What is Digg?83 Comments
- snowbeast, on 10/11/2007, -7/+42Nice review and just as I suspected, ATI laid a big honking turd. As a fanATIc this is a huge kick to the nuts, no matter what ATI does to the drivers.
Looks like I am in for my first nVidia card in at least 4 years, 8800 GTX it is. Thanks for nothing AMD/ATI, thanks for nothing......
Oops... sorry, thanks for the long ass 6 month wait you jackasses. ok, I feel better... - falloutsyndrome, on 10/11/2007, -0/+33More expensive, no open source drivers, slower . . . does it have any pluses? Seriously. I feel bad for AMD/ATi at the moment. They used to be so much better than this.
- PATSCRU, on 10/11/2007, -3/+28yeah, wake me up in 2012
- EzarKun, on 10/11/2007, -3/+25Yup, I was suspecting this. I ordered my eVGA 640MB 8800GTS last week.
Great review on the card guys. - GhostCow, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16Why type the acronym just to type the whole thing right after?
- calebb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14No kidding!
The 8800GTS performs significantly better than the 2900XT in all real world benchmarks... except the "3DMark 2006 game," where the HD 2900 XT really shines. Almost 20% faster than the 8800GTS. What the....
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=816850 - Maenor, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16Another great [H] review, but especially check out this section: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM0MSwxNywsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q= (scroll down to the "3DMark Numbers Mean Squat" section)
Who cares if it beats even the GTX (when easily OC'd) in '06 or any other 3DMark? It chugs more juice than a GTX, with less performance at a higher price than a GTS. - chingy1788, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14AMD and ATI should get a divorce...
- endlessrayne, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14great writeup. very informative and unbiased, as usual.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13Let's see whether or not the R700 can bring some real competition to the market.
- LLamaStar, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15nice. makes me feel better about my 8800 gtx's.
- AceGoober, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Great article guys. :)
Correct me if I am wrong but nVidia had a similar situation a few years ago. I believe the 2900XT to be a interim solution. - warriorscot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I dont understand how they managed to screw it up, the early prototype cards that were tested had phenomenal performance, where did they go. If AMD are just turning ATI into a maker of low to mid end solutions like intel ill not buy anything from either of them again.
- Prod1702, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8AMD/ATI was what i always bought but it is sad now that i have left both company's and went for Nvidia and Intel. Great review by [H] on this one. I love the part where they said ATI said that they don't need to put out a faster card because of Crossfire. Well here is to the 5800.
- dasilva333, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8" As it stands right now the Radeon HD 2900 XT, in our opinion, is a flop. "
- NeoHumanity, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Eh, it's not as big of a disappointment as the GeForce FX was back in the day, but after so many delays and with such high power consumption... Meh.
- Stevethegreat, on 10/11/2007, -3/+96 month ago I bought a card named 8800GTX, everybody asked me why hadn't I waited for ATI's response, I was/am not much of anyone's fanboy but I figured out that 8800 series is truly a technological marvel. At that point it was beating the crossfired/sli'ed cards of the previous gen on their own league (DX 9.0) while utilizing only a margin of its true power since it is designed to run on unified architecture environment (DX10). Now six months later it seems I was right, the DX10 results already seem exceptional compared to the competition while it's still the king of the hill on the previous gen, DX 9.0 applications. I think the 88xx series is the longest running champion by a big margin in GX cards' history, which makes them the best high end cards ever made (in relevance with the time they were released), as it seems nVidia gave a 2008 technology on the late 2006s. Seeing how hard it is for ATI to compete on such levels it makes me twice as happy for buying the first high end card which had great performance for price ratio.
On a different note, ATI's falling back is a bad development for the market since in absence of competition nVidia releases mid-end cards for 230 bucks, *cough* 8600gts *cough*, which is ultimately bad for the costumer, I hope ATI will gain its edge again, otherwise it may cripple AMD too, making Intel and nVidia the two evil empires on the pc market.... - SVPirate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6This kinda marginalizes the announcement AMD made about supplying open video drivers - who's gonna want them if the cards still lag behind NVIDIA?
*mails more Asprin to AMD*
Keep trying guys... - somecallmeTim, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Running straight benchmarks the card sits between the 8800GTS and 8800GTX at the same resolution and settings, but real world performance it just doesn't stack up - unless you run benchmarks on your computer all day I'm not sure if they are a good guide as they used to be. Interesting tho.
You are right in that AMD/ATi should not be discounted... anyone remember NVIDIA's FX series... especially the 5800? Yah, big flop there.
For $400, I would still put my money into NVIDIA today. - pennyfx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5i want to see some supreme commander benchmarks.. DX10!
