crossfire slaughtered by nvidia in hl2 hdr?

It is X850 crossfire competing against 7800GTX SLi, what do you expect? It would require explanations if it were X1800 crossfire.
 
Umm... duh? Its like comparing a 9800pro vs a 6800GT in Doom 3, you WOULD notice a difference.
 
John Reynolds said:
Comparing 6800 Ultras against those X850s would made for a more interesting read.
Click to expand...

Yes it would have, but apples to apples we'd have to see it X800XT vs 6800 Ultra. X850 is faster than Ultra and 6-7 months newer. Comparing X850 XT crossfire to 6800 Ultra crossfire is no different than comparing 7800GT sli vs X850 XT crossfire. They are in different classes.
 
850's compete with Ultras and according to nVidia 1 GTX = 2 Ultra so a more reasonable comparison would be crossfired 850's with a single GTX...

but since I didn't read the article and the link is currently down for me...I'm just talking out my ass about this...but I would suspect the 850's to better a single GTX at <1280x1024 settings
and be about on par at 16x12...and then see what the GTX can do above 16x12...
 
Whatever. It's a silly comparison. Comparing new gen to old gen, I would hope the old gen gets killed. Still, shows you just how powerful the new gen cards are compared to x8x0 and 6800.
 
Bar81 said:
t's a silly comparison...Still, shows you just how powerful the new gen cards are compared to x8x0 and 6800.
Click to expand...

Not silly at, considering that SLI and Crossfire is designed to combat hardware generation obsolecence. Most if not all developers...develop on pretty highend equipment, especially if
they consider their title a highly anticipated one. The Huxley developers use SLI rigs to give
and expectation of mainstream performance available when it ships.
 
kuyaglen said:
SLI and Crossfire is designed to combat hardware generation obsolecence
Click to expand...

Did you read that straight off a whitepaper? No way is this the case. Manufacturers PLAN obsolecence, they don't avoid it... how would they make money if we were all still using Voodoo 2's :confused:
 
Still though, people with (pcie) 850's can enjoy a long (gaming) life span with an addition of adding another card down the line.... though people with agp 850's, I think, should go with X1800's

On another note, I dont think this review bodes well for AMDzone in the minds of ATI (the comparison of "old and busted" vs "new hotness") unless they were going with what is available to consumers right now.
 
kuyaglen said:
On another note, I dont think this review bodes well for AMDzone in the minds of ATI (the comparison of "old and busted" vs "new hotness") unless they were going with what is available to consumers right now.
Click to expand...

They're well known whores of nvidia but that's besides the point.
 
I'm really looking forward for the 1800XT reviews: Firstly because they'll probably have benchmarks with final 5.11 drivers released (hopefully) and secondly we'll finally see some crossfire benchmarks without the dumb refresh limitation.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Yes it would have, but apples to apples we'd have to see it X800XT vs 6800 Ultra. X850 is faster than Ultra and 6-7 months newer. Comparing X850 XT crossfire to 6800 Ultra crossfire is no different than comparing 7800GT sli vs X850 XT crossfire. They are in different classes.
Click to expand...

Fair point, but I don't know if they have X800s to X-fire and I'd still rather see 6800 Ultras used than 7800. If you think a refresh of the same generation is unfair to use for comparison testing, then I don't see going outside that generation as being "more fair."

Either way, when online reviewers can't even get a logical, fair test bed configured you have to at times despair for the community in general. The years go by and still basic mistakes like this occur all too often.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Yes it would have, but apples to apples we'd have to see it X800XT vs 6800 Ultra. X850 is faster than Ultra and 6-7 months newer. Comparing X850 XT crossfire to 6800 Ultra crossfire is no different than comparing 7800GT sli vs X850 XT crossfire. They are in different classes.
Click to expand...

not truely, the x850xt pe was a refresh of the x800xt pe, and both were aimed to compete with the 6800 ultra, they were faster because they were refreshed. if nvidia did a 6850 ultra (6800ultra refresh), and we compared that with the x1800xt we would get the same results- meaning that this test is not really worth much...apart from showing how good the gts in sli are :p
 
Mayhs said:
not truely, the x850xt pe was a refresh of the x800xt pe, and both were aimed to compete with the 6800 ultra, they were faster because they were refreshed. if nvidia did a 6850 ultra (6800ultra refresh), and we compared that with the x1800xt we would get the same results- meaning that this test is not really worth much...apart from showing how good the gts in sli are :p
Click to expand...

