Hi there
Well this might have to be removed as this product is still under NDA until midday today. However as everyone else is posting reviews I shall post the findings I had with the early test sample I had about a month ago on 8.36 drivers.
System Specification
To begin with we started testing on an Intel based system to see how well the card managed with Intel fastest processor today, the QX6800. The system specification was the following:-
Intel QX6700 @ 3.00GHz (1333FSB)
DFI ATI RD600 Motherboard
Corsair PC2-8888 (1150MHz) CAS4 DDR2 Memory
WD Raptor 150GB 10,000rpm HDD
Creative SB Fatal1ty Sound Card
Antec P900 Case
Enermax 1000W PSU
Windows XP Pro
Windows Vista Premium
BFG GeForce 8800 GTX OC 768MB GDDR3 (600MHz Core / 1800MHz Memory)
ATI Radeon HD 2900XT 512MB GDDR3 (750MHz Core / 1600MHz Memory)
Drivers
Installation with the NVIDIA card was easy under both operating systems. In testing all applications ran but Farcry had minor corruptions under both Windows XP and Vista which must be an issue with NVIDIA’s drivers. Also the Farcry benchmark programme would not run with the NVIDIA card under windows Vista. Apart from that the BFG card gave good results under Windows XP but it was noticeably slower under Windows Vista which clearly says NVIDIA still have a lot of room to make improvements on their Vista drivers.
Moving on the ATI HD 2900XT was also an easy installation under both Windows XP and Vista. All I will say is make sure that on release the cards also have the dotnet software as part of the installation too as to prevent any installation issues. Under Vista the ATI installation was very polished and superior to NVIDIA’s attempt.
Image quality was on par with NVIDIA for 2D and general windows applications. The noise levels of the card was quieter both at idle and underload, the card also ran cooler than an 8800GTX does as well, these are great points. Performance the card was every so slightly slower than the 8800GTX under windows XP, but this was less than 5%. However under Windows Vista the ATI card was quicker in both Direct3D and OpenGL application plus the card was more stable too and had no issues running my Farcry benchmarks unlike the NVIDIA card. Plus the ATI also displayed NO visual corruptions at all in Farcry wheras the NVIDIA card did.
Benchmark / Game results
NVIDIA BFG 8800 GTX OC (Overclocked) vs ATI R600 (HD 2900) at stock speeds (Overdrive ATI Speeds = 850MHz / 1800MHz)
Windows Vista
NVIDIA DOOM3 1600x1200, settings max, 8x = 57fps
ATI DOOM3 1600x1200, settings max, 8x = 68fps (71fps OC)
NVIDIA Farcry (1920x1200) = Crashes on benchmark programme
ATI Farcry (1920x1200) = Looks similar speed with better image quality and does not crash (54fps)
NVIDIA AquaMark Default Test = 154.28fps
ATI AquaMark Default Test = 155.36fps (159.54fps OC)
NVIDIA Fear 1920x1200, settings max = 33/64/140
ATI Fear 1920x1200, settings max = 22/54/108 (Possible driver issue here?)
NVIDIA 3D Mark 2005 Default test = 16,097
ATI 3D Mark 2005 Default test = 17,025 (17,457 OC)
NVIDIA 3D Mark 2006 Default test = 11,504
ATI 3D Mark 2006 Default test = 11,500 (12,504 OC)
Windows XP
NVIDIA DOOM3 1600x1200, settings max, 8x = 71fps
ATI DOOM3 1600x1200, settings max, 8x = 70fps
NVIDIA Farcry 1920x1200, 8x AF & 8x AA = 51fps
ATI Farcry 1920x1200, 8x AF & 8x AA = 55fps (ATI better IQ)
NVIDIA AquaMark Default Test = 163.43fps
ATI AquaMark Default Test = 158.37fps
NVIDIA Fear 1920x1200, settings max = 34/67/158
ATI Fear 1920x1200, Settings max = 23/57/142
NVIDIA 3D Mark 2005 Default test = 17,250
ATI 3D Mark 2005 Default test = 17,110 (17,554 OC)
NVIDIA 3D Mark 2006 Default test = 11,950
ATI 3D Mark 2006 Default test = 11,788 (12,617 OC)
As you can see from the results in brackets I overclocked the ATI card using the overdrive utility to compare against the BFG overclocked card. I ran the ATI overdrive utility which maxed out both sliders. The new clock speed were 850MHz Core and 1800MHz memory, even at these clock speeds the card still remained both cool and quiet. Now onto the results well I was very impressed as now the ATI card was pulling ahead of the NVIDIA card under Windows XP and under Windows Vista the R600 was considerably ahead of NVIDIA’s offering.
