prerelease benchmarks r520

Status
Not open for further replies.
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?
Click to expand...

Then it was not aimed at you.
 
CrimandEvil said:
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.
Click to expand...

Really? I had no idea CF editions would only be 256meg...at this point I want this stuff to be released just so I can finally understand (hopefully) what the hell ATi is thinking...
 
please don't flame me :p but IMO.... If these benchmarks are correct.. and the x1800xt couldn't beat the GTX in HL2.... yes... the game where the x800 series beat up the 6800 series... I am very disappointed... I was looking forward for ati to rape the gtx with its secret weapon.. but :(

but we don't even know this is real so time will tell! :p
 
^eMpTy^ said:
Really? I had no idea CF editions would only be 256meg...at this point I want this stuff to be released just so I can finally understand (hopefully) what the hell ATi is thinking...
Click to expand...
Well don't exactly quote me on that, I can't remember if it was some BS from the Inq or from some reputable site. Just too much crap floating around out there, you know?
 
fallguy said:
Sad to see so many people believe anything they read on the internet.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I never believed any of that R520 will own the 7800GTX crap either. ;)
 
PRIME1 said:
They are launching in 2 weeks and none of their board partners have one yet???? :eek:
Click to expand...

I have to admit, that was pretty funny. Kind of like saying "I couldn't have killed that guy because I was across town robbing a liquor store".
 
Brent_Justice said:
http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=3069
Click to expand...

Quote:
This is a complete hoax - done with an OC'd X850, we think. Call our partners yourself and ask if they have R520XTs in house.

PRIME1 said:
They are launching in 2 weeks and none of their board partners have one yet???? :eek:
Click to expand...

I sure would like to know who the "second response" author was- if it wasn't Chris Hook. Even if the "R520XT's" weren't meant to come out the end of this month, it's HUGE news if not one of their board partners have an XT "in house".
Disclosure: I own ATI stock, so don't call me a GD Nvidia faboy
 
killerD said:
I thought you had to know how to read to be a marine? The benches were fake.
Click to expand...
1c3d0g said:
Wow, that's so fucking low asshole. :mad: No respect for the military...I hope you get your ass handed to you. :mad:
Click to expand...
CrimandEvil said:
QFT :mad:
Click to expand...

No killerD has no respect for the useless flaming and frankly neither do I. Anyone who gives this "preview" an ounce of credibility is naive. You really have to consider the source and the tone of the article along with the "anonymous" lab testing. Why would an AIB partner leak these substandard scores to some no name website, without architectural or new features information ? I'll tell you why. Plausible deniability. When the real reviews come in a few weeks, different benchmark scores are easy to explain away especially with custom demos.
If he went out on a limb and speculated about the physical hardware it would be much harder to explain any discrepancies. He may as well have said his imaginary friend benchmarked the card. I was born at night but not last night. :)
 
I'm not an ATI fan boi or anything, but I think I should mention that this is early days yet. Drivers aren't finalized, and that was only the stock frequency. The GTX and GT were probably overclocked from the original 400MHz.
 
Anyone who gives this "preview" an ounce of credibility is naive. You really have to consider the source and the tone of the article along with the "anonymous" lab testing. Why would an AIB partner leak these substandard scores to some no name website, without architectural or new features information ? I'll tell you why. Plausible deniability. When the real reviews come in a few weeks, different benchmark scores are easy to explain away especially with custom demos.
Click to expand...

OFT
 
sorry but thats just bull...if they are real thats a huge disappointment for me with this new gen (nvidias and atis) looks like ill skip this round...
 
I don't buy into the benches at all.
I am calling BS (as many ppl already have).

That is just the site being pricks for not being able to get a real product for benchmarks.

LOL - If the X1800 really had benches like that... GOOD BYE ATI.
But since its Bullshit, I am waiting till Kyle runs it through the ringer before I buy into any marks on the net.
 
Majin said:
I don't buy into the benches at all.
I am calling BS (as many ppl already have).

That is just the site being pricks for not being able to get a real product for benchmarks.

LOL - If the X1800 really had benches like that... GOOD BYE ATI.
But since its Bullshit, I am waiting till Kyle runs it through the ringer before I buy into any marks on the net.
Click to expand...
I don't know why people think it is bullshit. Think about it. The X1800XT should be 16 pipes, clocked at around 600 - 650 mhz where the fillrate is less then the 7800GTX. Now sure that 512bit ring bus should add some kind of performance but at most like 5% to 10% which will make it even with the 7800GTX due to the fillrate being much lower.
 
I call BS as well, for 3 reasons.

