Anybody going to bite the bullet?
- Thread starter Typedef Enum
- Start date
Found a link measuring video signal quality - no Radeon 9700 Pro
If you read German.. better for you
http://www.tech-report.com/news_reply.x/3747/
If you read German.. better for you
http://www.tech-report.com/news_reply.x/3747/
Above, I apologise if you feel that I abused you in any way. That was not my intent, at all. All I was saying is, that in the context of the title of the thread, that there wasn't a good reason to even bring up the TI4200. I in no way said anything about your ability to afford anything. I said "IF you can't or don't want to afford the 9700", this does not imply you cannot afford anything. I really think you need to be a bit less thin skinned, especially when posting anything nVidia related in a ATI thread these days. Again, I do apologise for any abuse you feel I have done to you.
BTW, I am retired, DO have all day to do what I want, and was much nicer to you in both my postings than you were to me.......
BTW, I am retired, DO have all day to do what I want, and was much nicer to you in both my postings than you were to me.......
Typedef Enum
Regular
Nagorak,
That's not true. Surround gaming is _not_ like FSAA with the original GeForce.
Before I decided to go for it, I re-read a bunch of Parhelia reviews, and the good ones (I swear to God, most of those reviews were total crap...How about HardOCP...) plain and simply said that Surround Gaming was the most incredible thing they've ever experienced...and the numbers were not that bad.
Two reviews that I checked out recently had the numbers in Quake3, for example, around 85 FPS...
Let's also not forget that just about everything you know, as far as Parhelia numbers go, are from the original drivers. I mean, it's not like any of the hardware sites would ever bother to take a 2nd look @ the thing with more mature drivers or anything...
Quite frankly, I'm just sick of the "bottom line" performance that yields positive hardware reviews. I mean, honestly...
I looked @ some other numbers that were supposed to change my mind...
- Code Creatures
- 3DMArk
- GLMark
And I'm like, so what? Who the **** cares about those things? I mean, does that in any way have any relationship to the games that I like to play? No they don't.
There are so many _good_ things to say about Parhelia, if you stop and think about it...as long as you sorta' put some things into perspective...
- Full DX9: 2 years post DX8, and look what we have. Look how long it took before any meaningful title arrived.
- Results for totally worthless benchmarks
- Performance when all is cranked.
- IQ when all is cranked
That's not true. Surround gaming is _not_ like FSAA with the original GeForce.
Before I decided to go for it, I re-read a bunch of Parhelia reviews, and the good ones (I swear to God, most of those reviews were total crap...How about HardOCP...) plain and simply said that Surround Gaming was the most incredible thing they've ever experienced...and the numbers were not that bad.
Two reviews that I checked out recently had the numbers in Quake3, for example, around 85 FPS...
Let's also not forget that just about everything you know, as far as Parhelia numbers go, are from the original drivers. I mean, it's not like any of the hardware sites would ever bother to take a 2nd look @ the thing with more mature drivers or anything...
Quite frankly, I'm just sick of the "bottom line" performance that yields positive hardware reviews. I mean, honestly...
I looked @ some other numbers that were supposed to change my mind...
- Code Creatures
- 3DMArk
- GLMark
And I'm like, so what? Who the **** cares about those things? I mean, does that in any way have any relationship to the games that I like to play? No they don't.
There are so many _good_ things to say about Parhelia, if you stop and think about it...as long as you sorta' put some things into perspective...
- Full DX9: 2 years post DX8, and look what we have. Look how long it took before any meaningful title arrived.
- Results for totally worthless benchmarks
- Performance when all is cranked.
- IQ when all is cranked
Chalnoth said:
Well, why not get the 9700 and wait on the motherboard? Seems to me that chipset manufacturers are the ones with the history of screwing up AGP specs so why not get 9700 on an AGP4X system and enjoy all the benefits that it has to offer and wait until the MB manufacturers have actually qualified their AGP8X offering with several GFX cards?
Well, I received one on Friday, installed it that evening, and originally had a few problems. Mainly with graphical issues in Counter Strike (its Half Life based for heaven's sake, which is based off of Quake II!!!!). Add to that it doesn't always apply FSAA/MSAA on older games (System Shock II, Counter Strike, a couple others that I have had time to test).
I loaded up Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, set the res to 1280x1024x32, with all graphics settings maxed, 4X FSAA, 16X AF, and it was one of the most amazing sites my eyes have seen. Not only did it look amazing, it ran butter smooth. I then loaded up Morrowind, same settings (sans shadows), and again, the output just amazed. It was significantly better looking than my GeForce 4 Ti 4600, and it ran much faster too.
Looking at ATI's past track record, they have done a very good job with this card's release. The original Radeon, then the 8500, all had significant problems at their release, so much so that many reviewers had a hard time recommending them. The Radeon 9700 has its share of problems, but for being an entirely new architecture, I think ATI has done a bang up job so far with it. Things will get better, but from all indications (well, my personal opinion here), about a month from now I think that many of the major problems that people have described will be gone. The driver dev. team seems to be working hard, and even though our friend Derek didn't have nice things to say about them, I think ATI is really moving in the right direction.
I can't wait to get the 9700 out of the test machine and into my main machine!
I loaded up Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, set the res to 1280x1024x32, with all graphics settings maxed, 4X FSAA, 16X AF, and it was one of the most amazing sites my eyes have seen. Not only did it look amazing, it ran butter smooth. I then loaded up Morrowind, same settings (sans shadows), and again, the output just amazed. It was significantly better looking than my GeForce 4 Ti 4600, and it ran much faster too.
