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

esiemi · 4 Jul 2007 at 17:53

still too late

Tom|Nbk · 4 Jul 2007 at 18:30

esiemi said:
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.

Multiple reviews show it to beat the GTS :confused:

heat/fan/noise is not really THAT much of an issue not to me and most of the other owners on this board anyway.

straxusii · 4 Jul 2007 at 18:33

Bear in mind you can buy an O/C GTS 640 for £230 inc vat and delivery

Teaf · 4 Jul 2007 at 18:44

The argument is silly though, you can get both of the cards within £5 - £10 of each other, so you just pick which you prefer either ased on the reviews you've read / comments you hear or brand you prefer. The 640MB GTS and the 2900 XT are pretty much on par in terms of performance at the moment (8800 GTS might outperform the 2900 XT in "proper" DX10 games or vice versa, who knows).

I don't get also why people say "well it's 6 months late". So? It's out now and has been for a while and people who are buying graphics cards now have the pick of both the Nvidia and ATi cards, 6 months ago you didn't but you could have either (a) waited for 2900 XT, or (b) bought a GTS and sold it later for a 2900 XT, or (c) bought the GTS or above and kept it because you were happy with it.

<whichever> is better because it's £5 cheaper and gets 5 FPS more in whatever game is a stupid arguement in my opinion.

Uriel · 4 Jul 2007 at 18:45

They don't show some of the games the 2900XT was really struggling with, like STALKER.

Tom|Nbk · 4 Jul 2007 at 18:54

Uriel said:
They don't show some of the games the 2900XT was really struggling with, like STALKER.

That benchmark was confirmed a load of **** that showed STALKER being bogged down, runs just as my GTS did here

Cyber-Mav · 4 Jul 2007 at 19:12

esiemi said:
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.

add to that the power consumption issue.

Cyber-Mav · 4 Jul 2007 at 19:14

Tom|Nbk said:
That benchmark was confirmed a load of **** that showed STALKER being bogged down, runs just as my GTS did here

you need to show both sides of the story, no point posting loads of threads showing 2900 beating gts in certain situations, it just makes it sound like your trying to justify your purchase of the 2900 :confused:

helmutcheese · 4 Jul 2007 at 19:20

/me lays a cable on AMD's doorstep

Tom|Nbk · 4 Jul 2007 at 19:34

Cyber-Mav said:
you need to show both sides of the story, no point posting loads of threads showing 2900 beating gts in certain situations, it just makes it sound like your trying to justify your purchase of the 2900

Post made no sense but no change there, I can fire up S.T.A.L.K.E.R right this minute and performance is never as low in those reviews, Im not trying to justify anything. Just the truth.

Cyber-Mav · 4 Jul 2007 at 19:43

so then why post links to reviews that show good performance for some games yet bad in stalker, and then you blame the benchmark they do? its like selective reading.

you abviously have something on your shoulder since you have started so many threads to do with ati and the 2900 that its quite ridiculous. really not sure what your trying to achieve here :confused:

Tom|Nbk · 4 Jul 2007 at 19:45

Cyber-Mav said:
so then why post links to reviews that show good performance for some games yet bad in stalker, and then you blame the benchmark they do? its like selective reading.

you abviously have something on your shoulder since you have started so many threads to do with ati and the 2900 that its quite ridiculous. really not sure what your trying to achieve here

You shouldnt trust reviews Mav. Not trying to achieve anything infact your the only one that has a problem with me, seems like your the one with the chip on your shoulder.

Cyber-Mav · 4 Jul 2007 at 19:53

Tom|Nbk said:
You shouldnt trust reviews Mav. Not trying to achieve anything infact your the only one that has a problem with me, seems like your the one with the chip on your shoulder.

now your saying i shouldn't trust reviews?

so reviews that say the 2900 has higher power consumption than a gts are not to be trusted?

and reviews which say that the 2900 is faster than the gts are not to be trusted?
this just doesn't make sense at all. your up to something cuz no one in the right mind would say what you have just said.

maybe you should have said that i should't trust reviews from dodgey places or something on those lines. but something is just not right here. :confused:

Tom|Nbk · 4 Jul 2007 at 20:00

A lot of reviews use different setups/configs/drivers you just shouldnt trust them as they can be very varying, for once I would have thought you would have at least tried to engage your brain to understand that but no all hope is lost

. CBA replying to you anymore Mav, your impossible.

