-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
second x2 review
- Thread starter Gerard
- Start date
200 watts full load
Yup, hammered in Crysis, hammerd in Bio, not much faster in others, im hoping the proper review sites show it better, i at least thought more than a few frames here/there in some, and not whooped of single cards in some.
*Awaits the, its the drivers posts.
Ive a GT, still lets see what the pricings like, but it doesn't look worth going to from the GT/GTS/GTX/Ultra.
I would say its worthwhile changing to from a gt, gts maybe in certain games at some res. The gt is being hammered by it in fear for example as well as tf2 by sizable amounts. Its also the only card that can comfortably handle call of juarez.
Have to wait and see, id be suprised if it was ever gonna be released this week, the 28th date had been going around for about a month or more then all of a sudden it was the 23rd then according to the inq it was expiring today...
Just have to wait and see when the cards show up her or when reviews from sites like hardocp show up.
I love the spin put on this:
"its beat in bioshock" its beat by 4fps but that doesn't matter, its still beat regardless of how much its by. But when its ahead by 6fps its "only" 6fps ahead.
Its not 2 cards vs one though. This isn't a gx2.
Id love to know what reviews some of you people have been looking at, is it like just pick and choose the tighter benchmarks and totally ignore the benchmarks where the x2 is clearly excelling over the competition? Example cod 4 @ 1280x1024 where the x2 is near 40fps faster, yeah clearly barely any advantage over the gtx...
Dual gpu or not when the 2900xt came out it was a midrange card, the reason they didn't go for a highend version was due to heat and leakage so they opted for crossfire to compete in the highend. The x2 came at a time where they moved to a smaller process and the heat and leakege problems were dealt with. Its plainly obvious the x2 is basically a stopgap solution as many cards have been in the past with both companies.
Crossfire like sli is not a perfect solution so its obvious it will scale better in some games than others, people just seem to be expecting a constant 100% over a single 3870 but thats not possible, if it were then there would be no need for super expensive high end cards and people could just go and buy the midrange and slap another card in when they wanted a large fps bump.
Crossfire like sli is not a perfect solution so its obvious it will scale better in some games than others, people just seem to be expecting a constant 100% over a single 3870 but thats not possible, if it were then there would be no need for super expensive high end cards and people could just go and buy the midrange and slap another card in when they wanted a large fps bump.
see above
Well the people that are expecting that clearly have never deal with multiple gpu's in a crossfire or sli config before, which is hard to believe because usually only enthusiasts will go for sli or crossfire and would normally be well informed about performance increases well in advance.
I was really hoping for something more, i don't want to see AMD fail, as that would be catastrophic for us, we had a taste of what Nvidia will do with zero competiton for 6 months when they released their 8 series, we do not want that again, id give up, id get a console for gaming, and just use PC for net if it ends up all Nvidia.
I doubt very much they will fail, r600 was a blip on the radar and nothing more imo. The word going around that rv700 has already taped out and theyve begun to send samples to board vendors. Last i read a r700 varient was due for late Q2.
The thing is in the highend the r600 is the first "bad" card theyve had for ages, x800 was good x1800 was good x1900 was good. r600 was delayed heavily and never panned out the way they wanted. Thats just the way of things but people just seem to see one "bad" product as a deathblow for some reason. Even saying it was a bad card stikes me as odd, to me its a solid midrange card with the only real drawbacks being the cooler and the power it sucks up.
Nvidia had the fx fiasco but people on forums seem to totally blank that like it never happened. I dont recall pitchforks and torches at the ready when that card struck the iceberg either.
Assuming its delayed, i can't see it though reviewers would hit the roof if they had to redo the whole thing. Near a certainty that the reviews were completed over the weekend.
200 watts total usage for 2 midrange gpu's is actually pretty good.