Looking at ATI's past track record, they have done a very good job with this card's release. The original Radeon, then the 8500, all had significant problems at their release, so much so that many reviewers had a hard time recommending them. The Radeon 9700 has its share of problems, but for being an entirely new architecture, I think ATI has done a bang up job so far with it. Things will get better, but from all indications (well, my personal opinion here), about a month from now I think that many of the major problems that people have described will be gone. The driver dev. team seems to be working hard, and even though our friend Derek didn't have nice things to say about them, I think ATI is really moving in the right direction.
I can't wait to get the 9700 out of the test machine and into my main machine!
Saying stuff like HL is based on QII can get you into a lot of trouble IIRC - I think there's already been a long argument over it previously stating that its actually a hybrib mainly of the Q1 engine with elements from the Q2 engine. But I digress...
You should know that FSAA does not work when 16bit is applied. So, for older games that don't have a 32bit mode then currently there is no AA option. I think this issue is likely due to the colour compression / the fact that its going through hyperz (althought thats currently my own unsubstanciated theory). I think ATI are toying with the idea of forcing 32bit if they can, although some form of SSAA may also be possible in the circumsances IMO.
G
Guest
Guest
But you apparently didn't use Windows ME, did you? Do yourself a favor...don't![/quote]
No win ME is a cheap worthless update that is why I didn't used it.
I did test it do and I wasn't impressed at all no win 98 SE any time aldo winxp is my favorite now..........
No win ME is a cheap worthless update that is why I didn't used it.
I did test it do and I wasn't impressed at all no win 98 SE any time aldo winxp is my favorite now..........
Only 7 posts here and I am already getting in trouble! I guess we would have to ask Valve about the whole Half Life thing.
I will have to try and force CS into 32 bit color, and see if that works (but I thought it already was in 32 bit, same as desktop).
BTW, if you are runing HL and CS on a 9700, don't attempt to use the ATI Fix!!! It causes it to not work. The fix is really only for the earlier cards (8500, 7500, etc.).
I guess we would have to ask Valve about the whole Half Life thing.I will have to try and force CS into 32 bit color, and see if that works (but I thought it already was in 32 bit, same as desktop).
BTW, if you are runing HL and CS on a 9700, don't attempt to use the ATI Fix!!! It causes it to not work. The fix is really only for the earlier cards (8500, 7500, etc.).
Typedef Enum said:
Indeed.
Video signal integrity, and not just on the primary output either.
FAA - very, very good where it can be applied. Which is in most games and with a very low performance hit for the quality gain.
Glyph anti-aliasing done well.
Regarding surround gaming - sure it will be slow in many games. If you insist on cranking everything to the max. If you don't however and adjust settings intelligently you should be able to have both good quality and the surround, which is arguably more important for your gaming experience.
The parhelia is an interesting card for people with high-quality monitors, or more than one, or who actually work with/read text on their screens, or play games where high quality anti-aliasing is important, or ...
It's not for everyone, but it does have a market. You would have to be sufficiently mature as a consumer to know your own needs and priorities to even begin to consider it though, so I doubt it will sell in great numbers.
Entropy
Typedef Enum, I congratulate you on your educated purchase, and on your ability to post your excellent reasoning. More people would do well to be as objective on their own needs when making any purchase.....
I do wish more people here would be as objective with, not only their own needs, but the needs of others. There is no "do it all" product here. And, I might add that your reasoning sure beats the usual "reasons" many fanboi's use to push their own agendas(not meaning that you are one). As far as I am concerned, the name on the box or on the chipset should be the LAST reason for buying a videocard......well, maybe not last, but close. Too many here start with the brand of chipset and never go any farther. If more of these people would open their eyes & objectively compare the products on the market with their own eyes, I'm sure we would see much less in the way of flame wars. Of course, it might put a hurting on many of the "hardware" sites on the net.....wow, think about so many people accually using their heads to make a purchase .....
I do wish more people here would be as objective with, not only their own needs, but the needs of others. There is no "do it all" product here. And, I might add that your reasoning sure beats the usual "reasons" many fanboi's use to push their own agendas(not meaning that you are one). As far as I am concerned, the name on the box or on the chipset should be the LAST reason for buying a videocard......well, maybe not last, but close. Too many here start with the brand of chipset and never go any farther. If more of these people would open their eyes & objectively compare the products on the market with their own eyes, I'm sure we would see much less in the way of flame wars. Of course, it might put a hurting on many of the "hardware" sites on the net.....wow, think about so many people accually using their heads to make a purchase .....
Does anyone really think 8X agp is going to make any difference at all? I mean, maybe as much as ATA133 does? Bottom line, just say no to 8Xagp at the moment........
Chalnoth, will you respond the same way when the 8Xagp TI4600 are availible IF they have the same problems? Or is this another "I just gotta keep people from buying anything other than an nVidia product" thing.......
Bottom line, just say no to 8Xagp at the moment........Chalnoth, will you respond the same way when the 8Xagp TI4600 are availible IF they have the same problems? Or is this another "I just gotta keep people from buying anything other than an nVidia product" thing.......
Typedef Enum
Regular
Not true.
But no matter what, my priorities have shifted over the last 2 years as well. I now use my system to do a lot of work, and I find that the multi-monitor features are a real sticking point. High Quality 2D is also now more important than it has been in the past.
JoshMST said:Only 7 posts here and I am already getting in trouble!
I will have to try and force CS into 32 bit color, and see if that works (but I thought it already was in 32 bit, same as desktop).
Use -32bpp on the command line to force 32 bit framebuffer. As for enginge: it's an evolved Q1 engine (skinning and coloured lighting). In the old builds, most tweaks that worked for GLQuake also worked for Half-life.
Cheers
Gubbi
