![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Radeon HD 2900 XT: Flop or Not?
- Thread starter ^eMpTy^
- Start date
- Status
bigstusexy
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2002
- Messages
- 3,194
I voted flop and I believe its a tab bit too early and too harsh to say that but then you (and I) have to come to the reality.
I haven't been keeping up with hardware that much but as far as the card that was released yesterday goes:
It costs more than its competitor.
It does not preform as well
It draws ALOT of power
It draws even MORE when its hot
When you add that all up it doesn't equal a win. We are all hoping for drivers to come and open up the heavens of which could happen, the one feature that they intend to support and it is the future and it will work may just pan out, however on the same fence we have that these games, this competing card aren't as new as their offering. I know these drivers are still in their infancy and its insane to expect them to be mature from the start but what gains are we going to see for this late product by software alone? Will it be enough to out pace a hardware and software set thats already out performing it whilst doing more work!
This puts you into a bind, the waiting game, will the promise of performance be kept? Will it be worth the wait? Finally when do you stop waiting? My current advice to brake someone in the "oh something better is about to be released" cycle for building/upgrading is that it always happens, and that they should set a price point and performance point and build to that specification.
In my eyes its not worth the gamble, although I'm not even started to collect the money to build a new system, this card has already fallen very low on the list of what might be chosen.
For the lower cards they may find their place in the media center especially the fanless $99 card, good video acceleration for newer intensive formats and no fan could be a win, but the performance offerings are a little too soft.
I haven't been keeping up with hardware that much but as far as the card that was released yesterday goes:
It costs more than its competitor.
It does not preform as well
It draws ALOT of power
It draws even MORE when its hot
When you add that all up it doesn't equal a win. We are all hoping for drivers to come and open up the heavens of which could happen, the one feature that they intend to support and it is the future and it will work may just pan out, however on the same fence we have that these games, this competing card aren't as new as their offering. I know these drivers are still in their infancy and its insane to expect them to be mature from the start but what gains are we going to see for this late product by software alone? Will it be enough to out pace a hardware and software set thats already out performing it whilst doing more work!
This puts you into a bind, the waiting game, will the promise of performance be kept? Will it be worth the wait? Finally when do you stop waiting? My current advice to brake someone in the "oh something better is about to be released" cycle for building/upgrading is that it always happens, and that they should set a price point and performance point and build to that specification.
In my eyes its not worth the gamble, although I'm not even started to collect the money to build a new system, this card has already fallen very low on the list of what might be chosen.
For the lower cards they may find their place in the media center especially the fanless $99 card, good video acceleration for newer intensive formats and no fan could be a win, but the performance offerings are a little too soft.
I don't care how other review sites called it but in my eyes it IS a flop. It came way late after similar generation of Nvidia's cards, it is barely able to perform at the same level as 8800GTS 640MB while consuming a significantly more electricity (I'm an efficiency freak so even this alone makes it a flop) and while having a significantly higher price (I can buy the 8800GTS 640MB card for the total cost of $320 (after all the rebates) today, and it might drop in price to less than $300 in next couple of months). Retarded excuses like "...but, but it might improve with new drivers!" don't work on me since same exact thing can apply to EVERY GPU (regardless of the company that designed and made it) at ANY given time (I still see performance improvements under Vista with every new Nvidia's driver release even with my old 7900GTX) 
InorganicMatter
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 15,461
Hector Ruiz, and our friendly AMD viral marketing employees (everyone know who I am talking about
).bigstusexy
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2002
- Messages
- 3,194
Oh one more thing! The current state of the card is that it leaks, now this has been said to affect power consumption but I believe that it also might have an impact on performance, and just as some cards may have lower consumption I believe some may perform differently, and while this is the case with any mass produced product I weary that this product may vary more wildly than normal, that too is not acceptable.
Option four: It depends on how good the overclocking is.
There was some talk of the XTX being the XT after you pour a crapton more voltage into it. If you can buy a card priced around the GTS and get something that performs around the GTX, I don't see how that can be all bad (assuming you don't care about the power and heat issues!).
There was some talk of the XTX being the XT after you pour a crapton more voltage into it. If you can buy a card priced around the GTS and get something that performs around the GTX, I don't see how that can be all bad (assuming you don't care about the power and heat issues!).
