AMD to release Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Black with unlocked multiplier (http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/601337/amd-to-release-athlon-64-x2-5000-black-edition.html)

^ What's especially interesting about this one is:
1) Price, if it translates well to the UK market (read: if this stupid money-grabbing government doesn't tax it to hell) this ($136/Ј68) is an amazing value CPU!
2) Energy Efficient (hopefully) at 65W
3) Unlocked multiplier, which doesn't happen in many chips and I've been told it's the safest and bestest way for n00bs to overclock...

All in all, as I was contemplating the purchase of a 4800+ at roughly that price when I get my new rig (hopefully this decade :xp: ), this chip might definitely take its place.

Radeon 2950XT for Xmas anyone? (http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/601338/rumour-control-amd-radeon-hd-2950xt-in-november.html)

"However, given that the HD 2900XT completely failed to compete with the GeForce 8800-series chips on anything except price, we’re sceptical about a 2950XT being able to trounce the next flagship GeForce chip. We’ll just have to wait until November to see the results for ourselves."

^Agreed

Again we'll have to wait for benchies, and I hope they release a Pro version or something to compete with the 8800GTS cause me thinks that's where its hurting the most atm for Ati's 2k series...

Yes and NVIDIA is supposedly releasing their G92 chip in November (http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/601250/rumour_control_nvidia_g92_to_launch_in_november.ht) ml) as well though I don't think CustomPC is right when they call it a GeForce 9800. I'm guessing it will be called the GeForce 89xx or 8850GTS.

In any case, at least the ATI division of AMD seems to be closing the gap with NVIDIA faster than AMD vs. Intel.

According to this article (http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/601215/rumour_control_geforce_9800_could_be_out_for_chris) tmas.html) romor has it it will be called 9800...But that doesn't make much sense when you're talking about the 8-series does it?
We'll just have to see...

that makes sense..... the 89xx series is still based on the g80
http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2007/02/15/geforce-8900gtx-and-8950gx2-details-listed)

NegSun, you need to broaden the scope of your news sources... otherwise we could just redivert this whole area to custompc and be non the wiser ;)

mtfbwya

Meh most of the stuff on CustomPC that's rumor is usually paraphrased from the Inquirer website anyways Astro...I didn't realise that the G92 was the 9800 series and the G80 the 8800 series, the 9800 seems to have come around pretty quick, but maybe it's the lack of Ati cards (and the fact they're way behind) that makes it feel like that.

^^^^
well, the 8800GTX was launched almost a year ago, so its about time that Nvidia got around to putting out a new card. my only question is why Nvidia feels that they already need a brand new lineup of cards right now. the life cycle of the 8800 series is still in prime time at the moment, so it seems like its just too early for Nvidia to get a new lineup of cards on the market when they've hardly expanded the 8000 series line hardly at all.

It does seem a bit silly...especially since the 9800 series doesn't bring any additional support (maybe DX10.1, but that's not even sure), so releasing a 9 series with another low, mid and high-end range seems a bit OTT if you ask me, especially since the 8800 is pretty much overkill nowadays on standard resolutions even on recent games...
But hey if it can push down the price of the 8-series (the 8800GTS in particular), who's gonna complain but the fanboys who don't have the ultimate pwnage GPU anymore?

The 2950XT is a good start on the long road to recovery for AMD. The main reason that R600 is slower than G80 is that its pixel processors run at the same clockspeed as the rest of the core, whereas they are clocked faster than the core in the G80. I have a feeling that R700 will have a similar arrangement to the G80's.

Oh, and NS: ATI isn't that far behind Nvidia. Since the HD 2900XT's rather lackluster release, ATI has worked overtime on the drivers and it now beats the 8800GTS in most cases and even rivals the 8800GTX in others. Not too shabby. Now they just need to bring power consumption down to acceptable levels.

I'm going to reserve any comments on AMD's CPUs until the release of Phenom. Comparing Athlon64 X2 to C2D just isn't fair, IMO.;)

Oh, and NS: ATI isn't that far behind Nvidia. Since the HD 2900XT's rather lackluster release, ATI has worked overtime on the drivers and it now beats the 8800GTS in most cases and even rivals the 8800GTX in others. Not too shabby. Now they just need to bring power consumption down to acceptable levels.
I was just reading that in my new CPC mag today Q, apparently Ati beats the cr*p out of nVidia in Vista as well drivers wise, with some games almost rendering twice the framerates that nVidia can produce...

