• 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.

[Warning Fudzilla] GeCube HD 2900XT beats 8800GTS 640MB

Tom|Nbk said:
Yea but the 2900 was never going to be a GTX competitor ;)
Click to expand...
Maybe not now but I am sure that a while ago that was the idea, until they got problems with the cores.

Looks liek AMD did a lot of driver optimising, especially in Company of Heroes, but F.E.A.R. still shows a bigger drop in framerate when enabling 4xAA where the 2900XT's score is more than halved
 
Yip it was ATI's current flagship aimed at the Crown, just did not work out same as Nvidias FX5000's

Tom no excuses, sellling more or less has nothing to do with it, fact is most users wont buy a £400-500 GTX/Ultra, they are not mainstream, Intel has that market.
 
Dutch Guy said:
Maybe not now but I am sure that a while ago that was the idea, until they got problems with the cores.

Looks liek AMD did a lot of driver optimising, especially in Company of Heroes, but F.E.A.R. still shows a bigger drop in framerate when enabling 4xAA where the 2900XT's score is more than halved
Click to expand...

Yea perhaps if they had done another respin it could have been a winner, but I guess they had already lost enough cash designing it and couldn't afford it or justify it, maybe they think they should have now.
 
Tom|Nbk said:
Yea perhaps if they had done another respin it could have been a winner, but I guess they had already lost enough cash designing it and couldn't afford it or justify it, maybe they think they should have now.
Click to expand...
They had a choice of delaying even longer or go with what they had at the time and they chose the latter.

I think the large performance drop is because AA is done in shaders and if it is with a game that relies heavily on shaders the drop is bigger than a game that isn't 'shader heavy'
 
I'm glad for people who bought this card, this is more like the performance they've been expecting and deserve.

I'm still shocked it can't beat a GTX with all the power it consumes, but at the same price at a GTS 640MB it gives people something to think about.

Now I wonder if they thought about doing a 256MB version to take on the 8800 GTS 320MB?
 
Dutch Guy said:
They had a choice of delaying even longer or go with what they had at the time and they chose the latter.

I think the large performance drop is because AA is done in shaders and if it is with a game that relies heavily on shaders the drop is bigger than a game that isn't 'shader heavy'
Click to expand...

Precisely.
 
I would have liked to see ATi`s card whip nvidia, we will just have to see whats around the corner. I was temptred to get a 2900XT , but gave in to the 8800GTS 640 meg.
 
Dutch Guy said:
I think the large performance drop is because AA is done in shaders and if it is with a game that relies heavily on shaders the drop is bigger than a game that isn't 'shader heavy'
Click to expand...


that makes no sense, ati themselves said that the future of games is more shader usage, they said this when they released the x1900xt cards.

so why would they cripple thier own hardware with shader based AA knowing that the future of games will be more shader instensive?

they pulled a FX, thats for sure. not the question is can they bounce back?
 
well done ATI, nearly a year late and still there is no solid proof of 2900 beating GTS, and even if really beats GTS what about the heat/fan/noise/AA etc issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom