prerelease benchmarks r520

Status
Not open for further replies.
[RIP]Zeus said:
Did you know. From what a person says and the the thing does is 2 differnt things?

Did you also know that ON PAPER matrox's parahiela whould have owned nVidia and ati with it's 512bit bus...and look where it is now...

The r520 = not impressive. and also you STILL can't buy it...

So get over your ego and stfu plz kthnx
Click to expand...


not impressive? ITS NOT OUT, for f*cks sake
 
Shifra said:
You're doing the same thing empty has been doing in alot of threads, mis-quoting Orton. Once again, since i'v had to correct people 4 times now in this forum on what was said exactly was that,

"The R520 should exceed the 7800GTX in all benchmarks but recognizes that the G70 has room for higher clocks."

that is not what is reprisented in that mockery of a pre-view benchmarks, that shows the R520 totally crapping out in everything vs the GTX. And once higher resolution comes in, you may as well use it as a paper weight. Its almost the exact OPPOSITE of what was said, yet you seem to think you can link the two, okay?

Some people seem to be missing a huge freakin part of their brain since the XT isnt even going to be opposition for the GTX, its suppose to put pressure on the GTX so Nvidia has to respond. The targeted card for direct GTX competition is the 1800XL. But you apparently think the XL and XT are both going to be more expensive and perform worse then the GTX, cause that makes a load of sense right? ATI wouldnt release them if they didnt because no one would buy them.
Click to expand...


Actually if I remember correctly Ortan said it all depends on what clocks they can get the r520 to. That was in the latest interview well finacial report.

Also the XT is the direct competitor to the GTX, and the XL was supposed to be ATi's bread and butter since it was going to be faster the the 7800 gt but slower then the GTX. Just how the 6800 GT took the cake by being faster then the x800 pro last round.
 
Shifra said:
You're doing the same thing empty has been doing in alot of threads, mis-quoting Orton. Once again, since i'v had to correct people 4 times now in this forum on what was said exactly was that,

"The R520 should exceed the 7800GTX in all benchmarks but recognizes that the G70 has room for higher clocks."

that is not what is reprisented in that mockery of a pre-view benchmarks, that shows the R520 totally crapping out in everything vs the GTX. And once higher resolution comes in, you may as well use it as a paper weight. Its almost the exact OPPOSITE of what was said, yet you seem to think you can link the two, okay?

Some people seem to be missing a huge freakin part of their brain since the XT isnt even going to be opposition for the GTX, its suppose to put pressure on the GTX so Nvidia has to respond. The targeted card for direct GTX competition is the 1800XL. But you apparently think the XL and XT are both going to be more expensive and perform worse then the GTX, cause that makes a load of sense right? ATI wouldnt release them if they didnt because no one would buy them.
Click to expand...

The keyword there is SHOULD; not will or does, but should. This means you can use other words upon actual release. Words like doesn't. Ati will release whatever they have faster or not. They can't release nothing, that doesn't help them. After all the respins someone probably just said to ship it just to have a product out there.
 
After reading posts on Rage3D, it seems before any numbers were released, all those ATI !!!!!!s were saying how amazing the R520 was going to be, and once we see numbers they say nobody thought it would be uber 1337!!!11oneone

There is probably contraversy as to if these are real, but that would give a site a TERRIBLE reputation to post fake scores. I dont know though
 
Shifra said:
You're doing the same thing empty has been doing in alot of threads, mis-quoting Orton. Once again, since i'v had to correct people 4 times now in this forum on what was said exactly was that,

"The R520 should exceed the 7800GTX in all benchmarks but recognizes that the G70 has room for higher clocks."
Click to expand...
Thats not exactly what he said.

"In terms of performance, ATI believes the R520 should exceed the GeForce 7800 GTX in benchmark tests if it can get the proper clock speed, but recognizes that NVIDIA has some headroom to overclock the GeForce 7800 clock speeds."

Hell I even have a link for it too. ;)

Nowhere in there does he say that the R520 XT will beat a GTX, he said its all based on whether or not they can get the clockspeeds necessary for it. So he is essentially saying "the R520 may or may not beat the GTX depending on clock speed."
 
razor1 said:
Actually if I remember correctly Ortan said it all depends on what clocks they can get the r520 to. That was in the latest interview well finacial report.

Also the XT is the direct competitor to the GTX, and the XL was supposed to be ATi's bread and butter since it was going to be faster the the 7800 gt but slower then the GTX. Just how the 6800 GT took the cake by being faster then the x800 pro last round.
Click to expand...

