Radeon 8500

[theflyingrat]

Tomshardware did a quick group of beches with the 'final' Radeon 8500 today. Looks like it's an impressive piece of hardware. But, however, ATI managed to screw it all up with some apparently horrible drivers, as well as having several of the card's key features not ready for prime time as of their release date.

Go check it out for yourselves. Guaranteed to disappoint!

[Cisco Kid]

I own a radeon 64 DDR vivo and have not had any driver issue problems and I am running the beta driver for XP.

This will be a short lived issue and you will see it resolved fairly quickly, bottom line is Radeon 8500 got beat in only 5 of the benchmarks if I am correct and it is all related to an immature driver. You can bet your last buck that with the next driver supposedly out within a month that the 8500 will stomp the G3 plus you get other features, such as best dvd playback and best 2d video quality in the graphics market.

You may not want to jump on the bandwagon yet but I would say if I had the cash I would grab one of these up in a snap. Damn the 7500 looks good as well, and I gotta say I love my Radeon 64 ddr vivo.

I do hear ATI rumbling up the road yeah baby yeah!!!:D ;)

Cisco Kid

[Kingslayer]

I looked at that review, and it fully supports my opinion that Tom is still a raging idiot.

He starts off saying that the drivers are bad. Umm, it's the first driver for the Radeon, what do you compare it to to come to your "bad driver" statement?

Yet the Radeon still beats the GForce at it's own game....3DMark2001. Yet he didn't go on a tirade about this. I personally think this is a major accomplishment coming from a company that hasn't really been a player for a while. He just kinda throws the info out there, like it's no big deal. Ya think he might be nVidia biased?

And then he tests goes and tests a brand new card on games that are a year old... Good testing Tom. Nothing like throwing a brand new piece of hardware against UT a 2 year old game.

He blasts ATI for failing to beat the Gforce in these old games. Games designed for DirectX 7 and 8, not 8.1. 8.1 is where the Radeon is going to shine. He even states the Radeons downfalls with the obsolete DirectX 7. It's irrelevant because DX7 is obsolete.

He states that there are instabilities in XP's drivers. He states in his opening, that tests show the instabilities. Where are the test results. He hasn't tested it in an XP environment, he took someone elses word on it, and was even dumb enough to state that later in the article.

He stated in is opening that there are AMD issues with the Radeon. This is significant if true, yet where is the proof and the testing behind that? It's not on that review.

ATI left out the Smoothvision. I actually applaud them for that. If they were having driver problems with the Smoothvision, better to leave it out, and fix it later, than just saying the heck with it and turning out a flawed smoothvision.

And the best thing of this whole article is where he says the pixel shader is great in 3DMark 2001, then states he doesn't know why it doesn't work that well in these 1 and 2 year old games he's testing it on. So he blames it on the drivers without a shred of evidence. How can you, in one sentence blame it on the drivers, when 3 sentences earlier you state you don't understand why it's not working...How quick he is to jump on the "Bad ATI Driver" bandwagon. Careful Tom, your sounding very nVidia bias to me.

This article didn't disappoint me at all. It showed me the strengths of the Radeon when it tanks the GForce at 3DMark2001. This article makes me want one even more.

ATI didn't blow it, as usual Tom the moron blew it.

[Cisco Kid]

I completely and wholeheartedly agreee with you on what you posted.

Tom is clearly an nvidia guy , what I like is theta the Radeon stomped the Geforce3 in 3dmark2001 and stomped it good. This whole issue of drivers is mumbo jumbo, speak to someone who owns one and uses it with the newest games , I am sure they are happy. Yes we will see some frustration with this first release driver but I think any probs will be solved in the next month ...

Cisco Kid, I would grab one in a snap if I had the cash:)

[Placid]

Why compare the 8500 to a gf3?
Why not compare it to a Ti-500 thats the current top of the line nvidia card not a 8 month old gf3.

3D Winmark2000 (no AA)
8500: 236
Ti500: 262
3D WinMark2000 (2x)
8500: 84
Ti500: 137

3DMark 2001 (no AA)
8500: 7516
Ti500: 7552

3DMark2001 (2x)
8500: 3731
Ti500: 5679

Quake3 (no AA)
8500: 180
Ti500: 190

Quake3 (2x)
8500: 88
Ti500: 122

[foxmulder]

Where are you getting those numbers?

[Placid]

http://www.pcmag.com/article/0,2997,s%253D1470%2526a%253D16423,00.asp

You have to click on the view results I cant link directly to that.

"We tested the GPUs (graphics processing unit) on 2-GHz Pentium 4 systems with 256MB of memory. We chose Microsoft Windows XP and DirectX 8.1 to take maximum advantage of the chip and driver feature sets".

[Cisco Kid]

even compared to the new Geforce Ti the radeon still beats it at 3dmark2001 based on toms review , where the ATI card is supposedly held back by immature drivers. Just curious where your numbers came from.

One thing, every site is going to have different numbers based on dif tests beds, os systems and other factors, ie) drivers and software...

cisco Kid:D

[Placid]

While they are a virtual tie in 3dmark 2001 with no aa with aa x2 the ti scored almost 2000 points higher, thats alot.

[Default]

Originally posted by Placid
Why compare the 8500 to a gf3?
Why not compare it to a Ti-500 thats the current top of the line nvidia card not a 8 month old gf3.

