ATI engineering must be under alot of strain. MS funding?

[RussSchultz]

Um, you're not confusing something with the S3 Virge are you?

I have NEVER heard term used to describe the GF2.

I think he is prolly referring to the original GF.

Err. Or that one either.

 

[bdmosky]

bdmosky.....
Spend some time reading my take on this.....which, BTW, was posted on Jan 29th!

Sorry martrox... I'm not understanding what you want me to take from that What you wrote is still speculation based upon your opinions after the NV30 was "launched."

 

[Pete]

What was wrong with the T&L on the GF? I, too, have only heard "3D decelerator" used in reference to S3 Virge cards.

 

[Magnum PI]

but guess what? They have low cost DX9 hardware now... does ATI?

it seems you can't get decent directx9 performance from the low cost DX9 part from nvidia. (fx 5200). it's more a marketing gimmick that something usable.. should be called DX9 marketingware instead.

in the same range ATI offers cards whose performances are decent, and have no problem doing what they claim they do. and we should soon see low cost *usable* DX9 part from them.

nvidia tend to include features when they are not ready for public consumption and add next to nothing to the end user experience. it good for their marketing they can claim they innovate. but consumers are deceived.

 

[Nexiss]

Pete & Russ,

Really, the only reason I think that might be what he is referring to is because when it (original GF) first appeared it benched at or slower than the TNT2 Ultra (if I remember correctlly).

 

[KimB]

it seems you can't get decent directx9 performance from the low cost DX9 part from nvidia. (fx 5200). it's more a marketing gimmick that something usable.. should be called DX9 marketingware instead.

People can always reduce the resolution. Not everybody needs to play at 1600x1200 with 4x FSAA all the time. Some are quite happy with even 640x480.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

You're still holding Nvidia to a double standard. You complain about the MX holding back DX8 technology, yet they were in their own right decent performers. Now you complain about the low-end FX line because they can't perform? You've got to start somewhere. Many of these features may need turned off for DX9 games, but at least developers will code in DX9 features because a larger user base exists.

That's just a cop-out. Supplying features to customers that cannot use those features in a practical way is worse than useless - it's misleading. MX was only ever launched in order to give OEMs something that met the marketing criteria for a nominally DX8 card with a new GForce4 moniker. As before, it made nice marketing tickboxes, but made lousy game playing. It is accepted as being part of Nvidia's refusal to support PS 1.3 because they didn't want to use a ATI derived spec, and so flooded the market with cheap, misleading cards that held back the development of advanced PS support for nearly a couple of years.

I don't see where it is a double standard for condemning Nvidia (or anyone else) for shipping products that market themselves as being able to do things they actually, practcally *cannot* do in any useful fashion.

 

[above3d]

Which may be possible. From what I've seen so far, nVidia has the superior motherboard chipset technology... That would be an interesting turn of events

More seriously, though, I doubt nVidia will have anything to do with the second x-box. I expect nVidia wants to focus on their core graphics technology, to attempt to re-cement their leadership in the PC graphics arena.

How much good does the nf2 do for the PIII in the xBox? I agree nVidia has a very good AMD chipset (as I use one at home.) Works very well with ATi R3x0 graphics cards--which is a compliment to nVidia in how well the chipset supports the Intel specifications (better than Intel-chipset boards it would appear, in some cases.) Heh... Wouldn't it be a hoot if M$ also switched to AMD for the xBox2 even as it replaces nVidia with ATi?

I think people are kind of missing the obvious here: M$ has made its decision relative to what it knows of both companies' upcoming technologies, which presumably is much more than we do. Also, despite whatever quibbles M$ has had with nVidia over the last year, M$ has been able to see as well as anybody how stellar ATi's product execution has been and how shabby nVidia's has been--and the combination of these factors alone could have had them leaning toward ATi for several months. I think it's important to remember that the problems nVidia's had over the last year date back to key decisions the company made well over a year ago. The same thing could be said about ATi's successes in the same time frame. I can easily see how M$ might conclude it was looking at a trend.

Yeah, "M$" as you so aptly call them, makes decision based on technology, not economics/business issues.

 

[StealthHawk]

What was wrong with the T&L on the GF? I, too, have only heard "3D decelerator" used in reference to S3 Virge cards.

