Gibbo is getting an R600!!

willhub · 14 Apr 2007 at 12:01

Gibbo said:
Hi there

I used 32-Bit version, but the R600 does already have 64-bit drivers now anyway, so will be no driver issues at launch as all version of XP and Vista are already supported and working.

Are the drivers your using stable and reliable?

easyrider · 14 Apr 2007 at 12:12

willhub said:
Are the drivers your using stable and reliable?

doesn't matter, you will still get stutter with 1gig of system ram in todays games

willhub · 14 Apr 2007 at 12:21

easyrider said:
doesn't matter, you will still get stutter with 1gig of system ram in todays games

I was asking weather the damnd drivers were allready stable, then if it was a positive answer, I would have said, oh good because Nvidias drivers are still garbage over 6 months later.

But if I want to stick an R600 in this rig, then I will, I think I said a bazillion times I am getting C2D in june/july...

Gibbo · 14 Apr 2007 at 12:24

willhub said:
I was asking weather the damnd drivers were allready stable, then if it was a positive answer, I would have said, oh good because Nvidias drivers are still garbage over 6 months later.

But if I want to stick an R600 in this rig, then I will, I think I said a bazillion times I am getting C2D in june/july...

Everything ran on the ATI card without issue and no visual problems were detected.

On the NV card Farcry had some very minor flashing textures, but minor but still a problem.

willhub · 14 Apr 2007 at 12:38

Gibbo said:
Everything ran on the ATI card without issue and no visual problems were detected.

On the NV card Farcry had some very minor flashing textures, but minor but still a problem.

Minor issues... to be honest I would concider than as a majour issue just because the Nvidia cards have been out like 6 months now, then the R600 that aint even out yet has better drivers than Nvidia's six month old 8800series. Shows ATi know what there doing and shows better quality and that they care more.

Oh also I am just wondering, is the card you have only as long as a GTX? I have seen one with like the main card, then the actual fan at the end, then this bacl thing? It really makes it look loads longer than the GTX but yea, its that OEM version aint it?

chaparral · 14 Apr 2007 at 12:45

Gibbo said:
Hi there

Those results don't look quite right!

In my testing on my system our GTX scored 11,950 under Windows XP and under Windows Vista it scored 11,504. That was the results of the BFG 8800 GTX OC in our Intel QX6700 @ 3GHz (1333FSB) with memory at 1150Mhz at 4-4-4-12. So in comparison that guys results look rather low considering he was using an QX6800 processor. Obviously I cannot tell you what the ATI card scored yet until AMD give me the go ahead.

Would that test be about right,,if it was done with the CPU & 8800gtx at stock speeds with no overclock ???..

gt_junkie · 14 Apr 2007 at 12:50

chaparral said:
Would that test be about right,,if it was done with the CPU & 8800gtx at stock speeds with no overclock ???..

I thought that. The OC edition's up on performance surely.

gt

Sir Random · 14 Apr 2007 at 13:13

Gibbo said:
Hi there

I used 32-Bit version, but the R600 does already have 64-bit drivers now anyway, so will be no driver issues at launch as all version of XP and Vista are already supported and working.

Were you using the 101.2 drivers for the GTX?

nicolasb · 14 Apr 2007 at 14:15

People were talking about R600's audio abilities a while back....

This is still not entirely certain, but the likelihood is that R600 will not be a sound card in remotely the way that term is normally used. We certainly do know for sure that the Realtek thing is a 100% red herring; the driver file in question is for an AMD motherboard chipset.

What R600 (and RV6xx) will offer in audio terms is (probably) just one thing: if you have a pre-recorded digital audio sound-track, it will allow that sound-track to be passed through and bundled into the audio portion of the HDMI signal.

The reason this is useful is you want to use your PC as a BluRay or HD-DVD disc player. Current-generation sound-tracks on DVDs are in formats like Dolby Digital or DTS. These are lossy compression formats (like MP3), and consequently have less-than-perfect sound quality; this the trade-off necessary to get the bit-rate down to a manageable level. If the bit-rates are too high then the sound data simply won't fit on the disc, and the disc-player can't read all of the audio and video data off the disc fast enough.

Because the bit-rate is quite low, it's possible to feed a DD or DTS soundtrack in digital format over a standard digital audio ("S/PDIF") link. If you've ever connected a DVD player to a surround-sound home cinema processor, that's what you're doing: the player outputs the DD or DTS signal in digital form, and the processor decodes it, converts to analogue, and sends it onto the amplifier (and the amp then drives the speakers).