Price point wise (realistically) the XL is going to be going directly against the GTX. Its also essentially the same card, though i doubt they'll be using GDDR rated for 800MHz on it. Both are 512mb cards both are employing a new architecture, and the XT and XL also both have pretty solid MSRP's considering the MSRP of the past 512mb cards. So unlike the GTX, the XT is problably not going to benefit from the same rapid price decline, that means ATI has to plan for people expecting some nice performance very close or exceeding the GTX from the XL model.




bildad said:
The keyword there is SHOULD; not will or does, but should. This means you can use other words upon actual release. Words like doesn't. Ati will release whatever they have faster or not. They can't release nothing, that doesn't help them. After all the respins someone probably just said to ship it just to have a product out there.
Click to expand...


i dont translate "should beat if target clocks are met" to "sucks in everything"

they'd never of spent this much time on it if they didnt think they could beat the GTX, they'd launch what ever they could, low/medium range, and start fullfilling OEM orders. Enthusiast card buyers, such as us, make up a minority of income for both companies.
 
Rage, Shifra, ATi, all the same entity with a different alias? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I'd have to agree with the above poster that whether or not the R520 is faster than the GTX/GT it will get released because they can still con most consumers and fan bois into buying their card even if it isn't the best bang for the buck or the performance king, someone will be ignorant enough to pick one up, after all these revisions and respins they needed to just release something. I guarantee that Shifra will be the first to buy an R520 XT even if it's a 3 slot cooling system disappating 400 thermal watts and requiring a 850W power supply just to be edged by the GTX. It's coming, whether you love it or lump it, just a few more weeks now. Anyone want to make bets on what whacky new character they'll use for this series? (I hate dinosaurs lol) ;)
 
CrimandEvil said:
Thats not exactly what he said.

"In terms of performance, ATI believes the R520 should exceed the GeForce 7800 GTX in benchmark tests if it can get the proper clock speed, but recognizes that NVIDIA has some headroom to overclock the GeForce 7800 clock speeds."

Hell I even have a link for it too. ;)

Nowhere in there does he say that the R520 XT will beat a GTX, he said its all based on whether or not they can get the clockspeeds necessary for it. So he is essentially saying "the R520 may or may not beat the GTX depending on clock speed."
Click to expand...


thanks for word picking, where were you for this adaptation earlier and the 3 other times it was mis-used very badly?

These benchmarks seem to line up with what Dave Orton has been saying about R520...R520 is competitive, but definitely loses to the GTX...which was running at default clocks...if you threw one of those leadtek dual slot GTX's in there...running at 500Mhz, it wouldn't even be close...
Click to expand...


neubspeed said:
Rage, Shifra, ATi, all the same entity with a different alias? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I'd have to agree with the above poster that whether or not the R520 is faster than the GTX/GT it will get released because they can still con most consumers and fan bois into buying their card even if it isn't the best bang for the buck or the performance king, someone will be ignorant enough to pick one up, after all these revisions and respins they needed to just release something. I guarantee that Shifra will be the first to buy an R520 XT even if it's a 3 slot cooling system disappating 400 thermal watts and requiring a 850W power supply just to be edged by the GTX. It's coming, whether you love it or lump it, just a few more weeks now. Anyone want to make bets on what whacky new character they'll use for this series? (I hate dinosaurs lol) ;)
Click to expand...


nope, i wouldnt. I simply am sick of people acting like chickens with their heads cut off at this total garbage link.

basically the main undisputed consensus is "OMGZ I TOLD YOU IT SUCKS!"

from what? some benchmarks someone had mailed to them and said himself he cant confirm if they're correct, and then ATI later commenting very fast that they were wrong? Oh okay! It does suck then lets all burn ATI down!
 
Shifra said:
thanks for word picking, where were you for this adaptation earlier and the 3 other times it was mis-used very badly?
Click to expand...
Reading your cherry picked "info." ;)
 
Wow, you people sure are fast to diss ATi especially when facing such credible evidence.
Keep the shimmering to yourselves teehee ;)
 
This is entertaining. I don't know what will happen, all I know is that I will be receiving my second 7800gt for an SLI config within days for about the same price as what the r520 will cost in a few months. Yep, will be enjoying it for months....To think I was waiting for the R520 a month ago...What a wasted time....Here's hoping ATI's new cards will be close (I have given up on it beating or matching the 7800gtx) so that there will be some competition, forcing nVidia to release something better at a lower price later on. Otherwise, nVidia can sit around for years waiting for ATI to catch up. I did like the 9800pro for about 1 month before going to 6800gt OC.
 
HeavyH20 said:
One item, does anyone really have a GTX that runs at 430? I wonder what the delta would be for the 7800 GTX cards that run at 490 compared to the x1800XT.

Personally, I see this as good news. The cards are similar in performance. That means nVidia will not sit on their laurels with a big lead. Now, they have to do some serious thinking with the r580 on the horizon.

I really want to see how these cards OC. And, a review with the cards in a Crossfire configuration (hopefully getting past 1600x1200 and 60 Hz ).
Click to expand...

no thinking necessary....their next gen is already to go ........so says my crystal ball
:cool:
 
funny how nvidia fans are "Oh yea..fake pictures! fake pictures"

Sources say THIS is the bench "See! crap all crap!"

