512MB version of ATI X850 card

[marsomega]

No, X850XT 512Mb performance is much less (http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33805933) than X850XT PE 256Mb, many people thought 512Mb card supposed to double the performance and beat 6800 Ultra SLI that DriverHeaven been hinted so it turn to be false.

Not true. People believed it was "FUDO", their next card to be shown off at the event. If you actually read anything from the forum over there, you would know they were all skeptical about an X850 with double the memory "beating the 3dmark world record". The primary excitement was that ATI would show off "FUDO" or the "X950 XT" as some called it.

[MUYA]

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_x850xt_512mb_prev/

ATI claims a 20-30% performance improvement over a stock X850 XT in DOOM 3, multiple areas in Half-Life 2, and Far Cry, allowing the 512MB card to even outperform the more expensive X850 XT Platinum Edition, but only one resolution was given: 1600x1200 with 6xAA and 16xAF

[MustangSVT]

Anyone else remember how the X800XT-PE was supposed to be 60% faster in Half-Life 2 than 6800 Ultra? Yea. Like I said, double the memory, double trouble. ;)

[jAkUp]

meh, MB's on cards is pure marketing for the most part. Just like wattage on a power supply. I was hoping they would introduce their SLI cards... guess not.

[Mr_LoL]

meh, MB's on cards is pure marketing for the most part. Just like wattage on a power supply. I was hoping they would introduce their SLI cards... guess not.

have ati now got sli in the works?

[Johnmcl7]

There's been rumours about ATi's version of SLi called AMR for a while now

John

[Clevor]

As was said earlier, the extra 256 MB ram will not improve the performance of an X850XT much in something like the 3DMarks. That's pure advertising BS. Only in Doom3 at 1600x1200x32, 4xFSAA, 16xAniso, and ultra detail will it help, but not sure it will entirely cure the hiccups and stalls.

There might be some improvement in seat-of-the-pants smoothness, but a 256 MB PE is already pretty smooth even in stuff like Far Cry at the settings I mentioned above. I know there is a sig diff between 256 and 128 MB ram on the card at those kinds of settings in an old game like IL-2 Sturmovik.

[Blacklash]

1024x768 with no candy on is a very poor way to measure a graphics card with an interface higher than 128mb. We all know dual 6600 GTs out do Ultras in benches of 3dmark05 at default. Is that a meaningful measurement for 1280 and up with candy on, no indeed. A single 6800 GT out performs two 6600 GTs under those circumstances, let alone an Ultra.

They need some 1600x benches of real game play with 4xAA/16xAF. Try something like Far Cry.

[SH64]

They need some 1600x benches of real game play with 4xAA/16xAF. Try something like Far Cry.

I second that .. games like CoR , Doom3 & FarCry running @1600x1200,4xAA,8/16xAF should be tested to see if there's any importance of the extra 256MB or not .

[ChrisRay]

1024x768 with no candy on is a very poor way to measure a graphics card with an interface higher than 128mb. We all know dual 6600 GTs out do Ultras in benches of 3dmark05 at default. Is that a meaningful measurement for 1280 and up with candy on, no indeed. A single 6800 GT out performs two 6600 GTs under those circumstances, let alone an Ultra.

They need some 1600x benches of real game play with 4xAA/16xAF. Try something like Far Cry.

Thats not entirely true. My 6600GTS in SLI outperform a single 6800GT @ 1600x1200 with no AA/16xAF. WHich is hardly something to snuff at. 2xAA also performs extremely well across the resolutions. I find it very unlikely the X850 XT 512 meg is going to benefit from the extra memory at 1600x1200 with 4xAA/16xAF

[Blacklash]

Thats not entirely true. My 6600GTS in SLI outperform a single 6800GT @ 1600x1200 with no AA/16xAF. WHich is hardly something to snuff at. 2xAA also performs extremely well across the resolutions. I find it very unlikely the X850 XT 512 meg is going to benefit from the extra memory at 1600x1200 with 4xAA/16xAF

My understanding was SLI did not double the value of the interface so it becomes a question of 128mb vs 256mb.

Let me clarify "with the candy on"; I mean 4xAA/8xAF or greater and was speaking to resolutions of 1280 and up. Under those specific circumstances in graphically demanding games like Far Cry, I stand by my assertion. One 6800 GT or even one X800XL is a better gaming solution. Even considering SLI I'd say the same, because a second 6800 GT could be purchased at a later date and you would still have the advantage of 256mb.

Of course it boils down to a matter of preference and opinion.

BTW, I believe there are some DOOM 3 benches up over at the Xtreme forums that show some return with 512mb at 1600x with 4xAA/16xAF.

[ChrisRay]

My understanding was SLI did not double the value of the interface so it becomes a question of 128mb vs 256mb.

Let me clarify "with the candy on"; I mean 4xAA/8xAF or greater and was speaking to resolutions of 1280 and up. Under those specific circumstances in graphically demanding games like Far Cry, I stand by my assertion. One 6800 GT or even one X800XL is a better gaming solution. Even considering SLI I'd say the same, because a second 6800 GT could be purchased at a later date and you would still have the advantage of 256mb.

