$120 Cheaper 8800 GTS 320MB Beats Up On $409 Radeon HD 2900 XT w/New Driver

Check this out guys. ATi is falling behind and it sucks because I really used to like them. I guess it is good I bought an 8800 GTX a couple months ago!

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM1MSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

 

well the 2900xt did come out to compete against the gts, not the gtx.

It did ok, but the 8800 had the edge with better AA and better resolutions

 

No one said anything about the GTX. The AMD Radeon HD 2900XT does not even stack up to an 8800 GTS 320MB version how lame is that!

 

another war thread

 

gaaaaad.. why beat down on the 2900XT? the 2900xt, gts and gtx are great cards.. why make a war out of it?

 

No not a war thread I'm not trying to say ATi sucks because they clearly don't. I'm just saying they dropped the ball on this generation. I really hope they pick back up for next gen though because I love going back and fourth between the two brand as both have their perks. I loved my 8500 LE, 9800 Pro, 800 XL and 1900 XTX aswell as my Geforce 2, 6600 GT, 7800 GT and now my 8800 GTX. Both companies have pros and cons and sometimes they fall behind in the race (Geforce FX series and it looks like now the HD 2900XT). I am not trying to start a war at all.

 

Well cant really compair the FX series against the 2xxx series from ati.. cause well.. 2900xt is just on the heals of nvidias cards, but the fx series was crushed by ati. but well well.. ive got my self a crossfire setup with 2900xt and im just amazed by the performance.. no one can say that the 2900xt performce bad.. cause it doesnt.. but it doesnt performe as well as the GTX.. but heey i like both companies.. i was going for a GTS 640 sli setup.. but i have tried sli so i went for crossfire this time and i works great

 

exactly, if you are happy with your setup and are secure that you made the right purchase, why waste time trying to pull down another product?

 

Interesting but it doesn't really matter, neither card is slow and the HD2900XT has a lot of room for improvement in the future. I still believe the HD2900XT is a card you can hold your head up high and be proud of, just like the 8800 cards, this hasn't changed my opinion on that. As long as the person in question is happy and I'm happy, who else should really care?

These sort of threads tend to cause problems and ignite the usual ATI vs Nvidia zealotry so be warned, although I do not think your intentions are as honourable as you are trying to make out.

EDIT: This does raise a few concerns over price vs performance, but it also goes almost totally against the results posted in this thread:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=227970

I have a lot of time for [H] but is it possible that results can be that different?

 

The only lamers around are those "reviewers" comparing 1 month market old product and it's imature drivers and a product with more than 6 months "stable" drivers.
It's obvious that you are the "nvidia boy" but you are missing something in your own posted link.Despite STALKER (which has nvidia logo) in no other game in that review 8800GTS didn't wiped the floor with 2900xt like you suspected.

I'll tell just one thing more, mod the Oblivion with Qarl's textures, Natural environments and few other eye-candy mods and than see how your lovely 8800GTS 320 wipes the floor with 2900XT 512.
That card is seriously crippled with small amount of memory and it will be no match to 2900XT in a game with large textures.

And wait, I didn't see they tested COH 1.7, I really wonder why?
Maybe because that game shows 2900XT's real face...

What about R6 Las Vegas, or GRAW, FEAR...
That review is so "objective" that it stinks.

 

i havent had the time to test R6:LV and graw yet with my two 2900xt but ive tested FEAR on 1600x1200 with every singel setting on max with AAx8 and AFx16.. 1% below 30fps but thats is caused by the 80gb IDE 2mb cache disk ive running it on haha, and 3% below 30 and 96% over 40fps.. and a avraged fps of 200fps

 

When will the driver excuse actually be null and void then? I mean you could equally blame ATI for not bringing the product to market on time so it's their own fault the drivers aren't as good as they could be, it's certainly not Nvidia's or anyone else's fault.

Double negative ftw?

