2900XT Ain't That Bad...

[phide]

P.S. Is usher synonymous with utter?

Fixed.

I'm seemingly not allowed to make minor mistakes without them being the focal point of your attention, having you call them out in a childishly sarcastic manner, then even going so far as to attempt to ridicule me because of them. Fascinating.

Frankly, I'm not at all bothered. Attacking a user on the basis of incorrect word usage (in my case due to a momentary brain lapse), among other things, shows your true colors.

 

[Pepsiennis]

Fixed.

I'm seemingly not allowed to make minor mistakes without them being the focal point of your attention, having you call them out in a childishly sarcastic manner, then even going so far as to attempt to ridicule me because of them. Fascinating.

Frankly, I'm not at all bothered. Attacking a user on the basis of incorrect word usage (in my case due to a momentary brain lapse), among other things, shows your true colors.

Phide, from the beginning this has been a thread of confrontation concerning the 2900XT, and I regret that as much as anyone does. Before I got the card some folks had asked that I post my thoughts about it after I'd purchased it, and that's why I began the thread. And in the 300+ posts since, I and many other 2900XT owners have been personally insulted by Nvidia supporters (and the occasional disappointed ATI supporter!) simply for stating our opinions and experiences with the card, which for many, if not most, of us seem to have been positive. I and other 2900XT owners have been ridiculed, name-called, hounded for every misspoken or mistyped word. So, when people come into a thread I started about a card I own and use, insult others and myself, accuse me of lying about the card and of trying to intentionally spread 'misinformation', and yes, even hopping on my own mistyped words... all because other (and very reasonable) Nvidia supporters had asked me to post my experiences... well then the tenor has been set by the rude ones. I and others suggested time and again we stay civil, but each entreaty went unheeded. Fine, if all that is understood by rude posters is a pointed word, then that was the pis aller. And you were taking a hand in it yourself, Phide. So if my words hurt you or anyone else, tough. After all that I and other 2900XT owners have been put through by the rude ones, they won't find any empathy from me.

I along with many would dearly love to resume a more civil tone that doesn't include personal attacks, slander, or English critiques. For example, that Bit-Tech interview with Mr. Taylor from Nvidia was fascinating, especially his comments on DX10 because, fanATIc or NVIDIAt, DX10 is a puppy we'll all have to walk real soon.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

Phide, from the beginning this has been a thread of confrontation concerning the 2900XT, and I regret that as much as anyone does. Before I got the card some folks had asked that I post my thoughts about it after I'd purchased it, and that's why I began the thread. And in the 300+ posts since, I and many other 2900XT owners have been personally insulted by Nvidia supporters (and the occasional disappointed ATI supporter!) simply for stating our opinions and experiences with the card, which for many, if not most, of us seem to have been positive. I and other 2900XT owners have been ridiculed, name-called, hounded for every misspoken or mistyped word. So, when people come into a thread I started about a card I own and use, insult others and myself, accuse me of lying about the card and of trying to intentionally spread 'misinformation', and yes, even hopping on my own mistyped words... all because other (and very reasonable) Nvidia supporters had asked me to post my experiences... well then the tenor has been set by the rude ones. I and others suggested time and again we stay civil, but each entreaty went unheeded. Fine, if all that is understood by rude posters is a pointed word, then that was the pis aller. And you were taking a hand in it yourself, Phide. So if my words hurt you or anyone else, tough. After all that I and other 2900XT owners have been put through by the rude ones, they won't find any empathy from me.

I along with many would dearly love to resume a more civil tone that doesn't include personal attacks, slander, or English critiques. For example, that Bit-Tech interview with Mr. Taylor from Nvidia was fascinating, especially his comments on DX10 because, fanATIc or NVIDIAt, DX10 is a puppy we'll all have to walk real soon.

