PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Paul on May 26, 2003, 05:31:50 PM
-
Recently bought a FX5200(I\'m a budget gamer...all i need to play is RTS, not FPS games, so budget card should be good enuf)...guys, this gotta be the crappiest piece of sillicon I\'ve ever wasted my money on. In fact the frame rates is so bad it actually score LOWER than my GF2Ti in the 3DMark 2001 test, although it manage to beat it\'s overall score due to the fact it\'s a DX9 card and can complete all the Nature and Pixel shader tests.
so I return it for an ATI Radeon 9100...and guess what...I get nearly 100%(that\'s double!) the frame rates in almost every test and best of all, the image quality of ATI is unbeatable. The color is just so vibrant!!
And most ATI Radeon 9100 are either same or priced cheaper than FX5200, some sites reported that this card is only about 10 to 15 percent worst than a GF4Ti, but the price is way cheaper.
also, the variant of 9100 i bought has 3.5ns memory..and default 500Mhz RAM speed!!
Nvidia may have the fatest card on the planet in the FX5900(which is still debatable with the recent cheat claims), but it seems like anything below that lose out to ATI in terms of price/performance for DX9 card. (Although ATI, still haven\'t an equivalent DX9 budget card like FX5200...but the FX5200 is SO BUDGETED it\'s useless).
ATI is king!!
-
Preach on!!!!!!!
:hat:ScottyJ:hat:
-
:rolleyes:
key word - budget
oh and 100% would be the same, not double. sheesh
-
lol, u bought an fx5200. u were better off buying a gf3 or an ati in the first place. the fx5200 is nothing but a gf4 MX420 with dx9 capability.
-
...research
-
Originally posted by mm
:rolleyes:
key word - budget
oh and 100% would be the same, not double. sheesh
Nope. U\'re wrong. 100% as in 100% increase. from 15fps to 30fps in the Nature test. That\'s 100% increase in fps from the original 15fps, and double the frame rates. Hee-hee.
and btw, budget and mainstream is where the most money is to be make, not the top end. And ATI is THE hands down winner with 9500/9600/9700 in these range...beat the crap out of any FX cards. In fact, the FX cards are so embarrasing it didn\'t even do much better than a GF4Ti...
And the image quality of ATI is just..
:bounce: :clown: :bounce: :clown: :bounce: :clown: :bounce:
What\'s the point of having insane frame rates when the image quality looks like crap??
Man, I love ATI!!!
-
Originally posted by Tyrant
lol, u bought an fx5200. u were better off buying a gf3 or an ati in the first place. the fx5200 is nothing but a gf4 MX420 with dx9 capability.
Yeah, i did do some research and most sites are saying the FX5200 is like 30% better than GF4MX...and there\'s hardly any comparison done between FX5200 and an ATI 9100. Now, i think those sites are on crack.(or just paid by nvidia).
And GF3 cards is about as easy to get as a Dinosaur nowdays. They\'ve virtually disappear from most stores.
Now, I\'m playing C&C:Generals in 1024x768x32 with HIGH setting...and I still get decent frame rates with great image quality!!! Woo-Hooooo!!!
=======
I Love ATI
-
you said "I get nearly 100%(that\'s double!) the frame rates".
that means the same. if you said 100% more, or 100% times, it would be different. until then........
nvidia will sell 3x more budget cards than ati can dream of
yer pissed:
a. you bought a frickin budget card and thought it wouldnt be one
b. you had to take it back, couldnt afford the good one, and had to buy an Ati to justify yourself
I\'m playing C&C:Generals in 1024x768x32 with HIGH setting...and I still get decent frame rates with great image quality!!! Woo-Hooooo!!!
yer kidding right? i play at 1600x1200 32bit 4xFSAA 8xAF and 60 fps. my laptop plays at 1280x1024......you running a p3 450 machine?
-
I\'ve got a saying. Never buy a budget card and expect good results or on par to higher end versions of the cards.. You get what you pay for. It\'s really that simple.
-
indeed
it\'s like buying a ford focus, when you really wanted that mustang..then going around and saying w00t!!! the color on this ford focus is unbelievable!!!!!!!! OMFG!!!!!! man, i love my ford focus!!!!!!!!!! it gets 100% the fps of the mustang and only cost 1/2 the price!!!!! ford focus r0x0rs my b0x0rs!!!!
...or something like that
for the clueless out there (rtfm!)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.psx2central.com%2Fmm%2Fbuyaclue.jpg&hash=d9398d164930a0bc4a849304c06ee03ee3496f90)
-
Hmmm seems we have some Nvidia fanboys here ;)
Seriously though, ATI is where its at right now concerning video cards. Since Voodoo was bought by Nvidia, all I have owned or even considered buying were Nvidia products, that is until I built my new PC and after doing some research I decided to give ATI a try. I am very pleased with the performance of my 9500 Pro and felt it was well worth the $199 I paid for it. ATI has really stepped it up and I am glad I didn\'t let my loyalty to Nvidia blind my choice.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Hmmm seems we have some Nvidia fanboys here ;)
Seriously though, ATI is where its at right now concerning video cards. Since Voodoo was bought by Nvidia, all I have owned or even considered buying where Nvidia products, that is until I built my new PC and after doing some research I decided to give ATI a try. I am very pleased with the performance of my 9500 Pro and felt it was well worth the $199 I paid for it. ATI has really stepped it up and I am glad I didn\'t let my loyalty to Nvidia blind my choice.