A) There's no way in hell that this new card, with 512MB memory, etc etc, can only do 6% better than the X850XTPE in HL2, 13% better in Far Cry. NVidia got an extra 40-75% from the 6800 to the 7800, and I refuse to believe that ATI could be so inept and clueless as to put out that kind of pathetic speed bump.

B) Anyone remember the early 7800 benches that were leaked at some Chinese site? How they were barely any faster than 6800s? How they were proven wrong in a couple of days? Hell, as far as I know, that Chinese site didn't even have a hate-on for NVidia like these guys do for ATI.

C) According to ATI, it's a fake. They have no reason to say this if it isn't- they'll just look like idiots if this guy is proven right next week. The only reason they would say it's a fake is if these numbers are going to be refuted.

I think it's pretty obvious what HA is aiming for: "Wow R520 is such a disappointment, I'm going to go out and get a 7800GTX without waiting for real benches"
 
haelduksf said:
I call BS as well, for 3 reasons.

A) There's no way in hell that this new card, with 512MB memory, etc etc, can only do 6% better than the X850XTPE in HL2, 13% better in Far Cry. NVidia got an extra 40-75% from the 6800 to the 7800, and I refuse to believe that ATI could be so inept and clueless as to put out that kind of pathetic speed bump.
Click to expand...
It's only a 16 pipe card with a slight speed increase, and HL2 is largely CPU limited anyway?

B) Anyone remember the early 7800 benches that were leaked at some Chinese site? How they were barely any faster than 6800s? How they were proven wrong in a couple of days? Hell, as far as I know, that Chinese site didn't even have a hate-on for NVidia like these guys do for ATI.
Click to expand...
One situation has nothing to do with the other. Those benches could have been fake, these real.

C) According to ATI, it's a fake. They have no reason to say this if it isn't- they'll just look like idiots if this guy is proven right next week. The only reason they would say it's a fake is if these numbers are going to be refuted.
Click to expand...
No reason? How about more lost revenue if these benches are accurate and people give up waiting for their card that is already months late and coming in with half the anticipated pipelines?

I think it's pretty obvious what HA is aiming for: "Wow R520 is such a disappointment, I'm going to go out and get a 7800GTX without waiting for real benches"
Click to expand...
Why would they care what you buy? I wasn't aware they sell 7800GTXs? :confused:
 
These next generation cards don't make significant performance gains at 16x12 and lower, we should wait and see for some high resolution benchmarks, that's when the 7800 GTX really pulls away from the 6800 Ultra as well. Maybe the X1800 is severely CPU limited (as is the 7800 GTX), people expect the R520 to be capable of nuclear fission and solving the world's poverty crisis, then when realistic benchies come out they deem them as fake and go pray to their statues of Orton the god of promises
 
Obi_Kwiet said:
ATI people on Rage3D forums are saying that card was actually just a OC'ed X850XTPE.
Click to expand...
That would make MUCH more sense.

It's pretty obvious that website had a bias anyway. hey probably just pulled this stunt so that ATI would collaborate with them again. ?
 
purgatory said:
Maybe Hardware Analysis's benchmarks were not that far from the truth after all.
Sorry no translation.
http://hardinfo.dk/show.asp?desc=3866
Click to expand...

Very interesting, similar results but not identical, the leaks are everywhere, just one more nail in the coffin I presume. We all (the non-ignorant ass eating fan bois) thought the R520 will be about on par with the GTX and that's exactly what seems to be the case. Also that was a stock GTX right, imagine a KO or Asus TOP GTX against it? :p

Ok, now Shifra and company will come in and say these benchmarks are bogus too, just wait for it. :rolleyes:
 
http://www.driverheaven.net/#news85118

I feel its also important to mention ATI have stated Sander sent the following email after he wasnt invited to editors day, it might be an insight into his state of mind.

> From: Sander Sassen - Hardware Analysis
> [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 08 September 2005 09:39
> To: Andrzej Bania
> Subject: Re: Editors Day

>
> So you're telling me I'm not invited is that it? I feel an ATI column
> coming
> up, lets see if we can drop the stock price shall we?
>
> Sander Sassen
> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com <http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/>
Click to expand...

And my favorite;
Speaking with ATI today one of my sources was keen to say "Everyone will see in October that the only board Sander tested was a Ouija board."
Click to expand...
 
neubspeed said:
Very interesting, similar results but not identical, the leaks are everywhere, just one more nail in the coffin I presume. We all (the non-ignorant ass eating fan bois) thought the R520 will be about on par with the GTX and that's exactly what seems to be the case. Also that was a stock GTX right, imagine a KO or Asus TOP GTX against it? :p
Click to expand...
Hmmm....
I'm still waiting for HardOCP and the other good sites to throw up their reviews.
 
