A year of nVidia

You'd take your money elsewhere anyway so it is no big deal. I was glad they did it, and the best part is everyone who knows they got burned will either
A) Buy ATI next time
B) do a little research and not buy on brand loyalty

So really you should be happy, the more informed the consumer the higher standards NVDA, and ATI have to adhere to, this really is in the end true.

 

That's looking like a pretty comprehensive list. One thing that I recall was the 100k units of NV30's. Back in Feb the news leaked out from TSMC that the first printout was only 100k (where as a typical major launch normally consists from 1-2 million units). Quite a few sites picked this up and wrote that GFFX had been canned before it's launch. (INQ comes to mind)

NVidia vocally denied this rumor and later put out a press release saying that 1.5 million GFFX units had been ordered/shipped, but if you read the release closely you noticed that this was for the whole NV3X family not NV30. (Couldn't find the urls, sorry.)

Cheers,

AJ

BTW: A list like this should be hosted in it's own url (Uttar? How about NFI?) so that you could aways simply easily refer to the url. Also, in order to be fair there should be open pages "available" for all manufacturers so that you could compare notes easily...

 

You've become an awful lot more interesting on the boards since your job change, and I mean that in a most complimentary way!

 

Thanks mate. 8) It's really refresing when you don't need to worry about mixing personal opinions with company statements. I like it too.

Cheers,

AJ

 

IIRC, some big wig at NV (perhaps DK, I'm not sure) made some really interesting comments last year, which are quite funny when you look back, something among the lines of :
"A 256 bits memory bus is overkill" or
"It is not possible to build a true next generation part on the 0.15 process"

Anyone got links to those ?

 

How about including info where it was found that the FX only does vertical offset AA, not horizontal offset axis AA. Yet another "feature" to create the illusion that their product is more efficient than their competitors in benchmarks.

www.jlmay.f2s.com/NV30-ATIAA.jpg

Anybody remember what the pre 3Dmark03 cheat drivers were?

 

44.03 was the last official "pre-cheat" release, IIRC. I think 44.10 were the same, but I believe those weren't released on nV's site.

 

I don't think you can label the 44.03s as being "pre-cheat" since they contain 3DMark03-specific opti-che-code. The 330 build catches them though.

 

I'm truly starting to think that the 30.82 set is the last non-cheat set of nVidia drivers

 

I didnt see it listed, but might have have missed it.

I think the nVidia sponsored Doom3 benchmarks showing the NV30 spanking the r300 is interesting. Also the quote from john Carmack saying he recorded a new demo because he wasnt hapy with the one nvidia prepared.

Ali

 

I will add too that. Since the Det30's are a tad slower I often opt for the Det 29.XX series or lower. After nvidia started on the Det30.xx performance slowed significantly. heh, who knows maybe they were cheating with the Det 2X. series as well.

 

That's not a bad idea, although I'd like to use NFI for other stuff than GPUs from now on ( okay, so that means nothing for hundreds of years ) - but if no one else proposed, sure. Could even do a small Perl script to make it easier to manage - I always loved how darn easy GPU:RW was to update. No useless crap, just the essantial.


Uttar

 

11 Nov 2003: FutureMark Patch 340 released

Code:

                      Patch Driver      3DMarks GT1    GT2   GT3   GT4 
GeForce FX 5950 Ultra 330   52.16       6412    205.7  46.6  37    37.3 
GeForce FX 5950 Ultra 333   52.16       5538    205    39.6  33.1  26.3 
Radeon 9800 XT        330   3.8         6435    209.7  45.4  38.6  36.3 
Radeon 9800 XT        333   3.8         6436    210.5  45.4  38.6  36.3

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8952&start=0&sid=da9e6dbd11e69e93de41f8604d6a29dd

Note: 333 is the release candidate of 340 according to DaveBaumann

EDIT: I thought that it would be good to add this to the list CI.

 

WTF??????? Nvidia STILL at it?

 

Good morning BiteMe, wants some coffee with that brief reality interlude?

 

Better throw a donut in as well.

 

The Dig places a selection of fresh and tasty donuts alongside the coffee.

 

Maybe I am not calm enough, but if anyone in real life treated me the way nvidia has been treating the consumer... I'll punch him/it in the mouth. I would think that 90%+ of everyone here would be fuming.

How's the job? and the ticker?

 

Apart from the image being poorly scaled, how do you get to that conclusion ("no horizontal offset AA")?

The 8xS patterns (there are two that could deserve that name) are well-known and do exactly what you'd expect from them. One is 2x2 OGMS with 2x1 OGSS, and the other is 2x RGMS with 2x2 OGSS.

Yes, it is worse than ATI's gamma-corrected sparse pattern (although I wish the gamma would be adjustable), but it does in no way create the illusion of being more efficient.