X1800, X1600, X1300 Sell Sheets

[Cookie Monster]

The real problem is that ALL companies say their products is at elast 50% or more faster than the competitors. e.g X800 XT PE was "supposedly" 60~50% faster than the upcoming 6800 ultra. and that was straight fromthe horse's mouth.

HDR and AA will be a big performance hit, and i want to know how ATi have gone to minimise the performance hit.

But :thumbsup: for ATi, angle dependant AF is no more, and i hope Nvidia does the same.
And whats more funny is,

"Shader model 3.0 done right" ATI never have built a S.M 3.0 card, and Nvidia has 1 full year experience at it.

Some of the stuff on the sell sheets look pure marketing gimmick, tricks, lies, and BS.
Funny it doesnt include doom3 on the sell sheets for X1800. I was hoping how well it does, since quake4 will be using the doom3 engine.

 

[Polish3d]

Listening to Morph opine is about as useful as trying to gauge how an election will work out by listening to Al Franken or Anne Coulter

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: Frackal
Listening to Morph opine is about as useful as trying to gauge how an election will work out by listening to Al Franken or Anne Coulter

You don't have to listen to me. Go to Beyond3D forums. Lost of knowledgable people there and the consensus seems to be that if the stuff on these sheets is accurate, ATI has some real winners here.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: Frackal
Listening to Morph opine is about as useful as trying to gauge how an election will work out by listening to Al Franken or Anne Coulter

You don't have to listen to me. Go to Beyond3D forums. Lost of knowledgable people there and the consensus seems to be that if the stuff on these sheets is accurate, ATI has some real winners here.

"Who gives a flying **** about what the guys at Beyond3D think"

I'm just kidding.

 

[lifeguard1999]

Still waiting for AT benches. Marketing is useless.

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: lifeguard1999
Still waiting for AT benches. Marketing is useless.

Hardly useless. There's a lot of good information there, even if you don't believe the benchmarks.

 

[swatX]

the thing that cracked me up was their IQ x1800 slide where they compare NV TRAA and their own Adaptive AA. NV image looks like its zoomed in to the max and ATIs image lookss like its zoomed to half.

rofl

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: swatX
the thing that cracked me up was their IQ x1800 slide where they compare NV TRAA and their own Adaptive AA. NV image looks like its zoomed in to the max and ATIs image lookss like its zoomed to half.

rofl

Huh? You can see clearly just from looking at the pictures that they are cropped exactly the same. Count the holes of the fence if you need to.

 

[n7]

Interesting.

Looks like 16 pipes might manage more than i was expecting.

 

[TheMouse]

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: swatX
the thing that cracked me up was their IQ x1800 slide where they compare NV TRAA and their own Adaptive AA. NV image looks like its zoomed in to the max and ATIs image lookss like its zoomed to half.

rofl

Huh? You can see clearly just from looking at the pictures that they are cropped exactly the same. Count the holes of the fence if you need to.

yea, it's definately cropped properly... It's interesting that they dont mention resolutions used.

 

[nitromullet]

Well, with an MSRP of $550, if the X1800XT 512MB has good availability and offers this kind of performance, it might find a home in my rig. This looks promising, but I'll wait until Wed to see what the numbers are really like.

 

[Powermoloch]

Look at the bright side guys, this is a HEALTHY competition for everyone.

 

[nitromullet]

Question... Did anyone see the 3DMark05 section? The top says, 0x 5x 10x 15x 20x 25x... What does that mean, how is that graph representing the 3DMark05 performance?

 

[M0RPH]

It lists the actual 3Dmark05 score in the top right corner of the slide. You can approximate the others based on that.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: M0RPH
It lists the actual 3Dmark05 score in the top right corner of the slide. You can approximate the others based on that.

I get that, but I still can't figure out what they are representing with the 25x etc... Based on the other graphs, I would think that simply eyeballing the bars to get a rough idea of performance would be a bad idea.

 

[aatf510]

If it's going to be 80% faster in F.E.A.R. then bye bye my GTX KO.

However, it's only going to get 9100 3Dmark05?? How is it going to be much faster than the GTX?
My GTX KO get 8600 stock on a 2.4GHz A64. I am guessing for marketing they are going to put the x1800 in a cream of the crop pc instead of a 2.4GHz A64.