Hee-hee...yep, blind loyalty is the worst...Nvidia did an excellent job previously but now, they just suck. Glad I moved camp to greener grass. But i guess we all know who\'s the really pissed off fan boy here....ha-ha!!
-
Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
I\'ve got a saying. Never buy a budget card and expect good results or on par to higher end versions of the cards.. You get what you pay for. It\'s really that simple.
But you\'re wrong...I get shit with the FX5200...and it\'s MORE EXPENSIVE than a 9100!!! The common "u get what u pay" certainly didn\'t apply here!!!
-
Originally posted by mm
nvidia will sell 3x more budget cards than ati can dream of
yer pissed:
a. you bought a frickin budget card and thought it wouldnt be one
b. you had to take it back, couldnt afford the good one, and had to buy an Ati to justify yourself
yer kidding right? i play at 1600x1200 32bit 4xFSAA 8xAF and 60 fps. my laptop plays at 1280x1024......you running a p3 450 machine?
I\'m not gonna argue with u about the 100% thing coz it\'s a different perspective of calculation..:snore:
And so what if nvidia sold 100 million budget cards previously?? Then was then. This is now. I admit they did fantastic budget cards previously...otherwise, I wouldn\'t have bought so many of their previous budget cards either. But let\'s not be blinded by history and looks at what the companies have to offer TODAY.
(a) I bought a budget card and expect it to be DECENT. GF2Ti met my expetaction more than 1 year ago, no complains.
(b) Yes, I took it back coz it sucks so hard and couldn\'t beat my old GF2Ti. I look around what\'s the next best thing in this budget range and found the 9100 met my criteria. Took it home, expecting it to be decent but it\'s BETTER THAN DECENT. Am I a happy man?? You bet.
Playing at 1600X1200 with 4XAA?? Do you understand the word BUDGET??? And yes, I\'m not ashamed to admit that I runs on a very humble XP1800@2000, 256MB SDRAM(yep, only SDRAM), KT133A chipset, a mobo that is 2 YEARS old(Soltek variant...damn good value for money!!!). And only have a puny 15" monitor. Why do I need 1600x1200??
Remember u get what u pay for?? I\'m not expecting a Ferarri with an Old Mustang and I actually put that to pratice...not just all talk..liek some people here.
I\'ve set my target performance & budget, get the stuff within my budget and if it met my performance requirement, I\'m satisfied. And if it EXCEEDs my expectattion like the 9100, I\'M SOLD!!!!
Ha! Ha!
-
Originally posted by Paul
But you\'re wrong...I get shit with the FX5200...and it\'s MORE EXPENSIVE than a 9100!!! The common "u get what u pay" certainly didn\'t apply here!!!
for nvidia... it does.
-
Yeah, I have to say, that as a Ti4600 GF4 owner, I\'m super happy. Playing at full res with max details and 4x AA is sweet. My parents bought a top of the line ATI, and while it has some features that are better (tuner/capturing software), and pricepoint, it certainly doesn\'t get the fps of my 4600, and the driver problems that ATI always has have plagued them from day one.
-
Originally posted by FatalXception
Yeah, I have to say, that as a Ti4600 GF4 owner, I\'m super happy. Playing at full res with max details and 4x AA is sweet. My parents bought a top of the line ATI, and while it has some features that are better (tuner/capturing software), and pricepoint, it certainly doesn\'t get the fps of my 4600, and the driver problems that ATI always has have plagued them from day one.
What ATI card are you referring to? The Ti4200/4600 isn\'t meant to be compared with the 9100 and below. Try comparing it with the 9500/9700 Pro and the ATI wins hands down. Take a look here and I see the 9700 Pro kicking the crap out of the 4600 in fps.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021202/radeon_9500-03.html
At least match up cards that are meant to compete with each other before making claims.
9500 Pro vs Ti 4200
9700 Pro vs Ti 4600
BOTH the 9500 Pro and 9700 Pro > GeForce 4Ti\'s with 4X AA on.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021202/radeon_9500-07.html
Also, what are these driver problems? They have been resolved in all of the new cards so I don\'t see any validity in that argument.
-
9700 vs FX more like it.. DX9 vs DX9 not DX9 vs DX8
like comparing apples and oranges.
-
I see the 9800 in there against the FX series and I agree you can pit the 9700 vs the FX series, but all the benchmark tests were using DX8. DX9 wasn\'t even out when the 9700 was made. Both the 9700 and the Ti 4600 were $400 cards at the time and both top of the line for their respective companies.