Rather than wait for a REAL source to show
Remember other sources say "The R520 is VERY impressive" too

IF.....IF these are fake numbers, going to make a lot of you in here seem pretty stupid. It's really better to wait and see.
 
Netrat33 said:
you roll your eyes to Tom's...but HA benches are credible

*smacking lips*


Oooo k
Click to expand...
I never said they were creditable, infact I said I didn't think they were.
Personally I think the numbers are suspect but after everything ATI has said about the performance I kind of expect numbers somewhere in the ballpark or the ones in the "review."

I'm still going to wait for the more reputable sites to put up their reviews soon.
Click to expand...
Right there in purple crayon. ;)

Gees I wish I was smoking what you are. ;)
 
CrimandEvil said:
I never said they were crditable, infact I said I didn't think they were. :rolleyes:

Gees I wish I was smoking what you are. ;)
Click to expand...

It's just tobacco!
GOSH!
 
For those of you still reading this thread. Its nice to see the R520 Lose, even after being delayed 4 months. Stellar :rolleyes:
 
USMC2Hard4U said:
For those of you still reading this thread. Its nice to see the R520 Lose, even after being delayed 4 months. Stellar :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Flamebait, pure and simple.
 
USMC2Hard4U said:
For those of you still reading this thread. Its nice to see the R520 Lose, even after being delayed 4 months. Stellar :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Shifra will show up at your door with an uzi in about 10 minutes :rolleyes:
 
Netrat33 said:
IF.....IF these are fake numbers, going to make a lot of you in here seem pretty stupid. It's really better to wait and see.
Click to expand...
And if they are real, how are you going to feel?

I want to see numbers from a retail card (not a preview or engineering sample). I won't even read "press release" benchmarks that are posted. I want to see numbers from a card that can be purchased at Newegg or another vendor. When the GTX was released, numbers were posted from BFG and EVGA cards. Hopefully we will see retail card benchmarks and not ATI supplied cards.
 
If everything holds out I guess I'll have to keep the GTX. :D Ah well, it would have to be substantially better for me to have bothered anyway. I can't wait for this lost coast thing to come in. HDR and AA and a said 10 to 30% hit from the regular game? Should be nicely pretty and playable. I hadn't seen this until H linked it today.->
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2005/06/14/hl2_hdr_overview/1.html

It says benches are to come. Shite! Now that would have been nice. Maybe when R520 comes we'll find out how good it is at these kinds of things. Nv definitely tweaked these kinds of features 6->7. Things like this are the times they actually put a hurting on 6800U in SLI instead of other way around.
 
USMC2Hard4U said:
For those of you still reading this thread. Its nice to see the R520 Lose, even after being delayed 4 months. Stellar :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I thought you had to know how to read to be a marine? The benches were fake.
 
killerD said:
I thought you had to know how to read to be a marine? The benches were fake.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say that, but I would say that they don't look 100% legit either.
 
jebo_4jc said:
I wouldn't say that, but I would say that they don't look 100% legit either.
Click to expand...
Yeah, at 16x12 the X850 doesn't wash with what other sites have reported in similar tests. Hell a few of the HA X850 scores were below those that other sites get. :eek:
 
CrimandEvil said:
Yeah, at 16x12 the X850 doesn't wash with what other sites have reported in similar tests. Hell a few of the HA X850 scores were below those that other sites get. :eek:
Click to expand...
Yeah, it did say they used custom demos, which could have been nothing but explosions and water and whatnot that tax the GPU harder than normal benchies, but it still doesn't really look like enough of an improvement over the X850 to make me believe it was a 1800XT.

If these numbers are fake, I wonder if HA is kicking themselves for including the 850XT numbers in their graphs, because that is what makes me suspicious......

The question though, is why would HA make this crap up and ruin their rep?
 
Shifra said:
thanks for word picking, where were you for this adaptation earlier and the 3 other times it was mis-used very badly?

nope, i wouldnt. I simply am sick of people acting like chickens with their heads cut off at this total garbage link.

basically the main undisputed consensus is "OMGZ I TOLD YOU IT SUCKS!"

from what? some benchmarks someone had mailed to them and said himself he cant confirm if they're correct, and then ATI later commenting very fast that they were wrong? Oh okay! It does suck then lets all burn ATI down!
Click to expand...

lol...I wasn't saying that Orton said it was slower...I was saying that it was a little slower than a gtx according to the benchmarks and that that lined up to what Orton said about it "probably being faster if we get the right clock speed"...and I'm guessing they were shooting for a little more than 600Mhz...

so to recap...you're the only one mis-interpreting and mis-quoting things here...

ahhh the paranoia of !!!!!!s...

