Choose A Different Card:
ATi Radeon HD 2900 XT
|
At A Glance
Details
|
Reference Images
![]() ![]() |
Related Cards
|
| Price | Name | Core | Mem | Buswidth | Memory | Displays | TV | VIVO | HD | HDCP | 2-Slot | |
![]() |
Sapphire Radeon HD 2900 XT | 750 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
PowerColor HD2900 XT 512MB GDDR3 | 750 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
ASUS EAH2900XT/HTVDI/512M | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
ASUS EAH2900XT/G/HTVDI/512M | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Diamond Viper Radeon HD 2900 XT | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
GeCube Radeon HD 2900 XT | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Gigabyte GV-RX29T512VH-B | 743 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
HIS Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB GDDR3 | 743 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Visiontek Radeon HD 2900 XT | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
MSI RX2900XT-VT2D512E | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
ATi Radeon HD 2900 XT | 745 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
XpertVision Radeon HD 2900 XT | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Club3D Radeon HD 2900 XT | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Diamond Extreme PC HD 2900 XT 1GB GDDR4 | 825 | 1050 | 512 bit | 1024 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Diamond Radeon HD 2900 XT 1GB GDDR4 | 825 | 1050 | 512 bit | 1024 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
HIS Radeon HD 2900 XT 1GB GDDR4 | 743 | 1000 | 512 bit | 1024 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Sapphire Radeon HD 2900 XT 1GB GDDR4 | 750 | 825 | 512 bit | 1024 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
PowerColor HD 2900 XT 1GB GDDR4 | 743 | 1000 | 512 bit | 1024 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | - | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Palit Radeon HD 2900 XT | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | - | y | d | y | |
![]() |
VVIKOO Radeon HD 2900 XT | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Jetway Radeon HD 2900 XT | 740 | 825 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y | |
![]() |
Diamond Radeon HD 2900XT 512MB OC | 800 | 800 | 512 bit | 512 MB | DL-DVI / DL-DVI | y | y | y | d | y |
102 Comments
Add Comment
This is a moderated comment list. All posts are subject to my personal approval. Please limit your comments to this card. Don't (for example) startasking questions about your video card here, you'll get a much better response in the forums. Anonymous posts are allowed, but I encourage you to sign up for the forums and post comments under your name. |












guest
guest
GPUReview Founder
guest
Performance is OK, but hard to say with the premature drivers for it.
The big negatives for me.
Its WAY too hot!, and it draws way too much power! If it can match the GTX with better drivers it can redeme itself, otherwise it needs to be in the 300$ price range to compete with the 8800GTS.
guest
guest
guest
guest
benchamark DirectX10
46fps
1024x768
no filters
GPUReview Founder
GPUReview Founder
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM0MSwzLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
And the XT dosent really have that much shader power.. even if it has 320 SPs, they are still clocked much much lower.
GPUReview Founder
guest
It isn't apples to apples anyway...
Shouldn't the HD2900XT be cheaper than the 8800GTX?
GPUReview Founder
guest
Atleast it can beat the 8800 GTX in DX10 .
And the fact that it beats the GTX in a very few ammount of games, is because those games use less complex shaders and so the R600's far less complex design works well with them.
guest
guest
whats up with that?
seems the 8800s do the same thing when i mess with the clock numbers? bug?
guest
guest
As for the 8800GTS, it is not compatible with the hugely popular Asrock 7750dual transition Motherboards.
guest
guest
guest
guest
guest
guest
guest
guest
powerful entry into the DX10 market
Good solid performance even with obvious junk drivers
Shows good potential, as well as a good match for the original intended competition.
the bad
not direct competition to the 8800 GTX 768MB
power hungry
a good house heater
Ok granted the card runs hot, and it's a power hog. Oh well that's something that'll be down to a personal choice when choosing a new card. On the other hand for the first ATI DX10 card it's a good start. From most benchmarks, people claim it's worse than the 8800 GTS 640MB, where as most reviews (average) it to be somewhere between the 8800 GTS 640MB and the 8800 GTX 768MB. If one compares to the 8800 GTS 640MB it comes out on top in some areas, as does the GTS. if one compares it to the 8800 GTX 768MB again it does come out in some areas, but like the GTS it fails in others. People bash the card, but no-one seems to remember nVidia has had a lot more time to work on the 8800's, not to mention while he 8800''s are good DX9 cards Vista and DX10 drivers are still a bit haywire. Something ATI does actually have 9though very immature)
guest
guest
guest
Texture Units: Nv gtx =32 ATi =16
Raster Operators: Nv gtx =24 ATi =16
So from the start ATI has less Pixel Fill Rate Texture Fill Rate.
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4946&s=14
Look at the insane Vertex Shader score for the ATI.
To show some evidence of what I am saying
YES I know 3D mark is not a really good compare but will have to do for now.