Diablo2K
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2000
- Messages
- 6,794
Wait and See? How are they going to fix the power leaks with anything other than a hardware change, and then its no longer going to be a HD 2900 XT. that power leak just increases heat and increases the noise lvl as everyone will have to run with higher CFM fans to get rid of the heat. Plus alot of people will have to upgrade there PSU for this card because of the power leak, and for what! Less performance, I don't think so!
kirbyrj
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2005
- Messages
- 30,693
HD 2950 here we come .
.... to be honest, I don't think FLOP is a strong enough word. I was REALLY hoping that AMD would pull through and wipe the floor with Nvidia (I own a X1900XT and 8800 GTS (320)) just so that Nvidia has to respond with lower prices and later on a better card. The fact that this card has all the issues it does, and that it is coming to us 6 months after the offerings from Nvidia ... it's just sad.
Now all this is going to do is encourage Nvidia to hike prices higher as they now have complete control over the high-end market.
shit...
Now all this is going to do is encourage Nvidia to hike prices higher as they now have complete control over the high-end market.
shit...
Well, I think most people know my thoughts on the card, but I'll share them in this thread too.
I think that the technology behind R600 is interesting and in many ways it is very forward thinking as I am sure many of us would agree. The problem is that the execution in the here and now leaves something to be desired.
Yes the R600 trades blows with the 8800GTS in many games. It does so by generating more heat, making more noise, and by costing a fair amount of money more at present. The prices will likely settle down and that's a good thing, but the heat and noise are not. Granted there are people who downplay the importance of those two factors and some people flat out don't care about those two issues. To be frank I only would care about those two things given certain circumstances.
I think we waited along time for something that should have been a match for the 8800GTX or Ultra and what we got was something that is only about as good as the 8800GTS with some give and take. That's not quite as big a loss as NV30 was for NVIDIA, but it's not what I'd call a win either. Even if they sell decent quantities of them in the total production run, they probably won't come near the 8800GTS sales. What about costs of development? I don't think AMD/Intel/NVIDIA or ATI ever expect to recoupe R&D costs off the high end parts but rather the mainstream parts.
I wouldn't call R600 a flop as there is alot of technological potential in the design down the road. Certainly ATI has laid the foundation for bigger and better things with this architecture and we also haven't seen the mid range cards yet. It is very possible that we will see compelling parts that are a better buy than NVIDIA's parts at the $100, $200, $250, and $300 price points. So as I said I wouldn't quite call R600 a flop, but I would call the HD 2900XT itself a flop. It's too little and too late for something that is close to being just as good as the compeitition.
I think that the technology behind R600 is interesting and in many ways it is very forward thinking as I am sure many of us would agree. The problem is that the execution in the here and now leaves something to be desired.
Yes the R600 trades blows with the 8800GTS in many games. It does so by generating more heat, making more noise, and by costing a fair amount of money more at present. The prices will likely settle down and that's a good thing, but the heat and noise are not. Granted there are people who downplay the importance of those two factors and some people flat out don't care about those two issues. To be frank I only would care about those two things given certain circumstances.
I think we waited along time for something that should have been a match for the 8800GTX or Ultra and what we got was something that is only about as good as the 8800GTS with some give and take. That's not quite as big a loss as NV30 was for NVIDIA, but it's not what I'd call a win either. Even if they sell decent quantities of them in the total production run, they probably won't come near the 8800GTS sales. What about costs of development? I don't think AMD/Intel/NVIDIA or ATI ever expect to recoupe R&D costs off the high end parts but rather the mainstream parts.
I wouldn't call R600 a flop as there is alot of technological potential in the design down the road. Certainly ATI has laid the foundation for bigger and better things with this architecture and we also haven't seen the mid range cards yet. It is very possible that we will see compelling parts that are a better buy than NVIDIA's parts at the $100, $200, $250, and $300 price points. So as I said I wouldn't quite call R600 a flop, but I would call the HD 2900XT itself a flop. It's too little and too late for something that is close to being just as good as the compeitition.
vodkajello
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2004
- Messages
- 87
I wouldn't call it a flop yet.
Just not what everyone was waiting for and expecting.
This part badly needs a die shrink to get power consumption down.
There is a possibility that with all the crazy new shader hardware and memory scheme that it will be really strong in DX10 titles. But if that is the case they are building this part too soon. They should still have a big focus on DX9 games which will be 95% of what comes out this year.