It's an interesting time for computer geeks that's for sure...with the release of Vista, DX10 and Dual/Triple/Quad-Core CPU's it's definitely a good time to be around, now all we need is some DX10 Star Wars action (*cough*K3*cough*) and that's it, I'll be robbing a bank...

I'm going to reserve any comments on AMD's CPUs until the release of Phenom. Comparing Athlon64 X2 to C2D just isn't fair, IMO.;)
It is if you compare them price-wise here in the UK...The Athlon 64 X2 series is ridiculously expensive compared to the Intel ones.

To compare it for you: The Intel Conroe E6700 @ 2.66Ghz is about Ј192 (that's $384), whereas AMD's flagship Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Black Edition @ 3.2Ghz is cheaper at Ј140 ($280)

Now I know the Conroes are insane overclockers, but to push it to it's limit you need to mess with the BIOS, have a decent motherboard, good case airflow (always recommended I know ;) ), get a decent HSF, TEC or watercooling, etc...

Not something your average Joe is gonna want to do...In fact AMD sells well in pre-built low and mid-range PCs, but the fact remains that Intel remains agressive in it's selling policies with other companies (for which it has been slapped on the wrist numerous times already)

that makes sense..... the 89xx series is still based on the g80
http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2007/02/15/geforce-8900gtx-and-8950gx2-details-listedBut) as far as I can tell NVIDIA never released any GeForce 89xx cards so that makes me wonder if this Inquirer article from February has turned out to be bogus. Unless NVIDIA is planning to announce this G92 GPU as a GeForce 89xx card in November which in some ways makes more sense to me but of course there is the issue of G92 not matching to 89xx. But maybe NVIDIA changed their minds and decided to forego production of 89xx.

In reality, I don't care right now. I'll just wait until both ATI and NVIDIA announce their new cards and wait to see the performance comparisons. I really hope both of them have made strides in reducing power consumption though.

@NS: C2Ds, especially Allendales, aren't nearly that expensive here.

These (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2+50001157+40000343+1050729314&name=Dual-Core) are the chips that I'm talking about. Don't let the Pentium nameplate fool you: these are C2D through and through, not Netburst (P4). They're cheap as dirt, and overclock very similarly to their (much) more expensive bretheren.

And overclocking them isn't as much of a pain as you think, NS. With any C2D you usually don't have to start worrying about voltages and temps until you get near to 3GHZ, and you can use the stock heatsink up to 2.8-3GHZ as well. And since these Allendales have high multipliers because of their low stock FSB, you can do it on cheap (extremely cheap ATM) memory. It's basically free speed, and I shouldn't have to say that at 3GHZ even the cheapest C2D will hand any Athlon64 its ass on a plate. And well it should, being a design that's two years newer.

Well, maybe the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Black Edition can change that balace a wee bit with it's unlocked multipliers...

Intel is just pure evil anyways

Not sure if this deserved a new thread or not, so I'll just post it in here:

AMD/Ati is apparently planning a release of a 55 or 65nm chip (RV670) for the release of a new 2900Pro, clearly aimed at the mid-range enthusiasts...
It's supposed to be as fast as the 2900XT, but half the price.

CPC article (http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/601348/rumour-control-new-radeon-as-fast-as-2900xt-but-half-the-price.html)
Dailytech (original) article (http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+Preps+R600+Dieshrink/article9073.htm)

Is this too little too late?
Sure it may (supposedly) support SM4.1 and DX10.1 as well as PCIe2, nVidia's new lineup has also been creeping forward and chances (or fears) are that it might win this round yet again...

AMD is apparently also planning the release of a 2900GT as well, another notch down from the Pro, but hopefully not as poopy as the 2600.

This is at least something cause it widens the range a bit and with the current drivers becoming a bit more reliable (more so for Ati then nVidia it seems) we might see a bit more of the true potential of the mid-range cards in both camps...As Xmas is coming up and not everyone would dare to put a 8800GTX on their Xmas list, these mid-range ones might be up for a good battle and some good sales this Holiday season.