This is a fair point, although should they do these reviews with user made mods, or with the game as it comes? It's a tough one and there are merits of both methods. Undoubtedly if you surpass the amount of onboard memory the 320MB GTS has in textures then obviously performance will suffer. They could also make a mod that takes advantage of 640MB of memory and equally leave the 512MB XT in the dust. As for being "seriously crippled", in 90% of cases up to and including 1280x1024, and in many cases even higher, even the 320MB performs very well, I can vouch for that first hand. It is still a very fast card despite having "only" 320MB of memory.

If you click the link on the review that leads to the [H] forum thread about it you will see the editor and co justify the tests that were used. Probably worth a read to get a better understanding of why they chose the games and settings they did.

At the end of the day statistics can be manipulated to show pretty much anything you like. If you are happy with the card I wouldn't worry too much about an updated mini-review (how I see it anyway).

 

Agree.. GTS, GTX, 2900XT are all great cards.. cant people just be happy with what they got and stop flaming eatch other.. i could easly gone with a GTX but i went for the 2900XT and im happy with is as i would be happy with a GTX to..

 

its just a review .. and im glad i read it.. hopefully ati will get back on top.. everyone just needs to relax and take it all in.. jeepers. :/

 

That site is biosed i can give like 5 sites that show 2900xt destroying the 320mb 8800.

Plus they aren't showing any resoultions above 1600x1200

And on top of that they show the games that performe the worst with that card hmm paid off by nvidia

Let's See FEAR lets see company of Heros lets see Prey Lets see Splinter cell double agent and Rainbow six vegas. I can right a review just showing those games and say the 2900xt is 130 cheaper than a gtx

 

The important part is in bold; numbers can be manipulated to show or prove pretty much anything you like so there really is no point getting stressed out over it all.

Hell you also have 2 2900's in Crossfire, I was under the impression that Crossfire HD2900's were faster then SLI'd 8800GTX's, you have nothing whatsoever to worry about.

The test does hold more water for someone like me who is limited to 1280x1024, 1440x900 or 720p because really that is the stomping ground of the 320MB GTS in terms of price vs performance and I don't think many people would argue about that but for you guys with uber rigs, don't let this stuff effect you. Like you say there are reviews out there showing the opposite and that will always be the case. Even the FX5900 Ultra was shown beating the the 9800 Pro in a lot of tests depending on where you read, it's no big deal is it? The only thing that you could really get upset about is getting comparable performance for less money, but if you play at insane resolutions that's really not the case considering the GTS 640MB is roughly the same price as the HD2900XT and the 320MB won't be able to keep up once you crank up the res anyway.

Don't worry, be happy.

 

I'm honestly a little skeptical of the hardocp review. I've owned both cards and can say without a doubt that the 2900XT is a much better gaming card. Also notice the lack of "apples to apples" comparison that hardocp usually does. Hopefully some other people like myself who have both cards can give their input as well.

 

I have a question then my man if you don't mind.

I have this 8800GTS 320MB at 600/1800 atm (it will do 650/2000 but I have a Shuttle and with summer coming...I'm sure you get the picture). I can game only up to 1280x1024 and I am generally very pleased with the performance this card is giving me. Obviously my minimum framerates would improve in texture limited situations thanks to the extra memory, but in general what are the real world gaming benefits if I were to upgrade to a HD2900XT from my current 320MB GTS? I generally refuse to play with less then 4x AA and 16x AF if that changes things btw. Your feedback would be much appreciated.

 

Please don't get me wrong. I think that the 8800 gts 320mb is a great card, especially for the price. I enjoy gaming at 1600X1200 and the 2900XT gave me a much better experience at that resolution. I also ran some benchmarks at 1280X1024 and 1600X1200 on both cards and got better performance on the 2900XT. I used 3dmark05and 06. Source stress test, Fear, company of heroes DX10, Call of Juarez DX10, Oblivion and a few others. I just don't understand how my comparisons varied so much from the HardOCP ones. The cards are great and I would recommend both of them.