backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 173 comment(s) - last by subarusvx.. on May 15 at 10:21 AM

ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT puts up some impressive numbers in benchmarks

After several delays, AMD plans to launch its long-awaited R600 graphics processors. AMD is currently briefing select members of the press on its R600 architecture in the Tunisia, but there is no embargo date on the R600 for DailyTech -- we can show you benchmarks now.

AMD plans to launch a completely new DirectX 10 lineup with the flagship ATI Radeon HD 2900 XTX. Other models such as the Radeon HD 2900 XT, Radeon HD 2600-series and Radeon HD 2400-series will also join AMD’s DirectX 10 family after the initial high-end launches.

AMD equips the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT with 320 stream processors to take on NVIDIA’s GeForce 8800 GTS, which features 96 stream processors. However, AMD and NVIDIA have taken different approaches towards their unified shader designs. AMD pairs the R600 GPU with 512MB of GDDR3 memory clocked at 1.65 GHz across an eight-channel, 512-bit memory interface. In comparison, the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS features 640MB of 1.6 GHz GDDR3 memory on a 320-bit memory interface.

AMD equips the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT with a dual-slot, blower-type heat sink. Unlike the OEM Radeon HD 2900-series previously pictured, which is an 11.5” long card, the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT makes use of a smaller cooler so everything fits within the 9.5” PCB. Although the R600 GPU supports HDMI audio and video output, the reference design only features dual dual-link DVI.

Onto the benchmarks. The tests were conducted on an Intel D975XBX2 BadAxe2, Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 and 2x1GB DDR2-800 MHz. The operating system on the test system was Windows XP, with a fresh install before benchmarking each card. Testing of the AMD ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT was performed using the 8.361 Catalyst RC4 drivers, while the GeForce 8800 GTS used ForceWare 158.19 drivers.

All game tests were run with the maximum detail settings at resolutions of 1280x1024. Futuremark’s 3DMark06 was tested with the default settings. Although we ran the benchmarks on our PC, we were not supplied a monitor for testing higher resolutions.

Gaming: Maximum Quality, 1280x1024
Game
AMD ATI Radeon
HD 2900 XT
NVIDIA GeForce
8800 GTS 640MB
Call of Duty 2
73.5 FPS
56.7 FPS
Company of Heroes
92.1 FPS
90.1 FPS
F.E.A.R.84.0 FPS
83.3 FPS
Half Life 2: Episode 1 112.0 FPS57.4 FPS *
Oblivion
47.9 FPS
39.5 FPS
3DMark06
11447
9836

* Our benchmarks for Half Life 2: Episode 1 showed an abnormal framerate for the NVIDIA GeForce  8800 GTS card that scaled with lower resolutions -- we believe there was a copy error. We reran the tests this morning and achieved 119.2 frames per second with the GeForce 8800 GTS.

The following benchmarks were performed under SPECviewperf 9.

Workstation: Maximum Quality, 1280x1024
Game
AMD ATI Radeon
HD 2900 XT
NVIDIA Quadro
FX 5500 (G71)
Cadalyst C2006
314
243
Autodesk 3ds Max v8 OpenGL
129
101
Autodesk 3ds Max v8 D3D
342
242
Catia 02
56.73
44.87
Maya 02
224.59
142.18

Expect AMD to pull the wraps off its DirectX 10 product line up in mid-May, with value, midrange and high end models to boot. AMD’s flagship ATI Radeon HD 2900-series will have two models at launch – the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XTX and the HD 2900 XT. The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XTX models feature 1GB of GDDR4 memory while the lower HD 2900 XT features 512 MB.

The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT is poised to have a street price approximately the same as the GeForce 8800 GTS, which currently has a suggested retailer price of $449.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Impressive
By osalcido on 4/24/2007 5:46:52 AM , Rating: 3
those numbers are damn good for an equally priced competitor to the 8800gts.. let's hope that this is not another ati paper launch tho




RE: Impressive
By ashishmishra on 4/24/2007 5:58:18 AM , Rating: 3
Impressive numbers indeed, though FEAR numbers somehow seem too low in comparison to 8800GTS, may be some driver issue holding back performance there. Also 8800GTS's score for Episode 1 seems low, unless maximum quality means something like 16X MSAA 16X AF.


