R600vsG80 Benchmark Comparisons From Any Game Welcome!

[Xion X2]

That sucks man,youre only getting half of it now :( And on a sidenote wtf happened to rob ? How the hell did he manage to get himself banned ?:headexplode:
I'll buy a new copy soon, because I want to play it online.

Rob got himself in a sh!tstorm of an argument with a guy about PC Gaming vs. Console gaming. Got pretty heated, and I think he's been issued a temporary vacation (like 2 weeks, or something.)

[Blacklash]

I'll buy a new copy soon, because I want to play it online.

Rob got himself in a sh!tstorm of an argument with a guy about PC Gaming vs. Console gaming. Got pretty heated, and I think he's been issued a temporary vacation (like 2 weeks, or something.)

:lol:

Crikey, that thread was hilarious. I've never seen such hostility :p It's fine to debate hardware and dang, that was a tad too much.

On a side note, I hope ATi does come out with the twentynine fiddy in August|September. I may spring for Crossfire.

[sammy sung]

:lol:

Crikey, that thread was hilarious. I've never seen such hostility :p It's fine to debate hardware and dang, that was a tad too much.

On a side note, I hope ATi does come out with the twentynine fiddy in August|September. I may spring for Crossfire.

Yup the next in the evolution from ati/nvidia will be interesting,even if i decide to keep my sli board when the rma is completed(provided it works better this time) my next board wont be another gtx,think ill opt for its successor since niether of the current gen dx10 cards seems able to provide a good enough dx10 experience.

EDIT: Checked that thread,rob blew all his fuses its seems,dang he sure like's caps :p

Found Robs new theme-song hehe :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5zS8W0n8Kc&mode=related&search=

[Xion X2]

What's funny is that in real life he's not at all like you see him on here. I always kid him about how he writes and talks like a 3 year old online which is completely different from what he's like in real life.

I mean, we clown around and stuff all the time, but the guy's one of the most intelligent people I know, and you'd never know that from the way he gets around on the net. It might be a good thing he got banned under that name since he gave up his SLI setup one month after picking it. :lol:

[Blacklash]

nm

[Redeemed]

Latest review from EB that has the HD 2900XT with current drivers vs a 640MB GTS:

http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=420&Itemid=27

Um... that doesn't make much sense. Thier STALKER test has the 2900 barely breaking 24 fps without AA and AF at 2048x1536, then suddenly it is getting over 100fps averagle and like 50 some odd fps minimal with AA and AF enabled at that resolution? :wtf: Something isn't right there...

[Blacklash]

Um... that doesn't make much sense. Thier STALKER test has the 2900 barely breaking 24 fps without AA and AF at 2048x1536, then suddenly it is getting over 100fps averagle and like 50 some odd fps minimal with AA and AF enabled at that resolution? :wtf: Something isn't right there...

I believe all AA tests they did = static lighting and no AA = dynamic lighting. The latter has a much heavier FPS hit.

Example: HD 2900XT, 1600x with dynamic lighting = 43 Average, 1600x 4xAA|8xAF static lighting = 93 Average.

[Xion X2]

Stalker is just an unoptimized, buggy pile of crap. And I'm not just saying that because it may not run well on the 2900XT. Hell, my GTX SLI setup even slowed down to 25fps on some places on that game. It also paused and froze left and right.

I dumped that P.O.S. to the curb a loooooooong time ago. It's pretty sad that 6-7 years of development nets you that buggy pile of code.

[Xion X2]

Got the HDR feature working right on the Catalyst 8.38s. Not sure what was happening before.. maybe adjusting an in-game option was screwing it up. But it's working now. Performance is relatively the same.. consistent 50+FPS w/ the hood cam. Settings same as before: 1680x1050, 4xAA, 8xAF:

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/263/testdriveunlimited20070ml4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/9407/testdriveunlimited20070gh1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/149/testdriveunlimited20070zw7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/2946/testdriveunlimited20070hi4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Redeemed]

Stalker is just an unoptimized, buggy pile of crap. And I'm not just saying that because it may not run well on the 2900XT. Hell, my GTX SLI setup even slowed down to 25fps on some places on that game. It also paused and froze left and right.

I dumped that P.O.S. to the curb a loooooooong time ago. It's pretty sad that 6-7 years of development nets you that buggy pile of code.

Actually, it ran really well on my two GTSs. That was when I was using the s754 3400 as well. Then again, with nVidia's drivers, God only knows what could have been happening. :rolleyes:

[sammy sung]

They really took some strange descisions regarding AA on the 2900xt it seems,if it had as comparatively small performance hit as nvidias counterparts it would own the 640mb GTS as it does without it, now its on par with it enabled.Its been discussed in length about it being a design choice/flaw so would that really be something that could be fixed with drivers without sacrificing image quality ?

