R520 benchs

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-09-16 11:21am

Hardware analysis got their hands on some benchmarks which they can't confirm.

With the help of a board partner we’ve been able to run the same set of benchmarks we’ve previously run on NVIDIA’s GeForce 7800GT and GTX, although we could only submit our benchmark scripts and testing configuration to them. The numbers you see reflected in the next few pages are therefore provided AS IS, as we have no way to verify them as we don’t physically have a board, they are accurate as far as we can see and in line what we’ve been expecting. So without further ado, let’s take a look at what the R520 architecture is capable of.

So go look, its not pretty.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2005-09-16 11:29am

Not good for Radeon if its true. It might however be a driver issue considering most cards end up preforming 15% better than when they first are released as the engineers figure out the best order operations to use.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-09-16 12:15pm

True, but even so, unless they are miracle workers those 24 pipes in a 7800GTX will jut keep purring along in games such as Splinter Cell 3 and keep a nice lead.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-09-16 12:43pm

Their only recourse, now, is to significantly undercut Nvidia or count on Crossfire being a massive success story. If their top-end cards can't compete with the 7800GTX and the 7800GT, then they've got significant problems because there will be no reason for people to use these cards instead of the top-end models. Unfortunately for ATI, the top-end gamers tend to go for the top-end models, even with a price-break, so ATI may have to cede this one to Nvidia and go for the mid-range gamers.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-09-16 12:50pm

Except that Crossfire is developing weirdness(1600X1200 at only 60Hz? who the fuck did that?!), while they can't undercut that much.

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2005-09-16 06:44pm

Interesting. Good thing I opted to get a 7800GTX now rather then waiting for for new ATI cards.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-17 12:50am

Did you guys actually look at the benchmarks? They're not bad. Only in Splinter Cell is there a worthwhile difference between them and the 7800 series. Driver tweaks will be made and then I'd say the 7800's will be better in some games, the X1800's in others. What it all will come down to, I think, is whether ATI will be able to get the cards out in the same kind of quantity that NVIDIA did, and whether the X1800's will be available for way less than MSRP like the 7800's are. ATI will also have a significant advantage over NVIDIA if they can bring the X1600 series to market before NVIDIA can roll out the successor to the 6600 GT.

I know these results are probably dissapointing to people that were expecting something amazing, but I learned that lesson with the FX 5800. Besides, the 7800 series is an amazing card. You can't fault ATI for merely matching its performance.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-09-17 12:59am

Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:Did you guys actually look at the benchmarks? They're not bad. Only in Splinter Cell is there a worthwhile difference between them and the 7800 series.

In not one game did these cards exceed the performance of the 7800 series, which is really poor given how much earlier the 7800 series was released (and actually available to the public, no less). If the cards were merely tied it would've been a huge win for Nvidia because of the delay and because of the fact that their cards offer SLI support.

Driver tweaks will be made and then I'd say the 7800's will be better in some games, the X1800's in others. What it all will come down to, I think, is whether ATI will be able to get the cards out in the same kind of quantity that NVIDIA did, and whether the X1800's will be available for way less than MSRP like the 7800's are. ATI will also have a significant advantage over NVIDIA if they can bring the X1600 series to market before NVIDIA can roll out the successor to the 6600 GT.

That might be true, but there's no way that high-end gamers will prefer the X1800's to the 7800 series which was released earlier and which offers SLI support. ATI, despite the delay against Nvidia, could not match the performance of their rival and therefore has no chance of getting high-end gamers. Since its cards will be about as expensive as the 7800 series (if not moreso), they will not find a market with any segment of the gaming population.

I know these results are probably dissapointing to people that were expecting something amazing, but I learned that lesson with the FX 5800. Besides, the 7800 series is an amazing card. You can't fault ATI for merely matching its performance.

They didn't, though. SLI support is a trump card that ATI doesn't have. The 7800 series is awesome, and unless newer drivers dramatically improve the performance of the X1800 then ATI will have failed utterly in its effort to wrest top-end gamers away from Nvidia.

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2005-09-17 01:02am

I wasn't, by any means. Those are very respectable framerates, but I'm glad I didn't wait and pay about 150 dollars more for a comparable card, even though the price will go down.
Edit: Doh, not respectable, I meant, frigging awesome.

2nd edit: Well, frigging awesome compared to the kind I get now...*kicks computer, then kicks newegg for the delays*
3rd edit: Argh, I really should stop thinking of things to post after I've already submitted the post...
Anyways, SLI-support was a big draw for me, even though I'm not getting a second card for a few more months (probably around the time Oblivion comes out).

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-17 01:27am

Master of Ossus wrote:
Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:Did you guys actually look at the benchmarks? They're not bad. Only in Splinter Cell is there a worthwhile difference between them and the 7800 series.
In not one game did these cards exceed the performance of the 7800 series, which is really poor given how much earlier the 7800 series was released (and actually available to the public, no less). If the cards were merely tied it would've been a huge win for Nvidia because of the delay and because of the fact that their cards offer SLI support.

They were very close in all but one game, so close I would call it a tie. Because there is almost always some improvement in drivers from pre-release to post-release, I'd say that it will end up a performance tie overall.