I'm hoping they are just building for the future and when this new tech matures with the next offering it will be competitive in power consumption, performance and price. Right now the only thing this card has going for it is that it is roughly the same price as the competition.
This is clearly a stepping stone product. The new architecture should really start showing good numbers when everything is refined in the "R700" revision.
Until then nvidia looks cooler and faster for the same money. So ATI really doesn't have much to work with in the short term, at least in DX9 games.
Just not what everyone was waiting for and expecting.
This part badly needs a die shrink to get power consumption down.
There is a possibility that with all the crazy new shader hardware and memory scheme that it will be really strong in DX10 titles. But if that is the case they are building this part too soon. They should still have a big focus on DX9 games which will be 95% of what comes out this year.
I'm hoping they are just building for the future and when this new tech matures with the next offering it will be competitive in power consumption, performance and price. Right now the only thing this card has going for it is that it is roughly the same price as the competition.
This is clearly a stepping stone product. The new architecture should really start showing good numbers when everything is refined in the "R700" revision.
Until then nvidia looks cooler and faster for the same money. So ATI really doesn't have much to work with in the short term, at least in DX9 games.
pmrdij
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 197
i went with the middle ground here as there may yet be a positive future. i agree with many of the points that Kyle, Brent and others have brought up but at the same time i am a 1280x1024 gamer due to 17" LCD's respectively so the card not playing well with anything above that resolution in most titles doesn't bother me. what matters to myself is the look and feel of what i play. quality settings are always turned to their max setting for any system i build and then scaled back if needed. PSU requirements have never been a factor as i am the type to expend $2xx+ on a PCP&C for each new system i make. to me if AMD/ATi can manage some more performance via driver optimization than this wouldn't be a total loss of a purchase should the price come down to being below the 8800GTS 640.
after saying all that i am aware of the fact that this card requires many quality settings to be reduced to achieve playable frame rates at 1280x1024 res. that is not worth the $399 (or $429 now on Newegg). looks like i will be going back to nVidia for the first time in almost six years.
- Robert (pMr)dEATHiNjUNE
after saying all that i am aware of the fact that this card requires many quality settings to be reduced to achieve playable frame rates at 1280x1024 res. that is not worth the $399 (or $429 now on Newegg). looks like i will be going back to nVidia for the first time in almost six years.
- Robert (pMr)dEATHiNjUNE
trinitron6_03
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 137
1. they tried
2. didnt work out as well as it SHOULD have been
3. sucks way to much power
4. still above price point IMO!!!
5. well if they can go to the 65nm process, clean that up a bit, make it run well, get rid of the ring topology in their setup (yes i believe thats partially why ati is not as good! IMO!!! PEOPLE IMO!!) and then price it even lower, i tell you what i think it will be a good card..
so no i didnt vote yet, i am going to wait and see.
2. didnt work out as well as it SHOULD have been
3. sucks way to much power
4. still above price point IMO!!!
5. well if they can go to the 65nm process, clean that up a bit, make it run well, get rid of the ring topology in their setup (yes i believe thats partially why ati is not as good! IMO!!! PEOPLE IMO!!) and then price it even lower, i tell you what i think it will be a good card..
so no i didnt vote yet, i am going to wait and see.
Exactly
I can live with heat if it allows me to buy a $400 card that performs at $500 levels.
I think it ultimately comes down to what the ASP is. If it drops down to GTS 320 levels, then it's not that bad, but the power consumption is still a problem. Assuming this card performs on par with the cheaper GTS (or even a bit better), I think I'd still go with the GTS. Electricity is constantly going up, and that's not going to change.
I really hope ATI has something faster and more efficient in the pipeline. At this point, I'm still thinking what I thought last year: "What the hell was AMD thinking when they bought ATI?"
I want competition, and right now, things are looking fairly one sided on the mid-priced CPUs and 200+ GPUs.
Luckilly for AMD, there aren't any DX10 games, so I suspect people aren't feeling the need to upgrade until a big game like Crysis comes out.
I really hope ATI has something faster and more efficient in the pipeline. At this point, I'm still thinking what I thought last year: "What the hell was AMD thinking when they bought ATI?"
I want competition, and right now, things are looking fairly one sided on the mid-priced CPUs and 200+ GPUs.
Luckilly for AMD, there aren't any DX10 games, so I suspect people aren't feeling the need to upgrade until a big game like Crysis comes out.
