2 Phenom reviews

[dave39]

It's funny because so many people held off buying a Q6600 so that they could get one of these... hehe

 

[Apokalipse]

It's funny because so many people held off buying a Q6600 so that they could get one of these... hehe

only to have them perform well?

 

[NosBoost300]

2900 doesn't suck.

It has an issue with anti-aliasing, and it consumes a bit more power than it probably should. But it's still a fast card, which broke the 3dmark06 record a few times.

lol... i was a bit rash on that one huh? i didnt really mean they suck.. but they were a disappointment for the wait.. and for cost there were and are better alternatives.... and in consideration to its drivers, of everyone saying.. "wait for drivers" it didnt come true sadly... but anyway.. im' going back to running 3dmark... i managed to get my cpu 3dmarkable at lower volts... so hopefully i can manage higher than 3.3...

they are no doubt good cards.. but when in comparison to its competition its not looking too good..

though i'm not speaking in reguards to the 3870.. i will give it its due time

 

[Apokalipse]

and in consideration to its drivers, of everyone saying.. "wait for drivers" it didnt come true sadly...

Better drivers did come out, which made it compete better against the Nvidia cards.
It doesn't beat an Ultra, and the anti-aliasing issue didn't get fixed. But the situation did improve with better drivers.

 

[gurusan]

the r600 situation really improved when the price dropped. For a short while the 2900 pro was the best GPU for the money.

 

[Invisible]

for like 3 days haha

 

[gurusan]

yeah...the release of the 8800GT swiftly took care of that one.

 

[Merkwürdigeliebe]

yeah, no one in their right mind would've ever bought a 2900XT, particularly after the PRO came out

 

[maroon1]

i just read that Phenom 9700 n 9900 will be available Q1 2008 for a price of $300 n $350.

And both perform worse than the cheaper Q6600

If those prices are true then there is no reason to buy AMD phenom unless you already have AM2 motherboard

 

[maroon1]

the 5000+ black edition oced to3.4ghz is faster then a e6750 on stock i kno that, and its a 140$ chip. .

Can you show us a proof ?

AMD's Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Black Edition | Tom's Hardware
According to tomshardware, 5000+ @ 3.3GHz performs only 2% faster than 6000+

I'm pretty sure that E6750 at stock is slightly faster on average than 5000+ @3.4GHZ