Eloquently said and true. You know whats interesting? What's going to happen to all this flaming if and when the time comes that DX 10.1 is introduced in which aa resolve is used more so then HW? Make no mistake, DX10.1 is coming the only concern is if aa resolve will be a 'forced' addition over current HW. Now don't get me wrong, I am not getting that technical and detailed about it. And, some will say "I'll just upgrade" but the problem here is that it's one thing to upgrade at will, it's another when you are forced to when there is nothing wrong with your current video card. Those that remember the DX 8.1 to DX 9.0 transition and how DX 9.0 nay sayers thought that it was pointless soon found themselves up a creek. From my understanding, HD 2900XT is a good contender for the GTS 640 using DX 9.0. We also know that DX10 is more or less a transition period until DX 10.1 (whatever they decided to call it) is finalized. Therefore, we really can't draw any solid conclusions from current DX 10 applications because as we know, that will soon change. And, some games we've seen it's simple not good. Some believe that the full aspect of Dx10 is not used however, I believe that what you are seeing is in fact DX 10 be it one or a few missing features or not, it is in fact DX10 without the added features found in DX 10.1. DX 10.1 should change that with better performance gains adding more details (in a nut shell, not a technical explanation). However, that's if the video card is architecturally designed for dx 10.1 and how it will use shader aa (again if mandated). As of late all we have seen is DX 10 not the full features of dx10.1 and, the performance hit is extremely high. From what I've read dx10.1 will change this. For example (and this is just an example of what's to come) COJ using the june 20, 2007 1.1.1.0 patch. Regardless of what the "conspiracy" theories are, if COJ (using patch 1.1.1.0) is something we can expect out of future DX 10/10.1 titles you will be hard press to flame in this thread.


There are games like Alan Wake, Crysis, Hellgate:London, Crysis, Bioshock, and UT3 are a few titles do out that will show you the true color of DX 10. However, this is going to be short lived when in fact DX10.1 makes it's appearance. I am not sure if these titles will be DX 10.1 ready or not or if a simple update is needed to make it 10.1 we will have to wait and see.

 

[phide]

Before I got the card some folks had asked that I post my thoughts about it after I'd purchased it, and that's why I began the thread.

Understood, and we value any and all input on the subject. If there's something about the card that you feel has been misrepresented or misconstrued, or feel that it has positive aspects that haven't been touched on or, rather, downplayed, I welcome that information.

And in the 300+ posts since, I and many other 2900XT owners have been personally insulted by Nvidia supporters (and the occasional disappointed ATI supporter!) simply for stating our opinions and experiences with the card

That shouldn't happen unless some feel that they're being misled. I, and certainly others, have a certain feeling of obligation to not let users lead viewers astray. Recommending the XT is fine (for whatever reasons you feel), discussing it is encouraged, and debating it is even more welcome. There are probably a lot of asses who insult you, or your intelligence, for merely buying the card, but I think the majority probably felt that you have had some sort of agenda or damaging bias for one reason or another. Looking back through some of the early posts, I can't say with any certainty whether that's an unreasonable assessment.

And you were taking a hand in it yourself, Phide. After all that I and other 2900XT owners have been put through by the rude ones, they won't find any empathy from me.

I don't recall that. I did jump at something absurd you said, then jumped again because it seemed that you attempted to veil the absurdity by later stating it was a joke, then exclaiming with significant glee that users "took the bait" and mocked them for their supposed ineptitude. That's not civility in my book, and if I compare the act to something a child may do, that's only fair game -- and the fact that you're a 2900 XT owner is totally irrelevant in the regard. If you're very satisfied with the card, that's what's important.

I along with many would dearly love to resume a more civil tone that doesn't include personal attacks, slander, or English critiques.

I completely agree.

The bottom line, however, is that if you start a topic with the title "2900XT Ain't That Bad", you should expect to defend yourself, and the card, from some degree of criticism. For personal attacks, the Report Post feature is yours to utilize at your discretion.

 

[nicepun]

the Report Post feature is yours to utilize at your discretion.

I reported some rude comments a while back when the thread started getting really ugly and nothing happened.

 

[ND40oz]

I reported some rude comments a while back when the thread started getting really ugly and nothing happened.

Eh, it's been that way in this sub-forum since the mods changed...oh well, just have thick skin and don't let it get to you.

 

[Commander Suzdal]

I don't think a revised version of DX10 will save a fundamentally flawed design. There is one area, though, where an R600 feature might actually give it an edge in future games if developers implement it--the tesselation engine. The potential power of that unit to transform the the detail level in a game is tremendous. If developers start using it and nVidia doesn't incorporate it in a soon-coming GPU of their own, it could change the marketplace.

 

[pandora's box]

I don't think a revised version of DX10 will save a fundamentally flawed design. There is one area, though, where an R600 feature might actually give it an edge in future games if developers implement it--the tesselation engine. The potential power of that unit to transform the the detail level in a game is tremendous. If developers start using it and nVidia doesn't incorporate it in a soon-coming GPU of their own, it could change the marketplace.

i highlighted the important part. just about every single feature that ATi has invented failed if Nvidia didnt implement it in their GPU's.

 

[Xeth]

Last time ATI implemented tessellation (Radeon 8500), it failed because it was buggy (made games artifact and crash), performance-degrading, and not necessarily an improvement (in some games it made boxes look like balls). Later games with high polygon counts essentially made the technology obsolete. People were really excited about the technology (I bought a 8500 partially for that reason) and the big FPS game engines supported it (Quake 3, UT2k3, Serious Sam), it just didn't turn out to have much tangible benefits.