Driver tweaks will be made and then I'd say the 7800's will be better in some games, the X1800's in others. What it all will come down to, I think, is whether ATI will be able to get the cards out in the same kind of quantity that NVIDIA did, and whether the X1800's will be available for way less than MSRP like the 7800's are. ATI will also have a significant advantage over NVIDIA if they can bring the X1600 series to market before NVIDIA can roll out the successor to the 6600 GT.
That might be true, but there's no way that high-end gamers will prefer the X1800's to the 7800 series which was released earlier and which offers SLI support. ATI, despite the delay against Nvidia, could not match the performance of their rival and therefore has no chance of getting high-end gamers. Since its cards will be about as expensive as the 7800 series (if not moreso), they will not find a market with any segment of the gaming population.

It seems like a large delay to people who follow video card news, but a few months is not a big deal overall. And people don't really care about that anyway. They care about money now vs. performance now. The delay meant that NVIDIA sold some 7800's to potential X1800 customers, but that's all. As for SLI, I don't think most gamers care about that. Only a negligable percentage of buyers are willing to spend an extra $400-500 to get 8x FSAA instead of 4X, and people interested the option to upgrade later will be turned away by the need to get an expensive SLI motherboard. They will also know that by the time they should want to upgrade, ATI's Crossfire will probably be ready.

I know these results are probably dissapointing to people that were expecting something amazing, but I learned that lesson with the FX 5800. Besides, the 7800 series is an amazing card. You can't fault ATI for merely matching its performance.
They didn't, though. SLI support is a trump card that ATI doesn't have. The 7800 series is awesome, and unless newer drivers dramatically improve the performance of the X1800 then ATI will have failed utterly in its effort to wrest top-end gamers away from Nvidia.

To me, it comes down to this:

1. Can ATI match NVIDIA's high quantities?
2. Can ATI match NVIDIA's low prices?
3. Can ATI beat NVIDIA to market in the ~$200 segment, and is their mid-range offering a big improvement on the 6600 GT?

I don't think ATI is going to come out ahead this round, but I wouldn't ring the bell for NVIDIA just yet, either.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-09-17 01:44am

Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:They were very close in all but one game, so close I would call it a tie. Because there is almost always some improvement in drivers from pre-release to post-release, I'd say that it will end up a performance tie overall.

Even if it ends in a tie, it will still be a win for Nvidia which went to market first and which offers SLI support.

It seems like a large delay to people who follow video card news, but a few months is not a big deal overall.

Nvidia is ahead by several months, and that's ASSUMING that ATI can rapidly get their cards into the marketplace--by no means a certain thing. All this to offer no discernable advantages over Nvidia's flagship card.

And people don't really care about that anyway. They care about money now vs. performance now. The delay meant that NVIDIA sold some 7800's to potential X1800 customers, but that's all.

Since the point of creating a new card is to sell them this is an entirely ridiculous argument.

As for SLI, I don't think most gamers care about that. Only a negligable percentage of buyers are willing to spend an extra $400-500 to get 8x FSAA instead of 4X, and people interested the option to upgrade later will be turned away by the need to get an expensive SLI motherboard. They will also know that by the time they should want to upgrade, ATI's Crossfire will probably be ready.

Nonetheless, it is an advantage that Nvidia's cards clearly offer over ATI's. The X1800 offers no advantages over the 7800. Period. End of story. The 7800's SLI support is an advantage, even if you don't think it's very significant, and most users who wish to purchase cards in this range are looking at very high-end systems and are looing for advantages. Crossfire is not looking like an attractive option, as has been mentioned already in this thread, and so ATI is basically coming late to a party and completely unprepared.

1. Can ATI match NVIDIA's high quantities?
2. Can ATI match NVIDIA's low prices?
3. Can ATI beat NVIDIA to market in the ~$200 segment, and is their mid-range offering a big improvement on the 6600 GT?

I don't think ATI is going to come out ahead this round, but I wouldn't ring the bell for NVIDIA just yet, either.

Nor have I. The advantage, though, is NVIDIA's right now at the high-end side of the market. The X1800, despite coming out months later (and potentially not even then), offers no discernable advantages over the 7800 and is weaker in ways that matter to the people who are buying them. This is not to say that ATI is dead in the water, but to point out that they have definitively lost in the high-end spectrum for this generation.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-17 02:02pm

We don't seem to be disagreeing very strongly. We both acknowledge that SLI support and the delay matter, but differ on the magnitude. I think NVIDIA's advantage is only slight, and can be overwhelmed by other factors, depending on how they turn out. You think that ATI has lost the high-performance crown for this round, and we both agree that the mid-range market is up in the air. Since this argument is based on gut feeling and personal observation, I don't see the point of continuing to argue.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-09-17 02:05pm

Another factor, the reliability of these benchs, senior ATi engineers have said these benchs are not remotely similer to the real benchs and other things, I actully doubt this is final benchs but a good guess.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2005-09-17 03:49pm

Ace Pace wrote:Another factor, the reliability of these benchs, senior ATi engineers have said these benchs are not remotely similer to the real benchs and other things, I actully doubt this is final benchs but a good guess.