-
I agree, ATI are a cheaper and right now better card manufacture. Don\'t get me wrong. I get the best out for the cash i have. But, comparing an 8xagp, dx9 card to a 4xagp dx8 card is hardly justifiable. They did it only because the FX wasn\'t out. Compare the 9700/9800 cards to the FX series and compare the GF4ti cards to the 9500 series. It\'s only fair. :)
-
I see your point, but the 9500 is a DX9 card as well and was released later than the 9700 as a mid range card. All I am trying to point out to some is: If you had $400 6 months ago which card would you have bought? As your statement above implies Soul you would have bought the ATI ;)
Personally, I like both companies and don\'t find a problem with either manufacturer, but ATI holds the crown right now and if you have the cash and are buying a card immediately, ATI is the way to go. I didn\'t want to spend $400 myself, but I wanted a DX9 card so I bought the $200 9500. :)
-
Oh on a side note... the 9100 Pro is a revamped 8500 - which is a decent card as well. Guess ATI had some extra chipsets and wanted to get rid of them so the remarketed them as the 9100.
-
OMFG!!!! soully defending nvidia!!!!
oh no, the apocalypse has begun!!
-
Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
for nvidia... it does.
Not for the FX series, it doesn\'t.
-
Originally posted by mm
OMFG!!!! soully defending nvidia!!!!
oh no, the apocalypse has begun!!
Not defending ati or nvidia. I\'m not a fanboy. I\'m simply saying it\'s only fair to compare cards that were designed around the same time and series etc.
paul. With any company, you get what you pay for. Budget cards are exactly that. Put aside the nvidia vs Ati crap for now. Nvidia budget cards are cheap compared and lower in performance to compared to their high end more expensive versions. It\'s the same with ATI, their budget cards are cheap and low in performance compared to the more expensive high end cards.. You get what u paid for. But when it comes to comparing Nvidia against ATI. You get more out of your buck with ATI. :)
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Oh on a side note... the 9100 Pro is a revamped 8500 - which is a decent card as well. Guess ATI had some extra chipsets and wanted to get rid of them so the remarketed them as the 9100.
Yes, the 9100 is the 8500, but a slightly improved version of 8500, while the 9000 is a slightly inferior version of the 8500.
-
Amusing video regarding Nvidia drivers...
http://www.giga.de/help/helpnite/grafik2.wmv
A GeForceFX crashing twice in a 5 minute presentation on a German TV show and to make matters worse the last one was a BSOD. No company is perfect :)
-
Originally posted by Paul
Yes, the 9100 is the 8500, but a slightly improved version of 8500, while the 9000 is a slightly inferior version of the 8500.
I am quite happy with the 9500 Pro as I sold my neighbor my 9000 Pro and there is quite a difference. I did see a difference when I switched out my GeForce 4 MX 440 with the 9000 though and decided to stick with ATI when I bought my midlevel card. It has enough eye candy for the price :)
-
Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
Not defending ati or nvidia. I\'m not a fanboy. I\'m simply saying it\'s only fair to compare cards that were designed around the same time and series etc.
paul. With any company, you get what you pay for. Budget cards are exactly that. Put aside the nvidia vs Ati crap for now. Nvidia budget cards are cheap compared and lower in performance to compared to their high end more expensive versions. It\'s the same with ATI, their budget cards are cheap and low in performance compared to the more expensive high end cards.. You get what u paid for. But when it comes to comparing Nvidia against ATI. You get more out of your buck with ATI. :)
Gigashadow: This i gotta agreed. :cool: I wouldn\'t mind switching camp back to Nvidia if they do a better job next time. Btw, ATI will be releasing their 2nd gen DX9 card soon...already kicking Nvidia butt\'s in the mid range...now looks all set to take the top performance back and more importantly, a decent DX9 budget card to kick FX5200 to totally eliminate this piece of scrap metal from any buyer\'s mind, and refined mid-range DX9 card with better performance.
=================================
Arnold S. (Terminator 3) - "The time has come."
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
I see the 9800 in there against the FX series and I agree you can pit the 9700 vs the FX series, but all the benchmark tests were using DX8. DX9 wasn\'t even out when the 9700 was made. Both the 9700 and the Ti 4600 were $400 cards at the time and both top of the line for their respective companies.
Yep exactly. the 9500/9600/9700 is targeted to vs Ti series..and ATI won the round. The FX was supposely Nvidia turn to take back the crown..but instead after much delay, they only managed to churn out some embarrassingly loud and hot cards that still can\'t beat the 9500/9600/9700 series...until the 5900 came along and restore some pride to Nvidia. Frankly speaking, nvidia is already 1 generation behind ATI, now that ATI is getting ready to launch their 2nd gen DX9 cards soon. And seeing how the FX is the 1st cards implemented with 3dFx technology...one can\'t help but thinks anything 3DFx is jinxed....if I remember correctly 3DFx also missed a product cycle which quickly brought their untimely demise...
-
how can one sound somewhat intelligent, yet sound like an 8 year old with a candy bar in the 1st post of this thread?
