Sorry ATi, no matter how you spin it, when impartial independant people analyze your products, your top end Dual-Core solution is matched by nVidia's Single-Core solution.

How about you stop putting so much money into BS marketing, and actually come out with a competitive product, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to do this. Not a product that matches last generation's products from your competitor, an actual competitive product. I'm being totally serious here, I really want ATi to start competiting. The consumer needs competition at the highest level. You have put out such great products in the past, and RV770 was a step in the right direction, but not a big enough step. And now, to top everything off, your letting your drivers degrade. I expect so much more.

As wrong as this is on AMDs part I think its on par for the market. Everyone pulls this crap. The 4870x2 is a great card without a doubt. I wish they didn't do this however. No matter how good the card is this kind of marketing only appeals to fanboys and turns guys like me off.

newtekie1and RV770 was a step in the right direction, but not a big enough step.

It was. You're getting a GTX 285 at ~$400 and GTX 295 for $99 more, thanks to the RV770 and products based on it. That being said, the GT200b is a step in the right direction, but it was more or less brought to reality thanks to the competition ATI brought in. Building high-end GPUs on 55nm process wasn't really part of NVIDIA's long-term plans. The GT200 was to hold ground until GT212, built on the 40nm process.

What I dont understand is they have the "vanilla" HD4850 so low on the food chain. It's an awesome card!

Dones't matter to me, there both still X2 Expensive.:(

doesnt the 4870x2 own all at high resolutions? why on earth would you be playing with a GTX295 on 1440x900? in this respect, the 4870x2 wins.
That doesn't say that this isnt a bunch of marketing bologni, though.

I don't see why everybody is getting so bent out of shape about this. Both companies do this to each other all the time and this time AMD is just trying to make their product look more appealing because they know they nvidia has the faster card. The 4870x2 has been out for quite some time and it only makes sense for the new nvidia dual card solution to be hands down faster. ATI will attempt to hit them back when the R870 is ready and nvidia will probably do the same with their next card a few months following that.

It has been going like this since the companies entered the market and that is the way it will always be until one company bows out. Competition is good but I hate this kind of smear marketing and it doesn't matter which company does it.

Using this as an excuse to flame the crap out of ATI for this is a bit much because all they are trying to do is sell their product even though some of the slides are pretty questionable.

3870x2doesnt the 4870x2 own all at high resolutions? why on earth would you be playing with a GTX295 on 1440x900? in this respect, the 4870x2 wins.
That doesn't say that this isnt a bunch of marketing bologni, though.

It does not. Only rarely at the highest resolution because the 295 can only use 896 MB of ram and the 4870X2 has 1024MB of usable ram. - When both cards run out of framebuffer, that extra 128MB of ram will put it ahead.

Interesting, I wonder if there will be a review showing benchmarks between the 2 at 2560 using 8xAA, 16xAF ;) using cat 9.1?

Could be fake. I tried looking for it on AMDs website and I cant find nothing of that.

computerdethCould be fake. I tried looking for it on AMDs website and I cant find nothing of that.

It's not a public presentation and will never feature on the company website.

I think they made some improvements to catalyst 9.1 and give some better scores in crysis and other games.
www.behardware.com/news/10055/dx10-catalyst-9-1-quad.html
They both have preety powerfull hardware and there is much to be tweaked from drivers to get more perf. , the hardware is good , the drivers need more work to get more perf..
Funny thing , crysis , a game made to showcase Nvidia hardware is present in Ati's slides to show their superiority , hahaha.

I don't find a problem with these results at all, though i'm not sure i trust these numbers, if ATI have new catalyst drivers 9.1 and they've enabled their sideport on the HD 4870x2 then i think it's possible that the HD 4870x2 is beating the GTX 295, though i don't really trust it to beat it by those margins. Also i read some of you saying "well they tested at high resolutions, the GTX 295's weak point". WHO IN THE HELL is going to buy these cards unless they are playing at high resolutions? These are enthusiast, top of the line graphic cards, they're meant for high resolutions, so the fact that they used 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 makes perfect sense to me. As for the marketing ploy, who cares, what company doesn't in some way try to put down their competition?

There just showing of what there card can do. As most of us know some cards do good and some don't. ATI is just pointing out of what the card can do. As you know, some games are made with certain cards, and some games play better on a Nvidia card and some play better on a ATI card. I have see this with my 4850X2. But we are just going to have to wait and see Nvidia's response and see if ATI tries to come out with anything else.