I disagree with that a bit. You see the X850 is on a difference performance bracket than the 6800 Ultra. (Except OpenGL) but since Nvidia Didn't make a 6850 or 6900U it's not fair to compare a newer card released 6 months later to the 6800Ultra to the 68u. It's direct competitor is the X800XT not the X850. To compare a card like the X850 to a 6800U is no different than comparing a X850 vs a 7800GT. I don't think either of these 2 cases would be fair. Not fair to nvidia x850 vs 6800U and not fair to ati X850 vs 7800GT. ;)
 
The X850 is only a 20MHz stock difference from an X800. However, it is technically a new core (R480 against R420/423), so it received a new designation. The feature set, etc, is the same.
 
Wish they'd put in the score for single cards as well. Atleast, we could have atleast seen the performance improvement between SLI and Crossfire and seen which is more efficient.
 
wow that review is retarded... lol... or maybe it was whoeevr bought it up... ;)

come on now... one 7800gt can compete with two x850xtpe... no comparison... the only competitor is dual x1800XL :p
 
Still... GT SLI doubled the X850 crossfire at 1024x768 with full HDR (no AA, no AF)... I got ~30 fps with 1 6800 GT at 1280x1024 with 2xAA and 4xAF... and the crossfired x850 gets 37 fps at 1024x768 with no aa and no af? We'll just have to wait for driver maturation. Even though it's x850 vs. 7800 GT, it's half life 2 after all. I still don't believe the x850's in xfire should perform like that. Those numbers may be reasonable for a single x850 xt. And you also have to look at the performance hit. From no HDR to Full HDR, the GT SLI suffered 4 fps loss. The x850's suffered a 38.22% performance loss.

This is probably testiment to new gen. Hope the x1800's are like this as well.
 
I doubt there would of been that much of a difference if 2 X1800XL's were used instead of the 850XT's. In MOST other benchmarks I've read across many different sites, the X1800XL's in crossfire mode don't run that much better than 2 850XT's. Slightly better if anything. Two X1800XT's would be a completly different story im sure. The X1800XL's would surly perform better than the X850XT's in the most highest of resolutions when in crossfire with HDR. I do agree they should of used the X1800XL's in the comparison. Still think the GT's would of handled it well though. Then they can blame the drivers or something else instead of accepting the GT's outperformed it =). Still feel Sli is half ass atm anyways, wait till Slix16 is out, then we'll see what happens.

-DarkLegacy
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
Still... GT SLI doubled the X850 crossfire at 1024x768 with full HDR (no AA, no AF)... I got ~30 fps with 1 6800 GT at 1280x1024 with 2xAA and 4xAF... and the crossfired x850 gets 37 fps at 1024x768 with no aa and no af? We'll just have to wait for driver maturation. Even though it's x850 vs. 7800 GT, it's half life 2 after all. I still don't believe the x850's in xfire should perform like that. Those numbers may be reasonable for a single x850 xt. And you also have to look at the performance hit. From no HDR to Full HDR, the GT SLI suffered 4 fps loss. The x850's suffered a 38.22% performance loss.

This is probably testiment to new gen. Hope the x1800's are like this as well.
Click to expand...

dont forget this is not half life 2...with my single x850xt pe i run half life 2 at 1600x1200 with 4aa and 16 af and i rarely go under 60...
 
Devnull said:
SLI is a gimmick, 'nuff said.
Click to expand...
So I take it Crossfire is also just a gimmick? ;)

Anyways, uh yeah comparing an 850XT even crossfired ones isn't a real comparison for a single GTX muchless SLIed ones, especially when it's using HDR.
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
Still... GT SLI doubled the X850 crossfire at 1024x768 with full HDR (no AA, no AF)... I got ~30 fps with 1 6800 GT at 1280x1024 with 2xAA and 4xAF... and the crossfired x850 gets 37 fps at 1024x768 with no aa and no af? We'll just have to wait for driver maturation. Even though it's x850 vs. 7800 GT, it's half life 2 after all. I still don't believe the x850's in xfire should perform like that. Those numbers may be reasonable for a single x850 xt. And you also have to look at the performance hit. From no HDR to Full HDR, the GT SLI suffered 4 fps loss. The x850's suffered a 38.22% performance loss.