[Amuro]

Stalker is just an unoptimized, buggy pile of crap. And I'm not just saying that because it may not run well on the 2900XT. Hell, my GTX SLI setup even slowed down to 25fps on some places on that game. It also paused and froze left and right.

I dumped that P.O.S. to the curb a loooooooong time ago. It's pretty sad that 6-7 years of development nets you that buggy pile of code.
I cannot agree with you more on it. Stalker is a total letdown.

[fivefeet8]

They really took some strange descisions regarding AA on the 2900xt it seems,if it had as comparatively small performance hit as nvidias counterparts it would own the 640mb GTS as it does without it, now its on par with it enabled.Its been discussed in length about it being a design choice/flaw so would that really be something that could be fixed with drivers without sacrificing image quality ?

They could work around it, but as to whether how much is anyones guess. What's interesting is Nvidia's 8800 cards can also do AA resolve in the shaders if needed(AA shader resolve is part of the dx10 spec), but of course they have actual hardware on the ROP's to handle it so it's not touted as much. ;)

The r600 seems to be limited to shader AA resolve only.

[Vasot02]

ELITE BASTARDS CONCLUSION

Who buys a high-end graphics board to game without anti-aliasing enabled?
Sure, there are a small handful of people who do just that, but the vast majority of gamers demand fantastic performance with at least 4x anti-aliasing turned on. This is where the lustre of the Radeon HD 2900 XT begins to fade - Quite simply, its level of performance drops once anti-aliasing is turned on is unacceptable. Thankfully, that raw performance helps to at least bring it close or equal to the GeForce 8800 GTS in a lot of situations, but it isn't the G80 killer many hoped for or wanted, and that's without even daring to mention the GeForce 8800 GTX or Ultra.

the problem is, almost everything it can do the GeForce 8800 GTS has already offered for some time, and in a quieter, cooler package to boot.

End of story

Well lets hope X2950 or a newer ATI Vpu is better next time

With Antialliasing enabled Nvidia still continues to be the winner in most cases and that's it what it matters

The X2900XT suffers badly with AA

This proves that newer does not mean always better

It remarkable that a 6 months old Gpu like the G80 proves to be such an Excellent work

CONGRATULATIONS NVIDIA :)

[Xion X2]

ELITE BASTARDS CONCLUSION



End of story

Well lets hope X2950 or a newer ATI Vpu is better next time

With Antialliasing enabled Nvidia still continues to be the winner in most cases and that's it what it matters

The X2900XT suffers badly with AA

This proves that newer does not mean always better

It remarkable that a 6 months old Gpu like the G80 proves to be such an Excellent work

CONGRATULATIONS NVIDIA :)

Are you blind? Look at my above benchmark w/ Test Drive. It's as fast as a GTX w/ AA ENABLED. Maybe even faster.

What games was Elite Bastards testing in their review, and what drivers were they using? I can't get onto their site.. every time I do I get a page error.

But if they were testing older games like F.E.A.R., Prey, etc then you can toss it out the window with all the others. Honestly. Let's look at how the card plays newer titles.. not game engines that came out 2-3 years ago.

[Riptide]

EB:

The following drivers were used:

- NVIDIA ForceWare 158.18 was used on the GeForce 8800 GTS
- ATI Catalyst 7.5 was used on the Radeon HD 2900 XT



Below is a list of all the tests and applications used for benchmarking:

- 3DMark 06 (Version 1.1.0)
Overall score, fillrate, perlin noise and batch size tests, 1600x1280, AA/AF disabled
- ShaderMark 2.1 (Build 129)
All tests, 1280x768, AA/AF disabled
- Half-Life 2: Episode One
Elite Bastards custom timedemo, application AA/AF
- Prey (Version 1.3)
Elite Bastards custom timedemo, application AA/AF
- Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (Version 1.1)
FRAPS, application AA, control panel AF
- Company of Heroes (Version 1.70)
Built-in timedemo, application AA, control panel AF
- F.E.A.R. (Patch 1.08)
Built-in timedemo, application AA/AF
- S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl
FRAPS, application AA/AF
- Need For Speed: Carbon (v1.3)
FRAPS, application AA/AF
- Lost Planet: Extreme Condition demo (DirectX 10)
Built-in timedemo, application AA/AF

[Xion X2]

Yep, just like I thought. No newer games except for Lost Planet & Stalker(which is running a much older engine since it's been in development for so long), and the LP demo was in DX10 which unfortunately has a bug w/ the current ATI drivers and cannot be tested accurately. The DX9 version of it runs great on the 2900XT.