I say there is no point in arguing over this and getting heated. I will say that Nvidia is winning, but ATI is just trying to come back and showing the public what there cards can do... I think that is called marketing?

a_umpI don't find a problem with these results at all, though i'm not sure i trust these numbers, if ATI have new catalyst drivers 9.1 and they've enabled their sideport on the HD 4870x2 then i think it's possible that the HD 4870x2 is beating the GTX 295, though i don't really trust it to beat it by those margins. Also i read some of you saying "well they tested at high resolutions, the GTX 295's weak point". WHO IN THE HELL is going to buy these cards unless they are playing at high resolutions? These are enthusiast, top of the line graphic cards, they're meant for high resolutions, so the fact that they used 19020x1080 and 2560x1600 makes perfect sense to me. As for the marketing ploy, who cares, what company doesn't in some way try to put down their competition?

Exactly , it's not like you buy a card like this to play at 1280x1024 , it's just overkill.
Even testing in low resolution these cards is pointless but they follow the routine.

newtekie1

Sorry ATi, no matter how you spin it, when impartial independant people analyze your products, your top end Dual-Core solution is matched by nVidia's Single-Core solution.

How about you stop putting so much money into BS marketing, and actually come out with a competitive product, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to do this. Not a product that matches last generation's products from your competitor, an actual competitive product. I'm being totally serious here, I really want ATi to start competiting. The consumer needs competition at the highest level. You have put out such great products in the past, and RV770 was a step in the right direction, but not a big enough step. And now, to top everything off, your letting your drivers degrade. I expect so much more.

Lol, what is that graph? gtx295 is 11% faster than gtx285? :D

If graphic card manufacture(s) are cutting their order with the competition (along with some no longer being exclusive to the competition) then this information may in fact be working.

What part of INTERNAL PRESENTATION do you people not understand? Nvidia does the same shit, Intel does the same shit.

rpsgcWhat part of INTERNAL PRESENTATION do you people not understand? Nvidia does the same shit, Intel does the same shit.

They need to lie , otherwise they can't be in this bussines for too long :).

ValdezLol, what is that graph? gtx295 is 11% faster than gtx285? :D

gtx285 --> gtx295
+11% performance
+25% price

that's why i don't buy enthusiast... same with intel core extreme stuff, or any intel. usually AMD/ATI is much better for the money you actually pay.

a_umpI don't find a problem with these results at all, though i'm not sure i trust these numbers, if ATI have new catalyst drivers 9.1 and they've enabled their sideport on the HD 4870x2 then i think it's possible that the HD 4870x2 is beating the GTX 295, though i don't really trust it to beat it by those margins. Also i read some of you saying "well they tested at high resolutions, the GTX 295's weak point". WHO IN THE HELL is going to buy these cards unless they are playing at high resolutions? These are enthusiast, top of the line graphic cards, they're meant for high resolutions, so the fact that they used 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 makes perfect sense to me. As for the marketing ploy, who cares, what company doesn't in some way try to put down their competition?

You said it partner.

I think it's better for people to think 4870 X2 = GTX 295. Unless you're freaking testing your hardware by milliseconds and digits below 0.01, the usual gamer won't see a damn difference. We're not comparing a GeForce 8600 with the 4870 X2 here, but instead the two TOP OF THE LINE video cards in the market. Doesn't matter which one can give you an extra frame per second. You can't go wrong between these two, at least that's how I see it.

leonard_222003They need to lie , otherwise they can't be in this bussines for too long :).

I agree this is bullshit, but nv did this too, many times before.

With 8xaa the 4870x2 may beat the gtx295.

www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2009/test_nvidia_geforce_gtx_295/20/#abschnitt_performancerating

ValdezI agree this is bullshit, but nv did this too, many times before.

With 8xaa the 4870x2 may beat the gtx295.

www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2009/test_nvidia_geforce_gtx_295/20/#abschnitt_performancerating

Hmm, why does one have to click on Rating 2560x1600 8xAA/16xAF in order to see it? :confused: (at the bottom of the page on the left side)

EastCoasthandleHmm, why does one have to click on Rating 2560x1600 8xAA/16xAF in order to see it? :confused: (at the bottom of the page on the left side)

I don't know, maybe 2560 with 8xaa is not a realistic situation :D
Anyway thanks for the info, i didn't notice that :)

ValdezI don't know, maybe 2560 with 8xaa is not a realistic situation :D
Anyway thanks for the info, i didn't notice that :)

That website did use a beta of Cat 9.1 so those results at 8xaa are encouraging. Therefore, IMO it justify those slides to some degree. However, I'll hold my final opinion until after cat 9.1 is actually released.