Graphic Cards ATI R520 scores 10K+ in 3Dmark05

bottle

bottle

Caffeine Addict
Forerunner
"Fudo" to beat two 6800 Ultra SLI
DESPITE WHAT people were claiming, the G70 will score better than the 7800. The card never got the 7800 suffix based on its 3Dmark05 score and if it was number would end up significantly bigger. It's actually going to be quite better but still not as good as the "Fudo" R520.

We got some numbers from this card and it turns out that R520 scores more than 10000 in 3Dmark05. We still don't know its clock speeds but we know the score. For what we know Nvidia can not mach this with G70.

This is actually even better or equal to two 6800 Ultra cards in SLI which kinds of makes it looks ridiculously fast. Imagine R520 in Crossfire, what ATI "cool chap" described as "Coolest technology ever" could do? Just double the number please.

No question that R520, Fudo will be fast the only questions remains are when is it going to be out and when it will actually be available. We will hopefully found out more soon

From [RANK="www.theinquirer.net/?article=23752"]Inquirer[/RANK]
 
FanATic talk.....Anyway INQ=NO CREDIBILITY.So take this with a pinch of salt.
Even 2day the 6800U is beaten by the X850 in 3dmark'05 ,games however tell a different story.
 
The X850XT is a clock bump to the X800XT...launched many months later.Its ATI's 5900.
As for the INQ-its greater than 7800 but less than 10k.What kind of maths do they want to play?
Nvidia's "improved" products have been better historically,the 9800 pro wasn't too much of a jump from the 9700 but the GF4 Ti was a signifcant improvement over the GF3.(Until they fell into the fx trap and created a whole lot of unneeded stuff into NV30 and neglected shader perf.Its even believed that NV3X is glide-capable(!!!) coz the people who were designing it thought the NV30 and Geforce "fx" would be a fitting tribute to 3DFX.LOL.If only they had put more shader units into their core...)
Seeing is believing AFAIK and INQ=BS.So unless I read a review at Anandtech or Xbit I would reserve judgement.
 
Clock bump or not, it offers better performance. Nvidia is not immune to the speed bump too Geforce 3 ti 500, Full FX line, Geforce 4 ti series in AGP 8x, Geforce 2 ultra etc....

And How can I forget the infamous Geforce 4 mx series... Sheez looking at GTA SA post by quicksilver, one more game that card wont be able to play. Nvidia though did superficially ammend that by enabling the new technologies across their entire product line.
 
Yes u r right about that Aces but consider what ATi was doing each time ,during the product generations u mentioned....
The R300 has been ATi's sole wonder -full credit goes to them for that.But I don't think a wiser Nvidia will ever allow that to repeat.Lets wait for a true benchmark to come out and not waste time on speculative bs from INQ.
Too much GF4 MX bashing is done for all the wrong reasons esp. for the GF4 MX-it was supposed to be mid to low level card in 2002 and it did a fine job at that.At that time ATi had only the 8500 against the gf4 ti and the 7500 against the gf4mx and the gf4mx was better than 7500 anyday.
Why curse a '02 era card for not playing 2day's games?
Infact I feel be it ATi or Nvidia two things must be done:
The 64-bit cards must be discarded.And 128-bit cards with run of the mill ddr400 should take their place in low-end sector.
All mid range cards must move to 256-bit interface.The cost increase can be minimized by using slower 3.6-2.8ns ddr(most of which can run at 650-740mhz anyway).So the memory bw on the mid-level cards like the 6600gt would increase significantly.
 
Well becuase it misled ppl, pure and simple they thought it was a better card then geforce 3 which it clearly was not. Nvidia also agreed to their mistake and if you notice now Fx 5200, as well as 6200 series support the new technologies.

Its like getting a 2 year old technology, rehashing it and slotting it with the current generations, imagine a Radeon 8500 being given a minor bump and re-releasing it as X800 mx....
 
Its not ATI vs Nvidia........................:bleh:
its Aces vs Undertaker .....................AGAIn :P

Rockyme2002 posted 1.72 minutes later:
hellscream666 said:
I use NVIDIA and that has always worked better than my Roomy who has got ATI.....think NVIDIA is the best
Click to expand...
yeah same here....

have got a 6600gt nd my friend has a 9200 , i kick his ass ;)

cmon maan , which cards r u takin bout, compare cards of the same league :tongue:
 
