its optimized for, than installing other driver, this is still have more "fun" than wait months for AMD maybe find some performance and fixing the bug's.

AMD problems not only the lack of competative products, they have huge problems in SW releationship side too, in the last few years NV made monopoly in SW side and not only with great architectures, SW sell HW and not HW sell SW, so when a company have a kickass architecture and not have support for it from SW dev's side, than its can fail only.

Hope for a magic driver out of the date.
 
vertex_shader said:
Drivers WHQL certification can't sell hw because 95% of the users not even know whats that, 3% not care, so 2% of the users think the same as AMD.
Click to expand...
That´s not true almost everyone go get drivers to Nvidia site witch have the WHQL drivers.
You only get betas in Nzone.


The reality is 90% of the games optimized for NV cards, when the game coming out the beta driver is there too what runs the game better than older drivers and most of the times bug free, but sometimes cause problems with other games.
ATi side you need to wait 2-3 months and than maybe you get some more frame and user able to play the game bug free.

Most of the users choice NV strategy and when new beta cause problems in other games than its optimized for, than installing other driver, this is still have more "fun" than wait months for AMD maybe find some performance and fixing the bug's.
Click to expand...

For every review site almost 99% of them say that ATI driver for Vista is far away better then Nvidia ones.
ATI-> first stability, next performance. Is how they work.

The latest beta from Nvidia for Bioshock have corruption in many other games. That corruption does not exist in the WHQL drivers of Nvidia.
You think that is very good sending trash drivers to the internet just for have better reviews for 1 game that came out (Bioshock)?
Sorry but that´s disgusting.

A good review have to use the latest WHQL driver from the companys ;)
The story that ATI drivers suck is very very old and it´s not true. Not even close.
 
v_rr said:
That´s not true almost everyone go get drivers to Nvidia site witch have the WHQL drivers.
You only get betas in Nzone.
Click to expand...

Read again what i write, i not talked about nv 4 WHQL driver/year ;) , i talking about the users not care about WHQL certification because its means nothing, we see already BSOD WHQL drivers.

For every review site almost 99% of them say that ATI driver for Vista is far away better then Nvidia ones.
ATI-> first stability, next performance. Is how they work.
Click to expand...

Tell me one site where the reviewers testing games from stability aspect and playing from start to the end, i'm sure you can find a single one, so this reason has no future.

You think that is very good sending trash drivers to the internet just for have better reviews for 1 game that came out (Bioshock)?
Sorry but that´s disgusting.
Click to expand...

Yes, NV driver strategy is better, because reviews show good performance in the games whats coming out with game optimized beta driver, this reviews NEVER use this driver to test other games.

A good review have to use the latest WHQL driver from the companys.
Click to expand...

I say this always, noone care.

The story that ATI drivers suck is very very old and it´s not true. Not even close
Click to expand...

I not said its sucks, i said they need better driver strategy, because what they use it now its not good from they own users.
When you buy a hd2900xt and see this review than your only hope maybe next driver give some performance, than some weeks gone new driver out and nothing changed, hopeing 4ever its not good, its will be much better when game out performance almost in the maximum and not in 60%.

First thing is what AMD need to do crack the monopoly in SW side, Valve can't change the picture with they 3 years old engine and addon games (hl2:ep2).

Dark days still coming this year for AMD when games Crysis, Hellgate London, Huxley, Conan, Quake Wars, Unreal3 coming out, and this is not the whole list.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pete said:
Just as a reference for GF8 series #s, here's AMDZone's benchmarks (no R600s).
Click to expand...

We still don't have an AMD Radeon DX10 part, and frankly we don't feel like buying one. If AMD wants to send one our way we will gladly add those numbers.
It is a sad shame that we don't have a DX10 Radeon card. From all appearances the Radeon crew just doesn't care about anything. They have made no attempts to be at Quakecon in years, and we no longer have anyone inside AMD's new GPU headquarters that appreciates us running their 512MB Radeon card launch lan, or some of the testing we did in COD2 to show that that much memory could matter. Perhaps we can hope that Sapphire or Asus steps up to the plate. We would love to be able to tell you how the Radeon parts perform with this title. It is sad that we can not.
Click to expand...

Why the hell the site have banners when they can't go to the store and buy cards :rolleyes:, and this id*o*s what users call as expert :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is what else they say in relation to the AMD part:

It is a sad shame that we don't have a DX10 Radeon card. From all appearances the Radeon crew just doesn't care about anything. They have made no attempts to be at Quakecon in years, and we no longer have anyone inside AMD's new GPU headquarters that appreciates us running their 512MB Radeon card launch lan, or some of the testing we did in COD2 to show that that much memory could matter. Perhaps we can hope that Sapphire or Asus steps up to the plate. We would love to be able to tell you how the Radeon parts perform with this title. It is sad that we can not.
Click to expand...
 
Oh I agree. It just seems they feel they should be pampered with free hardware by AMD, since afterall they are names AMDZone.

Personally, they should buy their equipment just like all the other consumers.
 
vertex_shader said:
Why the hell the site have banners when they can't go to the store and buy cards :rolleyes:, and this id*o*s what users call as expert :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Sites buying their own hardware for testing would be ideal (the Consumer Reports model), but I don't believe this is the case for the majority--if not totality--of the sites I visit. So I'm not sure I'd blame them for this, especially not knowing their financial situation (review hardware is probably not the only expense they incur) or even focus (aren't they more about CPUs and MBs?).

If the biggest hardware sites don't seem to buy their own stuff, why should the smaller ones? I've always thought it couldn't be that expensive a proposition merely in terms of hardware costs, given that a site could probably sell its review samples in its forums (a la SPCR, though I'm not sure if they're selling stuff they bought or received), but selling may not be easy as pie.

Anyway, this whole tirade--er, train of thought :p is severely off topic. I was just trying to provide some context for G8x figures, to see if various sites' #s agreed with each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Dazed and Computed / did the GPUs took the wrong road?
2
Replies
27
Views
10K
liolio
L
A
Forza: A Test Case for next gen hardware discussion
2
Replies
32
Views
9K
tuna
T
A
Holy Wall of Text: My impressions post Playstation 4 (PS4) unveil
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
20K
(((interference)))
I
Unknown Soldier
AMD Launches FireStream Compute Accelerators Featuring Cypress Chip
Replies
2
Views
3K
Dave Baumann
Dave Baumann
T
  • Locked
New Gamebryo LightSpeed engine for Wii
Replies
3
Views
4K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
Back
Top