Good 2900 vs 8800 review

[SK-1]

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1131/crossfire_hd_2900_xt_vs_8800_ultra/index.html

[Darknova]

Very very interesting....looks like I won't be going for an 8800...

[DanTheBanjoman]

Around 15-20% higher performance in de CF setup it seems, however in some tests it doesn't even beat the 8800.

And the CF setup uses 125W more, I vote 8800

[Kreij]

I vote for the Crossfire setup as it seems to pretty much rule at 2560x1600 which is what I run at.

I don't really care about the added cost on my electric bill :D

[DanTheBanjoman]

I don't really care about the added cost on my electric bill :D

High power consumption has more drawbacks than just financial ones.

[Darknova]

Around 15-20% higher performance in de CF setup it seems, however in some tests it doesn't even beat the 8800.

And the CF setup uses 125W more, I vote 8800

I wasn't looking at the CF setup.

1000 points less than the Ultra in 3Dmark...and $300 cheaper...

[DanTheBanjoman]

Get a GTX then, if price is your concern the power consumption makes it cheaper and faster than the 2900.

[Ketxxx]

I vote 2900. With the kind of improvements thats been seen with later driver releases, it just looks more promising right now.

[Kreij]

I didn't see the PSU listed in the test setup specs. I wonder what they were using.

[largon]

Good 2900 vs 8800 reviewIndeed, but we already know HD2900XT does well at non-AA but it pretty much sucks once AA is enabled. Even at lower res'.

Some priceless quotes and shots from the review:
Ultra scoring lower than GTX
(http://images.tweaktown.com/imagebank/bankbreak_g_17.gif)
:D:laugh::roll: These guys are clearly pros.
(...)
------

Even though we have two cards in Crossfire, the heat output on them is generally lower than that of the Ultra which is nice. We honestly thought that we would be pumping out a bit more heatThese guys don't just get it don't they?
For some reason they seem to think heat = temperature.

------
http://images.tweaktown.com/imagebank/bankbreak_g_15.gif
The noise levels on the Crossfire setup are clearly louder, even when at idle. It may bother some people so it’s something worth thinking about.:rolleyes:
I really don't know why they list lower dBs for CF in the chart... Which should I trust: the chart or their scribblings?

edit,
I wonder what's with their power consumption figures; their E6600 @ 3GHz + G80Ultra draws 340W... For comparison my Q6600 @ 3GHz + G80GTS draws 265W at peak loads (quad prime + fullscreen rthdribl) measured from the wall outlet.

Icing on the cake:
- P35 for crossfire. WTG.

[AsRock]

Were are the GTX's in SLI UMMM. :|.

[DanTheBanjoman]

These guys don't just get it don't they?
For some reason they seem to think heat = temperature.


Idiots they are.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heat
added or external energy that causes a rise in temperature, expansion, evaporation, or other physical change.

[SK-1]

Were are the GTX's in SLI UMMM. :|.

The cost/performance factor would still hold true.It may even be more in favor of the 2900 due to the crossfire vs sli performance disparity.

[mandelore]

I didn't see the PSU listed in the test setup specs. I wonder what they were using.

its a TAGAN based on the connectors used

[niko084]

Still a crap review.... They still miss all important changing details.

[yogurt_21]

Indeed, but we already know HD2900XT does well at non-AA but it pretty much sucks once AA is enabled. Even at lower res'.
originally quoted by largon

care to back that up? I run all my games with full 16xaa.

[Wile E]

*sigh* Here we go again. I'm not even gonna read the review. All I know is this, my card plays any game I want at my res, with max details and full AA/AF. It gets great benchmark numbers (another one of my favorite things to do), and it also has that nifty HDMI w/Audio feature. Good enough for me.

[driver66]

9208

9209

9210

[Chewy]

originally quoted by largon

care to back that up? I run all my games with full 16xaa.


not trying to nitnat here but from what Ive read nv's new lineup (8800's) do better at higher res especially with AA than 2900xt's, that why I happiy went to green team! The team I told myself I would not because I dont like them! lol

[yogurt_21]

depends on the bench and driver versions used but that gross generalization is mostly false, save for farcry (an ancient game to be benching at this point) and doom 3 (which is nvidia biased anyways)

[Conti027]

green or red? what color do you like more?

[magibeg]

From now on my vote is for the purple team, who needs green, red, blue or whatever colors companies have :P

On a side note though crossfire does seem to be scaling well but one thing i have to wonder about is that as the games became more complex i wonder how much of a difference the CPU was making on the fps.

[Chewy]

depends on the bench and driver versions used but that gross generalization is mostly false, save for farcry (an ancient game to be benching at this point) and doom 3 (which is nvidia biased anyways)


yea it was a while ago like 6 weeks, but it was tests done after a few driver releases. Company of Heroes really benefited with the 8800's at high rez and some aa/af added in.. all in all both cards are relatively great (doh ofc they are lol). I havent seen any recent benches with newer drivers, but here in Canada the 2900xt 512mb is 500+ taxes and I got my 8800gts 640mb for 360 + taxes - $30 MIR.. so that was somewhat a no brainer on my part :P after seeing how it did on the game I played the most till a few weeks ago (COH).

New trusted benches would be nice to read, but I also heard my psu might not be the best for overclocking the 2900xt, I like having some decent headroom, I want my psu to last :P and now Im going water cooling so I think my system wil be just right with my psu after overclocking... hopefully :D.

[HellasVagabond]

Well you guys should forget the price for a while and focus on the fact that ATIs Flagship needs to come in Pairs in order to Beat the Ultra in SOME games.
In anycase the G92 is just around the corner so dont even bother with 8800 and X2900 tests.

[mandelore]

i would compare the ultra and the 1gb 2900xt, the512mb as-you-know was ment for sparring against the gts. so its performance is fantastic in that respect

[KennyT772]

I want to see all the top models vs both 2900's. Two 2900 512mb two 2900 1024mb two gts320mb two gts 640mb two gtx 768 and two ultra 768 all benched in single card and multi card setups. Oh and redone every time drivers come out. That is what we need, not this biased shit.

[yogurt_21]

orrrr..... you could just head over top tomshardware where they've already done that.

[WarEagleAU]

I love it. great banter on both sides. It took the 2900xt a few months to mature with drivers, but its looking more and more like the card it was meant to be on the initial deploy.

[HellasVagabond]

By the time it looks what it should be months ago even ATI will have a new GPU ready....

[Wile E]

By the time it looks what it should be months ago even ATI will have a new GPU ready....
BS. Quit posting this dribble. The 2900 does exactly what it was intended to do, compete with the GTS, which it does quite easily. It even comes close to the GTX in some benches, including games.

[TonyStark]

Hey guys, whats going on?

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/2196/xtpwnsqh0.jpg


:D

[HellasVagabond]

Posting DX9 bench of a DX10 title....In any case it is no secret that Nvidia still has a driver problem with Bioshock.

As for the Dribble Wile E im tired listening to people saying that the X2900 will become better and better in time. I dont think that the people who bought it did it so they could have their moneys worth in 5-6-7 months. Same goes for Nvidia and their GTS problems im not talking just for ATI but at least people that have GTS cards like myself aint saying that they will get what they paid for later in time, we have come to terms with the fact that the product aint perfect and thats that. Who knows perhaps both the GTS and the 2900 will deliver what they should in 2 years...But who will really care by then ?