(not that i agree with any of the babble above)
oh, and Glide was 3DFX\'s downfall, sheesh
-
Hey mm, I got the same card as you, Ti4600, good quality card right there.
I steered away from budget cards cause I here a good graphics card can really extend the life of your computer.
-
sort of, a great video cardis no replacement for a great CPU
-
Some of you make very strong and valid arguments, biased on facts and experience. While others show clear signs of biased views. Keep in mind when in the Nvidoit vs ATI debate some people truly believe there company of choice is better based on weak benchmarks(cheats in driver code(which ATI once admitted to in regards to the quake demo-although at least they had the balls to admit it, unlike the arrogant NVIDIA)
I have found in my experience dealing and testing with numerous computer setups’s with all kinds of video cards, that the Benchmarks, fanboyism hype, clever marketing etc... that the real proof lies is the real-time application of your home PC.
I personally Own a Geforce ti4600, because at the time of purchase it was the best card available,(of course I volt modded the memory controller chip and Gpu chip, therefore having to watercool it). Although I now have switched camps to ATI for a couple of good reasons.
1. ATI in the past year has made tremendous strides in Driver development as well as the hardware to go along with it. It seems that when NVIDIA truly established themselves at the king of graphic cards that they became a little sloppy and arrogant, a mistake that most monopoly companies are guilty of.
2. Since in reality it really isn\'t really practical to buy the top-end cards, as compared to the upper middle-ware which can usually be overclocked to the high-end specs. ATI\'s middle-ware cards are much better performers than there NVIDIA counterparts, AKA.. BETTER BANG FOR THE BUCK.
3.When I was given the chance the own the 9700pro for 2 months I was blown away mainly by one thing, the picture quality. I did not realize fully how much of a difference good quality picture output can make, since I have been using NVIDIA beginning of TNT2 line.
So far ATI\'s track record has proven there cards to be of better quality/(performance, property tech implementation etc.. than NVIDIA has in the mass market GPU cards(mid level and high) for the past 8 months. NVIDIA may have the 9800 ultra but ATI is soon to be releasing there second gen DX9 card, so again they are ahead of NVIDIA\'s schedule.
Personally I favor neither company, I lean with what ever company has the best card at my time of purchase, or argumentive debate. My next purchase will be near the end of September, I want the newest GPU card for half-life 2. "IF" NVIDIA is able to produce upper mid-level cards that exceed(performance/price wise) ATI\'s, then NVIDIA will be sitting inside my PC. Until then "ATI" The way it was meant to be played!
-
Screw you all! My Voodoo 5 owns everything right now and still running strong for nearly 3 years!
Not that I\'m proud that I still own one after 3 years, and well I kinda sorta wished I had a better one.
*sets up net to fish some loot*
-
Originally posted by mm
how can one sound somewhat intelligent, yet sound like an 8 year old with a candy bar in the 1st post of this thread?
(not that i agree with any of the babble above)
oh, and Glide was 3DFX\'s downfall, sheesh
Well, "somewhat intelligent babbling" is better than some people who complains about "babbling" but have nothing intelligent to babble about except "why are you babbling?"
LOL.:laughing:
-
Originally posted by NVIDIA256
Some of you make very strong and valid arguments, biased on facts and experience. While others show clear signs of biased views. Keep in mind when in the Nvidoit vs ATI debate some people truly believe there company of choice is better based on weak benchmarks(cheats in driver code(which ATI once admitted to in regards to the quake demo-although at least they had the balls to admit it, unlike the arrogant NVIDIA)
I have found in my experience dealing and testing with numerous computer setups’s with all kinds of video cards, that the Benchmarks, fanboyism hype, clever marketing etc... that the real proof lies is the real-time application of your home PC.
I personally Own a Geforce ti4600, because at the time of purchase it was the best card available,(of course I volt modded the memory controller chip and Gpu chip, therefore having to watercool it). Although I now have switched camps to ATI for a couple of good reasons.
1. ATI in the past year has made tremendous strides in Driver development as well as the hardware to go along with it. It seems that when NVIDIA truly established themselves at the king of graphic cards that they became a little sloppy and arrogant, a mistake that most monopoly companies are guilty of.
2. Since in reality it really isn\'t really practical to buy the top-end cards, as compared to the upper middle-ware which can usually be overclocked to the high-end specs. ATI\'s middle-ware cards are much better performers than there NVIDIA counterparts, AKA.. BETTER BANG FOR THE BUCK.
3.When I was given the chance the own the 9700pro for 2 months I was blown away mainly by one thing, the picture quality. I did not realize fully how much of a difference good quality picture output can make, since I have been using NVIDIA beginning of TNT2 line.
So far ATI\'s track record has proven there cards to be of better quality/(performance, property tech implementation etc.. than NVIDIA has in the mass market GPU cards(mid level and high) for the past 8 months. NVIDIA may have the 9800 ultra but ATI is soon to be releasing there second gen DX9 card, so again they are ahead of NVIDIA\'s schedule.