Rollo said:
It's only a 16 pipe card with a slight speed increase, and HL2 is largely CPU limited anyway?
Click to expand...

Umm...how is HL2 CPU limited for the X1800 if the 7800 SLI is getting 120fps?

Rollo said:
One situation has nothing to do with the other. Those benches could have been fake, these real.
Click to expand...

They are not all that different. Some random site has "Exclusive benchmarks" long before anyone else does. Doesn't make these false, but it sure as hell puts them pretty far from credible.

Rollo said:
No reason? How about more lost revenue if these benches are accurate and people give up waiting for their card that is already months late and coming in with half the anticipated pipelines?
Click to expand...

How does lying about these benches increase their sales? How will it be better for them if they have to turn around in a week and say "heh, sorry, I guess those benchmarks aren't bull"?

ATI has stated unequivocally, both at Driverhaven and Guru3d, that this is a hoax. Someone with a REAL card at Driverhaven is calling this a hoax.

Rollo said:
Why would they care what you buy? I wasn't aware they sell 7800GTXs? :confused:
Click to expand...

See the Driverhaven post. They arent interested in selling NVidia cards, just harming ATI, and I never claimed otherwise.
 
haelduksf said:
Umm...how is HL2 CPU limited for the X1800 if the 7800 SLI is getting 120fps?

They are not all that different. Some random site has "Exclusive benchmarks" long before anyone else does. Doesn't make these false, but it sure as hell puts them pretty far from credible.

How does lying about these benches increase their sales? How will it be better for them if they have to turn around in a week and say "heh, sorry, I guess those benchmarks aren't bull"?

ATI has stated unequivocally, both at Driverhaven and Guru3d, that this is a hoax. Someone with a REAL card at Driverhaven is calling this a hoax.

See the Driverhaven post. They arent interested in selling NVidia cards, just harming ATI, and I never claimed otherwise.
Click to expand...

So you're going to believe rants on ATI !!!!!! sites over this? K...

We now have 2 different sites in 2 different contries showing the R520 to be inferior to 7800 in several benchmarks. Are they both lying and just making stuff up?
 
the hardinfo link looks more realistic, showing the x1800xt is faster than a 7800 gt but just abit slower than a gtx. i dont trust anything just yet. some of the results look inline but other off.

we will just have to wait and see
 
I have to say that if these figures are true (which i personally dont believe), then i'll be pretty damned annoyed because i've been waiting for this card, resisting the temptation to buy a 7800 SLI rig.

Ati better pull something spectacular out of their ass with the X1800 or its back to nvidia for me.

Fingers crossed, because i love my ATI cards. Never failed me. Mind you neither did my Nvidia's. But the drivers werent as nice.
 
bildad said:
So you're going to believe rants on ATI !!!!!! sites over this? K...

We now have 2 different sites in 2 different contries showing the R520 to be inferior to 7800 in several benchmarks. Are they both lying and just making stuff up?
Click to expand...

I have no idea. I tend to put more stock in rumous from ATI employees than rumours from one biased site and one that I can't even read.

That said, I'm not commenting on the speed of anything until I see a real review from a site that A) I trust and B) is in a language I can understand. One currently under NDA.
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sander Sassen - Hardware Analysis
> [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 08 September 2005 09:39
> To: Andrzej Bania
> Subject: Re: Editors Day
>
> So you're telling me I'm not invited is that it? I feel an ATI column
> coming
> up, lets see if we can drop the stock price shall we?
>
> Sander Sassen
> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrzej Bania" <[email protected]>
> To: "Sander Sassen - Hardware Analysis" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 10:37 AM
> Subject: RE: Editors Day
>
>
>> Hi Sander,
>>
>> We submitted a list of media in our region about a month ago - and it
>> was down to Munich to decide where to send invites
>>
>> They have the budget etc
>>
>> We will have very limited places on the day - so there will definitely
>> be a tour straight behind any main event to make sure we see as many
>> people as possible :~)
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Andrzej Bania
>> PR and Marketing Manager
>> Northern Europe & South Africa
>> ATI Technologies
>> Tel: +44 7074 319 319
>> Eve: +44 7725 670 880
>> Email: [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sander Sassen - Hardware Analysis
>> [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: 08 September 2005 09:14
>> To: Andrzej Bania
>> Subject: Editors Day
>>
>> Will I be there is the question?
>>
>> Sander Sassen
>> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
Click to expand...

Sure looks like its the case of a reviewer throwing a temper tantrum like a baby to me. There is no proof for the general public that the numbers are real, or fake. But his attitude sure doesnt help his case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top