Where is R6 Vegas? Test Drive Unlimited? DIRT? Why continue to bench games that are 2 or more years old with brand new hardware?

I guess they do this because the majority of the PC gaming population owns them, but it makes no sense for judging performance. None of those games were coded for a unified shader architecture, so why not throw in a few more that were for a more accurate assessment?

[Riptide]

I guess they do this because the majority of the PC gaming population owns them, but it makes no sense for judging performance. None of those games were coded for a unified shader architecture, so why use them to bench a Unified Shader part with?
My 2c..

Yes, mainly because those are games that are important to many of us right now. For instance I just finished Halo2, ST:Legacy, and FEAR Extraction Point within the last couple months. All DX9 stuff. I will be playing STALKER at some point soon. None of the DX10 titles you mentioned really spin my crank. I have zero interest in them. Crysis OTOH...

It makes sense that they include those "ancient" games in their benchmarking simply because they are important to much of the market. That said, I do agree with you that there is cause for a little more balance in these reviews and that it wouldn't hurt to have at least TWO DX10 titles tested along with the rest. There should be some more balance at this point.

However, by the time I get serious about playing something like Crysis once it comes out I will most likely be using a different card then anyway. The XT's successor and the new NV card might be out then - and will probably trash the 8800/2900 in DX10 performance.

[Henesly4You]

But if they were testing older games like F.E.A.R., Prey, etc then you can toss it out the window with all the others. Honestly. Let's look at how the card plays newer titles.. not game engines that came out 2-3 years ago.


Errrrr.....wth are you talking about? You cant just blindly toss out reviews of certain games just because they don't perform well on your card:rolleyes:

Those games you call old such as F.E.A.R, COD2.... etc are also extremely shader heavy games with extremely detailed textures. You cant dismiss them just because they do not perform up to your expectations with your current hardware.

What you are doing is picking and choosing what you want to believe which is well.....about as fanboyish as it gets.


You need to look at the whole picture bud, not just part of it.

[Xion X2]

My 2c..

Yes, mainly because those are games that are important to many of us right now. For instance I just finished Halo2, ST:Legacy, and FEAR Extraction Point within the last couple months. All DX9 stuff. I will be playing STALKER at some point soon. None of the DX10 titles you mentioned really spin my crank. I have zero interest in them. Crysis OTOH...

It makes sense that they include those "ancient" games in their benchmarking simply because they are important to much of the market. That said, I do agree with you that there is cause for a little more balance in these reviews and that it wouldn't hurt to have at least TWO DX10 titles tested along with the rest. There should be some more balance at this point.

However, by the time I get serious about playing something like Crysis once it comes out I will most likely be using a different card then anyway. The XT's successor and the new NV card might be out then - and will probably trash the 8800/2900 in DX10 performance.

Can't argue with much of that. And yeah, all I'm calling for is a little more "balance" in these benchmarks. You just can't expect to get an accurate reading of a DX10 card with games that weren't even coded with unified shaders in mind like TDU, R6, DIRT, etc.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. 8800GTX plays older games much better than 2900XT. There's no question about that. 2900XT was designed for unified shader code like is used in newer games and ones to come in the future. It wasn't designed to play 2 y/o Direct X 9 titles. So if that's what you're looking to do, then get an 8800GTS/GTX.

[Henesly4You]

Yep, just like I thought. No newer games except for Lost Planet & Stalker(which is running a much older engine since it's been in development for so long), and the LP demo was in DX10 which unfortunately has a bug w/ the current ATI drivers and cannot be tested accurately. The DX9 version of it runs great on the 2900XT.


I don't think you can really make this assumption with Lost Planet DX9 until ATI gets AA working correctly in it. For all you know performance could go to dookie once AA is enabled with that game the same way it does with some other titles.


As for Stalker do you really think its running the same engine that they originally started out with 6 years ago? :rolleyes:




None of those games were coded for a unified shader architecture, so why not throw in a few more that were for a more accurate assessment?

So what? this doesn't seem to have a negative impact on the G80 and its a unified shader architecture so your point again?


Bottom line this is the first time in history that a New GPU has come out and has not been able to run some of the older games with faster frame rates than the previous competition.

I remember when the 9700pro came out, first DX9 card, it ate DX8 games up for breakfast like none other before even though it was a DX9 card.