As for power usage look at the clock on the ATi GPU clock 743MHz, clock your GTX up to that and see what the power usage would be.
(If you can, bet probably not on air cooling for long term)
Power usage should drop a lot with the move to 65nm, at the moment I believe this card is really a protoypye for the next die shrink, remember the Nv 6800 Ultra cards, where crazy at the time for running hot using power.
This videocard is also not meant to be compeating against the GTX but the GTS 640MB.
As for the drivers there is still room for improvement, happens with all new products for any company.
(Lets see in 2 months whats happening)
To finish of I am not loyal to any company.
guest
GPU clock does vary though I've seen most at either 750or 440. The ideal 743mhz clock is kinda odd.
Swebarb: no one says you have to buy it. Each to their own as they say.
JamieUK: Fortunatly those two boards are based off of VIA North bridge chipsets so compatibility shouldn't be an issue. I would however, recommend if you switch from nVidia cards to ATI cards that you make sure to wipe all traces of the nVidia drivers before even installing the hardware.
guest
If an HD2900xt works then that changes.
guest
Any video card will normally word on a VIA chipset based board. It's just a matter of making sure any pervious drivers are gone to avoid conflicts.
guest
guest
which is better
ATi Radeon HD 2900 XT or GeForce 8800 GTS
guest
guest
guest
guest
guest
guest
2900 320/5=64|64*4=256
2600 120/5=24|24*4=96
2300 40/5=8|8x4=32
Nvidia is gonna be in big trouble soon. Ati just needs to update their drivers for the 2-series, Btw i dont think nvidia will refresh they 8 series of cards most likely they'll just skip to 9-series and repeat the cycle they started with the 8-series(High end before christmas time, Low end 6 months later)
guest
guest
guest
Senior Member
Member
the matured drivers are having a huge impact on performance for the positive.
Senior Member
from this site
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcgameshardware.de%2F%3Farticle_id%3D602373%26page%3D3&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&safe=off&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools
, is that true? If it is, then it's better to own a HD 2900 XT than a 8800 GTX if you want to play Crysis on max settings. But we'll see when Crysis actually does come out. And hell... the matured drivers did a GREAT job!
Member
a grain of sand, none the less, the first grain i've seen
guest
Senior Member
Senior Member
guest
Senior Member
Did quite a nice job on improving performance .
guest
Senior Member
Member
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/diamond_radeon_2900_xt_1gb/
Im suprised firingsquad didn't investigate uber high resolutions, which is where I suspect this card would shine.
Senior Member
guest
http://www.sapphiretech.com/fc/products/products_overview.php?gpid=184
http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=2&l2=8&l3=544&l4=0&model=1673&modelmenu=1
any help will be more than welcome
guest
guest
guest
guest
http://forums.hardwarezone.com/showthread.php?t=1659449
Senior Member
guest
GPUReview Founder
Senior Member
guest
Senior Member
guest
guest
guest
Senior Member
http://techreport.com/articles.x/12956/4 There must be a major architecture flaw in the R600 .
It looses 24% performance in LP , while the 8800 GTX looses 6% performance , when 4x AA is turned on .
guest
Senior Member
Lol edit : I can't believe I wasn't aware of this until now . The HD 2900 XT's ROPs don't process antialiasing , it's shaders do , that explains the whole deal with crappy AA performance . It's probably because future DX10 games will be forcing cards(probably) to use their shaders to process antialiasing .
guest
Senior Member
guest
Another thing people need to consider are the drivers. This card is getting better all the time, as the initial drivers were rather poor. Whilst the 8800s will be at their peak for driver optimisations.
All ATi/AMD had to do is drop the process and get some more speed out of the card before the 9800 drops. Ala the 850XT...
Senior Member
But with current games , the 8800's use their ROPs to perform AA, while the HD 2900's use their shaders .
In newer games, all games will force all cards to use their shaders to do AA.
guest
Senior Member
Senior Member
guest
guest
Lots fo problems with it, namely innefficient drivers took all its performance beacuse it needs to sort the workloud out a ton mroe then g80's to sue all tis shaders, its shader clock is like half that of the g80's beacuse its locked to it's core, so there goes half your performance.
Its just small things like that really.
Doesnt help that people try to use 4x SSAA to get screen thigns when cfaa is intended for this card since it uses shaders instead of ROPS.
Senior Member
I'd wait for the next generation of cards from both ATi and nVidia .
guest
guest
Senior Member
guest
Senior Member
guest
guest
guest
guest
guest
Senior Member
As for Far Cry 2 ... I doubt it ... the superscalar architecture is horribly inefficient . It'll be atleast one or two more generations of ATi cards using the superscalar architecture , before you can directly compare the amount of shader operations between the ATi and nVidia ( scalar architecture ) cards .