This is probably testiment to new gen. Hope the x1800's are like this as well.
Click to expand...
IMO, 10x7 is a largely irrelevant resolution for multi-GPU testing. Even a single 6600GT is capable of rendering even top flight current titles in 10x7. IMO, 12x10 is pretty much the lowest resolution that matters in a multi-GPU scenario. Realistically, 16x12 and up is by the far most important. It isn't until you get to such high resolutions that a multi GPU setup begins to overcome the overhead involved with card level paralellization.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
I disagree with that a bit. You see the X850 is on a difference performance bracket than the 6800 Ultra. (Except OpenGL) but since Nvidia Didn't make a 6850 or 6900U it's not fair to compare a newer card released 6 months later to the 6800Ultra to the 68u. It's direct competitor is the X800XT not the X850. To compare a card like the X850 to a 6800U is no different than comparing a X850 vs a 7800GT. I don't think either of these 2 cases would be fair. Not fair to nvidia x850 vs 6800U and not fair to ati X850 vs 7800GT. ;)
Click to expand...

No offense, but you have no clue what you are talking about. A 7800GT /X is a different architecture than 6800GT /U. X850 is the same architecture as X800, just a faster refresh. X8x0 was released with the 6800 series LAST year. Seems fair to compare cards released a few months ago to something a year and a half ago...:p :confused: especially when we have newer parts out............

That being said, this review is obviously slanted and these guys have no idea what they are doing.
1.) Why would they not compare a single X1800 XL vs a 7800GT???! Both cards are on the market so they can't use that BS. I don't know many people running Crossfire (only a handful on xtremesystems, let alone anywhere else) so obviously that hardly defines their readership.
2.) "During testing we encountered a bug with purple textures replacing the normal ones on many runs with the worst effect being inside the church where much of our particular time demo covers." -No shit.....when you change res without restarting CS it happens. And you call yourself a reviewer??????

3.) I never saw less than 25fps at 1280x1024 with my single X850XT PE and 4000+ all running bone stock with Max Detail set in the ATI drivers (4xAA 16xAF) with "full HDR."
 
CrimandEvil said:
So I take it Crossfire is also just a gimmick? ;)

Anyways, uh yeah comparing an 850XT even crossfired ones isn't a real comparison for a single GTX muchless SLIed ones, especially when it's using HDR.
Click to expand...


Same deal... Get you to spend $600-1000 for two video cards that are going to be slower than a single card in 6 months. It's just an easy way for them to get you to shell out more money. It would be more appealing to me if they would just build two cards worth of stuff onto a single PCB or simply create handpicked, super high clock/mem versions of their cards much faster than the XT/GTX cards. Not that I'd spend that much.


However most of the people who buy it are probably so insanely rich that it's just not an issue.
 
You cannot compare Nvidia's NEWEST GENERATION OF CARDS (ala the 7800gt and gtx) with ATI's LAST GENERATION OF CARDS (the x800 series).
 
wickedld9 said:
No offense, but you have no clue what you are talking about. A 7800GT /X is a different architecture than 6800GT /U. X850 is the same architecture as X800, just a faster refresh. X8x0 was released with the 6800 series LAST year. Seems fair to compare cards released a few months ago to something a year and a half ago...:p :confused: especially when we have newer parts out............

I think you misunderstood me, I'm not saying a 7800GT is fair to compare with the X850. The X850 wasn't only a faster core If I remember correctly the memory had more agressive timings. What I'm saying is that a direct competitor to a 6800 Ultra is a X800XT. The X850XT Came out 6 months after the 6800U and X800XT were on the market. I'm just pointing out to a previous poster that the X850 is signifcantly faster than the 6800U because it was released much after the 6800U and shouldn't be compared. It's was even in a different price bracket than the Ultra. If Nvidia were to have released a 6900U or 6850U then I would compare that to a X850. That's all I mean.
Click to expand...
 
SINCE no one else bothered to say, if you go look at some benchies with HDR+AA a Single X850XT PE preforms around that or better

Something doesn't seem right in those benchmarks
 
More out of whack then you might expect because the x8 is showing it's last gen heritage imho.

i.e. Even GF6 to 7 they tweaked the fancy shit. No fancy shit and SLI 6's beat a single GTX. A GTX can beat GF6 SLI when soft shadows and stuff are involved much more readily.
 
