nVidia May Scrap GFX and AMD Unleashes Barton XP3000

intel dominates business AND the home sector

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

like i said, computer packages are the man thing these days.

Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
back up anything u say.. won\'t happen.

as for 3dfx.. I agree 3dfx ran glide way better then anything else. Doesn\'t make up for the fact that they are NO LONGER. 3dfx is dead. Shame really, Nvidia could have made 3dfx/geforce hybrids. They would have rocked. Geforce chipset for D3d, 3dfx for Glide/opengl.

Err...just to add, Geforce FX IS the first 3dfx/Nvidia technology hybrid if I\'m not wrong. It uses some of the technology to be implemented in 3DFX last foray codenamed "Mojo" which never sees the light of day.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

really?

never seen any info on this... link would be good.

A link

The reason they\'re changing from NV30 to FX, in fact, is mojo... about 2/3rds down the article.

and the fact the Geforce FX isn\'t performing so much better than a radeon 9700 Pro perhaps suggested Nvidia should have stick with their own technology in the first place?? The Geforce FX was also massively delayed causing it to missed a product cycle...

Seems like anything 3DFX spells DELAY...hee-hee.

As for the Intel vs AMD thingy,

my opinion is AMD has been doing fine previously until end of last year. The Barton 3000+ has been shown to be inferior to a P4 3Ghz in almost every test. I guess the limit of elegance vs raw speed have been met. The fact is they\'ve delayed the Athlon 64 which is bad coz once you miss a product cycle, you could very well go down under.

Still for anything below Athlon XP 2100+ is still worth buying IMO due to the price/performance factor. However, those looking for higher speed than that should stick to Intel for stability and superior performance which is at about the same price.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

Stability... only people that don\'t get stability are the ones that can\'t setup a machine correctly. Both amd and Intel based. As for performance, the 2800+ TBred performs on par with the Intel’s equivalent and is cheaper. AMD have only screwed up with the barton cores by labeling the chips higher then they should be.. all the tbreds perfrom on par with there intel equivalent.

The Barton performs like a 2800+, by mislabeling it at higher speed, it\'s like back to the days of the Pentium ratings..with the PR133 stuff...they can never hope to match those claims. It\'s bad for their reputation. Basically, it\'s conning people.

btw, I currently use an age old Duron and it is NEVER as stable as when I use my trusty old Celeron 400. And don\'t tell me story about setting up. i\'ve tweaked everything, reformatted, and it\'s still gives me the weird hanging on and off. And I don\'t even o/c my CPU! it shouldn\'t take a rocket scientist to install a CPU/MB and if the thing is still unstable after so much work, I don\'t see why the average user wants to meddle with all this hassle, especially corporates...they want plug, play and run their business. Not plug, tweak and PRAY!!!

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

dood, i\'m talking about Tbreds/bartons being stable.. AMD DID have a stability issue...  as you said... AGE OLD.  Intel had problems with some cpus too.. The 3000+ barton performs more like a 2700+ really.

I set these machines up. I\'m running one now, i don\'t have any problems what so ever.. just as the other amd users in this thread don\'t.

I went through all this crap with mm......

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]