Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

16 Pages « < 13 14 15 16 >Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Definitive R6xx thread, Some more solid info

views
     
derek87
post May 11 2007, 10:00 PM

Keep it C.L.E.A.N.
******
Senior Member
1,077 posts

Joined: Nov 2006
From: Sabah,Sandakan Status:STUNNED


QUOTE(empire23 @ May 11 2007, 05:48 PM)

- The R600 is not even out with mature drivers (i have an X2300 on hand)
where did you get that X2300? show so benchies here pls... =) that will be so entertaining!
empire23
post May 11 2007, 10:09 PM

Team Island Hopper
Group Icon
Staff
9,417 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Bladin Point, Northern Territory
QUOTE(derek87 @ May 11 2007, 10:00 PM)
where did you get that X2300? show so benchies here pls... =) that will be so entertaining!
*
Asus lappie. I might discreetly post it later. Just got the lappie yesterday lah.

But here's the wierd part, benches are heavily driver independent (the driver reported to be in use is a Catalyst 8.31) and i get insanely low 3Dmark scores, too low to believe. So i think there are a few bugs about, but it generally functions just nicely in some games. But it chokes on others. I'm going to try low level tests (MADD, Triangle output and such) for the time being since they're far less driver dependent.

But AVIVO seems to work just fine, with hardware offloading across the lines for various media tested with it. And of course ATI's newly implemented Powerplay and some fancy power gear thinggy.

LittleLinnet
post May 11 2007, 10:52 PM

Iophobia
*******
Senior Member
3,593 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: ***Penang***
why does X2300 have something to do with R600?
I thought it is still based on R5XX architecture and ATi just renamed it
linux11
post May 11 2007, 11:17 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
104 posts

Joined: Jan 2005
From: Seremban


Mobility Radeon X2300
http://ati.amd.com/products/mobilityradeonx2300/specs.html

it's a DX9 gpu.
empire23
post May 12 2007, 12:10 AM

Team Island Hopper
Group Icon
Staff
9,417 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Bladin Point, Northern Territory
QUOTE(LittleLinnet @ May 11 2007, 10:52 PM)
why does X2300 have something to do with R600?
I thought it is still based on R5XX architecture and ATi just renamed it
*
Yeap, it seems i'm mistaken.

Although it using highline drivers is wierd (prerelease beta, because catalyst intaller said it was newer than the 7.4) . And ATI/AMD seems to be playing the "it might be this or that" game. With speculation saying it's sometimes an M64 or the next gen M71. Seriously at this time i can't tell, because lappie has developed fault in keyboard and is to be sent back tomorrow (seems the 1 to backspace and F1-F12 key don't work)
SUSdattebayo
post May 12 2007, 02:27 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
5,366 posts

Joined: Aug 2005


R600 has 512 bit, GDDR4, more stream proc. than 8800GTX hmm.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R600#Chipset_table

awaiting for this, hope it will be capable to create whirlwind to blow buyers away from nvidia laugh.gif

if ATi still lose their market share in the DX10 cards market, will AMD be doomed unsure.gif
cstkl1
post May 12 2007, 02:29 AM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(dattebayo @ May 12 2007, 02:27 AM)
R600 has 512 bit, GDDR4, more stream proc. than 8800GTX hmm.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R600#Chipset_table

awaiting for this, hope it will be capable to create whirlwind to blow buyers away from nvidia laugh.gif

if ATi still lose their market share in the DX10 cards market, will AMD be doomed unsure.gif
*
cool card
just realised something
ppl gaming on vista has no choice now to go 4gb kekekke on vista 64 if they want to even game with the xtx crossfire..

