再次发起该楼运动！目标2W！

I am all for reasons for 8800GTX price drops.

agree. Even for the diehard nvidia fanboy, a weak ATI is not a good thing. A strong ATI will drive the prices down which is good for everybody.

However, ALL the news are bad, and ALL can't be wrong.

Plus one review says the R600 is running at 100C.

R600 is a flop...the sooner you deal with it, the better off you'll be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ^eMpTy^
R600 is a flop...the sooner you deal with it, the better off you'll be.

<yawn>

me pets his 8800GTX on water ...

Rumors can be wrong and cannot be, but every one is saying the same thing. Which means it is true, but it does not make sense to me, how could this be possible.

1GB memory, 512bit memory, 320 stream processing unit, 140MB memory bandwidth. All these number are better than Nvidia then how come it is slow. There is definately some drivers issue or every thing i stated up there is not true.

Dell Ultra Sharp 24" LCD
Foxconn AMD690G mATX Motherboard
AMD X2 3600 @ 1.9
4 GIG OCZ DDR2 800
Sweiftech (3 x 3) 120mm Radiators Custom Water Cooling
Dtek Fuzion CPU block.
ATI 650 Pro HDTV Wonder
(2 X 160) 320GB SATAII Hard Drive RAID 0
(2 X 18X) Dual Layer DVD Writers

We should ignore everything except that it consumes 240W, does HDMI, Physics, comes with Half-life 2 Episode 2/Team Fortress 2. Anandtech's/HardOCP's/Guru3D's reviews will be the reviews that are completely legit, so only 10+ days left .

We should ignore everything except that it consumes 240W, does HDMI, Physics, comes with Half-life 2 Episode 2/Team Fortress 2. Anandtech's/HardOCP's/Guru3D's reviews will be the reviews that are completely legit, so only 10+ days left .

Who knows, they may have gone so far as to make it a killer in dx10, while being not so hot at dx9.
Just have to wait and see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLord
/me pets his 8800GTX on water ...

See how it does under water? I betcha it shoots sparks it is so fast!

From what i have seen Fudo, dailytech and kyle are the only sources that are all doom and gloom. Everything else i've been reading has been saying its about even with an 8800gtx and that the power/temp reports have been overstated. What its like in real life, who knows, but at this point I'd rather wait for the benches before i make a decision either way.

Which means that, once again ATI is left with only sloppy seconds, because they are once-again at performance parity with Nvidia, and only 6 months late (happened with the highly-anticipated R520 too). ATI slid into a performance lead with the x1900 series, but that only took NINE MONTHS, after which Nvidia was heavily entrenched.

ATI hasn't wowed the video card community since the introduction of the 9700 Pro. I'm not holding my breath on this one. Competition is a good thing, but ATI is a little late to this party - Nvidia went ahead and released midrange parts without them, and because there is no competition, the value in the 8500 / 8600 sector is weak.

r520 was arguably faster than the 7800gtx and was roughly ~2 months late iirc. The x1900 raped when it was released. r4XX wasn't much of a letdown, it was just a paperlaunch however it is arguable that ati's x800xt was faster than a 6800 ultra. The 6800gt was amazing though.

My X800XL is getting really long in the tooth, especially on my 24" 1080p display and running Vista. I try to get 2 years out of my video cards. This time I have to have a card with 512meg or more. My rig is as follows:

X2 3800 939 @ 2.4Ghz
Nforce4 (non SLI)
2 gig pc3200
Antec True Control 550W
2 320 gig 7200.10 in raid 0
1 320 gig 7200.10 storage
X800 XL @ 440core/ 567mem (on water) PCI express.
HDTV Wonder
SB Audigy 2

Think I will end up with a 8800GTX since the power requirements may not require me to replace my power supply. I do not plan on ever running SLI. I will go Quad core in 6 months to a year, so I will get 2 years out of my MB, Proc, and Mem.

Do you guys think my power supply will cut it for now?

Your power supply is probably the only thing that can handle an 8800GTX in your rig.