Flopparoony.
There may be a lot of potential in the design, but it's going to need a hardware refresh (and probably die shrink) to see it.
Overpriced. $400 is the maximum I will pay for ANY video card. $300 used to be the MSPR of new high-end cards. $600 is just F-ing ridiculous.
DX-10 is currently a non-issue.
Problem #1: It requires Vista.
Problem #s 2-19: See Problem #1.
Problem #20: There are no DX-10 games.
2900XT is only useful as a stepping stone toward the refresh.
There may be a lot of potential in the design, but it's going to need a hardware refresh (and probably die shrink) to see it.
Overpriced. $400 is the maximum I will pay for ANY video card. $300 used to be the MSPR of new high-end cards. $600 is just F-ing ridiculous.
DX-10 is currently a non-issue.
Problem #1: It requires Vista.
Problem #s 2-19: See Problem #1.
Problem #20: There are no DX-10 games.
2900XT is only useful as a stepping stone toward the refresh.
mason.kramer
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
- Messages
- 64
It's worse performing, it's louder, it's more expensive, and it draws more power. Where's the upside?
Commander Suzdal
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2004
- Messages
- 2,134
Floptacular!
It saves you money on heating? Drowns out noisy neighbours? Looks nice in 3DMark? Come on, be creative, I'm sure it has lots of uses*!
*Uses may not include playing games
how much of the performance difference is do to the 512mb vs the 768mb on the gtx? I have to admit i am greatly dissapointed in the 2900 which i have been waiting for since the 8800s were released. i may still have to go with the 2900 however seens as i have everything to run CF and not to excited to replace my board and such.
i run my games at 1900x1200 so i know it has to make some difference.
i run my games at 1900x1200 so i know it has to make some difference.
Did anyone notice the pattern here?!
nVidia worked on the Xbox, then released the FX series cards which were the biggest flops in GPU history (until now).
ATi not only worked with Nintendo AND Microsoft on their console chips but was also bought by AMD... They came out with the R600 which, like the FX 5800, is loud and sucks up much more power than the competition...
nVidia finally got their crap together because they worked with Sony on the PS3's RSX (which was just a beefy 7800 from what I've read) and still managed to keep the Perf Crown for 6 months before ATi could even think about challenging them.
Don't work with Microsoft on a console GPU unless you're ready with a kickass PC GPU!!
So, hard lesson learned, ATi/AMD! I look forward to the R700... they say that's when AMD and ATi will join their tech knowledge... the R600 is still just ATi's baby... seems like this kid came out sideways and now Momma's going to hurt for a while.
nVidia worked on the Xbox, then released the FX series cards which were the biggest flops in GPU history (until now).
ATi not only worked with Nintendo AND Microsoft on their console chips but was also bought by AMD... They came out with the R600 which, like the FX 5800, is loud and sucks up much more power than the competition...
nVidia finally got their crap together because they worked with Sony on the PS3's RSX (which was just a beefy 7800 from what I've read) and still managed to keep the Perf Crown for 6 months before ATi could even think about challenging them.
Don't work with Microsoft on a console GPU unless you're ready with a kickass PC GPU!!
So, hard lesson learned, ATi/AMD! I look forward to the R700... they say that's when AMD and ATi will join their tech knowledge... the R600 is still just ATi's baby... seems like this kid came out sideways and now Momma's going to hurt for a while.
Drivers can't fix power consumption. and if they can, not 100Watt more than the 8800 GTS which performs the same for less $$$
FLOP your Sister...
ATI tiene una arquitectura optimizada para DX10, con soporte de HD, HDMI y HDCP.
Cuando los fabricantes comienzena optimizar sus aplicaciones los "nvidiot" deberán actualizar sus mediocres piezas de tecnologia, pseudo Dx10, que solo pueden funcionar rápido en aplicaciones Dx9.
ATI tiene una arquitectura optimizada para DX10, con soporte de HD, HDMI y HDCP.
Cuando los fabricantes comienzena optimizar sus aplicaciones los "nvidiot" deberán actualizar sus mediocres piezas de tecnologia, pseudo Dx10, que solo pueden funcionar rápido en aplicaciones Dx9.
ATI should team up with Sony making Blu-Ray players with R700 chips in them. That should do the trick.