So in 3D Mark 2005, 3D Mark 2006, AquaMark, DOOM3, FarCry the ATI card won on both performance and image quality. It was only Fear where NVIDIA had quite a good lead which is no doubt due to the fact it’s a “best played on NVIDIA” game possibly or drivers?
Summary
Overall from my early testing the new ATI HD 2900XT 512MB looks like a serious contender to the GTX and GTS 640MB for gamers and benchmarkers. The only disappointing results were in the game called Fear but everything else was faster on the ATI product. The ATI card was also quieter and cooler running with fantastic overclocking potential. The product is a little more expensive than a GTS 640MB but cost considerably less than a GTX. So considering the card already has fantastic Vista drivers and far superior features to NVIDIA's offerings such as HDMI along with better video editing and DVD abilities does indeed make the HD 2900 XT worth while considering.
If your thinking of buying a new high-end card then I would suggest you don't make your decision based just on my review because my game testing is limited and as such I would recommend you check reviews done by professionals on a wider range of games before making your decision. If I was buying a graphics card and £300 was my limit then yes the HD 2900 XT would be my choice not only because its about the best performer in this price region but due to the fact it has great features, has little to no performance hit under Vista and is very overclockable. It appears most HD 2900 XT cards hit 850MHz-900MHz core and upto 2000MHz memory and beyond. However if you want the best then it does seem that the GTX does offer a performance edge on most games under Windows XP, but under Windows Vista the R600 based card is keeping pace with the 8800 GTX and for a lot less money in the programmes I tested.
Everybody already knows what the card looks like but here is one I took when I had the card a few weeks ago:-
I know my review does not go into great detail and the game testing is rather poor but at least you now know a little more about the card. We have 200+ R600 cards in stock at this moment in time and you can buy them after midday today.
Well this might have to be removed as this product is still under NDA until midday today. However as everyone else is posting reviews I shall post the findings I had with the early test sample I had about a month ago on 8.36 drivers.
System Specification
To begin with we started testing on an Intel based system to see how well the card managed with Intel fastest processor today, the QX6800. The system specification was the following:-
Intel QX6700 @ 3.00GHz (1333FSB)
DFI ATI RD600 Motherboard
Corsair PC2-8888 (1150MHz) CAS4 DDR2 Memory
WD Raptor 150GB 10,000rpm HDD
Creative SB Fatal1ty Sound Card
Antec P900 Case
Enermax 1000W PSU
Windows XP Pro
Windows Vista Premium
BFG GeForce 8800 GTX OC 768MB GDDR3 (600MHz Core / 1800MHz Memory)
ATI Radeon HD 2900XT 512MB GDDR3 (750MHz Core / 1600MHz Memory)
Drivers
Installation with the NVIDIA card was easy under both operating systems. In testing all applications ran but Farcry had minor corruptions under both Windows XP and Vista which must be an issue with NVIDIA’s drivers. Also the Farcry benchmark programme would not run with the NVIDIA card under windows Vista. Apart from that the BFG card gave good results under Windows XP but it was noticeably slower under Windows Vista which clearly says NVIDIA still have a lot of room to make improvements on their Vista drivers.
Moving on the ATI HD 2900XT was also an easy installation under both Windows XP and Vista. All I will say is make sure that on release the cards also have the dotnet software as part of the installation too as to prevent any installation issues. Under Vista the ATI installation was very polished and superior to NVIDIA’s attempt.
Image quality was on par with NVIDIA for 2D and general windows applications. The noise levels of the card was quieter both at idle and underload, the card also ran cooler than an 8800GTX does as well, these are great points. Performance the card was every so slightly slower than the 8800GTX under windows XP, but this was less than 5%. However under Windows Vista the ATI card was quicker in both Direct3D and OpenGL application plus the card was more stable too and had no issues running my Farcry benchmarks unlike the NVIDIA card. Plus the ATI also displayed NO visual corruptions at all in Farcry wheras the NVIDIA card did.