Cyber-Mav · 4 Jul 2007 at 20:11

yes i understand a lot of reviews use different setups from one another BUT when they test 2 cards or more they use the same hardware for each gfx card tested.

e.g if firingsquad test a 2900 and a gts they will do so on the same base system. its not as if they will test 1 card using a different cpu or different amount of ram in the system.
as for drivers they always tend to use the latest ones available.

again your side stepping the issue and not explaining yourself properly here.
saying that we shouldn;t be trusting reviews then why did you post a link to a review in the start of this thread and also in many other threads you have started you post links to reviews and now your saying those reviews are not to be trusted. it seems you only trust reviews that show the 2900 being better than the gts and when its the other way round you say the review is not to be trusted.

please give me some clarification on this matter.

helmutcheese · 4 Jul 2007 at 20:43

This is my view in my short time here and I am not going to add to this or bait arguements:

There is 1 person in general who is a nice dude but has made many threads about the new ATI card he has, I read into it he is trying to convince himself he did good buying the card as he was on Nvidia now ATI then was going to do a swap back to Nvidia with another user and now thinking about buying Nvidia until again decides to stay with the ATI.

I personally would put these cards down to same as FX5000's and they could actully game ok but overall were dudes, skip the ATI range this time as I did with Nvidia, I went from GF 4 TI4600 to 6800Ultra, has no hard time gaming inbetween.

I was kind of same with my AM2 over C2D but I made my own decision on variables and will leanr to live with that.

Tom|Nbk · 4 Jul 2007 at 20:51

helmutcheese said:
This is my view in my short time here and I am not going to add to this or bait arguements:

There is 1 person in general who is a nice dude but has made many threads about the new ATI card he has, I read into it he is trying to convince himself he did good buying the card as he was on Nvidia now ATI then was going to do a swap back to Nvidia with another user and now thinking about buying Nvidia until again decides to stay with the ATI.

I personally would put these cards down to same as FX5000's and they could actully game ok but overall were dudes, skip the ATI range this time as I did with Nvidia, I went from GF 4 TI4600 to 6800Ultra, has no hard time gaming inbetween.

I was kind of same with my AM2 over C2D but I made my own decision on variables and will leanr to live with that.

Ok, I'll stop making threads about the card I own, since when have you seen a person that owns a nvidia card make an ATi thread anyway, also the fact I am a beta tester means I get a lot of the information first hand. NO body on here is totally unbiased. But Ok even though it creates good discussion I'll stop and give myself a slap on the wrist.

helmutcheese · 4 Jul 2007 at 20:58

You can do whatever you like, you seem a nice guy, beta testing means little, I did same for MS and I'm no expert on software.

I just think the more you torture yourself the worst it gets (IMO), being there with "did I get right kit etc" many times.

If the card runs game the way you are happy thats all that matters, I have others on my case as I have Raptors and a 8800 Ultra, you dont see me telling anyone not to buy them if they can afford.

killer_uk · 4 Jul 2007 at 20:58

helmutcheese said:
snip

He's just posting info that shows the card in good light, which it deserves, after all the bashing it receives on the forums. The card is improving as shown, and I wouldn't compare it at all to the FX series as this card is actually a good competitor. Obviously though I'm not saying you're wrong as, you are entitled to your opinion.

helmutcheese · 4 Jul 2007 at 21:03

Im not wrong or right, but I aint daily changing my mind if I should have got a Nvidia or ATI card, do at times on AM2 v C2D but I need live with that decision making multi threads trying to justify it would not help esp on topic of ATI v Nvidia or AMD v Intel.

As I said if a cards bad it gets bad press, thats life for you, and as I stated Nvidia got same and did for drivers for 8800 and Vista very recently.