A promise is a promise :) there you go!

If they had gotten NV30 out earlier in 2002 it would have been clocked lower than the NV30 we saw in 2003. R300 still would have been the better card. Also keep in mind that the "early" drivers for NV30 were terrible performance-wise, it took NVIDIA months to get performance up. And I'm not even talking about shader performance. You can literally see games like UT2003 double their performance- and that was before the monkey business with filtering. The card was soooo delayed and the drivers were still horribly immature.

Still, you must be able to see the fallacious logic here. "In the past, the past was like the past. Oh, except for the recent past when it wasn't. But...that was just an aberration. Everything will be fine this time. Really."

Even if NVIDIA re-energizes themselves, you're forgetting that this isn't the same old-ATI of generations past either.

 

you said that about the NV30 chal.

And you were some of them saying that.

and the moral of this short story. At this point in time I don't really really a rat's arrse about how each card performs, we've seen it all before (probably movre from nvidia than ATi) and we're going to see it all again. I'll decide when both ards are on the market and I can find out how they both play the games I want to play.

Although being honest my TFT is limited to 1280*1024 and both the 9700 could and the 5950 can easiliy manage that with high fps. Unless either the NV40 or the R420 gives a big IQ boost ovewr the current gen I may not even bother.

So far the IQ boost on the NV40 isn't quite enough over the 9700 (my baseline) to warrant a change.

 

TFT? The Frozen Throne?

 

I personally think all bets are off, and either ATI, NV, or PVR could win this time around. NVidia made a serious misstep with the NV3x and ATI made a very gutsy move going with 256bit bus and 8 pipes. Since neither ATI nor Nvidia is likely go to with a 512bit bus, and they will both be using similar ram, similar semiconductor processes, I expect both of them to be much closer this time around. If the R420 and NV40 do come out on top, I think they will be much closer to each other than the NV30 vs R300. Series 5 is the wildcard.

This generation could turn out to be very good for gamers, with NV and ATI delivering similar performance PS2.x parts, Intel delivering PS2.0 finally on the lowend, it could finally move the whole ISV market forward.

Personally if NV or ATI are within 15% performance of each other, I think they share the crown, and we all win.

 

TFT is some tech related to LCD screens so Read

 

Well, DB must be under NDA since Cebit .

There's something that i don't understand otherwise. The 175/210m transistors rumor :/ Partners of Nv say that the NV40 will be 3 times faster than the 5950, and that NV41 will be 2 times faster than 5950. They add that the Nv40 should be available in may/june and the NV41 in july-august.

So if the NV40 175m and 210m were tape out at the same time, and that the 175 is now the Nv41, why is it released 3 months later? Stock issues? I find quite ironic that the 210m should get out before the 175m chip.

But if the 210m chip is just rumor, then, well it's all logical

 

the only thing that makes sense to me is that nv40 is nv41 w/ higher clocks. but what do i know

 

You may change your mind when HL2, Doom3, EQ2, and a bunch of other big titles hit this year. 1280x1024 w/4xFSAA @ stable 60fps will be a challenge. The game might be CPU limited at lower res with FSAA off, but with FSAA on, HL2 for example, runs at a pathetic 32fps at 1024x768 on a 9800 PRO.

 

Thanks Blood, Didnt quite make sense to me Heh When I first read your post I thought were insulting, Read it several times and saw a good explanation

 

I'm about to buy a 17inch LCD myself.
Going to get the HITACHI CML174SXWB.

Out of 41reviews at Newegg it has 5 stars.

I know my 9800-256 would run it just fine
but I think a shiny new R420 or NV40 would
play HL2 and Doom a little better.

Anyone here using this monitor?
How is it gaming? It has a 16ms pannel.
So I'm hoping it does fine at 100Hz at 1024.
That's the res I use with high AA/AF setting and max details.

For 400 bucks it seems like a good deal.
I've been waiting for a LCD to get better on the gaming side.
It seems they are now.

________________________________________
- Specifications -

Panel Type: TFT Active Matrix LCD
Native Resolution: SXGA (1280 x 1024)
Pixel Pitch: 0.264 mm
Brightness: 260 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400 : 1
Response Time: 16 ms
View Angle: 160° / 160° (Horizontal / Vertical)
Input Connectors: 15-pin D-sub, DVI-D
Features: Integrated Power Supply, Kensington Security Port
Dimensions & Weight: 14.7" x 15.5" x 8.0" (WxHxD) / 11.0 lbs
_________________________________________

 

All too true although highly dependent on whether I actually buy any of those games.

 

I've got an NEC 1760NX which uses the same panel as the Hitachi. Image quality and response time seems pretty good to me although I don't game much.

You should note, however than colour reproduction isn't the best, as the panel isn't able to display 24-bit colour natively. It is an 18-bit panel which uses interpolation to simulate full 24-bit colour. I believe some of the newer Samsung and LG panels are full 24-bit panels whilst also supporting 16ms response time. I've a friend who has one of the LG panels but I've not seen it myself so I can't give my opinion on the difference between the panels!

 

Damn....I absolutely AGREE with DC...........just what is this world coming to? BUT.............(yes, DC, as usual, theres a but)

Here's the problem. If the 2 cards are close, does anyone believe that nVidia won't follow it's lying, cheating ways to gain a much more percieved lead? They have never seemed satisified with competeing .... they want to destroy the compitition. And, IF they take all those IQ shortcuts in order to gain that percieved advantage, do you honestly believe we all win? I think not........

 

CPU limit?

Since ATI implemented Overdrive, the cards supporting it may ignore your overclocked settings when they are stressed too much.

And graphics drivers also use the CPU for some tasks, so if these tasks are done more efficient, the CPU limit will come later.

Besides, when a game is CPU limited, lowering the AA and AF setting does not improve performance, as these actions are only GPU (often GPU Memory bandwith) based. So when lowering AA and AF does improve your FPS, you are not CPU limited in that game.

 

More so if there is a ceiling of ~$500 dollars for a top end card and one IHV has good yields and the other don’t. It would make for a buyers market for sure.

 

If they have the same image quality, then yes. 8)

 

I think a better word would be comparable.

 

Fair enough. It ain't exactly gotta be exact, but it does have to be close there too.

 

And the same level of driver support, yeah 8)

Linux users, dual head gamers and people who experiment with 64-bit OSes badly need some tlc from ATI

 

What do you think the chances are that ATI will implement an AA format / technique that will remove jaggies on Alphatest artifacts?
While the NV35 offered a solution with it's mixed modes they were too slow to be useful in most cases the NV40 would seem to be fast enough based on the UT2004 performance.