This post has been edited by cstkl1: May 12 2007, 02:40 AM
GeneralX
post May 12 2007, 01:46 PM

Newbie
****
Senior Member
577 posts

Joined: Jan 2007
From: Random


Found an interesting article ... the R700

Wikipedia R700

TSikanayam
post May 12 2007, 01:59 PM

there are no pacts between fish and men
********
Senior Member
10,544 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: GMT +8:00

QUOTE(GeneralX @ May 12 2007, 12:46 AM)
Found an interesting article ... the R700

Wikipedia R700
*
Some things in the article don't make sense.

1. It references [T]ardOCP. Twice. That particular article they referenced has less credibility than even Inquirer's rumors. It was based on the fanboi opinion of an idiot who knows nuts about chip design.

2. If R700 was made for a Q1'08 launch, it would not inherit anything from Barcelona. It would be too far along in development to inherit much from AMD at this point, especially not something as fundamental as split power planes. If it does have something like that, it's because it was designed that way.

3. I personally doubt it would be 65nm, unless they go very conservative with it. My guess is 55nm (or smaller depending on when they are targeting to release).
gtoforce
post May 13 2007, 05:18 AM

SPAM AND BECOME A SENIOR MEMBER
*******
Senior Member
2,967 posts

Joined: May 2006



anything after september is still 65nm
haha
cuz the plan to reduce the size of graphic card aint gonna move til this sept...i heard they are introducing new chip size by that time

oh...and i think id rather wait for the 2950pro
TSikanayam
post May 13 2007, 07:50 AM

there are no pacts between fish and men
********
Senior Member
10,544 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: GMT +8:00

R700 won't be around very soon (i highly doubt Q1'08, but then again... hehe).

2950 pro won't be here so soon either. Assuming it is the RV670. But yes that may turn out to be an interesting chip... as well as G92...

This post has been edited by ikanayam: May 13 2007, 07:51 AM
Radeon
post May 13 2007, 08:27 AM

Semi-Retired Overclocker
*******
Senior Member
2,257 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

more spoilers for the xtx oem
the card is shown as XT instead of XTX though, not sure if it's a driver issue.

Default XTX clock
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


OC
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


X-Fire
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Source:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showth...t=143915&page=3

This post has been edited by Radeon: May 13 2007, 08:27 AM
cstkl1
post May 13 2007, 09:30 AM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

err those scores are lower than a gtx...
first review by the man shamino.
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4946&s=1


Added on May 13, 2007, 11:12pm
ultra stock lost to OCed air cooled x2900xt
http://r800.blogspot.com/2007/05/3dmark06-8800ultra-vs-2900xt.html

current world record of 3dmark05 - X2900xt!!
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/4594/30kni1.jpg


Added on May 14, 2007, 3:13 amcstkl1 score tongue.gif
x6800@3.317 , 473*7
EVGA 680 mobo,
2x1gb Crucial Ballistix Tracer - 950mhz CL4 - 2.2v
8800gtx 575/1350/900 (Stock)
3dmark06 = 11086.

Shamino VrZone
x6800@3.3 ,366*9
ASUS P5K Deluxe (Intel P35 Chipset)
2 x 1GB GSkill CL5DDR2 915MHz, 5:4 Divider
HD2900xt 880/1030 (742/828 - Stock)
3dmark06 = 11896!!!...


p.s. take note the 8800gtx was not running on the lastest driver which would have given it another 500 or so more points based on my other clocks with the 8800gts on that driver.

This post has been edited by cstkl1: May 14 2007, 03:27 AM
jarofclay
post May 15 2007, 11:27 AM

Klipsch Addict
Group Icon
VIP
2,068 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Ipoh / Penang / PJ


Just to share some benchies... the HD2900xt was running with very early drivers so do take that in mind.

Firingsquad
Hornet
post May 15 2007, 11:59 PM

What?
*******
Senior Member
4,251 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Malacca, Malaysia, Earth


Hmm... judging from that DirectX 10 benchmark (guru3d), I think the HD29xt kinda ok when comes to DX10, had it came out 6 months earlier that is. and its power consumption isnt too nice.