The x800 XT was faster than a 6800 Ultra, but the difference is less than %10-20, and it was actually slower in OpenGL. Only the x800 XT PE and the later x850 XT revisions were NOTICEABLY faster. The x800 Pro (12 pipe) was actually an embarassment to ATI because it was toasted by the 16-pipe 6800 GT (same price). Didn't help that ATI also got raped on the midrange because they refused to release the x700 XT to compete with the 6600 GT, and they were late with an AGP version of the x700 (the 9800 Pro couldn't even compete with the 6600 GT). Their only midrange wins were with the x800 XL and x800 GTO, and thse were LATE in the product cycle. ATI ruled the high-end, but blew the midrange (you'll see this pattern many times in my post).

Release date of 7800 GTX: 6/22/05. This was also a hard launch.
Release date of x1800 XT: 11/5/05. That's 5 months later, and the launch had poor availability. R520 WAS faster than the 7800 GTX, but not the 7800 GTX 512MB (which had the same poor availability). However, the x1800 XT was NOT more than 10 or 20 percent faster in a given game, which meant there was little impetus for 7800 GTX owners to upgrade (especially with SLI available).

The x1900 series was impressive on launch, but Nvidia came back and offered > %80 of the performance of an x1900 XT for almost $200 off (the 7900 GT, priced at $299). While there are people who buy the ultra high-end cards, the real money is made in the $200-300 bracket - this is why Nvidia cleaned-up despite having a pathetic top-end, because the 7900 GT had zero competition for four months (once the x1800 XTs were liquidated). And since the x1900 GT (four months later) was too little, too late, ATI had to wait until the release of the x1950 Pro (8 months later) before they could compete on price and performance with the 7900 GT...and by then, they had to sell it for under $200, cutting into profits.

The pathetic showing of the x1600 versus the 7600 GT also didn't help things. In fact, poor performance in the midrange hurt ATI, because even though they had the performance crown for almost the whole year of 2006, they actually lost marketshare that year.

So, here we are again, it's practically a repeat of 2005. ATI is six months late with their power part, and the competition has had time to release lucrative upper-midrange solutions (8800 GTS 320) and hog potential sales. In fact, things are worse than 2005: even Nvidia's midrange cards have beaten ATI to market, giving them little chance to compete.

I'm sick of watching ATI dig themselves a deeper grave with every iteration. This was supposed to be the generation where they beat Nvidia to market with a better product, thanks to their investment in the Xbox 360 GPU, but that obviously didn't help things. R600 may be better, but once again it will be a marginal improvement, discouraging upgrades from the 8800 GTX. If the midrange is anything like the x1600 (and x700 Pro before it), you can kiss that goodbye DESPITE the poor performance of Nvidia's 8500 and 8600 lineup.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

thats roughly what i have
and i just got a 8800GTS and love it i would say if you have the cash(and room) for a GTX go for it

It "might" only consume 240 watts if it's overclocked.
Simple math:
PCI-e connector #1 - 75 watts
PCI-e connector #2 - 75 watts
PCI-e slot - 75 watts

The max it could draw is only 225 watts. That mysterious 2x8 plug might give more, but it's not REQUIRED for use.

It could be that a few people, throwing DX9 games at the card and using immature drivers, have...

... insert thunderclap echoing over the peaks and down through the valleys...

... proclaimed as if the voice of Hardware Heaven itself that the R600 has lost. Or it could be that it's a card that can handle today well, and might prove the better once a tomorrow with DX10-based games arrives. And a lot of awfully loud and edgy people are perhaps terrified that if the latter were true, that means they paid almost $600 to one camp for what they could have got for $400 and a tub of patience from the other.

I remember back in the early discussions about the Xenos GPU, someone theorized that when nVidia got the contract for the GPU on the original XBox, the resources that the project consumed helped to create the GeForce FX disaster, and that ATi better watch out that the "XBox curse" didn't get them too. Almost seems to be a prophecy fulfilled, now...

nvidia's problem during the xbox development wasn't the NV30, it was that the xbox caused all products during and sometime after it (GF3 - NV30) to be late.

The problems with the NV30 had to do with bad assumptions on SM2 design, and fixes during the development couldn't help the design shortcomings yet still caused it to be late.

I don't think it was the same situation since ATI handed off the 360 GPU to MS almost 2 years ago. ATI has had problems with releasing products on time that go back much longer.

