Real World x1900 series benchmarks

B

bobrownik

Gawd
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
800
so far only 3dmark scores , 05 and 06 , both latest versions,

win xp pro sp2,all latest drivers , except for x1900xt taken from the cd , the cat6.1 from the website doesnt have support for the card

my system , (nothing overclocked)

opt148 @ 2.2ghz , 200fsb,
1gig ram 2-3-2-5 timings ,
dfi-nf4 ultra-d
x1900xt
----------------------------------------
THESE SCORES WERE RUN WITH CLOCKS SET TO 500/600

EITHER THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH MY CARD OR THE DRIVER

GO TO PAGE 6

3dmark05 - score 9004
3dmark06 - score 3908


 
I'm only 2000 points behind you 3D Mark 05.. I see no point in getting a new video card yet.
 
Damn I thought that card was going to be a little faster than that. I know they need to do some work to the drivers but damn, isn't the x1800 right behind that thing?

I suppose games will speak a different language in the benchmarks so to speak.
 
um...thats just above the 7800gtx and x1800xt...mayb it pulls away in games? we have to remember this is 3dmark05/06
 
With his processorspeed (2,2ghz.), an X1800XT@default speeds normally scores ~8400 in 3DM05 if i remembered correctly.

@Bobrownik, do you have Farcry and the leaked (HDR) beta patch? I'm dying to see if Ati improved FP HDR performance vs the X1800.
 
Hmm.. then that is pretty nice then. Very nice card man. Care to do any gaming benchmarks for us all when you have some spare time? :D
 
Yeah man, try to get the equivalent of an FX-55 or FX-57 so we can gauge your results with all the other current X1800XT/7800GTX results out there.
 
Cpu score will go up, but not much in gpu scores, since 3dmark, is all glitz, lighting, textures
i would expect with a 2.6+ dual core/ 2.9ghz Opty he'll get around 5K with 1 card.
my opty (2.93 )single core scores , 300 points less then a 2.7ghz dual core , but the gpu tests are close..
 
wickedld9 said:
This review tested with the same processor.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/271/14/

I can tell you for a fact that you are processor limited running stock at 2.2GHz. If you overclock to ~2.8 you will see scores near 11,100 in 05, and 06 will go up quite a lot as well.
Click to expand...

3dmark scores don't fluctuate much with the CPU (especially not that much). It's been that way since 3dmark03. CPU differences will have a larger influence on 3dmark01.
 
Wow, i hope thats just 3dmark sillyness, because on 05 i have you by about 900 points. Any chance you could get some game timedemos or something? i never trust 3dmark...
 
Apple740 said:
With his processorspeed (2,2ghz.), an X1800XT@default speeds normally scores ~8400 in 3DM05 if i remembered correctly.

@Bobrownik, do you have Farcry and the leaked (HDR) beta patch? I'm dying to see if Ati improved FP HDR performance vs the X1800.
Click to expand...

With my Stock Opteron 170 at 2.0ghz and x1800xt stock I got 8900. I get 9900 with my opteron 170 at 2.4 ( can go 2.7 but I like cpu at stock voltage) and my x1800xt at 700/800.
 
I believe the upgrade to a x1900 would be pointless if you already have a x1800xt overclocked. Its not worth the couple hundred dollars
 
Not really worth the title of "upgrade". I so wanted one of these, have to wait another month :(
 
bboynitrous said:
Damn I thought that card was going to be a little faster than that. I know they need to do some work to the drivers but damn, isn't the x1800 right behind that thing?

I suppose games will speak a different language in the benchmarks so to speak.
Click to expand...


It's seriously cpu limited. With a dual core cpu vrzone ppl were banging out 12k stock in 05
 
lordneo said:
Cpu score will go up, but not much in gpu scores, since 3dmark, is all glitz, lighting, textures
i would expect with a 2.6+ dual core/ 2.9ghz Opty he'll get around 5K with 1 card.
my opty (2.93 )single core scores , 300 points less then a 2.7ghz dual core , but the gpu tests are close..
Click to expand...

You can't get much more wrong :rolleyes: 05 and 06 are cpu limited
 
9617atix190028zk.gif

9617atix190037za.gif

9617atix190047iv.gif

9617atix190053af.gif

m99keb0fs.gif

m99kyt9ym.gif

m99l6g1vg.gif



found these on xs =O
 
sabrewolf732 , wasnt this suposed to be real world scores thread?.. and not some review scores thread?

hold your horses guys ,

its just a 3dmark , the scores we should be looking at is games like fear and cod2 (ill try to get some next)
whatever games that use lots of pixel shaders , thats the future of games

3dmarks scores are not cpu limited (much),

[email protected] ,270fsb with 2.5-4-4-7 timings ,1:1

3dmark05-score 9688
3dmark06-score 4270




unfortunately the ati overdrive doesnt work with this driver
 
bobrownik said:
hold your horses guys ,

its just a 3dmark , the scores we should be looking at is games like fear and cod2 (ill try to get some next)
whatever games that use lots of pixel shaders , thats the future of games

3dmarks scores are not cpu limited (much),

[email protected] ,270fsb with 2.5-4-4-7 timings ,1:1

3dmark05-score 9688
3dmark06-score 4270




unfortunately the ati overdrive doesnt work with this driver
Click to expand...


you're scoring really low compared to other scores i've seen, odd.
 
sabrewolf as much as id like to believe those benchies...theres no proof that they are true :(
 
I'm only 2000 points behind you 3D Mark 05.. I see no point in getting a new video card yet.
Click to expand...

you are making your buying decision based on 3D Mark 05? wow...
 
ok , im gonna do some fear next,

somone let me know what res and settings to test it with ,

i got the retail game , ...somewhere
 
1280x1024 + all F.E.A.R. settings maxed + soft-shadows + with and without AA 4x/AF 16x... that should be enough :)
 
bobrownik said:
ok , im gonna do some fear next,

somone let me know what res and settings to test it with ,

i got the retail game , ...somewhere
Click to expand...