An advantage of BluRay and HD-DVD discs is that, aside from the increased storage capacity compared to DVD, they also have better performance - more bits per second can be read off the disc. This allows much higher-quality sound formats to be used: formats like Dolby True HD, and DTS-HD. These use higher sampling rates (e.g 96kHz rather than 48), higher bit-depth (e.g. 24-bit rather than 16) and also lossless compression (the difference between putting a .wav file into a .zip archive and converting it to a low bit-rate MP3).

Unfortunately, the bit-rate of these new formats is high enough that it is no longer possible to feed the signal through an S/PDIF connection. You therefore have two choices: 1) The player has to decode the signal itself and produce 7.1-channel analogue output, or 2) the signal is output in digital form via HDMI 1.3 (or higher). Output via HDMI is likely to be the highest-possible quality option in a high-end system, because self-contained surround-sound processors are generally more capable of producing high-quality audio than disc players.

In order to be able to handle this, you therefore need a player which has an HDMI 1.3 output, and you need a surround-sound processor with HDMI 1.3 input. (The processor then passes the video portion of the signal on to the display).

The audio capabilities of R600 will (I am pretty sure) be limited to doing just that: if you use your PC as a hi-def disc player, you will be able to pass the disc sound-track out via HDMI and, thence, to an external surround-sound decoder. So we are not talking about "a sound card" in the accepted sense of that term. It's not going to generate sound, in the way that (say) a Creative card does. It will simply pass through a pre-recorded digital signal for external processing and conversion.

lay-z-boy · 14 Apr 2007 at 14:25

Um....duh? :confused:

It was quite obvious that the 'soundcard' was for hdmi, anyone who thought it was for kmixer output like a creative soundcard needs to be slapped and learn to read.

At the same time, unless the hd 2900 uses hmdi connectors the onboard 'soundcard' is useless.

Darkwave · 14 Apr 2007 at 14:33

lay-z-boy said:
Um....duh?

It was quite obvious that the 'soundcard' was for hdmi, anyone who thought it was for kmixer output like a creative soundcard needs to be slapped and learn to read.

At the same time, unless the hd 2900 uses hmdi connectors the onboard 'soundcard' is useless.

He was just explaining because quite a few people are getting confused.

It was a well written and well thought out post, no need to come down on him like a pile of bricks.

lay-z-boy · 14 Apr 2007 at 15:45

I was coming down on the people who go 'omfgz i have my 1337 xfi f@7@l17y soundcardz why would i want t3h crappz0rz r6Oo soundcardz'

Tom|Nbk · 14 Apr 2007 at 16:49

AMD preps lineup including 1024 HD baby

The R600 512MB is the grand finale. R600 is HD 2900 XT, as our Wily already disclosed. This board packs 512MB of GDDR-3 memory from Samsung, and offers same or a little better performance than 8800GTX, at a price point of 8800GTS. R600 GPU supports two independent video streams, so even a dual-link DVI can be done, even though we doubt this was high on AMD's priority list. This product is nine months late, and a refresh is around the corner, unless AMD continues to execute as ATi did

http://www.theinq.com/default.aspx?article=38923

Vogon · 14 Apr 2007 at 17:19

LOL @ the Inq ...

"The R600 1GB is very interesting. Originally, we heard about this product as a GDDR-4 only, and it is supposed to launch on Computex. We heard more details, and now you need to order at least 100 cards to get it, it will be available in limited quantities only. We expect that ATi will refrain from introduction until a dual-die product from nV shows up, so that AMD can offer CrossFire version with 2GB of video memory in total, for the same price as Nvidia's 1.5GB. Then again, in the war of video memory numbers, AMD is now losing to Nvidia flat-out"

since when has crossfire or SLi made use of both cards memory ??? since never AFAIK :rolleyes:

That aside, they are saying that the XTX wont be released until/or when nvidia releases a dual core graphics card ?
The 8800 Ultra, latest rumours are dual GPU and mega price, so maybe if thats released ?

And IF the 100 card limit applies, I would hope OcUK will be getting at least 100 units in ??

Jakus · 14 Apr 2007 at 17:27

nicolasb said:
People were talking about R600's audio abilities a while back....

Unfortunately, the bit-rate of these new formats is high enough that it is no longer possible to feed the signal through an S/PDIF connection. You therefore have two choices: 1) The player has to decode the signal itself and produce 7.1-channel analogue output, or 2) the signal is output in digital form via HDMI 1.3 (or higher). Output via HDMI is likely to be the highest-possible quality option in a high-end system, because self-contained surround-sound processors are generally more capable of producing high-quality audio than disc players.

