An exclusive gaming industry community targeted
to, and designed for Professionals, Businesses
and Students in the sectors and industries
of Gaming, New Media and the Web, all closely
related with it's Business and Industry.
A Rich content driven service including articles,
contributed discussion, news, reviews, networking, downloads,
and debate.
We strive to cater for cultural influencers,
technology decision makers, early adopters and business leaders in the gaming industry.
A medium to share your or contribute your ideas,
experiences, questions and point of view or network
with other colleagues here at iVirtua Community.
The 7800GT/GTX is able to outperform the X1800XT in almost every game, and in the ones where the X1800XT prevails, the 7800GTX's in SLI outperform that.
Hopefully, R520 in AMR will provide much more performance. I think we are all looking forward towards that.
Contributed by Predator, Guest 510 iVirtua Loyalty Points • • • Back to Top
I am really, extremely suprised that it is worse than the 7800GTX. I can't believe ATI would spend that much time on it, just to have it basically fail.
Well, I'd say it failed. I mean, it almost never beat the 7800GTX, and when it did, it never beat the 7800GTX by much. For a card to come out 2-3 months later than the opponent, and not be any better, I'd call that failing.
Last edited by Josh on Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
Why are they comparing ATIs not finalised graphics system with Nvidias matured architecture and drivers? Just completely ignore those stupid benchmarks and wait for the final product. Until then don't draw any conclusions uch as which is better.
Why are they comparing ATIs not finalised graphics system with Nvidias matured architecture and drivers? Just completely ignore those stupid benchmarks and wait for the final product. Until then don't draw any conclusions uch as which is better.
Yes, due to the fact that the clock speeds of the X1800's were increased after this article was released.
How many of you know about Board Revisions here?
ATi and Nvidia test the performance of a card by releasing several board revisions (example: Rev01, Rev02, Rev03, etc.) in their labs. What Sander's review states that the Board isn't the final revision, its an older revision, hence they cannot give the accurate results. Because the final revision of the Board clearly states that, the Core has been increased to another 25Mhz and the Memory to another 50Mhz.
Yes, due to the fact that the clock speeds of the X1800's were increased after this article was released.
How many of you know about Board Revisions here?
ATi and Nvidia test the performance of a card by releasing several board revisions (example: Rev01, Rev02, Rev03, etc.) in their labs. What Sander's review states that the Board isn't the final revision, its an older revision, hence they cannot give the accurate results. Because the final revision of the Board clearly states that, the Core has been increased to another 25Mhz and the Memory to another 50Mhz.
That may be true. But I even predicted that ATI would do this, just to 'prove' Sander wrong.
Yes, due to the fact that the clock speeds of the X1800's were increased after this article was released.
How many of you know about Board Revisions here?
ATi and Nvidia test the performance of a card by releasing several board revisions (example: Rev01, Rev02, Rev03, etc.) in their labs. What Sander's review states that the Board isn't the final revision, its an older revision, hence they cannot give the accurate results. Because the final revision of the Board clearly states that, the Core has been increased to another 25Mhz and the Memory to another 50Mhz.
I never stated or implied that they increased the clock speed due to Sander's article. I was implying that when Sander tested it, the clock speeds were much lower than when ATI released the product. I doubt it has anything to do with ATI increasing clock speeds because of Sander's benchmarks. But then again, seeing ATI's behavior lately, such a move could be possible.
Contributed by Predator, Guest 510 iVirtua Loyalty Points • • • Back to Top
No, Sander was right with those benchmarks, that was pre-production card, an earlier revision. But ATI also not trying to prove Sander wrong, because the final revision of the Board is Rev05 with increased Core and Memory speed. And Rev02 board might have 500Mhz Core Speed with 650Mhz Memory. Those were preliminary scores and Sander also said it many times.
And more importantly Catalysts 5.11 are first official drivers for it. Expect performance to go up, as they already developed a fix for OpenGL games, which is going to be an integral part of those Catalysts.
Its still too little to late in my opinion. ATI have come to the party too far behind. They should have released a undoubted king of the hill and let nvidia play catch up. So after the 6/8 mnth delay they release an equal card.
Digg Topic
Tag topic on On del.icio.us
Technorati Search
Post to Slashdot