3D Winmark2000 (no AA)
8500: 236
Ti500: 262
3D WinMark2000 (2x)
8500: 84
Ti500: 137

3DMark 2001 (no AA)
8500: 7516
Ti500: 7552

3DMark2001 (2x)
8500: 3731
Ti500: 5679

Quake3 (no AA)
8500: 180

Ti500: 190

Quake3 (2x)
8500: 88
Ti500: 122

like tom's article said, the ATi AA set is not ready yet and any testing with Nvidias AA would be unfair because Radeon 8500 was not designed for it. Also i do not completly agree with Kingslayer on his views because Tom did not straight out attack ATi for it's performance sort comings in some benchmarks. He did telll us that the drivers are not final as of yet and expressed that with new drivers that ATi Radeon 8500 will beat Ti500. All of us know already that ATi will make more drivers, so i see no reason to get ****y at Tom. I realize that Tom may have been a little rough on ATi for haveing faulty drivers at the moment, but with all due respect Ati should have had COMPLET drivers shipping with the card. This was a rushing mistake on ATi's part for trying to get the product out in time to beat Ti500. But 2 weeks was not going to loss them the race, so they should ahve atleast finalized the drivers. Just a note i'm still an ATi man! This article has not shifted my like of company in any way.

[Default]

why did it block out pizzy?? i realy don't see that as a swear word:rolleyes:

[theflyingrat]

Here's my deal: I'm not about to get all snippity about something as dumb as video cards and who hates what reviewers.

The simple fact is, despite what tests the Radeon did/didn't win, the drivers at time of release (now available - shipping from Newegg and other retailers) were still lacking in basic features (FSAA). So the moment you install the card, in order for it to function properly with the performance you paid for, you'll need to go straight to ATI for the latest drivers (although this is good practice, anyway), plus wait for a month to use the anti-aliasing feature, along with whatever else people unravel as they use the cards in real life.

I'll be the first one to admit that NVIDIA is needing some major competition - they'll get fat and apathetic, otherwise. But, as evidenced before, as soon as ATI gets its game on with some sweet new drivers with improved performance, compatability, etc., NVIDIA may very well release a set of its own and beat ATI back into the dirt.

And let me lay any ideas you have about myself being Mr. 'My GeForce will own your crappy ATI/Voodoo/whatever' to rest. The minute ATI can prove they can make use all the horsepower they claim they have in this card without sacrificing compatability or stability, I'll get one. I hope it's not too long! In fact, I'd like to hear from the first person who receives their card along with real, release drivers.

[Kingslayer]

Let's straighten something out here and now.

1. Kingslayer didn't get ****y because the ati lost. I got ****y, because as usual, Tom did a half ass job on his review. He doesn't look out for the reviewer, the one that wins is the one that gives him more personal gain.

I dont care who wins. If the ATI wins fine, if the GForce wins fine. But at least give it them a good review based on fact that way the customer (read us) gets good scoop. Not half cocked bias crap like Tom puts out. Look at his review, put aside your video card favoritism and look at it, and anyone can see that it is bias review, with unproven statements that will send the reader potentially in the wrong direction.

2. Kingslayer didn't say that Tom attacked the Radeon either. What I said was that he put the faults on the limelight and swept the achievements under the rug. Anyone here should be more than capable of looking at the 3DMark scores and not be impressed beyond belief that a company like ATI can come out of no where and take the Kings crown. Even GForce fans have said, WOW.

Now as for smearing reviewers.....

I will continue to smear reviewers that do a crappy job like Tom did on this review regardless of what my personal bias is. I will continue to down trod on the reviewers that cant come forward with substantial evidence to their claims. I will continue to point out the weaknesses of reviews in order to protect those reading a bias review in order to make a decision on what to buy.

One young member in here asked what card to buy, and I put a reply to him longer than this one. Read it, you'll be suprised how quickly I can drop my ATI bias in order to help a fellow member out.

God am I glad my wife is coming back tonight. She's been gone two weeks and it's time to get rid of this pent up testosterone.....I'm beginning to become a grouch.

[Default]

i have read the review and yes i do see that Tom is hard on ATi for the bad driver support, but i don't see it realy as bias. I also didn't realy see any strong suggestions as to him sideing with Nvidia either, though. The notion that i got from the article is that the battle could still be anyones victory and Tom even says that ATi could very well beat Ti500 IF the drivers are improved, which they will be.

all in all?.....man bang your wife!! that built up testosterone is affecting your jugment.:p Just consider yourself lucky to have someone to drain into:( i'll just have to go solo:rolleyes:

[Default]

one more thing..... was it the title of the review that ticked you off? Cause i found it a little harsh

[Default]

I just looked at the review again and i still come to the conclution that Tom is not praising any card. As he states at the beginning it is a quick review and as such he just threw some facts out. Maybe if he had more time he might have noticed the 8500's giant leaps more, but as he stated it was a quick review he may not have had time for going into great detail about things.

[Kingslayer]

The he shouldn't have done the review. A reviewer with a little professionalism would have waited and turned out a full review giving us the full situation, the full story, and the full facts.

He did not do this.

He put out a "short review" to boost his hit count because it was a Gforce vs. ATI review.

He should have been more professional about it. What he did was fair to neither card.

This is his style. He is always pulling this crap. And that is why I will continue to whine about it. You don't see any of the reviews done by this site in this type of manner. The reviews here are put out when the facts are found and the story is complete, not just put out because it's hot news and it'll boost your hit count.

Case in point. There is already one post in this forum with someone changing their mind on buying the card because of his review. He has already changed one persons mind with this short unsubstaniated review.

That is wrong.