 

[Pepsiennis]

You'd think ATI would want to talk to some game developers and get them onboard the tesselation train before publically trumpeting the "feature". I imagine if they had, we'd have heard about it by now.

Hi EastCoastHandle! You're undoubtedly right about DX10, but it's a necessary bridge to DX10.x, or whatever will be usable, eh? Progress is never painless I suppose.

 

[Pepsiennis]

OK, something good, something bad: TechARP has up a review of the 2900XT up against an 8800GTX but no 8800GTS, which is weird as hell. Also weird as hell is that even though the review is dated today (June 29th) they used the 7.5 Cat's even though the 7.6's have been out for days. Their choice of games is also weak (Doom3/Far Cry/Company of Heroes DX10), but even weaker is they couldn't get Far Cry to run in Vista, which is odd because I was playing Far Cry on my Vista Ultimate 64-bit installation just yesterday and it was running pretty good. The good news (for fanATIcs, at least) is that they tested in Vista, and the card did very well in Company of Heroes, which is suggestive of future-looking on ATI's part instead of past-looking. The 2900XT's detractors will be interested to note that they tested the card up to 8xAA. The review is not a 'who's better, red or green' kind of review. It's more of a 'the card does this' kind of review.

All in all it's certainly an odd review! Not something to ever base your conclusions on, but still, you might be interested. Buy some shares of Morton's Salt and take a gander:

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=418

 

[Commander Suzdal]

i highlighted the important part. just about every single feature that ATi has invented failed if Nvidia didnt implement it in their GPU's.

This is not an ATi-invented feature (at least, not this time around), but part of an unspecified future DX spec. From the [H] review:

Currently in DirectX 10 having a tesselator processor is not required. However, in future versions of DirectX the tesselator is part of the pipeline and will be required. Eventually NVIDIA will have to add this in as well. ATI is currently ahead of the game as far as this technology goes. However, it is one of those things that has to be utilized by the game developer. The game developer has to specifically make their games utilize the tesselator engine, if they do not it is simply a piece of hardware in the GPU which goes un-utilized. This somewhat reminds us of Truform, ATI never could get support with that feature. However, this is a different scenario because the tesselator will be part of the DirectX spec in the future. It is helpful to game developers to have it in there now so they can start experimenting with it.

So it's kind of like nVidia implementing HDR in the 6800 series--forward-looking, but not necessarily far-out if a developer decides to take advantage of it, and eventually standard. I had forgotten about TruForm and I never had the chance to see it in action, so some of the problems experienced back then may still be an issue. My guess is that the key to its success will be some sort of object tag that identifies which elements of a scene should use it and which ones shouldn't. That would make optimization and debugging of the feature a lot simpler than applying it globally.

Anyway, my point being that R600 incorporates a feature that will be required by DX soon (remember, no optional features any more) and that it might be an edge--edge, get it? Tesselation? Edges? Oh, never mind...

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

OK, something good, something bad: TechARP has up a review of the 2900XT up against an 8800GTX but no 8800GTS, which is weird as hell. Also weird as hell is that even though the review is dated today (June 29th) they used the 7.5 Cat's even though the 7.6's have been out for days. Their choice of games is also weak (Doom3/Far Cry/Company of Heroes DX10), but even weaker is they couldn't get Far Cry to run in Vista, which is odd because I was playing Far Cry on my Vista Ultimate 64-bit installation just yesterday and it was running pretty good. The good news (for fanATIcs, at least) is that they tested in Vista, and the card did very well in Company of Heroes, which is suggestive of future-looking on ATI's part instead of past-looking. The 2900XT's detractors will be interested to note that they tested the card up to 8xAA. The review is not a 'who's better, red or green' kind of review. It's more of a 'the card does this' kind of review.

All in all it's certainly an odd review! Not something to ever base your conclusions on, but still, you might be interested. Buy some shares of Morton's Salt and take a gander:

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=418

Good analysis here. I read their conclusion and they are still under the impression that the HD 2900Xt is a direct competitor for the GTX and Ultra , With those few gaming benchmarks in Vista the R600 flat out beats the GTS. All we need know is a few more games benchmarked in Vista.

 

[Pepsiennis]

Ahoy, Commander! Well, if it's in the DX10 specifications, I guess ATI didn't have to talk anyone into coding it, after all. Thanks for recalling that part of the novel, uh... review.