- silenteulogy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6I think it's time we started looking more carefully at the performance/wattage ratio. We are fast approaching computers that will draw too much power for a standard 110V outlet. Low-power consumption will be a definitive criteria for future computer parts I purchase.
- evil-doer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5its upgrade time for me next month and its a big change. ive used amd cpus and ati videocards for many many years. now im going with intel and nvidia. gotta go with price/performance over any fanboy issues.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Same here. I recently went from my X2 to intel's E6600 and ATI graphics to an 8800.
Hopefully by this time next year AMD/ATI will have something that makes me want to swi - syafthegeek, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4ExtremeTech reviewed it and it consumes a lot of power even when in idle state. Well you gotta have a better power supply for this one.
- 3xch4ng3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Wow.... ATI's R600 series was suppose to be the "nVidia Killer" like the 9700 Pro was. Looks like they fumbled on this play.
- superdupergc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3they're getting open source drivers soon... don't panic.
- Piglith, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3ATI would be better off moving their development into their next 2 gens of cards or they won't be able to catch up. From what nVidia has in the labs, they have quite a few more tricks up their sleeves.
- erikerikerik, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3yup.
8800GTS all the way. At the time I could not justify the nearly $100 more for the GTX flavor for an average of 10FPS on the higher end of the FPS spectrum.
-
note how no one bitches now about having a duel slot cooler. Remember that the big hub'bub was the fact that the 5800Ultra used a duel slot cooler.
-
At first we resist change, then embrace it. - Caffeinate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Looks like the 8800 GTS is the card to have this generation. I'm guessing that there won't be any price drops on NVidia cards until the "new" wears off of the 2900 and they drop in price, causing some real competition. At ~$300, the 2900 is a good deal, as opposed to the 320MB GTS (provided you already have a good power supply). At ~$399, there is absolutely no reason to pass on the 640MB GTS in favor of the 2900.
Unfortunately, the 2900 doesn't provide the competition that I was hoping for. I'm guessing that it won't even be competing with the 640 GTS for long, unless some truly phenomenal drivers get released. The battle is going to be between the 320MB GTS & the 2900.
As much as I love AMD processors, AMD video cards have little to offer me this time around now that they also sell video cards. Once again, it just goes to show that in the tech industry, delays = disaster. Just look at the last few delayed "tech marvels": Vista and the PS3.
Here's hoping that AMD gets it together and gets rid of some of the old ATI management and marketing dummies that let this one slip through the cracks. I have faith in the ATI engineers, but the rest of them need to go. - SteveMax, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4smills, they do an "apples to apples" benchmark if you want that too. It's just that you won't play exactly in the benchmarked resolution+settings, you will play with the best settings you can in a given system. What they show is "how far can you go with this card, using the same CPU", or "which card will allow you to play those games with higher settings and/or resolution"; or, if you want, "in which card you will get the biggest 'bang'". The FPS values they get are not that important, what matters is the resolution and settings they are able to play. Just like when you have one in your computer.
- dstew74, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4One digg for referencing football in regards to a video card... although to me it looks like they showed up with a jv team to the varsity game.
- michaelothomas, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Yeah the card turned out pretty crappy overall. It's hotter, louder, slower, more expensive, and has inferior image quality than even the GTS.
More reviews listed here:
http://www.gpureview.com/Radeon-HD-2900-XT-card-518.html
But they all show pretty much the same thing. - SteveMax, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6IIRC = If I Recall Correctly, not Researched. He used the acronym with a different meaning than the usual, therefore comes the explanation.
- snowbeast, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3This 2900XT release reminds me of a rather notable movie quote " Joe, what you got there is one big piece of poopy". I agree with bamb00, this thing should not have costed more than the 8500 launch price of $299.
- ajbird, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Great review - this is the 3rd one I have read which says basically the same thing - the other are here if anyone is interested
http://www.hothardware.com/articles/ATI_Radeon_HD_2900_XT__R600_Has_Arrived/?page=14
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1100/15/page_15_final_thoughts/index.html
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM0MSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA== - GnomeTank, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2This isn't entirely shocking to me. Reports and rumors have been floating around since the 8800 released that ATI/AMD was having problems. The rumors that they pooched the architecture and were having to throw raw power at the chip to make it faster seem to have been true. It does draw way too much power for the performance, even at that price point. It's not a terrible card, but it surely doesn't stack up to what Nvidia put out six months ago. Look, I am willing to give ATI/AMD a free pass on this one. I already own a pair of 8800GTS's (the 640 meg ones), so I am not out on a limb having waited for a disappointing card. That said, they need to get it together with the R700. The R600 was the first post-merger card, so we should have expected some bumps. Every company is allowed their "FX/P4" fiasco, and this is AMD/ATI's. Even as a die hard "Nvidia Guy", I hope ATI bounces back. I loved my 9800 series card, and competition is always good for the market.
