New ATI cards, blah blah, benchmarks, blah.

Mr. Perfect · Post by **Mr. Perfect** » Tue May 04, 2004 3:20 pm

About Fing time we got to see how the new war will pan out. X800 Review at Toms.

Something I'm particularly interested in is this. From the looks of it, the GT will be priced the same as the Pro, but will pull right along with the higher-end cards due to it's 16 pipes.

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Tue May 04, 2004 3:48 pm

seems that in D3D ATi wins massively , but in OGL NVidia wins massively. to me that makes em equal.

Grendel · Post by **Grendel** » Tue May 04, 2004 3:50 pm

ATi: PS 2.0, 24b FP, 160M transistors - nVidia: PS 3.0, 32b FP, 220M transistors

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Tue May 04, 2004 6:24 pm

What Grendel is trying to say is that they are both super ultra fast!

It doesn't matter how many transistors you have, only what you DO with the ones you have. ATI, as usual, are fast-as-all-hell, but slightly technically behind. Who cares? How many games do I have with shader3.0? Nada.

I'll buy ATI again - simply because I don't want to install a 550W PSU. Or overheat my room in summer...

Teddy · Post by **Teddy** » Tue May 04, 2004 7:33 pm

well, check out hte open-gl benches!!! if you play d3, then nvidia is still for you. Not to mention ati will never allow antialising to work in d3 in opengl....

And as far as the power supply goes, a few hardware sites have already confirmed that it works jsut fine on a 350w, altho if you have a stacked system.... 350 may not cut it... Tomshardware tested the power useage and i believe it came out to 17 watts higher in usage than the x800... The second connection is just for stability.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Tue May 04, 2004 8:45 pm

I dunno.

is 40 more fps really worth an extra molex connector?

Mr. Perfect · Post by **Mr. Perfect** » Tue May 04, 2004 8:47 pm

[fanboy]Considering that D3 will be ass slow on a X800 XT, of course it is![/fanboy]

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Tue May 04, 2004 9:41 pm

i wonder if a inline molex splitter would make the 6800 think its on 2 different plugs?

Mr. Perfect · Post by **Mr. Perfect** » Tue May 04, 2004 10:00 pm

There's no way for the cards to figure out what's actually plugged into it, but there's the question of whether it will get enough power from one line.

Aggressor Prime · Post by **Aggressor Prime** » Tue May 04, 2004 10:38 pm

I will always get nVidia because my nForce 2 400 Ultra doesn't like Radeons. It ate the last one I had.

Grendel · Post by **Grendel** » Tue May 04, 2004 11:35 pm

Mobius wrote:It doesn't matter how many transistors you have, only what you DO with the ones you have. ATI, as usual, are fast-as-all-hell, but slightly technically behind. Who cares? How many games do I have with shader3.0? Nada.

Not yet, true. ATI is fast as hell because they fine tuned their existing line. nVidia OTOH redesigned their chips, something ATI still has in front of it w/ the next round of chips. nVidia will have a big advantage. Oh, FarCry uses PS 3.0 IIRC

Mobius wrote:I'll buy ATI again - simply because I don't want to install a 550W PSU. Or overheat my room in summer...

My condolences

XeonJr · Post by **XeonJr** » Wed May 05, 2004 4:40 am

I wonder if "AN" inline molex splitter.... Old habbits are hard to break

on topic..

Considering past experiences i've had with ATI cards, i'll be leaning towards Nvidia's line up.

BUBBALOU · Post by **BUBBALOU** » Wed May 05, 2004 5:45 am

[Grendel] wrote:Not yet, true. ATI is fast as hell because they fine tuned their existing line. nVidia OTOH redesigned their chips, something ATI still has in front of it w/ the next round of chips. nVidia will have a big advantage. Oh, FarCry uses PS 3.0 IIRC

You have to look at it from the real perspective folks.... that Nvidia is not under the M$haft XBOX Leash where ATI is now.. XBOX2 is ATI's Priority and failure to meet M$'s deadline will break the bank!

can you say the ATI retail trickle with optimizations for the game engine they think will do best.

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Wed May 05, 2004 9:55 am

XeonJr wrote:Considering past experiences i've had with ATI cards, i'll be leaning towards Nvidia's line up.

amen to that Xeon. 4 different Ati cards let me down. not one NVidia has let me down yet.

Vertigo · Post by **Vertigo** » Wed May 05, 2004 10:42 am

Weird, i've had no problems at all with my Radeon 9700 Pro for over a year now....

I'm probably going for an ATI, yet again, been happy with the one i have now, and I myself never had any problems with it.

SM 3.0 has nothing special to add anyway, just makes it possible for an entire shader effect to be done in just one pass, instead of multiple passes, and the F-buffer in the radeons makes multiple passes at least as fast as one huge pass anyway...

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed May 05, 2004 10:50 am

THG = antichrist.

friggin sellout...

Mr. Perfect · Post by **Mr. Perfect** » Wed May 05, 2004 1:05 pm

So post an alternative.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Wed May 05, 2004 1:28 pm

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjEx

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=2044

Teddy · Post by **Teddy** » Wed May 05, 2004 3:15 pm

Vertigo, how can you say you've never had any problems with ati???? Do you play any games??? I can understand the hardware end, ati makes descent hardware. But thier drivers have always been thier downfall and in my opinion.. they still are. I refuse to give more support to a company that puts out 4... yes 4 official driver releases that all have broken gamma(catalist 4.0-4.4)...

