• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Crossfire beats SLi in Doom3!!!

E

^eMpTy^

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Messages
3,233
Here's the inquirer article

Here's the benchies

Here's my e-mail to Fuad.

That's the worst headline I've ever seen. Did you even look at the benchmarks? They didn't run at 1600x1200, where the 6800s really become most efficient... Also, at the most graphically intensive level benchmarked (which was only 1280x1024 4xaa) Crossfire LOST to the Ultras and only beat the dual 6800GTs by less than TWO fps... Note that the x850xtpe's they were using cost THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS MORE EACH than the 6800GTs they BARELY beat at a LOW ASS resolution... Nobody is dropping $1400 on a videocard setup to play at anything less than 1600x1200. Your article should have been titled "weak Doom3 performance shows Crossfire not ready for prime time"...why else would they limit their benches to below 1600x1200...if they had access to Crossfire boards...they JUST MIGHT have had access to a monitor that could handle the resolution... You're supposed to see through the PR bullshit and report the real dirt Fuad, not fall hook line and sinker for a weak ass PR move.
Click to expand...

Silly Fuad...the benchies are practically worthless IMHO...I have no idea why anyone would benchmark a $1500 videocard rig at anything below 1600x1200...

EDIT: Sorry to be hating on Crossfire in yet another thread...mostly this is just a "hey look, fuad's an idiot" thread.
 
eh...should have looked at the author of the thread before clicking....
 
well, not really? the ultra takes top at the highest settings they used...and this is an x850xtPE...can't really compare to ultra's imo..although they are both top of the line..
 
Or, you know, that the article is obviously slanted and is terribly written to boot.

Nvidia slept in bed with John Carmack for ages and even made a NV30 as the chap requested and still managed to lose from its red competitor. It would like just like seeing ATI losing in Half Life 2, the game it cost them almost six million dollars.

I see about 4 errors in those two sentences alone, not to mention the "slept in bed" part...he can't say collaborated because that actually sounds reasonable for a graphics card company to do, so he instead uses a phrase that puts nVidia in as much of a bad light as possible. Then he makes it sound like nVidia built a video card with the specific purpose of beating ATI in Doom 3. Do you read these forums often? Do you know why this guy has such a bad rep?
 
1024x768? spppsh. show me some benches of cards actually doing some work, let's say 1600x1200 at minimum, then i'll be impressed.
 
Skrying said:
That you're a fan boy and cant help yourself from crapping ATi?
Click to expand...

So are you saying I'm wrong? Did you even look at the benchmarks?
 
why no 1600x1200?? lame... maybe it lost by too much. lol j/k - they all look too close to fuss over to me.

Anyways... the G70 is about to poke it's head out of the ground and is going to put those 850's in a hurt locker with two GTX's in SLi... until the R520... then things will get interesting... and around and 'round we go... wooo!
 
^eMpTy^ said:
So are you saying I'm wrong? Did you even look at the benchmarks?
Click to expand...
I think he's justifying his inability to read by attacking your credibility based on your history of advocating nVidia products.
 
Zinn said:
I think he's justifying his inability to read by attacking your credibility based on your history of advocating nVidia products.
Click to expand...

I read them perfectly fine, and I understand how they are totally crap. That's not hard.

What I find funny is that I've never seen Empty, post anything nice or fairly objective about ATi.
 
Skrying said:
I read them perfectly fine, and I understand how they are totally crap. That's not hard.

What I find funny is that I've never seen Empty, post anything nice or fairly objective about ATi.
Click to expand...
Okay okay, sorry for being a sarcastic prick...

I'm pretty impressed that Crossfire is working this well this early. Considering that nVidia improved SLi scores over time, ATI is doing well for its present level of product maturity. Get some BIOS and driver updates and I will bet that x850xt Crossfire kicks major ass.

Just the extra features and the ability to not have to reboot upon enabling Crossfire scores major points in my book...

In any case, I'm stuck with nVidia because I like my motherboard (alot)! I wonder what R520 Crossfire will look like...
 
HRslammR said:
1024x768? spppsh. show me some benches of cards actually doing some work, let's say 1600x1200 at minimum, then i'll be impressed.
Click to expand...
QFT

These numbers mean nothing.
 
That bench makes me ashamed to be a dane :/
Like stated before...why no bences at 1600x1200(or more) at high IQ?

Terra...
 
The reason Crossfire is efficient is because it doesn't require 2 of the same cards.

Just my $0.02.
 
