|
| Notices |
Welcome to the DriverHeaven.net forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us. |
 |
|
Sep 30, 2005, 04:41 AM
|
#46 (permalink)
|
|
DriverHeaven Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 52
|
I see potential to be better than NV's SLI ... Its just not quite there yet  |
|
|
|
Sep 30, 2005, 10:38 AM
|
#47 (permalink)
|
|
DriverHeaven Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Muskegon, MI
Posts: 1,424
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Veridian3
Nothing was thrown off at all.
There were two sections of that review.
1) the mothoerboard section where the systems were identical other than the motherboard used. (i used a 3800+ X2 because its a better CPU for desktop use and so you see the best performance from each motherboard rather than be bottlenecked by the FX55)
2) the graphics card sections where the systems were identical where possible so a FX 55 was used on all tests, same memory HD etc also used. The only difference was a NF4 was used for the SLI systems. All other tests were on the CF board. (FX55 was used for the game tests as it is the better gaming CPU and so you can see the best performance of the GFX cards being tested. The 3800+ X2 would have put more of a CPU bottleneck on those tests.
|
IIII see, sorry, my mistake. I looked at the test setups then went straight to the 3D gaming benchies. Sorry about the mix up.
__________________
|
|
|
|
Sep 30, 2005, 10:42 AM
|
#48 (permalink)
|
|
-DH Resident Uber Poster-
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Riverside, CA (right next to the f*ckin train)
Posts: 6,593
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BWX
Maybe, or maybe they are late because they re-designed them to be 30% to 50% faster? Hope so for ATI's sake.
|
Truthfully I do also, competition only helps the consumers 
__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 4, 2005, 05:09 PM
|
#49 (permalink)
|
|
DriverHeaven Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 778
|
Im sure the next Gen ATI will be better in performance and also change th 60 htz limitation. Also you have to remember Nvidia bought out 3dfx (The first to use SLI on a PCI bus) so they had a jump from the getgo!! I dont see ATI disapointing us.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 5, 2005, 06:38 AM
|
#50 (permalink)
|
|
DriverHeaven Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: around
Posts: 792
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by edperks
Im sure the next Gen ATI will be better in performance and also change th 60 htz limitation. Also you have to remember Nvidia bought out 3dfx (The first to use SLI on a PCI bus) so they had a jump from the getgo!! I dont see ATI disapointing us.
|
Well, disappointment is based on one's expectations I'd say.
I wasn't expecting 2x the performance of a SLI setup, so I'm not disappointed by any means. Just doesn't impress me much, that's all. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2005, 07:59 AM
|
#51 (permalink)
|
|
Code Geass Otaku.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Deptford,New Jersey
Posts: 1,079
|
not impressed (yet) im waiting
__________________
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads
