R520 vs the 6800's? Why would people think this?

[RIP]Zeus said:
Ya and DH is reliable
Click to expand...

Then go read on xtremesystems and read about the 40k r520.You know what I think your the !!!!!! type that just likes starting these things over and over again.
 
[RIP]Zeus said:
From what you have said. ati cards need higher clocks to compete with nVidia's lower clocks?
Sounds like a bad core design or Inefficient design. Kinda almost like what intel is doing right now...hitting the wall on MHZ. never could understand why ati and intel are so into the mhz myth :D
Click to expand...

competing is still competing now isn't it. Who cares if one has a high clock and is still on par?
 
skratch said:
Then go read on xtremesystems and read about the 40k r520.You know what I think your the !!!!!! type that just likes starting these things over and over again.
Click to expand...

Think what you want. At least i am not trying to start a flame like you just did.
 
Ati may need higher clocks for a given level of performance, but you need to keep in mind that they're still doing this with old tech. The successor to the years-old 9700 is outperforming Nvidia's "new" core.
 
[RIP]Zeus said:
Think what you want. At least i am not trying to start a flame like you just did.
Click to expand...

How am I starting a flame.Im trying to prevent another Nvidia/ATI war.This thread needs to be stoped.
 
Too lazy to read through the posts but the r520 will kill a 6800U, r520 is ati's next arc. It's not known yet if it will be ps3.0 compliant, but all signs point to yes. Add in the fact that ati has stated they WILL be making an agp end for it and they now have me drooling, as me and my socket 754 were getting a bit worried there for a sec. I'm trying to push pci-e off as long as I can. When the r520 will debut is anyones guess. Some think this spring, others think this fall. I know nvidia has a refresh due out this spring and then the nv50 due this fall. But nvidia already stated the nv40 would be their last agp part, so i'm looking at ati for an agp solution-especially since the nv40 wont have the power to play unreal 3.0 engine based games. ( Well maybe @ 640x400, but thats not pc gaming imo)
 
So, If the r520 beats out a 6800GT or Ultra, but what about 2 GT or ultras? Last i herd there was on option for SLI for ATI.

And then what about the card NVIDIA makes to compete with the r520? If the r520 still wins, will it be abel to beat new "next gen" NV cards?

Same shit diffrent Generation.... :p

Every unreal game out has been really easy to run with great graphics. Its jsut some good codeing if you ask me....so why are we to expect a 6800 or a x800 series will olny be abel to run it 640x480...thats just ignorant.......shit the minium system requirments will probely a FX series or 9800 card....
 
I(illa Bee said:
So, If the r520 beats out a 6800GT or Ultra, but what about 2 GT or ultras? Lastk i herd there was on option for SLI for ATI.

And then what about the card NVIDIA makes to compete with the r520? If the r520 still wins, will it be abel to beat new "next gen" NV cards?

Same shit diffrent Generation.... :p
Click to expand...

It is the same shit but right now if the rumors are true about the r520.You would need to run 4 6800 gt in sli to beat the r520.

Ati said the r520 will be 2x faster than the r300 tech.The 850xt gets 25k stock in 01 on a AMD setup.

The r520 broke 40k in 01 bone stock on a p4 setup.I expect another 3-4k on an FX chip.This card is no joke.
 
skratch said:
It is the same shit but right now if the rumors are true about the r520.You would need to run 4 6800 gt in sli to beat the r520.

Ati said the r520 will be 2x faster than the r300 tech.The 850xt gets 25k stock in 01 on a AMD setup.

The r520 broke 40k in 01 bone stock on a p4 setup.I expect another 3-4k on an FX chip.This card is no joke.
Click to expand...


Ill belive that when i see it (beating 4 ultras...)

as for 3damrk, that means nothing....
 
I dont think it can beat 4 ultras...maybe 2, and even then, slightly. But it will be a power house of a card thats for darn sure. Unreal games are coded with almost perfection, but I remember reading an article saying the demos displayed were running on 2 ultras and were struggling, so I'm thinking one lonley gt wont be enough, of course unless they were running the demos @ like 1600x1200 w 4x aa/8 x af. ;)
 
Why do people think the R520 would be against the 6800? Because if the new NV core isnt out, its the only choice it would have to compete with. Just as this gen, the 6800 is going up against a slight ATi upgrade from last gen. Common sense, huh? I think so.

Sir-Fragalot said:
I'll be more impressed if ATi can actually deliver a product close to launch and keep them in stock in retail shops and other places for more than a few isolated periods of time.

The availability of ATi products as of late has been laughable at best. Sure Nvidia has struggled with availability too, but its not been nearly as bad.
Click to expand...

The only real problem for ATi was the X800XT/PE. That was horrible, horrible, horrible. The X800 Pro was easy to get. In fact, it was avail the day after reviews hit the net. The X850 cards are easy to get, as are the X800XL's. Even AGP versions are out there.
 
it will probably end up being nv47 vs. r520....or wait, didn't they change the code name of the nv47 to g70?
 
Frankly, I don't give a crap what ati comes out with. I'll never own one. I've used and loved nVidia cards since my first PC (2000). I've had nothing but good experiences with nVidia, therefore they have a lifelong fan.
 
[em]HEAT said:
Frankly, I don't give a crap what ati comes out with. I'll never own one. I've used and loved nVidia cards since my first PC (2000). I've had nothing but good experiences with nVidia, therefore they have a lifelong fan.
Click to expand...

"I've never had carmel cheesecake, so it must not be good..."
A logical fallacy.
Not saying ATI is better, just saying,you know, it's good to try stuff sometimes....
 
like the saying goes..." don't knock it till ya tried it" if you were owning a 5900 ultra instead of a 9800 pro shame on you. :p ;)
 
eno-on said:
"I've never had carmel cheesecake, so it must not be good..."
A logical fallacy.
Not saying ATI is better, just saying,you know, it's good to try stuff sometimes....
Click to expand...


*laughing* I was just thinking that.
 
[em]HEAT said:
Frankly, I don't give a crap what ati comes out with. I'll never own one. I've used and loved nVidia cards since my first PC (2000). I've had nothing but good experiences with nVidia, therefore they have a lifelong fan.
Click to expand...

U keep doing your thing man :rolleyes:
 
R520 is more than a piece of paper - it's already been taped out (http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20041103035406.html and Google for 'R520 taped out', XBit is not the only source), and is scheduled for a 'launch' in the first half of this year. Obviously, ATi is going to hold their cards close on this one, and I quote 'launch' as an admission that ATi product launches have been extremely disappointing. Even if it does take an additional 6 months for channel availability to drive prices down from the exosphere, they will most likely still be ahead of G70 by a signigicant margin, and even the most sedate rumors about R520 have it beating at least 2x 6800 Ultra SLI. However, there are still many ifs, particularly yields on a new 90nm process. ATI went through 3 versions of R300 (9700Pro, 9800Pro, 9800XT) that allowed them to scale clock speeds by about 60% on what was essentially the same architecture, but this progression took over a year. Don't look for the first iteration of this new arch, R520, to be the best that ATI can do. At the same time, you can bet that NV will not sit idly by on this, and I look forward to G70 as much as R520, although my money is on R520 hitting general availability, even despite an epxected paper launch, first.
 
About Unreal 3 and "You'll need at least 2 Ultras to Play" seems illogical to me. Epic would not make a game, where you'd need a $500-600 USD card, if not two $500-600 cards just to have it run "Okay" at some resolution. They'd lose so many customers that way.


I agree with Fallguy completely. The people were probably just using thier common sense.
 
Since when do people compare the two?

The only reason I would compare the R520s to the 6800s/X8**s is just in terms of improvement of hardware.

In terms of just performance, Of course the R520 is faster! It's the next gen, it's going to be faster, just like the G80s will be.

I think you misread somewhere, someone probably compared and R520 to SLI 6800s.

(Since an R520 is supposedly twice the speed of an X850XT-PE, then supposedly it is faster then any SLI solution, since and X850XT-PE, in terms of power, is the fastest card on the market)
 
topdragon147 said:
i heard that the unreal 3 engine can run on a 6600 gt
Click to expand...

Thats what the developer said, but most likely youll be sacrifising alot of nice effects.
 
Look, people, the proof will be in the pudding.
If, when the r520 comes out, Nvidia does not have a new architecture out, it will be compared with nvidias top offering at the time. Namely, whatever iteration of the 6800 is nvidias top dog at the time.
We can't know how these will compare to each other, or how the r520 will compare to the next gen nvidia part either, until someone has them in their rigs.
End of story.
 
Hate_Bot said:
Thats what the developer said, but most likely youll be sacrifising alot of nice effects.
Click to expand...


Exactly. I'm sure it will run on a ti 4200, but you'll be sacrificing alot of detail and effects. If you want Max details/effects and a resoltuion of at least 1024x768 or higher, you ARE going to need a next gen card, what we have right now wont do it. Unreal 3.0 engine is fully ps3.0 compliant, and the nv40 doesnt have the power to utilize ps3.0 to it's full potential.
 
I think nvidia is going to take the crown back like they use to do it. Nvidia screwed up only once and now i am pretty sure it won't happen again. Hope next gens have agp bridges. :)
 
sorry, but any 'leaked' benchmarks etc. etc. are usually bollocs
the r520 whenever it is released will probably not be in proper circulation till around christmas

and anyway, the proof is always in the pudding......daul 6800gt/ultra is easily enough for whatever comes up, including the unreal 3 engine, as this is what they tested it at, high detail 1600x1200, running around 30fps.

ati will almost certainly have somehting in the bag to fight against the sli onslaught, however porbs will still abound......this is because a huge number of new cards (particularly the 66 and 68 series) were bought this year, by the 'upgrade every few years' brigade (i include myself here), and this was to cope with all the new funky games coming out....thiough the ultra high end market has grown exponentially last year, i doubt that this momentum will continue...

my 2 cents
f
 
freddiepm61 said:
sorry, but any 'leaked' benchmarks etc. etc. are usually bollocs
the r520 whenever it is released will probably not be in proper circulation till around christmas

and anyway, the proof is always in the pudding......daul 6800gt/ultra is easily enough for whatever comes up, including the unreal 3 engine, as this is what they tested it at, high detail 1600x1200, running around 30fps.

ati will almost certainly have somehting in the bag to fight against the sli onslaught, however porbs will still abound......this is because a huge number of new cards (particularly the 66 and 68 series) were bought this year, by the 'upgrade every few years' brigade (i include myself here), and this was to cope with all the new funky games coming out....thiough the ultra high end market has grown exponentially last year, i doubt that this momentum will continue...

my 2 cents
f
Click to expand...

It might be enough, But the fact is, that no current card, has the features needed, to run all the effects, it doesnt matter if you have SM3.0 or not, you just dont have the features.

Ditto to AOE3, the devs have said this themselves.

Edit: I love how you are all calling the people you compare them ATI fan boys, considering I have never ONCE heard or read this comparison. Ive heard comparisions with SLI (Like an R520 vs dual GTs or something) or comparisions of SLIvsAMR, but never R520 vs 6800GT/Ultra"
 
Ati needs higher clock speeds?
More like the chips are designed differently.
The R420 and all chips based on that are huge on vertex shader speed, while the NV40, and chip based on that are huge on pixel shader speeds.
I think anyone with a brain could figure that one out after looking at benchmarks.
Given the X800 pro can complete with an ultra in far cry, it's just a matter of how a game uses a video card.
If games come out being limited by vertex shaders, which card do you think will be faster clock for clock?
 
Do you guys remember when matrox did a paper launch of the Paraheila? I sure do remember. And if you went by the paper launch, that card should have OWNED...when the card was made and put into the hands of the [H]ard Team the card was a huge FAILURE. Now we have the r520 coming out. Paper launches galore. 32 REAL PIPES...big deal...what would you all do if this r520 did a Paraheila? what would you all do...really, you can't go by paper launches or by rumors. No one has benchmarked agaist a 6800U SLI setup. (or that i know of. Or if the r520 is really out to some people) No one really KNOWS what the Unreal 3 engine will do with a 5900 or even a 6800/x800...i mean come on. talking about possiblities of the card from a paper launch is one thing. but actully saying this is what it's going to do and it's going to beat this is rather bullshit.


edit: i would really like to know from the fans of ati. What would you do if the r520 is a huge flop in the shitter?...would you still support ati or move on?

And to start it off....i still supported nVidia during the FX days i had 5900's all around..i didn't drop nVidia cause they had ONE bad production of cards. But i would really love to know if the ati fans would stop supporting ati cause there r520 went to the shitter like the Paraheila did.
 
[RIP]Zeus said:
Do you guys remember when matrox did a paper launch of the Paraheila? I sure do remember. And if you went by the paper launch, that card should have OWNED...when the card was made and put into the hands of the [H]ard Team the card was a huge FAILURE. Now we have the r520 coming out. Paper launches galore. 32 REAL PIPES...big deal...what would you all do if this r520 did a Paraheila? what would you all do...really, you can't go by paper launches or by rumors. No one has benchmarked agaist a 6800U SLI setup. (or that i know of. Or if the r520 is really out to some people) No one really KNOWS what the Unreal 3 engine will do with a 5900 or even a 6800/x800...i mean come on. talking about possiblities of the card from a paper launch is one thing. but actully saying this is what it's going to do and it's going to beat this is rather bullshit.


edit: i would really like to know from the fans of ati. What would you do if the r520 is a huge flop in the shitter?...would you still support ati or move on?