This is a flop for ATi. If the 8800 GTS can keep up and generally exceed what the 2900 can do thats pretty sad. It can hardly keep up at all with the 8800 GTX/Ultra. Seems ATi really needs to either fix their drivers or rework the GPU to lessen the power consumption as well as increase the performance.
AceGoober
Live! Laug[H]! Overclock!
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2003
- Messages
- 25,541
I voted flop because the negatives outweigh the positives.
Not a flop, but not that good.
You have some head room for driver improvement. And if that happens then it could very well be faster than the GTS (since its about the same with some sites showing faster and other sites showing slower). Then you have the overclocking and possible DX10 strengths. So while its not a great card it still does have potential and that in my book makes not really a flop.
You have some head room for driver improvement. And if that happens then it could very well be faster than the GTS (since its about the same with some sites showing faster and other sites showing slower). Then you have the overclocking and possible DX10 strengths. So while its not a great card it still does have potential and that in my book makes not really a flop.
I actually voted "not that bad". In reality, the card looks borderline competitive, and there are a couple of fairly good features. Paired with the unusually good bundles, and very interesting overclocking potential, it's actually not a tremendously poor value (though no match for the value of the GTS 320 or 640). I'd never recommend it, but I wouldn't exactly call buying one a mistake.
In time, I'm fairly sure AMD will be able to squeeze a tad bit more out of the XT while fixing the more obvious driver issues. At that point, the XT might actually be recommendable.
In time, I'm fairly sure AMD will be able to squeeze a tad bit more out of the XT while fixing the more obvious driver issues. At that point, the XT might actually be recommendable.
Cousin Patty
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 634
Flop. Why would anyone buy this unless they are uninformed? I would maybe have bought this like years ago before I did any research on PC hardware. If you're in the know, there is ZERO reason to buy this card over Nvidia. Period.
I'll translate:
ATI has an optimized architecture for DX10, with HD, HDMI and HDCP support.
When the developers start to optimize their applications, "nvidiots" will need to update their mediocre pieces of technology, pseudo DX10, which only excels in DX9.
People are seeing the here and now of the R600, not the 4-6 months down the line (probably sooner, but that is when the DX10 titles will be more prominent).
I'm not an ATi fanboy, but I can see a few new driver revisions coming out that will increase it's performance...I also have the sneaky suspicion that it was developed with more DX10 in mind and DX9 (and lower) as a sidenote.
In DX10 benchmarks it's shown to be a solid performer...better than the 8800 remains to be seen as drivers for neither aren't mature enough to really speculate. It will be several months and a few games later until we DO see which pans out to be the powerhouse.
The only thing that depresses me about it is it's price, power consumption and loud fan, but I guarantee that they'll eventually be addressed as the card is revised to a smaller die size and better fan control.
My bet for now is the 8800, for later...it's a toss up.
I'm not an ATi fanboy, but I can see a few new driver revisions coming out that will increase it's performance...I also have the sneaky suspicion that it was developed with more DX10 in mind and DX9 (and lower) as a sidenote.
In DX10 benchmarks it's shown to be a solid performer...better than the 8800 remains to be seen as drivers for neither aren't mature enough to really speculate. It will be several months and a few games later until we DO see which pans out to be the powerhouse.
The only thing that depresses me about it is it's price, power consumption and loud fan, but I guarantee that they'll eventually be addressed as the card is revised to a smaller die size and better fan control.
My bet for now is the 8800, for later...it's a toss up.
freddiepm61
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 836
The thing is objectively of itself it is a good card, however when compared to technology that is 6 months old and it just keeps up it is simply not good enough.
Moreover anyone who buys one of these will be inevitably dissapointed as the R700 will be out quite soon, and the chunky time for new games coming out is autum/winter, so might as well wait
f
Moreover anyone who buys one of these will be inevitably dissapointed as the R700 will be out quite soon, and the chunky time for new games coming out is autum/winter, so might as well wait
f
D
Deleted member 109755
Guest
ffffffllllllloooooopppppp!!!
I voted flop for now.
The tech looks good overall though. I suspect that AMD will get the kinks worked out in the next 6 months and that the followup card (Christmas ?) will put them back in the hunt with whatever Nvidia's next card brings to the table.
The tech looks good overall though. I suspect that AMD will get the kinks worked out in the next 6 months and that the followup card (Christmas ?) will put them back in the hunt with whatever Nvidia's next card brings to the table.
- Status