If ATI can put out a card that can compete in the ~$200.00 segment, and use less power to boot, then it won't be too little, too late.

We'll have to wait for some benchies again first to find out...

well, we managed to get our hands on a 2900 Pro down at work, and we went ahead and tested it in one of our monster rigs we have at work as a display unit with a couple of games that we have pre-installed on it. it originally had two GeForce 8800GTX cards installed on it which is why the PSU has way too much extra power on tap.

Unit Specs:
CPU: Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Kentsfield (quad core)
Mobo: Asus Striker Extreme (NForce 680i SLI)
RAM: 4x 2GB Corsair Dominator DDR2-800
Sound Card: X-Fi Fatal1ty Edition
PSU: Cooler Master Real Power Pro 850W
OS: Windows Vista Ultimate x64
Display: NEC 26" LCD Monitor (Max res: 1920x1200)

the results were actually quite good. obviously, the performance of the 2900Pro does not match up well to 2 8800GTX cards in SLI. however, performance was fairly close to a single 8800GTX on most of the tests we ran. the games we used were FEAR, Bioshock, Call of Juarez, and World in Conflict. every game ran at more than acceptable frame rates with maxed out settings even at the monitor's max resolution of 1920x1200. not bad for a card that is supposed to be several steps down from the 8800GTX.

as for the card itself, we noticed that the card still uses the full 512-bit memory bus the same as the 2900XT. the only difference the card has is clock speed and a lower TDP that comes from underclocking. with the card being priced just slightly highter than the 8800GTS 320MB card, this card is a bargain no matter how you look at it. the TDP is still fairly high, but its hard to beat this kind of performance/dollar ratio.

anyways, just a bit of fyi for ya. ;)

Is it quite overclockable or did you not test it that way?

Checked a couple of reviews online and it seems to be the general consensus the it's the pwnage card to have for the most bang per buck...Checked the retail side in the UK and it's cheaper then any 8800GTS out there, but still more expensive compared to the US market (hate this country!!!)

The better Ati drivers should boost some confidence and maybe some people will be having this under their Xmas tree soon, and AMD stays in the race for now.

Edit:
lolz this is insane there's a 1Gb GDDR4 2900Pro version for sale for a mere $60 more than the cheapest 320Mb 8800GTS or $20 less than the cheapest 640Mb 8800GTS (source: Newegg.com)
In one word: pwnd!

Re-Edit:
More news: AMD goes mobile with unified shaders (http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/601360/amd-provides-unified-shaders-for-mobile-phones.html)

Seems like a good idea, and quite lucrative for AMD most likely, here's hoping they put that cash to good use.

All the Intel fanboys that have been predicting AMD's demise since the stone age must start to realise that they're here to stay...Intel can't live off the vaunted C2D technology forever, there's another round coming up soon.

In other news: November 17th (http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20071001PD211.html) is being whispered as a potential release date for a potential 2950Pro series, the specs look lovely, but what did momma used to say? "If it looks too good to be true..."
Time will tell.

Here ends my fanboyism for today as I shall rest soon, enjoy!

Thanks for the hands-on review, stingerhs. If you have the opportunity to do any more, please don't hesitate to do so!:)

ATI's definitely going after the 8800GTS with gusto! Let the price wars begin! YAY!:D

All the Intel fanboys that have been predicting AMD's demise since the stone age must start to realise that they're here to stay...Intel can't live off the vaunted C2D technology forever, there's another round coming up soon.
:confused: Um, I don't see the connection between Intel's C2D vs. ATI AMD and the NVIDIA vs. ATI/AMD battle for graphics supremacy...

Here is hoping that this latest round of graphics cards makes progress in reducing electrical power consumption. I know I'll be looking into those stats when these cards get released.

They have been released.;) (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010380048+106792278+1067931819&name=Radeon+HD+2900PRO)

EDIT: Oops, you're talking about the R670-based cards, aren't you?