Of course it boils down to a matter of preference and opinion.

BTW, I believe there are some DOOM 3 benches up over at the Xtreme forums that show some return with 512mb at 1600x with 4xAA/16xAF.

I'd have to say I disagree with your assertion, Under many cases 1 6800GT is too slow to bring about such performance in the games and scenerios you mentioned. It certainly doesnt perform fast enough in Far Cry to run @ 1600x1200 to make the extra performance worth it. Benchmarks and my own person obversation show this. Of course I wouldnt neccasarily change what your saying. I just feel your observatios are one sided.

[Blacklash]

I'd have to say I disagree with your assertion, Under many cases 1 6800GT is too slow to bring about such performance in the games and scenerios you mentioned. It certainly doesnt perform fast enough in Far Cry to run @ 1600x1200 to make the extra performance worth it. Benchmarks and my own person obversation show this. Of course I wouldnt neccasarily change what your saying. I just feel your observatios are one sided.

I will wrap this up by saying I strongly urge folks to read all available reviews that include 6600 GTs in SLI,6800 GTs and X800 products better than the Pro, particularly the X800XL, before marching out to make purchases. Read all reviewer recommendations, weigh the information, and draw your own conclusions based on your needs. I am not going to continue to parrot my stance and further derail the thread.

[ChrisRay]

Yes people. Do look at the benches. In situations where AA/AF arent always used even @ 1600x1200. Any situation where AFR is used the 6600GT has significantly more shader/pixel fill than any 6800GT card or 6800 Ultra. Compare any shader bound scenerio. And you will see this to be true. The memory situation only occurs with with 4xAA. And @ 1600x1200 2xAA perfectly acceptable on both setups. Half Life 2, and Doom 3 both use AFR. And as can be seen in reviews and any shader bound situation. Far Cr is an unfortunate situation with SFR is used.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2284&p=7

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NzE2

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/geforce6600gt-sli/index.x?pg=6

I apologise for attacking your point malficar but I believe you have a very incorrect assertion of SLI performance based on incomplete data. Yes 6800GT pulls ahead with 4xAA. But thats not only rendering mode available to Nvidia hardware. I'd also like to point out that I think Hardocps results are crap. I played HL 2 fine @ 1600x1200 with 2xAA..

[AthlonXP1800]

Not true. People believed it was "FUDO", their next card to be shown off at the event. If you actually read anything from the forum over there, you would know they were all skeptical about an X850 with double the memory "beating the 3dmark world record". The primary excitement was that ATI would show off "FUDO" or the "X950 XT" as some called it.

Well I just read Tech Report and posts from other forums from ATI event at the weekend, I am a bit surprised to find there was no world record breaking 3D Mark and it shame R520 didnt showed up at the event. ATI should never organised overclocking event last week, it pointless. :rolleyes:

[jbirney]

Well I just read Tech Report and posts from other forums from ATI event at the weekend, I am a bit surprised to find there was no world record breaking 3D Mark and it shame R520 didnt showed up at the event. ATI should never organised overclocking event last week, it pointless. :rolleyes:

Don't forget they had a new mobo to show off as well...

[anzak]

meh, MB's on cards is pure marketing for the most part. Just like wattage on a power supply.

Normally I would agree, but if you have ever tried to play Everquest 2, you would know that this is not the case. The highest texture settings on EQ2 are unplayable on my X800XT because of lack of video memory. Framerate wise its fine in a small area with few textures and characters, but when I hit a large area it chokes giving me 3-5 second pauses. Unlike Doom 3 the difference between highest and extreme texture settings is VERY noticeable.

Getting off topic, I've been absent from nvnews over the past month because of MMOPRGs. I've tried almost all of them, EQ2, WoW, AC2, and SWG. Also many of the free/beta ones like KAL, Xiah, DO, ROSE, and Risk Your Life. After spending over $120 on games, I've finally settled on World of Warcaft. Now that my little quest for the perfect mmorpg to burn my life away on is over, I can get back to debating my favorite subject, computer hardware.

[ChrisRay]

Normally I would agree, but if you have ever tried to play Everquest 2, you would know that this is not the case. The highest texture settings on EQ2 are unplayable on my X800XT because of lack of video memory. Framerate wise its fine in a small area with few textures and characters, but when I hit a large area it chokes giving me 3-5 second pauses. Unlike Doom 3 the difference between highest and extreme texture settings is VERY noticeable.

Getting off topic, I've been absent from nvnews over the past month because of MMOPRGs. I've tried almost all of them, EQ2, WoW, AC2, and SWG. Also many of the free/beta ones like KAL, Xiah, DO, ROSE, and Risk Your Life. After spending over $120 on games, I've finally settled on World of Warcaft. Now that my little quest for the perfect mmorpg to burn my life away on is over, I can get back to debating my favorite subject, computer hardware.


Would you believe me If I told you EQ 2's video memory requirement isnt framebuffer space? Just total space allocated towards texture memory. More than likely its already swapping onto your system memory alot already. I really do hypothesize by how much as well.