While I dont think 1024x768 is good to bench a game with. I do find it amusing that the same people that give 3dmark merit, dont give these scores merit. When they are benched at the same res.
 
Met-AL said:
eh...should have looked at the author of the thread before clicking....
Click to expand...

yeah but his point still stands. The guys who wrote that crap are the biggest !!!!!!s I've ever seen. Everyone who buys a new card these days is either playing @ 1280x1024 (19in LCD) or 1600x1200 (CRT or 20in+ LCD). IMHO anything lower is worthless unless you're doing a CPU benchmark.
 
I'm trusting on [H] and FiringSquad (they have a 2405FPW ;) ) to benchmark in 1600x1200 4xAA 16xAF and in 1920x1200 4xAA 16xAF. Now that'll be interesting to see who comes out on top... :)
 
Skrying said:
I read them perfectly fine, and I understand how they are totally crap. That's not hard.

What I find funny is that I've never seen Empty, post anything nice or fairly objective about ATi.
Click to expand...

I say objective things all the time to try to cover up my insane !!!!!!ism...apparently you missed those three posts...
 
They said something about this

"Den anvendte Tft-skzrm understbttede desuden desvzrre ikke 1600x1200"

Not sure what langauge this was in but if you look closer they were using an LCD and just maybe that LCD did not support 1600x1200 which could explain why those benches were not there. As you know not all LCDs support that res...
 
robberbaron said:
Crossfire! Don't get caught in the...CROSSFIRE!! CROSSFIRE! CROSSFIRE! CROSSFIYAAAHHH!!!!

edit: I found a game that Crossfire will beat SLI at every single time.
http://crossfire.real-time.com/


http://crossfire.real-time.com/screenshots/gallery1/ss01_JPG.html

Imagine this... SUPER ANTIALIASED!

Here's a demo of the new advanced shadow and lighting engine on X850 crossfire edition cards:
http://crossfire.real-time.com/screenshots/gallery1/ss07_JPG.html
Click to expand...

Impressive, x850xt coming soon for me, can't wait to test that game out.
 
If you are a hardware review site, you ought to have a monitor capeable of 1600x1200..... That just means it is a poor review.
 
jon_k said:
If you are a hardware review site, you ought to have a monitor capeable of 1600x1200..... That just means it is a poor review.
Click to expand...

Yea but they did this at the trade show (ATI Crossfire Benchmarks @ DFI Booth was at the time of their article)...at a vendors both. Give them some slack unless have 1600x1200 numbers to share...

These numbers are still impressive only because I thought ATI would have been much slower in Doom3 or it would take them some time to become more efficent. Being right on NV heels at any res given the fact that xfire is brand new and SLI is mature is still not bad...
 
I wouldn't say that Crossfireis beaten yet. Wait for better drivers ;)

On a side note, Crossfire manages to have an 86% increase in frames at1600x1200 on the bench that anandtech did. Those are very impressive numbers from an early build. And if I remember correctly, even SLI isn't that efficient although this single test may just be a fluke. ;)
 
Those benches mean nothing. cmon, 2.5 fps out of 85? A drop in the mutha fuckin bucket. a rounding error as far as im concerned, blue on black really.

When you see somehting like that, it's clearly CPU limited. If they tested more than one game (especially on e that was ATI favored) I would be more inclined to believe the claims of the article. I personally find it hard to believe that ATI has managed to fix their openGL support. Especially last august when a 6800GT was easily beating a x800XT in Doom 3. ATi has probably improved on their openGL in the last 10 months so maybe things have changed i dunno, but the language of the article and the pathetic nature of the benchmarks, destroys all credibility in my book.
 
CodeWaste said:
Those benches mean nothing. cmon, 2.5 fps out of 85? A drop in the mutha fuckin bucket. a rounding error as far as im concerned, blue on black really.

When you see somehting like that, it's clearly CPU limited. If they tested more than one game (especially on e that was ATI favored) I would be more inclined to believe the claims of the article. I personally find it hard to believe that ATI has managed to fix their openGL support. Especially last august when a 6800GT was easily beating a x800XT in Doom 3. ATi has probably improved on their openGL in the last 10 months so maybe things have changed i dunno, but the language of the article and the pathetic nature of the benchmarks, destroys all credibility in my book.
Click to expand...

this is the point I was trying to make about testing at 1600x1200. At 1280x1024, it's gonna be more CPU limited.
 
CodeWaste said:
Those benches mean nothing. cmon, 2.5 fps out of 85? A drop in the mutha fuckin bucket. a rounding error as far as im concerned, blue on black really.
Click to expand...