[Henesly4You]

2900XT was designed for unified shader code like is used in newer games and ones to come in the future. It wasn't designed to play 2 y/o Direct X 9 titles. So if that's what you're looking to do, then get an 8800GTS/GTX.


LOL the 2900XT is no more of a unified shader card than the G80.

They are both unified shader cards.

[Xion X2]

I don't think you can really make this assumption with Lost Planet DX9 until ATI gets AA working correctly in it. For all you know performance could go to dookie once AA is enabled with that game the same way it does with some other titles.

And it could do just fine, just like it does with Test Drive and DIRT, which both perform on par with a GTX w/ 4xAA enabled.

It works both ways. Why such a pessimist?

As for Stalker do you really think its running the same engine that they originally started out with 6 years ago? :rolleyes:

Aside from the deferred lighting, yes, it is. Or do you expect they changed the entire game engine within the last year after working on the project for the last 5-6 years?

:rolleyes:

So what? this doesn't seem to have a negative impact on the G80 and its a unified shader architecture so your point again?

The G80 has more texture units, and that is why it handles older titles better. ATI did not go the same route because their product came out 7 months later and on the brink of DX10 which favors shaders over textures.

And it's a known fact, at least so far, that the latest games on the PC market favor shaders over traditional textures and are coded for Unified Shaders. R6 Vegas, Test Drive Unlimited, DIRT, Lost Planet.. all of these are. And all perform much better on the 2900XT than older titles do.

You can't ignore that fact. You can try to skirt around it and bring up all these older games in which the 2900XT performs poorly in, but before you know it this fact above is biting you in the ass again. You're looking to the past when current games and games of tomorrow are most likely running very well.

Bottom line this is the first time in history that a New GPU has come out and has not been able to run some of the older games with faster frame rates than the previous competition.

That may be somewhat true. Then again, the transition from these cards being overloaded with texture units as opposed to shader units was never in effect, either. You're talking about a disparity in code that was never there before, and it's going to affect performance significantly.

[Henesly4You]

Aside from the deferred lighting, yes, it is. Or do you expect they changed the entire game engine within the last year after working on the project for the last 5-6 years?


Uhh..no:rolleyes2 You go find me one single game from 6 years ago with Soft shadows cast on every single object including the tree branch shadows which even move in the wind, particles effects and grass blowing around and then lastly the crazy amount of detailed textures that no other game to date can offer or measure up to.

If you really think this is the same game code they started out with 6 years ago then I think that says enough about your credibility. LOL.

If anything this is the most shader heavy intense game on the planet right now.

Next.......







And it's a known fact, at least so far, that the latest games on the PC market favor shaders over traditional textures and are coded for Unified Shaders

Thanks for reinforcing my point ;)



. R6 Vegas, Test Drive Unlimited, DIRT, Lost Planet.. all of these are. And all perform much better on the 2900XT than older titles do.

And your point again? All these titles perform just as well on the 8800GTX and yet the 8800GTX is still able to play what you call (old and outdated games which you say shouldn't be accounted for) much much better.




You can't ignore that fact.

This coming from the person picking and choosing which benchmarks he wants to believe. Lmao.

I don't think you should be the one telling anyone else that they are ignoring the facts when that person is CLEARLY YOU.

[fivefeet8]

The G80 has more texture units, and that is why it handles older titles better. ATI did not go the same route because their product came out 7 months later and on the brink of DX10 which favors shaders over textures.


Dx10 doesn't favor shaders or textures. It's up to the developers to decide which one they will use more for their games. API shader unification should have little to do with how a game is developed. It should be transparent to the developer. They will still be working with either Pixel, vertex, and now geometry shading data. That's mainly what a Unified Shaders architecture is. Automatic load balancing between pixel, vertex, or geometry with little intervention or manual coding. Dx10 itself also reduces many API overheads that were on older dx API's.

AMD is the one betting on future games being far more shader hungry than texturing, but PC games(not console ports) have been increasing in texturing usage quite a bit. I don't see texturing usage lowering anytime soon. Unreal Tournament 3 has already been stated(Sweaney) on the PC to be mostly texture/fillrate bound than shader bound. Carmacks new Megatexture feature for it's upcoming engine will also push texturing as well.

FEAR and COD2 are both older games, but they are also games where last generation's Dx9 cards were pushed to the limit in terms of texturing and shading. They both were very shader and texturing bound. Tomb Raider legend is also a game that is heavily shader and texturing bound as well.

The issues with the x2900xt performing like it does in some games isn't quite that simple and it's going to be interesting what AMD does with the hardware in future revisions.