Good analysis here. I read their conclusion and they are still under the impression that the HD 2900Xt is a direct competitor for the GTX and Ultra , With those few gaming benchmarks in Vista the R600 flat out beats the GTS. All we need know is a few more games benchmarked in Vista.

Hi Eastcoast! Well, I want to get excited about some of the benches, but I just can't because it frankly seems like a sloppy review in some regards (Catalyst 7.5, can't get Far Cry to run in Vista). I agree about the exclusion of the GTS, the natural and intended opposite of the 2900XT, perhaps we'll see it in another review beating the snot out of an ATI 2400XT? The Company of Heroes results are what I would like to have confirmed, as I have an (here we go again, folks!) opinion (subjective, of course) that the 2900XT really was intended for Vista and DX10 at the expense of XP performance. If you look at reviews across the web, in many if not most cases the 2900XT performs its best when benchmarked/played/used in Vista. Lets be honest, many of the people who were/are interested in the 2900XT are also the same type who are interested in Vista. It might possibly explain why there seems to be discrepancies between user reports and web reviews. And I'll proactively mention that the [H]'s XP vs. Vista graphics performance article used ATI's previous generation. What do you guys think?

 

[phide]

You'd think ATI would want to talk to some game developers and get them onboard the tesselation train before publically trumpeting the "feature". I imagine if they had, we'd have heard about it by now.

ATi's "Get In the Game" program has never really been terribly strong, whereas TWIMTBP has consistently been pretty solid at getting developers into the fold and properly utilizing NVIDIA features. I suppose it's a matter of NVIDIA just pumping much more money into luring developers in that ATi, but it's really unfortunate that most developers don't actively seek out the opportunities to work with both ATi/AMD and NVIDIA, because it's certainly possible for a game to be both part of GITG and TWIMTBP, and that would only serve to benefit us with better performance, features, and so on.

According to Wikipedia, only seven games supported TruForm, and three of them require accessory programs or INI editing to get it functioning. It was dumped, if I recall, with the X800 series. I think we can better support with the DX-spec tesselator, but NVIDIA's decision not to include hardware tesselation with G8x is going to result in slow adoption.

I think it's a good feature for R600, as it will no doubt give them some degree of exclusivity in this area (to my knowledge, NVIDIA has never supported any form of tesselation), but I don't see much becoming of it, just as we saw very little benefit with the ahead-of-its-time SM3.0 support on NV40.

 

[Pepsiennis]

... it's certainly possible for a game to be both part of GITG and TWIMTBP, and that would only serve to benefit us with better performance, features, and so on.

I agree with you 100% Phide, it would be best by far, for both themselves and the consumer, if game developers would work with both ATI and Nvidia. I have no idea, has anyone ever heard if either ATI or Nvidia puts a restriction on a developers participation (i.e., if you're part of our program you can't be part of theirs)?

 

[Marvelous]

It ain't that bad but it could be better.

 

[razor1]

ATi's "Get In the Game" program has never really been terribly strong, whereas TWIMTBP has consistently been pretty solid at getting developers into the fold and properly utilizing NVIDIA features. I suppose it's a matter of NVIDIA just pumping much more money into luring developers in that ATi, but it's really unfortunate that most developers don't actively seek out the opportunities to work with both ATi/AMD and NVIDIA, because it's certainly possible for a game to be both part of GITG and TWIMTBP, and that would only serve to benefit us with better performance, features, and so on.

According to Wikipedia, only seven games supported TruForm, and three of them require accessory programs or INI editing to get it functioning. It was dumped, if I recall, with the X800 series. I think we can better support with the DX-spec tesselator, but NVIDIA's decision not to include hardware tesselation with G8x is going to result in slow adoption.

I think it's a good feature for R600, as it will no doubt give them some degree of exclusivity in this area (to my knowledge, NVIDIA has never supported any form of tesselation), but I don't see much becoming of it, just as we saw very little benefit with the ahead-of-its-time SM3.0 support on NV40.

Well it is possible to be part of both programs till release, now if a company decides not to choose a program, they don't get any extra marketing help, where they will have to sign an exclusivity contract they get that help and much much more if its with the TWIMTBP, with game profiling with quite a few systems and other help, GITG really doesn't have as much resources, nV pumps alot of money into their program for the resources and developer's tools they make all come from that program.

Truform had issues, the new tesselator for the r600, I don't think its exposed yet in drivers, so it might be sometime before we see anything there. The g80 can also do tesselation in GS, as can the r600, so for future generation cards have to see which method is adopted, of course there would need to be changes to pipeline if the GS method is adopted because there is an overhead, which is pretty large depending on what is being done.