As others have pointed out, its amazing that in this early stage that ATI is even close and dont trash a site just because you dont understand the laungage...
 
CodeWaste said:
Those benches mean nothing. cmon, 2.5 fps out of 85? A drop in the mutha fuckin bucket. a rounding error as far as im concerned, blue on black really.

When you see somehting like that, it's clearly CPU limited. If they tested more than one game (especially on e that was ATI favored) I would be more inclined to believe the claims of the article. I personally find it hard to believe that ATI has managed to fix their openGL support. Especially last august when a 6800GT was easily beating a x800XT in Doom 3. ATi has probably improved on their openGL in the last 10 months so maybe things have changed i dunno, but the language of the article and the pathetic nature of the benchmarks, destroys all credibility in my book.
Click to expand...
Well they have been doing all sorts of tricks and hacks with Doom 3 since the beginning (now with Catalyst A.I. it's automagically applied per game). Example: turn A.I. on, load up Doom 3 and switch your weapon to shotgun. You'll see banding all over the barrel when you're close to a lightsource. If you turn A.I. off, the banding will go away but performance will decrease. At least it did show artifacts on mine, when I still had the Radeon 9800 Pro.I don't know if they fixed it by now though... :(
 
robberbaron said:
Crossfire! Don't get caught in the...CROSSFIRE!! CROSSFIRE! CROSSFIRE! CROSSFIYAAAHHH!!!!
Click to expand...
lol I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thinks that whenever they hear about ati now...

1.jpg
 
Jbirney said:
They said something about this

"Den anvendte Tft-skzrm understbttede desuden desvzrre ikke 1600x1200"

Not sure what langauge this was in but if you look closer they were using an LCD and just maybe that LCD did not support 1600x1200 which could explain why those benches were not there. As you know not all LCDs support that res...
Click to expand...

They were using no less than $1500 worth of video cards, which are designed to run at 1600x1200...and they didn't have a single monitor that could do 1600x1200...I call bullshit...
 
1c3d0g said:
Well they have been doing all sorts of tricks and hacks with Doom 3 since the beginning (now with Catalyst A.I. it's automagically applied per game). Example: turn A.I. on, load up Doom 3 and switch your weapon to shotgun. You'll see banding all over the barrel when you're close to a lightsource. If you turn A.I. off, the banding will go away but performance will decrease. At least it did show artifacts on mine, when I still had the Radeon 9800 Pro.I don't know if they fixed it by now though... :(
Click to expand...


Thats interesting, i haven't played doom 3 im my rig (my roomate just didnt have use of his computer for about a day) so im mostly unfamiliar with all the tricks that ATi has been employing.

Curious though about the banding on the shotty, so when the AI is on IQ goes down? Didn't people shit a brick when nVidia was doing that a couple of years ago? Why is it suddenly ok for ATi to do it for Doom 3?
 
Jbirney said:
As others have pointed out, its amazing that in this early stage that ATI is even close and dont trash a site just because you dont understand the laungage...
Click to expand...

What do you mean at this stage? nVidia's SLi came out almost a year ago. who knows how much of that time ATI spent developing crossfire.

maybe instead of launching CF when it was immature like SLI, they waited for a few months to refine it, and then show off a finished product. (I do like that latter apprach better BTW, i'm damn sick and tired of products launching and then having to wait thorugh 6 months of driver updates and fixes to cash in on the promises the products made at launch)

Also......that CF setup at Compudex was probably set up, tested, and tweaked for days. and im also curious, where did the guys who made these benchmarks get the 2 6800ultras that fast, and how much tweaking did they do to the nvidia set up?

See my problem with the whole thing is, i have a boat laod of info about that ATI set up, and nearly none about the nVidia one. blind acceptance is one of those things i never got very good at.

And im trashing site because of the editorial nature of the language, not the one it's written in. If you're going to do a benchmark, then do one. I really could do with all the bullshit of what you 'think', you thinking about daisies is not bgoing to make the card run any better than thinking about roadkill. keep your thoughts to yourself and report what you tested.
 
who knows how tweaked the 6800U's were... or not tweaked... before I let any real opinions congeal about CF I am going to wait and see how it does in the hands of the general public.
 
Nice to see it in action. Figured it would not take much to beat out Nvidia's Sli
 
lol, and if it WAS Benched at 1600x1200, you would say "OMG, Who plays at THAT res with a dual card system, I require 1900x1600 Benches!!!!!!"

:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top