Personally I favor neither company, I lean with what ever company has the best card at my time of purchase, or argumentive debate. My next purchase will be near the end of September, I want the newest GPU card for half-life 2. "IF" NVIDIA is able to produce upper mid-level cards that exceed(performance/price wise) ATI\'s, then NVIDIA will be sitting inside my PC. Until then "ATI" The way it was meant to be played!
Excellent thesis. It\'s all about the BEST BANG FOR THE BUCK when u buy the GPU at the point in time and ATI is currently THE UNDISPUTED CHAMPION. Like you, I\'ve been using Nvidia since TNT and was totally blown away by the image quality of ATI cards. No amount of comparison on the web via a Nvidia card can tells the difference until you see the real thing.
Even if Nvidia can beat ATI in terms of raw speed next round, i seriously doubt they can better the image quality...nvidia has never been bother about this after so many years even after much comments and critism from respected reviewers. All they care is raw speed to brag over the competition.
-
Originally posted by jm
Screw you all! My Voodoo 5 owns everything right now and still running strong for nearly 3 years!
Not that I\'m proud that I still own one after 3 years, and well I kinda sorta wished I had a better one.
*sets up net to fish some loot*
Just curious...does ur Voodoo5 have T&L?? If it doesn\'t i would be quite suprised if it can do decent frame rates with all the new games which required T&L.
-
////
Nvidia256:
that the real proof lies is the real-time application of your home PC.
////
Exactly, to hell with benchmarks. My 9100 already prove itself competent in C&C:Generals..for such an excellent price.
==========================
ATI owns me(until next time, that is)
==========================
-
Hey nvidia256 what card are you using now??? The Ti? Why did you only have the 9700 for 2 months? If I had it I wouldn\'t have given it back! ;)
Given your experience with both cards... I do have a question since this card (9500 Pro and is related to the 9700) is the first decent card I have had in a long time. There are so many options regarding AA and other choices its hard to know what to put my settings on. Basically, do I just experiment around with them or is there do\'s and don\'ts regarding these options.
Current setup:
P4 2.4
512 MB DDR
Asus P4PE MB
ATI Radeon 9500 Pro
-
experiment all you want...
-
Well first off the 9700 pro was not mine to own, if so I would have loved to keep it. I was boring it from my good pal, whose college bought him a new computer, since he is funded by the government.
Yes, NVIDIA\'s main focus is frame rates over quality(just look at the ti\'s poor framerate when AA is implemented, and don\'t get me started on AF) while speed is important for games, ATI has a good balance of both in there line of cards while NVIDIA skimps on the quality. It seems only now that NVIDIA has begun to pay more attention to quality, for instance they have dramatically improved there AF implementation as well as AA. While this is certainly an improvement, it is still not up to par with what ATI is offering, after all this particular area is ATI field of expertise.
Regardless, as it has been said before, the mid level cards are where the business is, and therefore the real importance for each company is to focus on that market. Who cares if NVIDIA\'s top of the line card does 10 more fps than ATI\'s, that area of interest is a small minority of people, and even then i\'d take the higher quality card over the small performance gain of a less than stellar one.
Not sure if this is100% true(although I’m sure many of you had heard of this) but NVIDIA apparently tried to pay a large sum of money to the developers of HALF-Life (Valve) to support or make the game only capable with NVIDIA based cards, sort of like how games are made to be played on one type of console. This is how low and desperate NVIDIA will go in order to dominate the pc graphic end market. It\'s business strategy’s like this that destroy the pc market many cherish, cause in the end we the consumers loose big time. Of course if Valve had agreed to this, they would have screwed themselves right up the ass, as I’m sure the game would have been boycotted by us PC gamers to in order to clear make out statement point out. Who knows tough the PC market could potentially mimic many or take on many aspects of the console market, like property games for the Hardware vendor.
-
Originally posted by NVIDIA256
Not sure if this is100% true(although I’m sure many of you had heard of this) but NVIDIA apparently tried to pay a large sum of money to the developers of HALF-Life (Valve) to support or make the game only capable with NVIDIA based cards, sort of like how games are made to be played on one type of console. This is how low and desperate NVIDIA will go in order to dominate the pc graphic end market. It\'s business strategy’s like this that destroy the pc market many cherish, cause in the end we the consumers loose big time. Of course if Valve had agreed to this, they would have screwed themselves right up the ass, as I’m sure the game would have been boycotted by us PC gamers to in order to clear make out statement point out. Who knows tough the PC market could potentially mimic many or take on many aspects of the console market, like property games for the Hardware vendor.
yeah, heard of that before. btw, isn\'t DOOM 3(and/or some other games/apps?) comes with some crap promotion like "Optimized for nvidia" or something like that? Ne way, some sites tested these softwares and found that ironically, it runs better on an ATI. :)
-
nvidia made thier new cards for doom3 (and vice-versa), and doom3 runs better on thier cards.
eat it
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hardocp.com%2Fimages%2Farticles%2F1052729768FyFQIMpRcj_2_3.gif&hash=16fef6b951fa005a054f2bb969ba1b8d26059745)
We were thrilled to see these scores at 1600x1200. I truly did not think this sort of frame rate at such a high resolution would even be within any system\'s grasp. At this crushing resolution we see the GeForceFX 5900 Ultra stay ahead of the 9800 Pro from 25% to 70% in frame rate.
