[ati-forum]5800s and 5700s not at full potential

[timw4mail]

Originally Posted by saulin

It's called dedicated PhysX. That's normal. Basically you are using the Nvidia card only for PhysX so it gives you better results than using the card for everything. That card is kind of weak to be used for both. Well you won't max your games wit it. That's for sure.

Well, it used to be that I'd get better results using only the 8800GTs, so something changed.

[Clockadile Dundee]

Originally Posted by timw4mail

Well, it used to be that I'd get better results using only the 8800GTs, so something changed.

The way the benchmark doles out points, seems to be what changed.

This is so that when you plug in a dedicated PhysX card, you say "Wow, my score went up".

Whether this is an appropriate way to measure performance, I am not necessarily rendering a judgment, but never the less, this leaves benchers with only one option: a dedicated PhysX PPU.


Saulin: I think you if you look over my posts, you will see that your claim that I lavished ATI cards with praise is utterly baseless.

I only intend to refer to the consensus opinion of the current model at hand, and that it is seen as quite good.

I have never had anything but a terrible ATI IGP or two, and the only thing worse, would be an Intel IGP.

So, you are arguing not with me, but with what is called a "straw man".

[Clockadile Dundee]

Of course 5700 and 5800 series "Not at full potential"

Everybody knows that you can never be sure about being an early adopter; there is always the chance (Guarantee in this case) that the "D0" will come out, and because you have a "C0" that is 97% as good as a "D0", you will burn yourself with cigarettes.

Then again, I am not necessarily bashing the existence of this thread, because I think that is just rude, 99% of the time, and who am I to say this is that 1% of the time.

[JarrettM]

It took how long for the 4870 to run at full potential? It wasn't until 9.4 that the drivers were fully optimized. I expect the same thing for the ATI 5800 series - the drivers won't be fully optimized until at least 10.2.

[Clockadile Dundee]

Originally Posted by JarrettM

It took how long for the 4870 to run at full potential? It wasn't until 9.4 that the drivers were fully optimized. I expect the same thing for the ATI 5800 series - the drivers won't be fully optimized until at least 10.2.

So, are you saying that it isn't worth buying one until then?

[CAHOP240]

Originally Posted by saulin

Wow CAHOP240 talk about having a diarrhea of the mouth. You sure spit a lot of crap.

Good way to start

First of all he tried changing the subject with PhysX which has already been discused over and over. Nvidia has it and ATI doesn't. Nvidia supports it and ATI doesn't. Nvidia has an advantage here. How does it affect performance? ATI will crawl in games that use Nvidia PhysX.

No, you tried to change the subject. You're the one who brought up PhsyX in the first place which didn't even make sense to begin with. And Oh, big surprise that ATI crawls in games with PhysX turned on. That's not an issue with ATI drivers though which is why you bringing up PhysX in the first place is questionable. That's like saying Nvidias drivers are bad because they don't don't support Eyefinity (a proprietary software option from ATI, see where I'm going with that?)

Now the rest of the crap you mentioned is not even worth discussing. ATI will soon have this and this. This is the way things are gonna be going forward... blah blah blah.

Look at how things are now first. When hardware web sites stop mentioning how the drivers affected the results then we'll know drivers have got better.

Review sites say the same thing for Nvidia cards as well whenever something doesn't SLI properly or a game crashes or anything out of the ordinary occurs. I've read plenty of reviews and I've seen just as many comments for Nvidia as I do for ATI.

ATI has Eyefinity. Yay! that's awesome except you can't possibly think that 1 5870 will run smooth on 3 monitors with the high settings people would probably want to use.

Look at the reviews so far. Settings need to be lowered to get playable gameplay. Also you need extra monitors. Sure it's nice to have but not something really apealing to most people.

I pointed you to a review on [H] where Kyle did a test of a slew of games using Eyefinity. He even addressed your question directly at the end of the review and stated that the single 5870 is plenty strong to run your games at those extreme resolutions. The only games that even had to be toned down were of course Crysis and Crysis WH. That review was done on Guru3D if you care to look. I would agree that not many people will use it (for games btw)and having two 5870's will definitely be more "future proof" for something like that. But I can definitely see this being used by someone who works at home and needs multiple displays like a broker or programmer. A cheap little 5750 can handle that for them though.

I think PhysX is more appealing and more affordable at this time as much as you guys don't like it.

PhysX had a chance to become widely adopted under W7 where you can run multiple drivers. Heck I was even considering buying an Nvidia card to use as a dedicated PPU up until they decided to try and choose the way I should build my machine. I'm not going to get into that debate all over again.

When say Nvidia does have better drivers and probably better features I don't mean that ATI drivers go crashing on every system or that they don't work. So please stop even bringing that up. Again once reviews sites stop mentioning drivers so much and once users stop using drivers as excuse we'll know ATI has made really good progress with them.

Buying a card now to get the performance it should have one year from now is not my way of thinking when upgrading.

Well right now a 5870 offers great performance, competes with a GTX295 for $100 dollars less and still has room to grow with improved driver updates. But I'm with you in regards that buying a 5870 right now doesn't seem like a good idea when I don't know what a GT300 can do. I'd rather wait until both cards are out and see what happens but while I'm waiting I won't go around bashing Nvidia threads.

[xlink]

Originally Posted by Clockadile Dundee

It was the highest numbered card I new of. Now, I come to find out, ATI's number is like 20 times higher, and don't quote me on that math, but why didn't somebody tell me ATI's model naming scheming uses such a numerically higher basis?

Nvidida needs to put those engineers to work, getting their naming scheme at least 10 times higher, or I am abandoning Nvidia's crap cards forever, "295" pffft.

nVidia ran out of numbers FYI. Instead of calling the 9800s, 8900s like any respectable company would, they called them 9800s and then had no more numbers left for their last series.

[JarrettM]

Originally Posted by Clockadile Dundee

So, are you saying that it isn't worth buying one until then?

No, in fact this is more of a reason to buy one. It already has amazing performance, and it's only going to get better over time. =)

[Shane1244]

Looks like we will have to wait for December! ;]

Or, They might hold off a little longer and release 10.1

[Clockadile Dundee]

Originally Posted by xlink

nVidia ran out of numbers FYI. Instead of calling the 9800s, 8900s like any respectable company would, they called them 9800s and then had no more numbers left for their last series.

I know, I have a 7950GT.

I was just being asinine, because there seemed to be no hope of a legitimate debate.