See, in my mind, when Dave Orton says R520 "should" be faster "if" they get the right clock speeds but they recognize that G70 can clock higher...that's as good as an admission of defeat...because if there was any room whatsoever to claim market leadership...he'd be doing it...cuz that's what you're supposed to do...talk up your company...
 
killerD said:
I thought you had to know how to read to be a marine? The benches were fake.
Click to expand...

don't need to know how to read...just be able to kill people...especially one's with big mouths that should have been banned months ago...
 
killerD said:
I thought you had to know how to read to be a marine?
...
Click to expand...
Wow, that's so fucking low asshole. :mad: No respect for the military...I hope you get your ass handed to you. :mad:
 
Anyways before I add on to this stupidity I just want to say in the begining I believed the Benchies to be true. I dont know many other realiable sites other than Anandtech and the H so I dont know if HA is a good site or not. After people started putting out what the X850XT got in certain games and how the Guys at Guru 3d posted that article and re reading the HA article to see all the clear anti ATi feelings he has I have to say I think these Benchies are fake. USMC2[H]4U I suggest you go read this entire thread (Painful I know) and then think about what you said. Im not trying to sound jerkish their or sarcastic or anything I just think you made an honest mistake.

Something I found odd is that the amount of Nvidia users saying that these are the R520s scores and that ATi !!!!!!s are being bitches for saying they arent when their is more evidence leaning towards them not being real than them being real. I know some Nvidia guys were cheering but come on. Do you honestly think ATi would make a card that cost 600 dollars and performed below a GTX and slightly above a X850XTPE?
 
fallguy said:
Sad to see so many people believe anything they read on the internet.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that for a second. nobody believes what they read on the internet.
 
{NG}Fidel said:
Anyways before I add on to this stupidity I just want to say in the begining I believed the Benchies to be true. I dont know many other realiable sites other than Anandtech and the H so I dont know if HA is a good site or not. After people started putting out what the X850XT got in certain games and how the Guys at Guru 3d posted that article and re reading the HA article to see all the clear anti ATi feelings he has I have to say I think these Benchies are fake. USMC2[H]4U I suggest you go read this entire thread (Painful I know) and then think about what you said. Im not trying to sound jerkish their or sarcastic or anything I just think you made an honest mistake.

Something I found odd is that the amount of Nvidia users saying that these are the R520s scores and that ATi !!!!!!s are being bitches for saying they arent when their is more evidence leaning towards them not being real than them being real. I know some Nvidia guys were cheering but come on. Do you honestly think ATi would make a card that cost 600 dollars and performed below a GTX and slightly above a X850XTPE?
Click to expand...

Ok I'm probably one of the biggest nVidia fans on this board...and I've already said multiple times that these benchmarks are most likely fake...what more do you want?
 
Something can be gleaned from the Guru3D article though regarding that: http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=3069 If no partners have a R520 XT then that is not good news so close to launch! That would seem to indicate that the X1800 XT will be in short supply at launch if no one has them now. It seems despite all the time they've had, the X1800 XT will be a repeat of last year with the X800 XT. Hopefully I'm wrong but it's not looking that way. Rumors have been stirring before this little incident today and this dialogue rather seems to support it unintentionally.

I waited quite a while for the R520 and after reading those benchmarks (fake or not) I'm done waiting for ATi. Whatever the speed of the R520 XT, the fact is you can buy a G70 pretty much anywhere now whereas the R520 is still MIA. I know it's supposed to be released the first week of October but it wouldn't surprise me at all if it were delayed yet again. I'm very tired of playing at low quality and relatively low resolution with my crappy X300, it's time to really play come next week.

Something else to consider is the price of the R520 XT vs the G70. The G70 is $100 to $150 less and I was able to buy a Seagate 250GB SATA HD with the extra money I saved. For $600, you get a X1800 XT (if it's available that is) and the performance might very well be below the G70's. The only pro to the X1800 XT/XL is the fact that they have 512MB of ram. Now that's nice but it's not needed right now. It doesn't hurt but it's no biggie if you don't have a 512MB card.

I just think the R580 is what the R520 was supposed to be and they couldn't get good yields on the 24 and 32 pp cards so then the R520 was born and the're O/Cing the crap out of it to keep up with the G70. As others have said...yeah we know why the G70 Ultra was cancelled. nVidia knew it wasn't a threat! I say screw ATi for making us wait.....for what? Go buy a G70 and have fun with a genuinely good card that will be good for two more years!
 
The only pro to the X1800 XT/XL is the fact that they have 512MB of ram.
Click to expand...
Not to mention that the Xfire edition will only have 256mb of memory. :(

At the price their asking it better beat the crap out of a GTX.
 
Definitely disappointing, will this make 7800 series prices move at all ? I was gettin interested in 7800GT if the price were right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top