-
Interesting (http://www.megagames.com/news/html/hardware/gfx5900caughtcheating.shtml)
Seems everytime i read something about nvidia lately it hasn\'t been good. :/
Doom3 is 1 game. Wow. :rolleyes: You gonna get this card simply for 1 game?
Seems like you\'re getting desperate mm, grasping to what little hope you have left for nvidia.
When i update next. I\'ll get whatever is the best card, with the cash i have. Right now, It seems like it\'ll be a ATI card. I won\'t be buying another GF4 card mm ;)
-
i\'d like to know where you got that 77% figure at, seems a little bloated...i\'m not gonna buy a nvidia card just because it\'s better at one game only at the highest settings.
-
another quote from that benchmark
Bottom line is this; whoever has the fastest video card with image quality to match when DOOM 3 hits retail shelves "wins".
highest settings? nvidia > ati in doom 3 on ALL settings
nvidia will continue to dominate the video card markets, both business and personal. soully, has AMD made an impact yet?
if you don\'t recognize the [H] in the pic above for where i got the quotes, you don\'t belong in this conversation.
ALSO, doom3 will be THE PC title to base ALL banchmarks off of. one title!? do you have any idea how many companies are dying to lease the doom3 engine for thier games? dozens have been made from the quake 3 engine...sheesh
-
sure has... How else do u think you\'d know about it... I wonder..
Why else has intel dropped their prices.. Competition maybe.. I wonder...
Nvidia will sell untill the Gf4 series is no longer worth buying. Their new cards.. that\'s another story. Do u truly think in 2 - 3 years people will be buying the old FX cards, or the Old Radeon 9800 cards?
Hard choice for you mm i\'m sure :rolleyes:
I\'m not against nvidia. I\'m simply saying if they continue to BS and build crappy cards compared to there competition. They won\'t have anything left in 2 years worth buying.
Think of Nvidia as how u think of AMD. Not worth the price u pay for second best eh
As for the quake 3 engine. Seems lately more companies are using the UT engines.
-
soully, look at those benchmarks and tell me nvidia is second best
this coming from a guy who still thinks nvidia put 3dfx out of business :rolleyes:
-
This coming from a guy who thinks 3dfx OWNZ nvidia. When nvidia ended up OWNING 3dfx :rolleyes:
1 game.. wow.
-
soully, honestly bro, i don\'t know why i waste my time talking to such ignorance with you
1. i never in my life said 3dfx would own nvidia. 3dfx possessed the BEST implimentation of Glide ever. nothing nvidia had at the time could compete with 3dfx on the Glide format. 3dfx banked thier entire extistance that OpenGL would be a fad, and unfortunately for them, it wasnt. hence nvidia becoming number 1, and the death of Glide. has any game since quake2 featured Glide? nevermind, you have no clue what i\'m talking about.
2. you are a complete fool for repeatedly saying one game. how many games featured the heavily licensed quake 3 engine? thats right, dozens, and more and more are released all the time. doom 3 will be THE hottest PC game to be released in recent years.
it disgusts me to think after all this time, you have little idea. i makes me think you disagree with me purposely to waste my time when you should know damn well better
-
Originally posted by mm
soully, honestly bro, i don\'t know why i waste my time talking to such ignorance with you
1. i never in my life said 3dfx would own nvidia. 3dfx possessed the BEST implimentation of Glide ever. nothing nvidia had at the time could compete with 3dfx on the Glide format. 3dfx banked thier entire extistance that OpenGL would be a fad, and unfortunately for them, it wasnt. hence nvidia becoming number 1, and the death of Glide. has any game since quake2 featured Glide? nevermind, you have no clue what i\'m talking about.
You have no ****en clue. Opengl was and still is highly supported. 3dfx died once they brought out STB. They ended up screwing their custormer base, had delays in manufacturing and releasing cards, the Voodoo5 6000 series of cards had shit loads of problems with certain motherboards and ended up cancelled, while all this was happening they were losing lots of money, they tried to build new chips that didn\'t come to life and in the end they ended up bankrupt. While Nvidia was still going strong selling their Geforce 1/2 series of cards
2. you are a complete fool for repeatedly saying one game. how many games featured the heavily licensed quake 3 engine? thats right, dozens, and more and more are released all the time. doom 3 will be THE hottest PC game to be released in recent years.
1 engine. That\'s all it is, even if it hundreds of games get made from it. not every developer will use it the SAME as id software. Don\'t forget there are other engines, UT etc...