Benchmark / Game results
NVIDIA BFG 8800 GTX OC (Overclocked) vs ATI R600 (HD 2900) at stock speeds (Overdrive ATI Speeds = 850MHz / 1800MHz)
Windows Vista
NVIDIA DOOM3 1600x1200, settings max, 8x = 57fps
ATI DOOM3 1600x1200, settings max, 8x = 68fps (71fps OC)
NVIDIA Farcry (1920x1200) = Crashes on benchmark programme
ATI Farcry (1920x1200) = Looks similar speed with better image quality and does not crash (54fps)
NVIDIA AquaMark Default Test = 154.28fps
ATI AquaMark Default Test = 155.36fps (159.54fps OC)
NVIDIA Fear 1920x1200, settings max = 33/64/140
ATI Fear 1920x1200, settings max = 22/54/108 (Possible driver issue here?)
NVIDIA 3D Mark 2005 Default test = 16,097
ATI 3D Mark 2005 Default test = 17,025 (17,457 OC)
NVIDIA 3D Mark 2006 Default test = 11,504
ATI 3D Mark 2006 Default test = 11,500 (12,504 OC)
Windows XP
NVIDIA DOOM3 1600x1200, settings max, 8x = 71fps
ATI DOOM3 1600x1200, settings max, 8x = 70fps
NVIDIA Farcry 1920x1200, 8x AF & 8x AA = 51fps
ATI Farcry 1920x1200, 8x AF & 8x AA = 55fps (ATI better IQ)
NVIDIA AquaMark Default Test = 163.43fps
ATI AquaMark Default Test = 158.37fps
NVIDIA Fear 1920x1200, settings max = 34/67/158
ATI Fear 1920x1200, Settings max = 23/57/142
NVIDIA 3D Mark 2005 Default test = 17,250
ATI 3D Mark 2005 Default test = 17,110 (17,554 OC)
NVIDIA 3D Mark 2006 Default test = 11,950
ATI 3D Mark 2006 Default test = 11,788 (12,617 OC)
As you can see from the results in brackets I overclocked the ATI card using the overdrive utility to compare against the BFG overclocked card. I ran the ATI overdrive utility which maxed out both sliders. The new clock speed were 850MHz Core and 1800MHz memory, even at these clock speeds the card still remained both cool and quiet. Now onto the results well I was very impressed as now the ATI card was pulling ahead of the NVIDIA card under Windows XP and under Windows Vista the R600 was considerably ahead of NVIDIA’s offering.
So in 3D Mark 2005, 3D Mark 2006, AquaMark, DOOM3, FarCry the ATI card won on both performance and image quality. It was only Fear where NVIDIA had quite a good lead which is no doubt due to the fact it’s a “best played on NVIDIA” game possibly or drivers?
Summary
Overall from my early testing the new ATI HD 2900XT 512MB looks like a serious contender to the GTX and GTS 640MB for gamers and benchmarkers. The only disappointing results were in the game called Fear but everything else was faster on the ATI product. The ATI card was also quieter and cooler running with fantastic overclocking potential. The product is a little more expensive than a GTS 640MB but cost considerably less than a GTX. So considering the card already has fantastic Vista drivers and far superior features to NVIDIA's offerings such as HDMI along with better video editing and DVD abilities does indeed make the HD 2900 XT worth while considering.
If your thinking of buying a new high-end card then I would suggest you don't make your decision based just on my review because my game testing is limited and as such I would recommend you check reviews done by professionals on a wider range of games before making your decision. If I was buying a graphics card and £300 was my limit then yes the HD 2900 XT would be my choice not only because its about the best performer in this price region but due to the fact it has great features, has little to no performance hit under Vista and is very overclockable. It appears most HD 2900 XT cards hit 850MHz-900MHz core and upto 2000MHz memory and beyond. However if you want the best then it does seem that the GTX does offer a performance edge on most games under Windows XP, but under Windows Vista the R600 based card is keeping pace with the 8800 GTX and for a lot less money in the programmes I tested.
Everybody already knows what the card looks like but here is one I took when I had the card a few weeks ago:-
I know my review does not go into great detail and the game testing is rather poor but at least you now know a little more about the card. We have 200+ R600 cards in stock at this moment in time and you can buy them after midday today.
