Go Back   OC3D Forums > [OC3D] General Forums > OC3D News
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #1  
Old 28-07-09, 06:35 PM
gaurang gaurang is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 525
Send a message via Yahoo to gaurang
AMD Turns Up the Heat with ATI FirePro V8750

What say enthusiasts – would you like to have a go at this 2GB graphics processing powerhouse or do you find it too dear?

Read more

__________________
the WriterZ... Creativity through Words
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 28-07-09, 07:24 PM
Rastalovich's Avatar
Rastalovich Rastalovich is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Testing hardware somewhere
Posts: 11,421
Quote:
If we compare it to NVIDIA’s present cards, the FirePro V8750 beats the Quadro FX 4800 all ends up in terms of speed.
--------------

Where exactly we get that from ?

The figures in terms of clock count/bandwidth/memory don't mean anything. This would be like comparing a motorola ppc with an intel cpu.

Professional CAD bench would be the thing to test as we can't test cuda performance on both cards with some Adobe stuff.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 28-07-09, 07:30 PM
gaurang gaurang is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 525
Send a message via Yahoo to gaurang
These are AMD's claims... so I guess they must have done some kinda testing before letting it rip.
__________________
the WriterZ... Creativity through Words
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 28-07-09, 07:36 PM
Rastalovich's Avatar
Rastalovich Rastalovich is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Testing hardware somewhere
Posts: 11,421
Quote:
AMD claim that if we compare it to NVIDIA’s present cards, the FirePro V8750 beats the Quadro FX 4800 all ends up in terms of speed.
Which is more accurate.

I mean it could very well beat it at CAD operation, but there is nothing presented that they back the claim with. Which is pretty serious being as these cards purchased by professionals for professional reasons, tend to cost high dollar.

Them simply saying it's "faster" is not quite good enough.

For all we know they could very well be saying it's faster in terms of clock/bandwidth.

Which is similar to staking a claim that a Pentium4 clocks at 3.2ghz stock so it's gotta be better than a x2 @ 2.4ghz.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 29-07-09, 04:33 PM
diablo170 diablo170 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 65
How much better would this perform on cad software or even gaming (crysis maybe ) compared to a consumer gpu, e.g nVidia gtx 295 or maybe a Ati 4870x2? Just wanted to kno the difference =]
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 29-07-09, 07:36 PM
Rastalovich's Avatar
Rastalovich Rastalovich is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Testing hardware somewhere
Posts: 11,421
Professional cards rarely game better than gaming cards, but generall cost atleast 2+x more.

How they perform ? We don't know, email AMD I guess.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 31-07-09, 10:05 PM
DistortedDiggaz DistortedDiggaz is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 14
I am finding this too expensive to be honest. In the announcement, there wa nothing on DX 11 support. I thought ATI were a lot cheaper too.. Oh well
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-08-09, 07:33 AM
Rastalovich's Avatar
Rastalovich Rastalovich is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Testing hardware somewhere
Posts: 11,421
This really is a professional card. Although it may use Dx11, as it becomes the progressive standard, whether it had Dx10 or Dx10.1 or Dx11, bears little consequence on the card as the tool it's intended for.
__________________


Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump










All times are GMT. The time now is 05:52 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.