2900xt owners\benchmarks thread

Jokester · 23 May 2007 at 23:48

Tom|Nbk said:
So ATi have promoted the card as having it along with it being on the packaging and now this .

Hard to say, I think everyone else got the wrong end of the stick as someone points out in that thread that ATI specifically said it was a feature of the 65nm cards ie not the X2900XT.

Jokester

fornowagain · 23 May 2007 at 23:51

Jokester said:
Nope the X2900 doesn't have it, but the lesser cards do. Though Avivo works it obviously stresses the GPU to the point the fan is speeding up.

Its just the definition, its using the shaders to support the cpu instead of a dedicated chip like the 8800.

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/r600reviewz/video.php

What also became apparent in the time we used the 2900 XT for video playback is that it is completely unsuitable due to the noise the cooler makes. If there is one thing a graphics card shouldn’t do when watching a movie/video, is to interfere with the user’s enjoyment and that’s precisely what the HD 2900 XT does! The fan is far too loud and the constant variation in speed makes it even more noticeable, so despite the reasonably good acceleration we cannot recommend any reference cooled models for video use.

http://ati.amd.com/products/hdseries.html

The series boasts many firsts for the graphics industry, including a powerful second-generation Unified Shader Architecture (USA), a 512-bit memory bus designed for full performance high dynamic range (HDR) rendering, and new Unified Video Decoder (UVD) technology for high-fidelity HD media playback. The mid-range and entry-level GPUs are the first graphics products in the industry to use an energy-efficient 65 nm process technology to achieve silent, passive cooling and lower power consumption. The ATI Radeon HD 2000 series also builds on AMD’s Windows Vista™ leadership.

I presume "the series" to include the 2900XT and thus the UVD statement that follows to apply. So maybe a little misleading? Although no mention of UVD under the cards specification, only hardware acceleration, which is what it has. Unlike the lower models which have a unified decoder listed under the specs.

Tom|Nbk · 24 May 2007 at 00:09

Jokester said:
Hard to say, I think everyone else got the wrong end of the stick as someone points out in that thread that ATI specifically said it was a feature of the 65nm cards ie not the X2900XT.

Jokester

It's written clear as day on my HIS box.
:mad:

Nelly · 24 May 2007 at 00:20

Just come across a review for the OCZ 8800GTX, dated 23rd May 07, looks like I've got a right bargain for under £300

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/514/1/

What will interest the people with HD2900XT is the benches, which show overclocked results for various cards as seen below, the full review has more benches.

Rainbow Six: Vegas -->

F.E.A.R. -->

fornowagain · 24 May 2007 at 00:29

You know they have a review on the XT? Btw all the reviews I've seen are on the front page.

bfar · 24 May 2007 at 00:42

omg this thread is shocking :eek:

This is really disapointing. 5 years of fantastic cards, and then this shambles

I really hope ATI get you guys sorted out asap. At least they're quicker than Nvidia with the driver fixes...

Best of luck lads, no doubt things will be looking better in a couple of weeks

Nelly · 24 May 2007 at 01:33

It's not that bad though, in some of the benchmark tests the HD2900XT is on par with a 8800GTX, if it can have those results with particular games their isnt anything to say that with future driver updates with specific games it will improve overall.

Clairvoyant · 24 May 2007 at 08:10

Jokester said:
Hard to say, I think everyone else got the wrong end of the stick as someone points out in that thread that ATI specifically said it was a feature of the 65nm cards ie not the X2900XT.

Jokester

Its also stated on OC website

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-074-HT

- ATI Radeon HD 2000 Series GPUs with ATI Avivo HD technology offer advanced audio, video processing, display and connectivity capabilities for high definition entertainment solutions
- Introduces a breakthrough for the playback of Blu-ray and HD DVD discs.
- UVD (Universal Video Decoding) is a new full-spec HD video processing technology that provides full hardware decoding of Blu-ray and HD DVD
- UVD technology enables a cool, quiet media PC with low power requirements for the GPU and CPU
- UVD technology enables entry level PCs to play full-spec HD discs

so it should be avalible with this card aswell. or is it another one of those. Oh its not for that version.

Dutch Guy · 24 May 2007 at 09:21

Looks like UVD is another feature that might be fixed by drivers like the AA implimentation but could very well be broken on the hardware side and never be fixed.