Lately i\'ve seen more engines using the UTs game engines over the quakes, ohh and don\'t let the "Mtv Generation" hype fool u. It could be a shitty, good looking game.... That doesn\'t mean it is though ;) Even so, not every game will be FPS. The Doom3 engine will be used mainly on FPS games.
it disgusts me to think after all this time, you have little idea. i makes me think you disagree with me purposely to waste my time when you should know damn well better
Your bias views are hardly facts mm. You\'ve posted 1 game that tops ati. I wonder how many games i can post of ATI\'s new cards that tops Nvidias. Maybe they\'ve rigged the results just like they did with 3dmark2003.. Wouldn\'t surprise me.
-
Opengl was and still is highly supported
i\'m stopped reading there and not reading anything else you say in this thread. this proves you are twisting what i said merely to produce an argument. you are a troll
-
3dfx banked thier entire extistance that OpenGL would be a fad, and unfortunately for them, it wasnt. hence nvidia becoming number 1, and the death of Glide. has any game since quake2 featured Glide? nevermind, you have no clue what i\'m talking about.
Glide is dead, opengl is not.
Ignore all u want, you always do.
nuff said.
More news ahead.. Dawn demo runs better on ATI card with OpenGL wrapper] (http://www.rage3d.com/articles/atidawning/)
Ouch!!
-
i understand your from australia, and perhaps the education system down there isn\'t quite so good
but...READ THE QUOTE!! I ALREADY STATED THAT GLIDE IS DEAD, AND THE REASON IT IS DEAD. NVIDIA DID NOT EVEN SUPPORT GLIDE!!!! 3DFX FOCUSED PURELY ON THIER SUPERIOR GLIDE DEVELOPMENT AND IT COST THEM THIER BUSINESS WHEN THE API WAS ABANDONED
sigh....
-
What part of Glide is dead, and opengl is not didn\'t u get?
You said Glide is dead, I totally agree. You said opengl was fad. Yet it still remains.
-
dude, you can\'t read. admit it
3dfx banked thier entire extistance that OpenGL would be a fad, and unfortunately for them, it wasnt. hence nvidia becoming number 1, and the death of Glide.
-
They based Their Entire extistance on GLIDE, not opengl. If so, they would still be around wouldn\'t they.
Please stop attacking me directly. That\'s a sign of a poor debater and a total asshole.
-
how can i debate with someone who cannot understand basic english? like i said, you purposely twist what i say to make an argument.
i stated 4 times now that they bet the farm that openGL would be a fad, and it wasn\'t
-
They bet GLIDE would be a fad.. Opengl is still highly supported and not just in gaming. 3dfx GLIDE is what killed them mm, not opengl. If they put everything into supporting opengl. They would still be around. Opengl was not developed by 3dfx.
-
Yawn, like i SAID ATI\'s second gen dx9 card will be coming out this summer, while NVIDIA will have to cling to there 5900. Keep in mind mm, ATI is ahead of schedule, it\'s pointless to use the comparison of NV\'s newest card when ATI\'s is just around the corner, we will see then who has the best doom3 performance at high res!
Other than that, you keep insisting that NV will dominate the market, yet we have made it very clear that the market is the mid level cards and that is where NVIDIOT\'s get there asses kicked right up the ass.
Personally if you feel like waisting your money on the 5900 ultra then be my guest, but I\'d rather buy the mid level card and overclock it to match the top end ones.
As far as I can see, your point about NV is not concrete, where were you when those limited, delayed, overpriced 5600 ultra\'s were burning up cause the geniuses over at NVIDIA ****ed up big time in there drivers causing the card to run at 3d accelerative mode when the windows screen saver was active. What kind of morons release a top end card that kills itself? Nvidia is surly destroying there reputation.
It\'s shame all those innocent people out there that buy the fx thinking that there mid level card is top notch quality/performance for what they paid for. Hope they don\'t see there friends ATI card cause we could up with a major epidemic of young adolescents with strokes, LOL!
-
Hahaha Soully... I am not against in this thread, but mm did say it 3 times... 3dfx banked that OpenGL would be a fad.
Anyway, nvidia, you inspired me... I am now the proud owner of a Radeon 9700 Pro for $270 total. Traded in the 9500 today since I had some extra cash (extra 70 on top of the returned 9500)...
-
Glad to hear Giga! Damn lucky chum, I\'m still stuck here with my Ti4600, but keep in mind it does well still with today\'s games,
Here are my speed settings if your interested.
Defalut
Core Clock Speed: 300mhz
memorey Speed: 648mhz
Overclocked speed(these speeds are only possible if volt moded)
Core Clock Speed: 345mhz
Memeory Speed: 720mhz
None the less the Anastrophic Filtering is piss shitty on this card, not even worth turning on. AA is nowhere near your lovely 9700 and it takes a big hit on performance, so I leave my AA on 2x(qun)
GOT TO HAVE AA when playing games.
-
Yeah AA is becoming a must in most games from what I have read. Your card still kicks ass... I probably would have gotten the same if I had revamped my computer a year ago. I did look for some Ti4600\'s but they are becoming very hard to find. The 9700 only beats the 4600 by a few fps and even falls behind on a few games, but like you said the AA and the Anastrophic Filtering are what sets the 9700 apart. Still though... if not for these new ATI cards (9500, 9700, 9800) I still think the 4600 is one of the best buys out there if you can find one.