Is it quite overclockable or did you not test it that way?well, we didn't have too much time on our hands to test it that much, but i'll look into it on Thursday night the next time i go in.

what we really need is a Crossfire Edition mobo so we can test 2+ of the 2900 Pros and see how well they stack up to a single card and 2x 8800GTX cards. in particular, i'd like to see if Crossfire just simply works better than SLI on Vista x64. the results of the 8800 GTX in SLI on our rig were impressive, but i did notice that some of the games like Call of Juarez and even Bioshock did not run very stable if left running for an extended period of time (30+ min) which is not a problem we had with a single 8800GTX nor the 2900 Pro. not to mention that i've had a number of complaints from some of our gaming customers that their SLI rigs just didn't play nice with a number of games while i've had few complaints from the ones with Crossfire rigs (albeit those guys are relatively few in number).

anyways, i am actually rather glad that we've been able to test hardware like that. it hasn't been till recent that our owner has finally been convinced that we need to show off high end hardware, and most of us just enjoy the chance to test out hardware for ourselves rather than having to read about them in articles. if its possible, i'll do my best to keep you guys informed about the stuff we get our hands one. :D

^^^That would be greatly appreciated.:)

:confused: Um, I don't see the connection between Intel's C2D vs. ATI AMD and the NVIDIA vs. ATI/AMD battle for graphics supremacy...
I was talking about AMD as a company, where Intel is obviously their greatest competitor and would love nothing more than to see them fail, shown in their aggressive marketing and for which the EU and Korean government have already slapped them for.

They have been released.;) (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010380048+106792278+1067931819&name=Radeon+HD+2900PRO)

EDIT: Oops, you're talking about the R670-based cards, aren't you?
I still can't believe the price of the 1Gb GDDR4 version (I hope it translates well to the UK market, but Sapphire's prices are usually quite good here), but I can't find any reviews for that one yet...Maybe stingerhs could get his hands on one of those suckas? I'm especially interested in whether GDDR4 makes a difference compared to GDDR3...

And I also wonder how well Crossfire fares against SLI, especially now that 2x1Gb 2900Pro cards would cost a bit more than half of 2x768Mb 8800GTX cards or a bit less even than 2x640Mb 8800GTS cards.

.......the games we used were FEAR, Bioshock, Call of Juarez, and World in Conflict. every game ran at more than acceptable frame rates with maxed out settings even at the monitor's max resolution of 1920x1200. not bad for a card that is supposed to be several steps down from the 8800GTX.....

The 2900 comparable to the GTS for sure.... Retesting at 1600p and the 8800GTX will come into its own. This is what those cards are designed for. It demonstrates how important consideration of the display you have is to a purchase decision. If you cant get over 1600x1200, why buy a 8800GTX ultra when you can get comparable results on a cheaper card.

mtfbwya

^^^^
the display is supposed to be our ultimate gaming platform (with air cooling instead of water cooling. that build is probably going to get done here relatively soon), and the monitor we have is already a $1200 monitor.

as for that monitor, i think we only have about 3-4 in stock. why so few?? because they're so expensive that very few people actually buy them. my point is this: most people don't buy the expensive equipment. we get a number of gamers in our store because of the client base our store has built over the years, and hence the reason for the gaming display unit we built. most gamers don't even go for the 1200p monitors that we have just simply because they're too expensive, and the ones that are willing to put money down on a 8800GTX SLI system still aren't very willing to put up the money for the larger monitors.

believe me, we've done our homework in picking out what kind of displays we put out. for some reason, most people only want the powerful hardware and not the best possible display. if you want my opinion, a single 8800GTX or a 2900XT would be just fine for one of these large displays, but for some reason, some people want the beefy hardware instead. call it good advertising on Nvidia's part i guess. :p

as for you, i can't help it that you'll still be clinging to your Nvidia cards even if AMD puts out a better one. :xp:

Monitors have to peak at some point in size, here in the UK 22" is the most popular one for price/performance nowadays...Not everyone even wants a 32" one just because it's not convenient to have it as a computer display, you might as well plug in your fancy HD TV

Heck 22" is bigger than the TV in my room, and it would rip to play games at that rez, there's just a point where things become overkill for most people...
And what you save in monitor spending money, you can throw towards (a) very decent GPU(s) so you can actually set everything to max when you're playing games.

Edit:
Another rumor (http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3393&Itemid=35) is going about claiming that November is the big month for AMD/Ati as it will also (supposedly) see the launch of the first Quad Phenoms, clocked from 2.8Ghz and/or 3.0Ghz upwards...