High resolution (like at least 1600x1200) with 4xaa/16xaf and no softshadows.
 
Mayhs said:
sabrewolf as much as id like to believe those benchies...theres no proof that they are true :(
Click to expand...

well, in most of the games at 2084 or whatever shows the 1900xtx being 20-30% faster than a single 512 gtx, they seem feasible. Other benches show no improvement. I guess we're gonna have to wait
 
d0

1) 1600x1200 with 4aa/16af then softshadows

2)1280x1024 with 4aa/16af then softshadows...

i can play 1280x1024 with 4aa/16af with m x850xt pe with everything on max n get avg of 55fps..this will tell me if i need tp upgrade or not
 
damnit , i dont have fear , my brother must have taken it ,

the only games i got worth testing is q4 and farcry ,

cod2 is missing too

none of this games are installed though so im gonna get to it ,
 
bobrownik said:
sabrewolf732 , wasnt this suposed to be real world scores thread?.. and not some review scores thread?

hold your horses guys ,

its just a 3dmark , the scores we should be looking at is games like fear and cod2 (ill try to get some next)
whatever games that use lots of pixel shaders , thats the future of games

3dmarks scores are not cpu limited (much),

[email protected] ,270fsb with 2.5-4-4-7 timings ,1:1

3dmark05-score 9688
3dmark06-score 4270




unfortunately the ati overdrive doesnt work with this driver
Click to expand...



Yep. That is correct scoring you have there. I'm getting the same on the x1900's I have here on the testing bench.
 
There's a bit of confusion in here.

A couple days ago XS got a leaked ATI PR release with slides showing how the X1900XT performed. Naturally, they projected their card as being close to 4x as fast as a 7800GTX/512. As we all know, ATI is famous for doing this. When bobrownik says "real-world" he means 3rd-party-done the honest way, not the complete and utter BS results ATI tried to feed us. Get it? Those graphs a while back are the ATI-rigged ones. As you can see from bobrownik's results, ATI was once again overoptimistic (what manufacturer wouldn't be). So cut bobrownik a break, he's just trying to help us get realistic benchmarks. Give him some time, timedemos take a while to do.
 
contaminant said:
I can barely see them, so can anyone tell me if this is correct:
X1900XT CF>7800GTX (512) SLi>X1900XTX>7800GTX (512)
Click to expand...

yes, depends on the game, the red bar = x1900xt crossfire
Ugly green = 7800gtx 512 sli
ugly orange =x1900xtx
green=7800gtx 512

from those benches seems like depends on the game. Alot of games the x1900xt is 20-30% faster than a single gtx 512, however some games like fear and one level in serious sam 2 a single 1900 is close to matching 2x 7800gtx 512's
 
Steve-o-man said:
There's a bit of confusion in here.

A couple days ago XS got a leaked ATI PR release with slides showing how the X1900XT performed. Naturally, they projected their card as being close to 4x as fast as a 7800GTX/512. As we all know, ATI is famous for doing this. When bobrownik says "real-world" he means 3rd-party-done the honest way, not the complete and utter BS results ATI tried to feed us. Get it? Those graphs a while back are the ATI-rigged ones. As you can see from bobrownik's results, ATI was once again overoptimistic (what manufacturer wouldn't be). So cut bobrownik a break, he's just trying to help us get realistic benchmarks. Give him some time, timedemos take a while to do.
Click to expand...

actually they're from a site that had to take the x1900xt coverage down due to nda
 
chinesepiratefood said:
Yes, those pics sabrewolf posted show charts of the X1900XT beating the 7800GTX 512 by unfathomable margins
Click to expand...

for the most part it's 20-30%. That charts aren't in FPS, they're in % which starts at 80%
 
sabrewolf732 said:
for the most part it's 20-30%. That charts aren't in FPS, they're in % which starts at 80%
Click to expand...
True, if you started it at 0% the difference would pretty much be very small (except for those ungodly FEAR scores..I'm still trying to figure that one out :eek: )
 
But that site also had 2 of them in xfire scoring 140fps at 2048x1536 14xAA 16xHQAF in HL2

im not stupid, i know they are listed in percents
 
sabrewolf732 said:
yes, depends on the game, the red bar = x1800xt crossfire
Ugly green = 7800gtx 512 sli
ugly orange =x1900xtx
green=7800gtx 512

from those benches seems like depends on the game. Alot of games the x1900xt is 20-30% faster than a single gtx 512, however some games like fear and one level in serious sam 2 a single 1900 is close to matching 2x 7800gtx 512's
Click to expand...
X1800? Looks like it says 1900. Again, I can barely read it so I must be wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top