 

[the Chase]

Maybe they scaled down the pipes because of them being way to fast than needed and people wouldn't have to buy a new vid card for 5 years!!

Numbers look way to promissing to me but if true would have to seriously consider one for my new build.(And I just bought a AGP mobo to reuse my 6600GT until the R580 or the 7800 Ultra came out).Sigh.

Maybe these #'s would force Nvidia to change their stance and come out with the Ultra.

October should be a fun month!!

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: M0RPH
It lists the actual 3Dmark05 score in the top right corner of the slide. You can approximate the others based on that.

I get that, but I still can't figure out what they are representing with the 25x etc... Based on the other graphs, I would think that simply eyeballing the bars to get a rough idea of performance would be a bad idea.

They might be doing that, if they haven't before because Nvidia did it with the GTX at least.

On my BFG there is the same bar graph comparing it to past Nvidia (and maybe ATI but I'm not getting up to look) cards.


It's like'


7800GTX ============================D~ 25x
6800 U 15x ===============D~
6600GT 7x ======D~

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: toattett
If it's going to be 80% faster in F.E.A.R. then bye bye my GTX KO.

However, it's only going to get 9100 3Dmark05?? How is it going to be much faster than the GTX?
My GTX KO get 8600 stock on a 2.4GHz A64. I am guessing for marketing they are going to put the x1800 in a cream of the crop pc instead of a 2.4GHz A64.

Most likely they used a 7800GTX with reference speeds, not an overclocked one. It's not really fair to compare your overclocked GTX to a stock X1800XT. The X1800XT looks like it will have some room for overclocking as well. The fair comparison would be your card against an overclocked X1800XT.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: M0RPH
They're placing a priority on image quality, unlike the competition. Looks very nice.

High quality AA without all the angle dependency... *drool*

I just have to laugh at this statement. Remind me again who has had super sampling for over a year and a half again? Remind me who introduced transparent antialiasing?

Yeah, they also have that awesome texture shimmering feature too!

PS. HDR + AA ... why would you settle for anything less?

Before you sing the praises of HDR+AA and tattoo an X1800XT logo to your butt, make sure you see what the performance penalty will be first. Oh yeah now that you mention HDR, remind me again who introduced FP 16 HDR?


LOL - it's always follow the leader.

What's up with all the "who introduced" crap? Who introduced dual slot coolers? Who introduced texture shimmering? Who introduced Fp16 that makes you give up AA? Put it this way: Last gen Ati had more speed, while Nv had more features. Now it's a possibility that Ati will have more speed and more features, and Nv will be scrambling to catch up.

 

[Hacp]

ya and the prescott has more performance per watt than the northwood.

 

[Avalon]

The charts appear to be using Intel's extreme graphics (or whatever their newest integrated GPU is) as the 1x base for comparison.

 

[PsharkJF]

Originally posted by: Hacp
ya and the prescott has more performance per watt than the northwood.

Lol. ^5

 

[nitromullet]

I'm not quite sure I understand the whole AA+HDR debate here either... I thought that was dictated by the game, not the card. Doesn't DOD:S let you run HDR with AA, whereas SS:CT and FarCry don't?

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: M0RPH
They're placing a priority on image quality, unlike the competition. Looks very nice.

High quality AA without all the angle dependency... *drool*

I just have to laugh at this statement. Remind me again who has had super sampling for over a year and a half again? Remind me who introduced transparent antialiasing?

Yeah, they also have that awesome texture shimmering feature too!

PS. HDR + AA ... why would you settle for anything less?

Before you sing the praises of HDR+AA and tattoo an X1800XT logo to your butt, make sure you see what the performance penalty will be first. Oh yeah now that you mention HDR, remind me again who introduced FP 16 HDR?


LOL - it's always follow the leader.

What's up with all the "who introduced" crap? Who introduced dual slot coolers? Who introduced texture shimmering? Who introduced Fp16 that makes you give up AA? Put it this way: Last gen Ati had more speed, while Nv had more features. Now it's a possibility that Ati will have more speed and more features, and Nv will be scrambling to catch up.

It's also possible they'll just release a card that trumps it the same day.

It's also possible PR sheets somewhat exaggerate.

Time will tell.