- jhugg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Well, there's been a big push for less wattage on the CPU front, and I think the GPU is going to be seeing something similar soon. I'd like to think 1000watt power supplies are something we'll laugh about in a few years. My new Athlon X2 is rated at 63W and my old Althon 64 was pumping out 90W. This is a good thing.
- BamB00, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2very disappoint by its performance and especially pricing, most 8800gts 640mb were only cost ~$340 with rebate. IMO 2900xt should list itself as $299 not $399.
- jslone, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Very disapointing.
I've always been a die hard AMD and ATI fan, but they both have been putting out crap. For the first time ever, my next system will be Intel/Nvidia, *cry*. - syafthegeek, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3AMD/ATI got it all wrong this time. If they want to get back in the race, they better fix it.
- DeadlyAura, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2To comment on the setting being different. [H]ard does this in order to get a comparison between the cards that is as even as possible. And, since the setting changes were in favor of the 2900, it makes it even easier to see that the 2900 is just not up to par.
- cthellis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The fumbling kinda hops around from generation to generation. I imagine the "it's ATi's turn" is also exacerbated by changes in their development process after the acquisition by AMD and other factors. Certainly they farked around this time, but the companies have been running at pretty much parity for the past two generations (except nVidia's SLI headstart).
Plus, when one of them ***** up a release, they tend to make up for it later on with redesigns and more mature drivers. (See "nVidia" and "5800")
We'll have to see, but certainly for now there seems to be absolutely no reason to look at a x2900. I'd wait until December (and sales/price drops!) to see what the situation is like.
The real wildcard for it all will be when Intel re-enters that segment. Not that I've seen much news on that front yet... - djbon2112, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2A little sad, I expected a lot more given the hype. Oh well, bye bye AMD, unless Barcelona RAPES the C2D in raw performance.
- stephenwq, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Though thats not exactly relevant to this article, as it clearly states that this card pulls more power than the GTS, which is the closest it can be compared to.
- timvidal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I had some high expectations of the 2900 but then again this is not the card to compete with the 8800 ultra. Seems ATI/AMD is having some major problems still. Looks like i will buying a new nvidia card this year when I upgrade.
- mitrovarr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I can't believe a company actually put out a card that takes 100W over a 8800 GTS. I mean, the GTS is already a behemoth, it's almost a full length card, it takes two slots, the damn thing runs at up to 80C at load, and the power consumption is already ridiculous. Now ATI cranks something out that is even worse, with no more performance? AMD and ATI need to improve their chip fabs and get their die size down, and stop it with the brute force engineering - you practically have to buy a 1kw power supply and a portable generator if you want to run one of AMD's 2x2 quad core attempts with a pair of their video cards, and you could probably use it to heat your house in the winter.
- RyeBrye, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Due to poor driver support on linux, this $399 beast of a video card will be easily outperformed by a $50 nVidia card in HD video playback. (ATI, even with binary drivers, has no xvmc support - which is extremely lame)
I will never buy ATI until their cards actually work under linux. - Snyder, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@ erikerikerik
Who said we have "embraced" dual slot coolers? We buy them because they are the only option in the high end. I love my 8800 GTS, but it's blocking one of my ***** PCIe ports. - Caffeinate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I second that agreement. $399 is too much for this card. If you don't already have a hell of a power supply, you will need to upgrade that, too, before getting it. I'd go so far as to say it would be a good buy at $250.
One bright spot, though - HD2600 is on 65nm, and therefore is going to be power efficient and won't run so hot. It might turn out to be the real bargain of the DX10 cards (though arguably the 320MB GTS is probably the best buy available for anyone wanting to run at 1680X1050 and below). - Ricochetbiscuit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1HotHardware's thoughts on the product are here: http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI_Radeon_HD_2900_XT__R600_Has_Arrived/
From the summary:
"To summarize, the $399 Radeon HD 2900 XT is a feature rich, DX 10 class graphics card that competes relatively well with a standard GeForce 8800 GTS in many aspects, except power consumption. We wished it was more, but a company can pull only so many Radeon 9700-type launches out of their hat. Over time, the Radeon HD 2900 XT is likely to become a somewhat stronger product due to more finely tuned drivers and continued tweaks made to TSMC's manufacturing process, but for now it is what it is. And who knows what ATI has in store over the next few months. If I was a betting man, I'd say a new high-end GPU manufactured at 65nm will arrive sooner rather than later. " -
Show 51 - 80 of 80 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is