RE: Impressive
By Hypernova on 4/24/2007 6:23:50 AM , Rating: 3
At 1280x1024 I would say it's CPU bottle necked. Definitely needs more testing at high res.


RE: Impressive
By Roland702 on 4/24/2007 9:01:38 AM , Rating: 3
While I would normally consider this res to be bottlenecked I would like to see a comparison at the higher resolutions to see how they fair. I would assume both cards to be bottlenecked at this resolution.

AMD/ATI Also claims to have "free AA", but I would say they are using bottlenecked resolution and turning on AA/AF as "free and not performance taxing"...


RE: Impressive
By retrospooty on 4/24/2007 10:00:32 AM , Rating: 3
yes... Todays cards cant be stretched until at least 1600x1200@4xAA.


RE: Impressive
By Slaimus on 4/24/2007 10:35:39 AM , Rating: 3
Something is not right here: these 1280x1024 frame rates are quite low for these super high end cards.


RE: Impressive
By Justin Case on 4/24/2007 2:00:49 PM , Rating: 3
I take it that "maximum settings" includes maximum AA, which means that in fact the card is rendering at much higher resolutions.


RE: Impressive
By Araemo on 4/24/2007 4:34:36 PM , Rating: 3
No, I don't know of any consumer-level card that still renders at a higher resolution for anti-aliasing. Every card I know of does multi-sampling(rather than super-sampling, which is what you are referring to.)

Multi-sampling involves running PART of the rendering pipeline at a higher resolution, and then tossing out the rest for most pixels. Only pixels that are identified to be on a triangle boundary get rendered as more pixels(and then down-sampled into one pixel).

Both ATI and nVidia are trying to do partial texture anti-aliasing, but neither seems to do it all the way unless there is a transparency affecting the current pixel.

I would really like to see real SSAA again, but I don't expect it any time soon.

That all said: Yes, MSAA still incurs a performance hit, but it is much less than it would actually take to render the scene at a higher resolution and then downsample it to your screen resolution.


RE: Impressive
By Justin Case on 4/29/2007 12:34:55 AM , Rating: 2
Determining if a pixel lies at a polygon boundary requires a good deal of calculations. And with high polygon count models, a very significant number of pixels does lie on a polygon boundary. So 1280x1024 is likely to mean at least 4x that much in terms of samples per frame.

As long as you have good anisotropic filtering, there is no real advantage to full supersampling.


RE: Impressive
By StarOrbiter on 4/25/2007 4:04:10 PM , Rating: 2
It is indeed ...


RE: Impressive
By puffpio on 4/24/2007 12:57:44 PM , Rating: 4
If it's CPU bottlenecked, shouldn't they both achieve around the same framerate as both cards would be waiting on the CPU?

some of those test show this..but CoD doesn't look CPU limited since the framerate is so different


RE: Impressive
By idconstruct on 4/25/2007 12:23:58 PM , Rating: 2
they were only talking about teh FEAR benchmark... in which they DO have almost identical framerates.

It makes sense though since FEAR is frequently bottlenecked by the cpu


RE: Impressive
By tuteja1986 on 4/25/2007 3:07:46 AM , Rating: 2
Woo , My buddy is angry after i sent him a link... a month ago he bought a used FX 5500 for $1700 and now he see it getting beaten up so badly by a $400 to $500 card. Anyways the card is looking very good and i would love to see my DX10 benchmark of games like Crysis , UT2007 and Alan Wake.


RE: Impressive
By ssidbroadcast on 4/25/2007 5:42:42 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Woo , My buddy is angry after i sent him a link... a month ago he bought a used FX 5500 for $1700


lmao. Really wow? I'd have to be super-retarded to pay $1,700 for a FX 5500 ...

/giving the benefit of the doubt. U prbly meant something else.


RE: Impressive
By PlasmaBomb on 4/25/2007 8:12:43 AM , Rating: 2
He is referring to the Quadro line of professional cards for the like of CAD, which cost a fortune.