And to start it off....i still supported nVidia during the FX days i had 5900's all around..i didn't drop nVidia cause they had ONE bad production of cards. But i would really love to know if the ati fans would stop supporting ati cause there r520 went to the shitter like the Paraheila did.
Click to expand...


Yes, except that ATI is a company that makes good and reliable cards, and actually does what they say, while matrox just sucks...
 
Hate_Bot said:
Yes, except that ATI is a company that makes good and reliable cards, and actually does what they say, while matrox just sucks...
Click to expand...

Don't dance around the question. Just a simple yes or no and maybe with a why to it. i don't care if ati makes good and reliable cards, I just want to know would you do IF it did happen.
 
I find it interesting to hear projections about how the next gen of ATI cards might perform in comparison to the current top of the line cards from either Nvidia or ATI. Before the 6800 and X800 series were released there was a lot of talk about how the 6800 and/or X800 could be twice as fast as the 9800 series. Turns out that they were pretty much right on target. I just consider comparisons like that to be informational.

There are quite a few games now that push the top end cards to their limits. Granted we're talking about 1600x1200 with lots of AA and AF, but then again, those settings are perfectly viable on less demanding games, so why not look for hardware that can handle those settings on the latest, most demanding games as well? Also, no one knows what it's going to take to run BF2 or the Unreal 3 engine at the highest possible settings either. My guess is that another quantum leap is in order. Throw widescreens like the 2405FPW into the mix which increases pixle count even further, and the case for requiring better hardware in the not-to-distant future is fairly easy to make.

Now, for the games that I play today, I can't make the case. The 6800 Ultra is certainly by no means taxed by Battlefield:Vietnam for example. It's perfectly acceptable for folks to assert that video cards are plenty fast by means of comparison to their own library of games. On the other hand, history has shown that there has never been a computing performance or capacity measure that has been considered "enough" for a very long period of time.

To the more immediate point: I don't predict immenent failure for ATI's latest card by any means, but I am skeptical about their capacity to make enough product available to satisfy demand. ATI really hasn't had a good track record in the past year or so with being able to supply their top of the line cards in quantity.
 
Matrox came out of no where with there card.ATI for the last 3 years has been making fast cards.They didnt have a rep for high end gaming cards like Nvidia and ATI.

They said there r300 would be 2x as fast as nvidia and it was,they said the the second gen R300 would be 2x faster and it was.Now they say there next gen will be 2x as fast as there x850 and I think It will.32 pipes ???

There also running the ram at 1800mhz How could it not be faster?Its also a new design core from the ground up.

If there card dosnt perform as they claim ill still suport them but theres no reason for me not to get a nvidia card if theres is faster.Ill get whats faster either from ATI or Nvidia.
 
Jesus people, get what works best in your budget when it comes out, until then, these kinds of conversations are like masturbating to anime.
 
rcolbert said:
To the more immediate point: I don't predict immenent failure for ATI's latest card by any means, but I am skeptical about their capacity to make enough product available to satisfy demand. ATI really hasn't had a good track record in the past year or so with being able to supply their top of the line cards in quantity.
Click to expand...

Nvidia didnt do much better at all with 6800 Ultra chips. It took 3 months after launch to find one, otherwise you'd be bouncing on ebay and/or paying through the nose. Especially PCI Express which ATI beat them to by months. Annoying people think it was only a problem with the ATI PE when they were both doing it.
 
Shifra said:
Nvidia didnt do much better at all with 6800 Ultra chips. It took 3 months after launch to find one, otherwise you'd be bouncing on ebay and/or paying through the nose. Especially PCI Express which ATI beat them to by months. Annoying people think it was only a problem with the ATI PE when they were both doing it.
Click to expand...


I found 6800Ultra's and GT more than i found any x800xtpe's

Also i had gotten both a 6800Ultra and 6800GT 2 weeks after there launch...
 
[RIP]Zeus said:
I found 6800Ultra's and GT more than i found any x800xtpe's

Also i had gotten both a 6800Ultra and 6800GT 2 weeks after there launch...
Click to expand...

I see alot more XTs and XT-PEs then I see GTs and Ultras

Closer To MSRP for both also...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top