-
Yeah AA is becoming a must
How does one play without it? I mean without AA the game looks jaggy even in high-res. AA cleans the image up.
I still think the 4600 is one of the best buys out there if you can find one.
I agree, that\'s why I am waiting till september to buy a NEW GRAPHIC\'S CARD for HALF-LIFE 2, DOOM etc...
The 9700pro all around kicks my Geforce4\'s ass trust me.
-
sigh.....
why don\'t people understand that 3dfx glide and opengl are 2 different things.. Opengl is still highly used It was developed by silicon Graphics.. Not 3dfx.. Glide was what 3dfx Banked on and developed, opengl came in second in their book. They didn\'t even have native opengl drivers till Voodoo2. When glide (3dfx\'s chipset drivers) died out (mainly because of 3dfx\'s screw ups) 3dfx got screwed. That simple... Let me make it clearer
DirectX = M$
OpenGL = Silicon Graphics / M$
Glide = 3dfx
-
That is what mm was saying LOL... You both said the same thing just in different ways.
-
/me pulls out hair.... ARGHHHH!!!!
mm says 3dfx thought opengl was going to be the fad.. It wasn\'t opengl they were counting on. It was there OWN 3dfx Chipset. (glide being the chipset drivers) Opengl is a totaly different driver. It wasn\'t even in the first voodoo card driver set. People were using 3rd party drivers to play opengl games... Think of it this way.. Imagine 3dfx counting on Direct3D to be the FAD, and not even thinking twice about their own 3DFX Chipsets. It wouldn\'t happen....
-
glide being the chipset drivers
wtf, why must you always say something to make to stop reading yer posts
Glide was an API, not a fukn chipset driver
:rolleyes:
-
Yea, glide being the API for the 3dfx chipset.. I don\'t mean it in a way to update the chipset itself, i mean it only works for the chipset..
Go play your opengl based voodoo card :rolleyes:
-
Yea, glide being the API for the 3dfx chipset
please, go find a clue. it\'s terrible that you work in the PC industry and don\'t know what am API is
-
mm, don\'t be such a knob.. I don\'t know what a API is :rolleyes: u seem to think glide relates to everything else but 3dfx...
Can you use glide on any other card that\'s not based on the 3dfx voodoo chipset?
no. Not without some sort of wrapper.
enough said.
-
i swear you either can\'t read, or refuse to read what i write
direct3D, openGL, Glide, CG...these are API\'s
they are how applications interface with hardware, and other applications
nvidia choose not to support Glide AT ALL. hence, what i said much earlier
so please, expand your knowledge before trying to contest what i say
-
lol..Thanks for explaining what APIs are.. I didn\'t know they were libaries containing function calls to graphics routines. if that\'s what you\'ll trying to say.... :rolleyes:
-
bah, STILL don\'t understand what that is
you do a fukn google search, and now think you know something?
you make me laugh
I didn\'t know they were libaries containing function calls to graphics routines.
which is EXACTLY what i said. i broke it down into simple text so you would understand
don\'t even bother replying anymore soully
-
simple text..... lol
U still think 3dfx banked on opengl.. and you sit there and tell me i have no idea... :laughing:
-
omfg, i said they banked on GLide SEVERAL TIMES!!!!!!!
i swear if you tempt me again, yer losing rights to PC forum
-
Originally posted by mm
(3dfx banked thier entire extistance that OpenGL would be a fad,) and unfortunately for them, it wasnt. hence nvidia becoming number 1, and the death of Glide.
Do u think glide and opengl are the same thing? here it seems u think opengl was what 3dfx was banking on... These were your OWN words man.. Maybe u meant Glide...
Ban me from these forums just shows you can\'t handle yourself as a admin. This is a debate. It\'s nothing personal. Although you\'re trying to make it so.
-
is the word "fad" not in the oz language?
you looked up API, go look up what a fad is
here, im bored
A fashion that is taken up with great enthusiasm for a brief period of time; a craze
3dfx figured that since they had a superior implementation of Glide, they weren\'t concerned when openGL came out.
why do you think nvidia made such a big deal out of Cg months ago?
this IS NOT a debate. this is me making a comment, and you taking it out of context merely in an attempt to frustrate me. you do it all the time. read back thru the thread, and you will see what you do. even two other people stated that you were doing it
-
Fad = the IN thing.
Why would a company rely on something they didn\'t even develope, when they have there own type of API. Clearly any company would rely on there own technology above another companys. That\'s all i\'m saying. Opengl is still popular. If they relied on it they would still be around. (only if they didn\'t screw up with other companys)
Ps.. i didn\'t do a friggin google search on API. I\'ve been playing around with DirectX SDKs for quite some time..
AHHHH
Now i\'m understanding you.
Sorry my bad.. I was thinking you were saying they thought opengl would be the fad forever and develope for it... Like d3d is now. Not understanding you were saying it in a way it that they thought it would die out..
:)
-
we\'re done with this conversation
your babbling incoherantly now