Of course developing more products at once will be a distraction from the core PC GPU business, but ATI had a lot more on its plate than Xenos. Don't forget the desktop chipsets that never went anywhere and the Wii GPU refresh.

but the xbox chip gave nvidia a nice foot in the door on chipset development, basicly, if MS hadnt contracted nvidia i wouldnt have my nice NF4 SLI board right now

I agree, I always saw the xbox deal as a big plus for nVidia. NV30 happened for what seemed like completely separate reasons.
__________________
GPUReview.com - Everything you ever wanted to know about videocards...and then some.


^eMpTy^
View Public Profile
Visit ^eMpTy^'s homepage!
Find all posts by ^eMpTy^

The 8-pin PCI-e provides 150 watts.

What else would they throw at it? DX10 games? Oh wait, those don't exist.

Your PS is fine. I've been running my gtx on this PS since december without a hickup. Check my sig for details.

Exactly my point; they aren't available yet, and until they are we won't know either way how HD 2900XT(X) and 8800GT(X/S) stack up against each other. So, one can't say (regardless of their stature on the web) the HD 2900XT is a bum. It's irresponsible to suggest it because there's no way of knowing yet. It may well be a bum, but taking sides so early is a blatant bias towards one camp or another, and for many web editors it sullies their objectivity. I don't know about you, but I try to avoid such 'fanboy' websites. They're fun if you own the product and like it, but they steer you into a bad purchase if you haven't yet decided.

The mental gymnastics of rationalization are a fascinating spectator sport. First the G80 cards were "irrelevant, premature, and/or unnecessary" because DX10 was so far off and ATi cards were "good enough" in DX9. Now "it doesn't matter" if R600 cards are NOT "good enough" in DX9 because they "may show their true superiority" in DX10. Or in the words of Chicago Cubs fans everywhere, "Just you wait til next year!"

I don't think 8800 GTX was a bad thing, i think that Nvidia had a good chance of getting some real money from it. Even if everyone keep saying that the real money comes from the mid-end cards.
Think about it, you are the only card vendor with something that does DX10, and even do DX9 in a huge display like the 30 inch LCDs with very high image quality and high fps. So you can say you are the only one that HPB (High Paying Bastards :P) can buy from.
They had an insane price for those things, come on, 600+ dollars on a video card?
I think that ADM/ATI is late to the market with the R600, not because of DX10 or vista are already on the market, but because they could not get the easy money that comes from beeing alone in a certain market.

Everyone seems to forget that ATI will sell those things for 400 bucks.
I do have a 24' DELL Wide LCD, you guys know how hard it is for a video board to push all that res in full glory (4x+ AA and 16 HQAF), but I was not willing to pay another 600+ dollars to do that, but 400 is a nice ammount. If nvidia drop the price of NV80 to 400, the only one that get to win is the consumer.
So in my view, the launch is good, not for ATI or Nvidia, but for us. The performance of a 8800GTX or more, for 400 dollars, for me is a hell of a good deal.

the thing is so far all the leaks say the same thing its slow
and barely able to keep up with the GTS
and the paper specs back this up LOTS of memory bandwidth so it can do a lot of AA with little speed hit but the lack of ROPs says its fillrate limited and thats bad at high res

i would bet the card kicks at at less then 1920x1080 say 1600x1200 is were it realy shines with 4x to 8x aa and 16x af
but the lack for fill will mean at high res its going to slow down and i think thats were the "free" AA is coming from
since its limited in fill and has ton of bandwidth youll see no hit from AA at higher res but youll also see no gain from not having it on

this is just my guess any way

agree with most of what you say Snow, Im a huge Ati fan too and yeah these now accepted delays are just retarded even longer with every release, and they dont really seem to care about it. You would think so after the x800 and x1800 stupid ass launches theyd be changing their strategy.


Anyways, theres gotta be something we can do, not buying Ati products would mean Nvidia can do whatever they want with their new releases right ?

Im actually going to buy the 8800GTS the day the R600 comes out lol.