Well in all fairness ,yes the naming on the GF4 MX was misleading but despite that lets not forget that during gf3's reign the $100-150 sector was dominated by the gf2 Ti(the gf3 ti 200 was $200+ at launch),so the $100 GF4-MX was meant to replace the gf2 Ti and it did a good job at that.
It was also the first card to be available at "decent" prices here(relative to then then prevailing situation in the market) that provided decent gaming in games of that age(02-03).
Even today the tax+margin ovehead on cards here is over 3k which is unacceptable.
Give me a $120-130 (i.e. 5-6k)9800 pro as it sells abroad and I'll be a fanatic tomorrow. :rofl:
I think discussions on video cards must be split in two :
1.Relating to products in Indian market
2.Relating to those in Intl. market namely that of the US.
 
undertaker said:
Too much GF4 MX bashing is done for all the wrong reasons esp. for the GF4 MX-it was supposed to be mid to low level card in 2002 and it did a fine job at that.At that time ATi had only the 8500 against the gf4 ti and the 7500 against the gf4mx and the gf4mx was better than 7500 anyday.
Click to expand...
Why are you comparing a 7500 to a gf4mx when they were released almost 2 years apart.
And the 8500 was a competitor to the gf3 ti500, not the gf4ti.
Ati had no card to compete with the gf4ti till when they suddenly pulled out the 9700 pro and made history.
There's a reason it's called the best video card ever built.
Such brute force that it can run most games at high resolutions with aa even 3 years after it's release.

Indian pricing is not a factor to dislike ati.
Microsoft sells games at 3k when people aren't ready to pay even 1500.
That doesn't make them a bad developer, specially when they have yet to release a game title that was bad enough to be even called 'mediocre'.
Infact they are so good, they could easily be the next blizzard.
 
"Indian pricing is not a factor to dislike ati"
As long u have to buy from India,it is.I felt sick when all I could get for my 6200 bucks($140 then) was a 5700LE here(or a 9550 for about 500 more from powercrapper).But this is Indian HW market, where the piggish-hw mandiwallah rules. :@
Nvidia's 6600Gt is finally available for a not-too-bad price of 9-10k.Compare that with anything ATi has to offer in either AGP or PCI-E.
 
Inquirer is not a review site hence how can anybody claim it to be "biased". ?????

it is just a "reporting" site. they publish what they hear from their sources. they cannot, and do not, make objective judgements per se but report what goes on behind the scenes.

hence although they might not be 100% correct all the time (bcuz of their sources) they do have a hit rate of around 80%.
meaning about 80 % of the time what they report comes out to be true.

hence it is unwise to give them a "biased" or "crap" or whatever badge / title unnecessarily.

infact other more popular sites such as tom's and anand have more commercial interests in their reporting ..... which is understandable as it brings them much needed revenue.
i remember about 4 to 5 years ago Tom's were virtually financed by MSI......
 
deejay said:
Inquirer is not a review site hence how can anybody claim it to be "biased". ?????

it is just a "reporting" site. they publish what they hear from their sources. they cannot, and do not, make objective judgements per se but report what goes on behind the scenes.

hence although they might not be 100% correct all the time (bcuz of their sources) they do have a hit rate of around 80%.
meaning about 80 % of the time what they report comes out to be true.

hence it is unwise to give them a "biased" or "crap" or whatever badge / title unnecessarily.

infact other more popular sites such as tom's and anand have more commercial interests in their reporting ..... which is understandable as it brings them much needed revenue.
i remember about 4 to 5 years ago Tom's were virtually financed by MSI......
Click to expand...
AFAIK Tom's HW has always awarded ASUS products more in comparison to MSI.Though u do see a lot of MSI adverts there.
 
AFAIK Tom's HW has always awarded ASUS products more in comparison to MSI.Though u do see a lot of MSI adverts there.
Click to expand...

Nah they rated an MSI k7n2 delta over Asus a7n8x dls, though the delta was a good board a7n8x was easily better. They were also nvidiots before...

Btw we are taking the global perspective here, just because ATI does not have a presence here does not mean they are bad. Face it India is not a market for gfx cards will not be one for years to come.
 
They gave their readers coice award to the A7N8X.BTW the K7N2 Delta was better,no question about it-three phase voltage regulators,better overclocking,and a 12v connector-making it a better board anyday.
 
Thats not the only judge of a board.The nf2 boards varied greatly in their oc-ability even among the same brand.As an average,only the EPOX 8RDA and the ABIT NF7 were exceptional due to vdd control.
My board won't go past 210mhz,on devhardware their A7N8X-X stopped at 205mhz while on another site this same board A7N8X-X reached 230mhz!
Xbitlabs got an A7N8X-Del to run at 217mhz for a week and then it died.A7N8X boards were moderate overclockers on average.
 
Back
Top