Would they say anything else?

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-17 04:39pm

They were very close in all but one game, so close I would call it a tie.

It's nowhere NEAR a tie considering that the ATi card costs a good $100 more. IF these rumors are true, that is.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-17 05:45pm

Going by the MSRP, they actually cost the same as the 7800 did upon introduction. It's just that the 7800 series can be found for way under MSRP. We really don't know what the street price of the X1800 will be.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-17 06:12pm

The 7800's lower price has to do with the fact that it came out first. This in no way changes the fact that the R520 is overpriced (officially) for these (rumor) performance numbers. It simply explains it.

If the 520 had been released at the same time, roughly, as the 7800, the parity would be there. But it was months later, thus, no parity.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-17 08:54pm

The 7800 GTX could be had for $100 under MSRP only a few weeks after release. I'm guessing that the only reason it was at $600 even for that short time was because NVIDIA wanted to gouge the people who are willing to pay anything to have the latest stuff before anyone else. Thus, if ATI can produce, distribute, and market their card just as cheaply (that's a big if) as NVIDIA, then the street price could be equal to the 7800 series very quickly. If not, then you're right, the 7800 series will be a lot cheaper. All I'm saying is that nobody but an insider can predict the relative street prices with any accuracy right now.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-17 09:50pm

The 7800 GTX could be had for $100 under MSRP only a few weeks after release.

::sigh::

So... what? You're simply naming ANOTHER way in which the match-up is uneven. This doesn't change the fact that the match-up is, indeed, uneven. Get it?

There is no tie between these products if one of them is significantly less expensive. Period. It doesn't matter WHY there's a price disparity. If ATi can produce these chips in the necessary volume to drop the street price, then you might say differently. But all information, rumor and official alike, indicates that ATi's offering is monstrously outclassed, dollar for dollar.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-09-18 12:53am

Mr Bean wrote:
Ace Pace wrote:Another factor, the reliability of these benchs, senior ATi engineers have said these benchs are not remotely similer to the real benchs and other things, I actully doubt this is final benchs but a good guess.
Would they say anything else?

No, lets see if I can dig up the links...here!

"This is a complete hoax - done with an OC'd X850, we think. Call our partners yourself and ask if they have R520XTs in house. The numbers aren't even close."

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-18 01:17am

SPOOFE wrote:::sigh::

So... what? You're simply naming ANOTHER way in which the match-up is uneven. This doesn't change the fact that the match-up is, indeed, uneven. Get it?

There is no tie between these products if one of them is significantly less expensive. Period. It doesn't matter WHY there's a price disparity. If ATi can produce these chips in the necessary volume to drop the street price, then you might say differently. But all information, rumor and official alike, indicates that ATi's offering is monstrously outclassed, dollar for dollar.

I don't know whether or not there will be a price disparity, and neither do you. I don't know why you insist on making such authorative statements with so little to base them on.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2005-09-18 02:00am

Those of you that think that ATI is only at a slight disadvantage here should look at this:

HL2
GTX vs XT
768 -- 2% ATI
1024 - 1% Nv
1200 - 12% Nv

GT vs Pro
768 -- 1% Nv
1024 - 4% ATI
1200 - 5% Nv

Doom3
GTX vs XT
768 -- 18% Nv
1024 - 20% Nv
1200 - 25% Nv

GT vs Pro
768 -- 34% Nv
1024 - 23% Nv
1200 - 38% Nv

FarCry
GTX vs XT
768 -- 5% ATI
1024 - 1% ATI
1200 - 1% ATI

GT vs Pro
768 -- 7% ATI
1024 - 4% ATI
1200 - 8% ATI

Splinter Cell 3
GTX vs XT
768 -- 14% Nv
1024 - 17% Nv
1200 - 12% Nv

GT vs Pro
768 -- 9% Nv
1024 - 24% Nv
1200 - 13% Nv

Now, ATI manages to win a few, but by far less than the average nVidia win. Furthermore, ATI is coming in a lot later than nVidia and should be providing a significantly higher performing part, not one that is slightly less powerful.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-18 07:07am

I don't know whether or not there will be a price disparity, and neither do you. I don't know why you insist on making such authorative statements with so little to base them on.

Wait a sec, I've been calling it speculation from day one. You're right that the 7800GTX's price fell rapidly... but there's no reason to suspect that'll happen for the x1800 series. If it does, obviously, that changes things, but as things stand right now, with what we know right now, assuming the speculation brought up in the OP is true, ATi is in deep, deep shit. There's no "tie" between these cards. There'd have to be an IMMENSE and rapid drop in price, exceeding even that of the 7800GTX, in order for the R520 to be even close towards being competitive.... again, IF the information in the OP is accurate. I fully understand newer data will change things. I'd have hoped that'd be a given.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2005-09-18 02:56pm

OK, your tone seemed more emphatic than that. We'll just have to wait and see what happens, or if those benchmarks are even real.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-09-19 12:19am

ATI claims it still hasn’t sent a single R520XT board to any of its partners. The Radeon X1800XT is getting ready and the first batch of the card is produced but not even the big OEMs have these cards.