Agree with the above posts. Even if the ATI card IS faster or just as fast as the 8800's, it's still too late to gain all the potential customers lost through delays. I buy the best card i can for my system regardless of what company makes it. Letting Nvidia have almost a half year or more to sell their top end card is just letting customers slip away who might have bought ATI cards if it had been out on time.
Best atm to just let the cards come out then make a decision on whats best after people have had a chance to use it a few weeks or so and can do reviews based on facts not on hearsay.

Great post....I especially love all the detailed info you provided......
it all makes sense now...I hope you will continue with this valuable info ..I feel I can learn a lot from you.
Thanks again.

love how I keep seeing this fallacy... "I just bought all the parts for a corvette but it doesn't go as fast as my mustang... wtf?".

Having crazy specs doesn't matter if you put them together improperly, or fail to do so free of any bottlenecks.

True, however the R600 will run with 2x6-pin. The 8-pin is optional, as has already been said.

Therefore, the 2x75W for the connectors and 75W for the pci-e slot still totals 225W max. As has been said, if the 8-pin is connected, which is optional, it will provide additional power which will be REQUIRED for overclocking.

Well in case it has MPI fuel system. It has a computer and values stored (Ken Fields), what to do in what situation the engine is in. If your change the engine more or less, the values are off. So it must relearn or have a chiptune till that time it doesn't run well.
So drivers are very important and that is so beta.

So Rumors are so differrent. Doesn't care much wich is right now. 3 WHQL drivers further down the road, all now is old news and the stance in performance has come to a higher level. Even nV G80 will still grow with newer drivers.

I think With DX10 and Vista merge there is a lot of work to do for ATI and nV.

Wenn at the 14TH all is benched. Next month after that and the next month after that again review updates give a different picture for both.

The problem is how much will the drivers get better and how much do they already have pulled out it
for aTI 50 to 65%
for nV 60 to 85%

Wich means if XT runs between GTS/GTX now, even nV gain driver peromance, but XT will catch up and reach GTX performance.

So Drivers are very important and the great unkown till end 2007, wenn it all fall in its place. Wenn nV and ATI reach 90% of what the can pull out of it.

Then Crysis is out hopefully And DX10 performance start to show.

Nice wet dream. What'd you do after you woke up?

You guys are putting me to sleep with all of this bickering - it's pointless. There aren't any DX10 games, and how many of you even have Vista installed? Sure, AMD/ATI is late with the R600, but it doesn't really matter unless you need to run DX10, which you don't (for now). Sure, ATI has lost some customers, but I keep seeing reports that they've already sold every R600 series chip that they can make into 2008 (one source: digitimes). I've always wondered exactly how many people have bought 8800s, I'll bet not many in the grand scheme of things.

I'm anxiously waiting for the reviews, that will tell the tale. After all this time I'd be greatly surprised if ATI has a loser on its hands.

Wat review DX9 or DX10?
Like I said before Drivers are a work in progress even way after release. The Performnace they manage to reach at 14th may isn't the performance ceiling of both rivals.
If aTI is equal or a bitty less in DX9 I don't mind. They could catch up in time.
Such card will be most need in dX10 games where FPS are in the 25fps with normal resoos and High settings.
So for me ATI isn't late

recently updated my EVGA 680i bios from p23 to p27 ( yeah I know its been a while)...Anyway, I noticed when I went into the bios to change everything back to my preffered settings that the linkboost option wasn't there anymore, at least not where it used to be. Can anyone tell me what happened with it, and if there is anything else I need to know about. I saw the list on the EVGA support site, but it doesnt really explain. Thanks for any help.

I just got my 680i, but from what I understand, Linkboost just caused more problems then it was worth. So Nvidia decided to scrap it and not have it anymore.

Frankly, it didn't do much, it will not be missed.

If you are doing an install of Vista you don't need the nforce drivers either, vista has that and audio and NIC drivers covered as well.

Did I mention as well, if it's a Vista install hide the cdrom full of drivers provided by the mobo manufacturel

very dissapointed with ASUS because ntune doesn't detect cpu temperatures/volts. My DFI worked well with ntune so why doesn't it work with a ASUS M2N-SLI?

It's up to Nvidia which nforce boards are fully supported by Ntune.

I have an Asua crossfire and the latest version of ntune and it doesn't detect volts or temps either.DOUG