Devnull said:
Same deal... Get you to spend $600-1000 for two video cards that are going to be slower than a single card in 6 months. It's just an easy way for them to get you to shell out more money. It would be more appealing to me if they would just build two cards worth of stuff onto a single PCB or simply create handpicked, super high clock/mem versions of their cards much faster than the XT/GTX cards. Not that I'd spend that much.


However most of the people who buy it are probably so insanely rich that it's just not an issue.
Click to expand...

you assume a lot... my 6800GTs in SLI are about a year old, and they still are faster than one 7800GTX benching (I get 11k on 3Dmark05)... gaming, depnding on the game, they have an edge on it in large resolutions...(they run FEAR very nicely @ 1600x1200) I have enjoyed the hell out of my SLI setup since I first built it, and I have really used the extra horse power for gaming @ 1600x1200 with advanced IQ settings throttled up. and I am not insanely rich nor are the people I know with SLi setups... Once again someone who says "SLI is a waste of money" (or something like that) is someone who has no personal experience with it...

You should check this out: http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=ODY5

SLI is very reachable for the budget minded and psuedo-novice pc builders.
 
Few people even game in 1600x1200 which is the only place you will see a benefit anywhere near the insane cost. And 3dmark is irrelevant since I'm pretty sure you do not play it.

My LCD only does 1280x1024 and plenty of people use displays that aren't capable of 1600x1200. It's simply an e-peen deal in my mind.
 
That was a waste of bandwidth....... WOW, last generation ATi against current generation NV. SHOCKING. :rolleyes:
 
Devnull said:
Few people even game in 1600x1200 which is the only place you will see a benefit anywhere near the insane cost. And 3dmark is irrelevant since I'm pretty sure you do not play it.

My LCD only does 1280x1024 and plenty of people use displays that aren't capable of 1600x1200. It's simply an e-peen deal in my mind.
Click to expand...


That's cool... your opinion is your opinion. and I know, I hate using bench marks to compare... I should really leave that out from now out. not real world, but I tell you, FEAR really runs great on my machine. Seems to be on par, if not a little over a single GTX from all of the comparisons I have read.. Anyways, it is true that the real benefits come out at over 1280x1024 resolutions, but large LCDs are priced extremely competitively these days, and that will only get more so. When people ask if they should get SLI I always sak what res will they be gaming at... I never excourage anyone towards it with 1280x1024 or lower... anyways...

back OT - we need to see X1800 series cards in crossfire before making any assumptions about it.. imo. I think two 1800XTs are going to give two 7800GTXs a real run for their $, if not beat them in perf and IQ. then there will be the 512mb GTXs.. lol. things will get interesting. :)
 
Devnull said:
Few people even game in 1600x1200 which is the only place you will see a benefit anywhere near the insane cost. And 3dmark is irrelevant since I'm pretty sure you do not play it.

My LCD only does 1280x1024 and plenty of people use displays that aren't capable of 1600x1200. It's simply an e-peen deal in my mind.
Click to expand...

Wow dude... I wouldn't say a few. Gimmick is also just plain misused word for SLI. Only thing that really handles CoD2 and FEAR cranked. I personally been gaming at 1600*1200 or higher for a long time when I can.

Epeen comments... same thing. No offense, but it seems you are living in your box, and don't have a firm grasp of what other people are doing. Certainly not an epeen thing dude. I'd say even a GTX is a hard sell for your desires, but I find I could use more than it can provide at times. It's just one of those things where you just know you will never see eye to eye with someone on this topic. I really think that you're assuming a lot of things that plain aren't true.

That may be the most popular resolution, but a lot of people game higher than that it's just more scattered. Makes sense when two sizes of LCD's are that res practically by definition, but it's still only on the cusp of what I'd start to call high-res. Like here your res may be the most popular, but 44 are at 1280 or below vrs. 45 rocking higher. Anyways, no matter what... "few" is a wicked stretch.

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=923586&highlight=resolution+poll
 
I never saw less than 25fps at 1280x1024 with my single X850XT PE and 4000+ all running bone stock with Max Detail set in the ATI drivers (4xAA 16xAF) with "full HDR."
Click to expand...

Yep, the same here, something is definately wrong with the Crossfire numbers. My single X800XTPE performs better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top