5 driver releases that wont run call of duty properly(catlaist 3.10 -4.4)on the 9700(this bug exists only on the 9700, the 9800/9600 is unaffected).

and ati refuses to support antialising in 16 bit color in opengl...so no antialising in descent 3(this applys for any card newer than the 9700).

game profiles for setting up aa and aff for diffrent games so you dont have to go in and change the global setting each time you want to play a game has been broken for 6 driver releases... If it ever worked in the first place!!!I never confirmed it because i didnt feel like loading that many old driver sets(I have better things to do with my time than beta test for ati...)

My complete list of bugs that annoyed me is actually much longer but i will spare you all the details, unless you really want me to list them all...

In my book, nvidia spends good money on thier"the way it's ment to be played" deal so thier hardware will play games good.... and they oviously spend much more money on betatester as i find about 99% fewer bugs in thier drivers(yes there are a few...)but no show stoppers like in the ati drivers...

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Wed May 05, 2004 11:28 pm

AceCombat wrote:i wonder if a inline molex splitter would make the 6800 think its on 2 different plugs?

Ace, you need to read up on Ohm's Law.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu May 06, 2004 1:21 am

thanks flip. kinda sucks that I have next to nil time for the puter now.. oh well *shrug*

Vertigo · Post by **Vertigo** » Thu May 06, 2004 3:12 am

Well teddy.... let's just say that with the games *I* played i never had any problems with them, at all.

I guess I don't play enough 'old' games to notice anything about FSAA in 16-bit then.

...and Call of Duty, i've ran the game when it was just released, hated it, and never played it again... now, taht was indeed with Cat 3.8, so i wouldn't know how it'd run now

Gamma.... never had the need to adjust it, so can't tell if there's a problem with it or not (my TFT is bright enough)

Let's just rephrase what i said then....

For the games that I play, i've never had any problems with my R9700 Pro.

(lately all i've been playing was UT2k3/4, Morrowind and Far Cry, all of wich run beautifully and fast on my pc)

Max_T · Post by **Max_T** » Thu May 06, 2004 5:40 pm

Vertigo wrote: For the games that I play, i've never had any problems with my R9700 Pro.

(lately all i've been playing was UT2k3/4, Morrowind and Far Cry, all of wich run beautifully and fast on my pc)

same...

Capm · Post by **Capm** » Thu May 06, 2004 9:25 pm

some systems work inherently better with one or the other. Nforce Systems work best with nvidia equipment. And let me tell you, having an ATI TV card in the same system as a GeForce is annoying when it wants you to update your ati video drivers becuase they're out of date (considering I don't HAVE any...) And there are some configurations where ATI blooms...

Go with what your system likes, in the performance war, they're all so fast it doesn't REALLY matter anyway. Next month someone will come out with something faster, shell out another 500 bucks and sell your old one on ebay... WHooPtie-Doo!

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Fri May 07, 2004 4:08 am

Did anyone else see this?
http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/200 ... fsaa-2.png

Vertigo · Post by **Vertigo** » Fri May 07, 2004 5:31 am

And what's the sue of that comparison ? It compares 6x FSAA with 8x FSAA....

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Fri May 07, 2004 10:15 am

Nevermind the massive performance penalty you get from enableing NV 8x mode which is really 4x multi-sample + 2x supersample. D3 drops to ~100 FPS on my FX5950 compared to the normal 480 FPS with 4x.

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Fri May 07, 2004 12:51 pm

MD-2389 wrote:
AceCombat wrote:i wonder if a inline molex splitter would make the 6800 think its on 2 different plugs?
Ace, you need to read up on Ohm's Law.

im just spewing my usual BS ideas.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Fri May 07, 2004 10:42 pm

Vertigo wrote:And what's the sue of that comparison ? It compares 6x FSAA with 8x FSAA....

It's just a demonstration of the top FSAA levels offered by the cards. Sure, 8x FSAA is as slow as hell, but it's soo perdy.

Grendel · Post by **Grendel** » Sat May 08, 2004 1:13 am

Argh ! Clippy !! Kill it, stomp on it.. !!!

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Sat May 08, 2004 11:54 am

So, it looks like you're trying to write a death threat. Would you like help?

Tyranny · Post by **Tyranny** » Sat May 08, 2004 12:17 pm

Krom wrote:Nevermind the massive performance penalty you get from enableing NV 8x mode which is really 4x multi-sample + 2x supersample. D3 drops to ~100 FPS on my FX5950 compared to the normal 480 FPS with 4x.

Heaven forbid you only get 100fps with 8x

STRESSTEST · Post by **STRESSTEST** » Sat May 08, 2004 12:40 pm

Vindicator · Post by **Vindicator** » Sat May 08, 2004 1:02 pm

Oh my...

Vertigo · Post by **Vertigo** » Sat May 08, 2004 1:51 pm

Tyranny wrote:
Krom wrote:Nevermind the massive performance penalty you get from enableing NV 8x mode which is really 4x multi-sample + 2x supersample. D3 drops to ~100 FPS on my FX5950 compared to the normal 480 FPS with 4x.
Heaven forbid you only get 100fps with 8x

With a game as old as D3 ?

That's low

Tyranny · Post by **Tyranny** » Sat May 08, 2004 3:43 pm

meh, no point arguing with tech geeks who act like video card output in games is an extension of their p

enis

Vertigo · Post by **Vertigo** » Sun May 09, 2004 3:00 am

Well let's just say that with the same level of FSAA you'll get like 10-15 fps in Far Cry... MAX

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Sun May 09, 2004 6:22 am

My calculator is superior therefore my penis is bigger.