Anyway some more mature driver would probably help it, performance wise.

This post has been edited by Hornet: May 16 2007, 12:01 AM
jarofclay
post May 16 2007, 04:58 PM

Klipsch Addict
Group Icon
VIP
2,068 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Ipoh / Penang / PJ


Fishchicken: Need to ask you a little... is the lack of gaming performance currently on the R600 mainly attributed to drivers and if so, do you foresee it beating the 8800gtx/ultra with R600 having mature drivers on?

...coz if you ask me, the specs on the R600 is so forward looking.

Thanks.
TSikanayam
post May 16 2007, 05:08 PM

there are no pacts between fish and men
********
Senior Member
10,544 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: GMT +8:00

Hm... it's quite "meh" to me. I think at least gaming wise, NV got it right for the high end this time. Midrange may be a different story altogether.

There is too little information to judge right now. The drivers look quite lame at this point, so new drivers may help quite a bit, especially with the AA modes since they seem to be doing the AA via shaders. But G80 drivers certainly aren't fully optimized either. I would not rush out and buy either one right now. Dx10 games are still nonexistant. I would wait 3-4 months till the driver situation works out a bit and maybe a few dx10 games are available before judging.
almostthere
post May 16 2007, 05:09 PM

Kepala abah ko
Group Icon
VIP
3,773 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Anywhere lah...as long got Kopi-O



QUOTE(jarofclay @ May 16 2007, 04:58 PM)
Fishchicken: Need to ask you a little... is the lack of gaming performance currently on the R600 mainly attributed to drivers and if so, do you foresee it beating the 8800gtx/ultra with R600 having mature drivers on?

...coz if you ask me, the specs on the R600 is so forward looking.

Thanks.
*
that's what everyone in the tech scene is trying to figure out as for something that's late into the game, it's got pretty mediocre results for now. I suspect drivers too since it looks like R520 redux so it's better to wait till someone has soemthing good to report back
jinaun
post May 26 2007, 04:12 PM

where are my stars???
Group Icon
Elite
6,139 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
QUOTE
Radeon HD 2900 XT lacks UVD video acceleration
by Scott Wasson - 01:38 pm, May 25, 2007

I've just learned something that compels me to publish a major correction to our review of the Radeon HD 2900 XT GPU. I got the clear, distinct impression from AMD's presentations, statements, and conversations with me at its Radeon HD press event that its new UVD video decode acceleration logic was present in its entire lineup of Radeon HD graphics chips, and I relayed that information to you in our review of the product, promising to follow up with tests of this feature at a later date.

True to my word, I set out yesterday to test HD video decode acceleration on a Radeon HD 2900 XT using an HD DVD drive and a version of PowerDVD supplied by AMD for such purposes. To my surprise, CPU utilization during playback on our Core 2 Extreme X6800 test system ran between 40 and 50%, well above what one would expect from a solution with full HD video decode acceleration.

Naturally, I contacted AMD to inquire about the problem. I received a reply from AMD's David Baumann discussing the issue that ended with this revelation:

    Be aware, though, that HD 2900 XT itself does not feature UVD, this is specific to 2600 and 2400, so the levels of CPU utilization you see should be somewhat similar to the previous generation.

The UVD logic handles the CPU-intensive bitstream processing and entropy decode acceleration portions of the HD video playback pipeline. These are the most notable video decode acceleration capabilities that would separate the Radeon HD 2900 series from its direct competition, the GeForce 8800 series, if the HD 2900 XT actually had them. Turns out it does not. As the email states, the video playback capabilities of the Radeon HD 2900 XT are essentially similar to those of the previous-gen Radeon X1950.

So the essence of our correction is that the Radeon HD 2900 XT doesn't offer robust acceleration of HD video playback and will not likely reduce CPU utilization or power consumption substantially during high-definition video playback versus a GeForce 8800. We still intend to follow up with testing, but the lack of UVD logic on the GPU resets our expectations dramatically.

