ati 2900xt

PC eye said:
And just what reviews are those? While some reviews show several model cards and a few from each game catagory the software is too wide range to cover everyone out just for XP compatible alone. Some games will simply run better on one make or the other by nature of software design. One example was older ATI AGP cards seeing problems when the Catalyst control center was running.
Click to expand...

Guru3d, Anantech, and so on.

Of course reviews can't cover every single variable but it's a damn site better than just looking at the specs and "guessing".
 
maybe you haven't visited the Nvidia website for a while. that graphic card is THEIR BRAND NEW product for Graphics Workstation computer and graphic servers. it is not meant for the general gaming consumers. it doesn't belong to the 8 series family. it uses the same chips as the 8 series do but this graphic card is not meant for us yet.

what is the 8 series ?

8800gts 320mb
8800gts 640mb
8800gtx 768mb
8800ultra 768mb

and
Entry-level GPU 8300, 8400 and Mid-Range GPU 8500, 8600

time for a little visite to nvidia.com ?
 
Last edited:
You seem to forget the original question which doesn't specify if the new ATI model is intended for use on a gaming machine. As far as rhe specifications go for the 2900s over the RX2600XTs the core and memory clocks are seen faster on the lower cost models. Do you need to spend $200, $300, $400, $500, etc. on a card to run Half Life 2 Episode Two when that comes out in october? I certainly won't buy at EBay on anything electronics related. No return policy guaranteed!
 
ATI is even giving out free games!!! if it is not intended for gaming? then for what? remember ATI have other cards not belong to the X generation that are for graphic workstations. if you only want to watch movies then any ati graphic card would do. again if you are a graphic designer or anything similiar to that ATI have different cards for those people.

if you would spend some time looking up the specification of x2600xt you would find the Memory Interface is 128-bit. just that already limited the card's ability to be one of the high end card.

if you would spend another minute of your time. look up all the cards that has 128bit memory interface. you would find that they all have a faster memory and clock speed than a 256bit memory interface cards. no matte how high the clock speeds are 256bit memory interface or higher is required for todays high definition gaming need. if you look at the nvidia 8 serie cards. all the high end cards have more than 256 or have 256bit memory interface.
and if you look at Entry-level GPU 8300, 8400 and Mid-Range GPU 8500, 8600. mid range have 128 memory interface and entry level have 64bit. again, no matter how fast your memory and chip clock speeds are. memory interface greatly limits your graphic card's processing speed
 
true but no one is telling nobody to buy a 8800ULRA. we are suggesting 8800GTS 320mb or 640MB. yeah if you get them 2 cards crossfire without water cooling you can use your PC case as a heater in the winter.
 
I know, I was simply drawing a price comparison. Lately Nvidia have been acting like the 'big man on campus' and there hasn't seemed to be much of a social challenge (and I say social, but we all know that if the quality of one high-end VGA over another is your main concern then there's nothing remotely social about it) to their illusions of undisputed superiority.
 
sure if you insist. but, i trust the reviews. they been very accurate. from ati x800 to HD2900. from, nvidia 7600 to 8800GTS.

i have bought these cards last year:
x800 pro
x850pro
x850 platinum
x300
x1650
x1950

for Nvidia :
7300LE
7800GS OCed
7900gt
8800gts 320mb


after reading serveral review before i bought those cards. when the reviews say they are slower then they are really slower on my PC. when the reviews say they are faster. they are really faster than other cards. i am very experienced after trying all those cards.
 
Last edited:
junwang0808 said:
ATI is even giving out free games!!! if it is not intended for gaming? then for what? remember ATI have other cards not belong to the X generation that are for graphic workstations. if you only want to watch movies then any ati graphic card would do. again if you are a graphic designer or anything similiar to that ATI have different cards for those people.

if you would spend some time looking up the specification of x2600xt you would find the Memory Interface is 128-bit. just that already limited the card's ability to be one of the high end card.

if you would spend another minute of your time. look up all the cards that has 128bit memory interface. you would find that they all have a faster memory and clock speed than a 256bit memory interface cards. no matte how high the clock speeds are 256bit memory interface or higher is required for todays high definition gaming need. if you look at the nvidia 8 serie cards. all the high end cards have more than 256 or have 256bit memory interface.
and if you look at Entry-level GPU 8300, 8400 and Mid-Range GPU 8500, 8600. mid range have 128 memory interface and entry level have 64bit. again, no matter how fast your memory and chip clock speeds are. memory interface greatly limits your graphic card's processing speed
Click to expand...