In order to be able to handle this, you therefore need a player which has an HDMI 1.3 output, and you need a surround-sound processor with HDMI 1.3 input. (The processor then passes the video portion of the signal on to the display).

HDMI 1.3 AV equipment is Yet to hit the Streets, I understand they are still squabbling over Blu-ray functions also. How I wonder does it leave the man in the street with a nice LCD and 5.1 surround system without HDMI interconnects, only optical links which You say are bandwidth limited ?

New HDMI 1.3 HDCP Surround Sound Amp...Then a new 120Hz LCD to get around the 1080P 24fps Blueray Stutter, Expensive times ahead :rolleyes:

Vogon · 14 Apr 2007 at 17:38

JAKUS said:
New HDMI 1.3 HDCP Surround Sound Amp...Then a new 120Hz LCD to get around the 1080P 24fps Blueray Stutter, Expensive times ahead

taking the thread OT ... but since when has blueray been decided as the defacto HD format ? blueray is Sony propriety, and I suspect just as likely to go the same route as past Sony propriety tech (beta anyone ?)

Are you also saying that we need new amps ?? I can feed a 5.1 signal into mine via optical or RF (even analogue if I must), either RF or optical sound perfectly good to me, this has nothing to do with my PC, maybe for people looking to build a HTPC, but then thats stretching the bounderies of THIS threads point

Tom|Nbk · 14 Apr 2007 at 17:51

Everything said so far looks like ATi have a winner, the card has been confirmed to retail at $399, 399.00 USD = 201.230 GBP , then add 17.5% to the Gordon Brown fund = 236.44, then add various other taxes approximate £30? Gibbo would know more im sure

, the card should retail for around £260-280 with the cheapest GTS (640) being around £260, and the XT beating both the GTS by a big margin and the GTX by a small margin. ATi have a true winner for the price/perf side considering the GTX is still fairly close to 400. Im really looking forward to this, I have put £300 as side as I know for a fact the XT won't surpass that, and with all the features on the XT, 24xAA, Uber HDMI support it really does sound exciting and the right choice.

. Every dog has it's day and it looks like NV's is around the corner.

Nelly · 14 Apr 2007 at 17:54

lol just wait till they hit the retail market, people will buy them regardless then see from customer results whether or not the R600 is worth buying or not. :rolleyes:

Im like most people! I want one myself but I'm not going to take anything said in this forum for granted, no offense but Gibbo who actually has the test sample wants this product to do very well in terms of sales & I'm quite sure you wont be biased in terms of any results, but I would rather see a totally random person with nothing to gain post some results woudnt you? besides if any negative results were shown anyway compared to Nvidias current flagship it woudnt do any good for sales would it? lol

I'll take any results with a pinch of salt untill we see retail results from review sites & customers who cant wait to spend their money.

Just my own opinion, I'll still end up buying the R600 regardless it does look an excellent graphics card. lol

LLBDTiberio · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:13

Thanks @ everyone for making this thread a very informative and fun read

.
And thanks Gibbo for giving an idea of Ati's offering (they will always be Ati to me

!).
I was really interested in the 2900XTX but there seems to be no real news about it, just speculation :confused:

.
But if I can get better performance, better Vista support and future-proof HDMI then I will get the XT and wait for the refresh, hehe, more money going towards my 24" monitor then :cool:

.
Ati really shot themselves in the foot when the X2900 series was delayed this much but they really seem to have been using their time to offer a better alternative to the GTX for less money, and (hopefully) optimise the XTX for pwnage

.

Tom|Nbk · 14 Apr 2007 at 18:18

LLBDTiberio said:
Thanks @ everyone for making this thread a very informative and fun read .
And thanks Gibbo for giving an idea of Ati's offering (they will always be Ati to me !).
I was really interested in the 2900XTX but there seems to be no real news about it, just speculation .
But if I can get better performance, better Vista support and future-proof HDMI then I will get the XT and wait for the refresh, hehe, more money going towards my 24" monitor then .
Ati really shot themselves in the foot when the X2900 series was delayed this much but they really seem to have been using their time to offer a better alternative to the GTX for less money, and (hopefully) optimise the XTX for pwnage .

Exactly the last minute delay really has helped them turn things around for the better, and everyone can now see why they did it.