With that out of the way, I believe I ought to take a moment to explain how we came to believe the Radeon HD 2900 XT had full HD video playback acceleration, an impression formed by many layers of talk from AMD, starting with the Radeon HD name. Let me share a slide with you from a presentation titled "ATI Radeon HD 2000 Series and the Ultimate HD Experience," given by AMD's David Cummings, Director of Mobile GPU Marketing. The slide looks like so:

You can, of course, read for yourself that it says "Avivo HD technology makes full spec HD DVD / Blu-Ray (HD Disc) playback accessible at all price points," but I just like repeating it. That gives one a certain idea, does it not? Now, let's have a look at another slide showing what Avivo HD brings to video decode acceleration:

The bit labeled "Avivo HD" shows GPU acceleration of bitstream processing and entropy decode, and makes clear it's distinct from the Radeon X1000's Avivo video processing, which lacks acceleration of those stages.

Now, look at any specs list for the Radeon HD 2900 XT-say, this one from AMD's website, and you will find listed among its specs "ATI Avivo(tm) HD Video and Display Platform" and a bullet point under that saying "HD decode acceleration for H.264/AVC, VC-1, DivX and MPEG-2 video formats." At the end of the day, one gets the impression that this GPU has Avivo HD, with all that entails.

Of course, AMD has left itself some wiggle room in its technical statements. The specs list above isn't technically untrue-just imprecise. The dodge built into the Cummings presentation, with its talk of making HD video playback "accessible at all price points" seems to be that high-end CPUs can handle HD video playback without as much assistance from the GPU. But that's a paper thin excuse, in my view.

To make sure this wasn't simply a matter of me missing the boat-it has been known to happen, and I've got a few gray hairs promising more of the same in the future-I checked with a couple of other journalists who attended a separate Radeon HD press event the week after the one I attended. Both Marco Chiappetta from HotHardware and Ryan Shrout of PC Perspective came away from their meetings with AMD convinced the Radeon HD 2900 XT had full HD playback acceleration via UVD logic, as well. I was not alone in gathering this impression from AMD. To their credit, some reviewers did sort through the fog and identify the Radeon HD 2900 XT's lack of UVD, but they were swimming against the tide of statements from AMD itself.

Nor could any of us have uncovered this fact prior to the publication of our reviews via testing, because AMD hasn't yet delivered a driver that includes the support for the Radeon HD's "full" multimedia capabilities. They initially targeted May 9 for that driver's release. AMD now says the driver is due next week.


http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/12552

will it be an issue or not...?

This post has been edited by jinaun: May 26 2007, 04:13 PM
X.E.D
post May 27 2007, 12:32 PM

curmudgeonosorus emeritus
******
Senior Member
1,955 posts

Joined: Jan 2006
From: Llanfair­pwllgwyngyll­gogery­ch


QUOTE(jinaun @ May 26 2007, 05:12 PM)
http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/12552

will it be an issue or not...?
*
Not really.
Did that author get paid off by nVidia? Seems to make a HUGE deal out of losing entropy decoding/bitstream processing. 8800 doesn't have'em too, practically keeping them at an even playing level for now.

Marketing BS, but this wouldn't even compare to the magnitude that Creative has done with their Audigy and X-Fi cards. Those are much easier to get a lawsuit on than this one.

The important factor will be the redux flagship chips (HD2950XT+/8900+), in which demanding full AVIVO HD/Purevideo HD v2 would be reasonable.

More importantly, hi-def video is more prevalent on H/X264 files than HD-DVD/BD, and there's a very nut-zy codec called CoreAVC that high-end GC users could buy without even blinking their eyes. 1080p H.264 fulfilled!

This post has been edited by X.E.D: May 27 2007, 12:32 PM

16 Pages « < 13 14 15 16 >Top
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0240sec    0.75    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 21st December 2025 - 04:28 AM