Apparently you never look at the actual specifications. Try looking over the 512bit memory interface seen on the HD 2900XT models seen at http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...+1305520549+106792278+1068520521&name=512-bit

What were you saying about 256bit now? ATI as well as NVidia carries models in the different catagories.
 
it is known that something didn't work out for the HD 2900XT. desgining errors? who knows. if you look at all older cards compare ati to ati and nvidia to nvidia. no 128bit interface is faster than 256bit interface from the same company. i am assuming by your saying a x1650 is faster than x1950 pro.
it is 128bit vs 256bit. just do a little research or even buy the cards yourself. you will see x1950 is faster than x1650. yes x1650 has faster memory clock speed and chip clock speed. there is a reason why x1650 is not consider as high end cards.

if you would do some research on google. i am sure it you will not find any review saying that HD 2600XT is faster than HD 2900XT
 
Last edited:
junwang0808 said:
it is known that something didn't work out for the HD 2900XT. desgining errors? who knows. if you look at all older cards compare ati to ati and nvidia to nvidia. no 128bit interface is faster than 256bit interface from the same company. i am assuming by your saying a x1650 is faster than x1950 pro.
it is 128bit vs 256bit. just do a little research or even buy the cards yourself. you will see x1950 is faster than x1650. yes x1650 has faster memory clock speed and chip clock speed. there is a reason why x1650 is not consider as high end cards.

if you would do some research on google. i am sure it you will not find any review saying that HD 2600XT is faster than HD 2900XT
Click to expand...

Where did I mention any comparison about any Radeon X1xxx series cards? The varying results seen with different cards depend on the games run for the most part no matter what but rate the memory interface is.

Results in Battlefield 2, Quake 4, and Far Cry showed the HD 2900 XT and the 8800 GTS running neck and neck. In Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory the HD 2900 XT managed to pull ahead a bit: The HD 2900 XT ran the game at 51 fps at 1600 by 1200 resolution with antialiasing, while the GeForce 8800 GTS board managed 45 fps.
The real battleground for these new boards will take shape later this year, when the first DX10 games start to appear. That's when we'll see who has really done a better job of building a unified shader architecture that's ready for the future of 3D gaming. http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,132798-page,1/article.html

TechSpot posted a review on the ASUS Radeon HD 2900XT


"After months of delays and much anticipation, ATI has finally come up with the Radeon HD 2900 XT, a DirectX 10 capable GPU meant to compete with Nvidia's GeForce 8 series, and the first big introduction in the PC enthusiast market since AMD acquired the company.

Today we have in our hands a Radeon HD 2900XT board, which is of course based on the R600 core using an 80nm design process. This version features just 512MB of onboard GDDR3 memory clocked at 1656MHz using a 512-bit wide memory bus. Combined with a core clock of 757MHz, the Radeon HD 2900XT can theoretically produce a memory bandwidth of 102.4GB/s, which is greater than that of the GeForce 8800 GTX."

http://www.ntcompatible.com/ASUS_Radeon_HD_2900XT_Review_s88829.html

Techspot has a multi page review seen at http://www.techspot.com/review/52-asus-radeon-hd-2900xt/
​
 
you are getting outdated news. first DX10 game is already out long time ago. it is called Company of heroes and your HD 2600xt is slower than HD 2900xt and 8800gts. no reviews will tell you HD 2600XT is faster than those cards.
tell me, when was the last time you seen a mid range card that is faster than the high end card.

from my experience ... NEVER....
 
Did you guys know the 2900 has sound capabilities?

There's a sound accelerator built right into the card, and it will output not only video, but sound through the hdmi output..........

I'm seriously considering one now. That might honestly be the coolest thing i've ever heard.

So pluggin in a 2900xt basically transforms your computer into a game console & Media center for your HDTV.
 
Last edited:
you're thinking hdcp

hdmi is a plug, and all the 2900xt brands i've seen come with a dvi-to-hdmi dongle for connecting to a hdtv.
 
junwang0808 said:
you are getting outdated news. first DX10 game is already out long time ago. it is called Company of heroes and your HD 2600xt is slower than HD 2900xt and 8800gts. no reviews will tell you HD 2600XT is faster than those cards.
tell me, when was the last time you seen a mid range card that is faster than the high end card.

from my experience ... NEVER....
Click to expand...

The first DX10 compatible game is out is what you mean there. If it runs on XP as well as Vista it's still far from a totally DX10 game. DX is simply a set of driver for 3D rendering and sound used by Windows. The RX2600XT will run faster here since it will be the card installed not sitting on a shelf somewhere. :P That doesn't do anything for me there. That's RX not HD while seen under the same catagory.

For the newer cards coming out the focus has been on multimedia application and options like dvi, s-video, tv tuners built in, and other features like PVRs on top. With newer models of sounds cards now seen for use in the second PCI-E slot when there is no SLI or Crossfire setup the ability to add sound chips on larger models isn't that hard. The increased demand for power would be a thing to look at however with two types of cards in one.
 
it does count as the FIRST DX 10 game dude and DX 10 games can also run on DX9. you have that option to use DX 10 or 9.

look at this review
http://www.trustedreviews.com/graphics/review/2007/07/26/MSI-RX2600XT/p5


your RX is even slower than HD. noticed the cards they are comparing with? they are all mid range card. no top end cards there. why? top ends card runs faster and doesn't not belong to that catagory. you are saying a mid end card can beat a high end card? then, y don't we all just buy mid end cards and save a whole bunch of money and electricity since they faster and more power efficent ?
 
What you missed there is simply the mention of seeing a faster core and memory clock on the 2600 model card over the others. And fast depends on what application. I've seen where some low end cards ring circles around more far more expensice high end models.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top