And by the time HIS got the info it will not be on the current cards they had already finalised their box design?

Emlyn_Dewar · 24 May 2007 at 14:02

6800 Purevideo all over again?
Are ATI trying to emulate all Nvidia's mishaps?

fornowagain · 24 May 2007 at 15:12

Link

Sampsa said:
8.38 RC7 drivers were published yesterday to press and I tried decoding HD-DVD decoding with Radeon HD 2900 XT today. HD-DVD movie with H.264 codec was completely corrupted with Cyberlink PowerDVD and Avivo acceleration. With VC-1 HD-DVD movie CPU load dropped a little bit compared to 8.37 drivers (55 % -> 46%) but it's still a lot worse than with 8800 Ultra and 8600 GTS (31 - 33 % CPU Load).

Sir Random · 24 May 2007 at 15:34

Why would they release drivers to 'The Press', but not to the general public? :confused:

Tom|Nbk · 24 May 2007 at 15:37

fornowagain said:
Link

Could you ask him to host those drivers?

Sir Random said:
Why would they release drivers to 'The Press', but not to the general public?

Baffling, but most likely to do some new benchies with. The last RC they sent the press was the RC3's

fornowagain · 24 May 2007 at 17:00

Sir Random said:
Why would they release drivers to 'The Press', but not to the general public?

I guess part of the RC group would include the press, someone has to test them. Not to mention updating reviews.

Gerard · 24 May 2007 at 22:38

Done some testing with my 8800gts (640mb) comparing it to the previous benchmarks i done, all at 1920x1200 high settings 4xaa 16x af:

vista 64:

Company of Heroes Performance Test (demo version): Average 43,6 Min 17.4, Max 121.5 (x1900xt)

Company of Heroes Performance Test (demo version): Average 64.6, Min 30.5, Max 180.9 (2900xt)

Company of Heroes Performance Test (demo version): Average 41.0, Min 22.7, Max 140.4 (8800gts stock)

Company of Heroes Performance Test (demo version): Average 51.6, Min 24.9, Max 162.1 (8800gts oc 600\1800)

Fear Performance Test: Average 42, Min 19, Max 95 (x1900xt)

Fear Performance Test: Average 51, Min 18 Max 99 (2900xt)

Fear Performance Test: Average 36, Min 19 Max 91 (8800gts stock)

Fear Performance Test: Average 42, Min 22 Max 99 (8800gts oc 600\1800)

Doom 3 54.2 fps (x1900xt)

Doom 3 70.5fps (2900xt)

Doom 3 57.8fps (8800gts stock)

Doom 3 61.3fps (8800gts oc 600\1800)

knowledge123 · 24 May 2007 at 22:51

thanks for that Gerard, much appreciated

Clairvoyant · 24 May 2007 at 23:06

So it looks like I did the right thing and buy Gerards X2900 XT.

Street · 24 May 2007 at 23:18

I'm still very much tempted to get one of these.. My 1900 is on the bay as we speak. But I'm still waiting on the latest driver release to see whether or not to cancel my auction.. The major selling point at the moment is that my Maze 5 will fit on it!

It would perform better than my 1900 but not sure whether or not its worth waiting for the refresh...

willhub · 24 May 2007 at 23:58

This certainly looks very tempting for me too to buy an HD2900XT.

Sir Random · 25 May 2007 at 00:39

Gerard said:
Done some testing with my 8800gts (640mb) comparing it to the previous benchmarks i done, all at 1920x1200 high settings 4xaa 16x af:

vista 64:

Fear Performance Test: Average 42, Min 19, Max 95 (x1900xt)

Fear Performance Test: Average 51, Min 18 Max 99 (2900xt)

Fear Performance Test: Average 36, Min 19 Max 91 (8800gts stock)

Fear Performance Test: Average 42, Min 22 Max 99 (8800gts oc 600\1800)

Either the Vista drivers are really bad, or there's something wrong there.

I just ran the FEAR test at 1920x1200, max detail, high quality, 4xAA/16xAF, on my GTX at stock (575/1800) on XP

Average 86, Min 44, Max 209

I know the GTX is a bit faster than a GTS640, but my scores are double your o'clocked score.