When using hardware T&L 3dmark2000 was slower than using software T&L. Although I think that was the exception, not the rule. It caused quite a ruckus back in the day though

I don't ever remember seeing a game that ran slower with hardware T&L on...then again there weren't many back in that time frame. Savage2000 was the true hardware TnL decelerator anyway...lower performance when "hardware TnL" was enabled than without

 

[Qroach]

Joe,

Yes, the earliest source that had enough apparent credibility to impact the stock market. (As I said.)

Actually spong as a source didn't have any impact at all on the stock market. The market only reacted about two - three weeks ago when the Nvidia/ATI thing was a done deal.

Obviously, nothing was official until this past week.

Agreed.

Correct.

ok.

Um, correct. Do you not understand my position at all?

yes I do.

Spong was a simply a public source that Dave could reference for the information.

Correct

As I said, if what I'm saying is correct, then Dave can't answer it in any way that would be definitive.

That's fine, then having someone else speak for him or on his behalf hasn't really help us solve much. it'd be better to raise anymore questions.

My only point is that Spong's story was different from all the other stories up to that point, because the street took it seriously. For whatever reason.

My point is spong was correc only by a fluke of luck. As I said, the only reason thier story was different is because they like to put a spin on every story that is seen elsewhere. Which is why they went out on a limb over the nintendo megaton rumor even trying to "confirm" a date that it would happen. Spong does this with many sotries.

How far in advance did Microsoft announce nVidia for the X-Box 1?

10 March, 2000 is when MS gave the contract to Nvidia and it was released on november 15th 2001 (21 months).

True. And every report I've seen so far is either 2005 or 2006.

Correct.

So, how long is MS supposed to "wait" until Sony officially annouces the release date of it's new console before it schedules it's own?

No idea really, but it can't risk being too early. It certianly didn't help the dreamcast battle off the PS2.

It's not up to Sony. It's up to Microsoft.

Sony is going to force it's competitors hands on the next console systems.

 

[horvendile]

Savage2000 was the true hardware TnL decelerator anyway...lower performance when "hardware TnL" was enabled than without

I thought they never got the TnL working at all?
I distinctly remember it not working at launch, and not for quite some time thereafter either. Then I just assumed they gave up.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Actually spong as a source didn't have any impact at all on the stock market. The market only reacted about two - three weeks ago when the Nvidia/ATI thing was a done deal.

Wrong. This took all of 2 minutes to find:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/yho...p;guid={21F35E45-734F-411C-B4E1-E04C08197E0B}

June 13, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- ATI Technologies shares shot up Friday, while Nvidia shares dropped after a report indicated ATI's graphics chipset would displace Nvidia's product in Microsoft's next-generation Xbox.

ATI Technologies (ATYT: news, chart, profile) added 5.8 percent to $8.40, while Nvidia (NVDA: news, chart, profile) dropped 7.8 percent to $23.47.

A report on Internet game site Spong.com cited Microsoft (MSFT: news, chart, profile) senior development sources in England as saying the company had decided in favor of ATI's graphics chipsets.

That's fine, then having someone else speak for him or on his behalf hasn't really help us solve much. it'd be better to raise anymore questions.

Quincy, that is all that someone with inside information is allowed to do.

My point is spong was correc only by a fluke of luck.

My point is that doesn't matter even if that's true!!. You clearly do NOT understand what I'm telling you.

What matters is the Dave posted the news and the reference. Do you not understand what Dave tried to tell you in his last post? He made the post and the reference to Spong. It wasn't me, or you, or some other forum poster.

Sony is going to force it's competitors hands on the next console systems.

Perhaps...but it's up to Microsoft to decide on how to be forced. Does MS shoot for a post PS3 launch and a more powerful console....or a Pre PS3 post with a less powerful console? There are valid arguments to be made either way.

 

[Qroach]

Wrong.

There's a number of factors that have caused the current price to fall in the last month. You can safely say that the xbox 2 deal is now factored into the price. Wrong perhaps in your opinion and the opinion of the article writter. That doesn't mean that's what actually caused the dip in Nvidia shares back in June. That could have been a dip in the overall market that caused the drop for all anyone knows. Also, are there other sources or market analysts that say the same thing?

This took all of 2 seconds to find:

http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/markets/marketfeatures/10108136.html

ATI Snatches Xbox in Blow to Nvidia
By TSC Staff
08/14/2003 08:36 AM EDT

In a body blow to Nvidia (NVDA:Nasdaq - commentary - research), rival graphics-chip designer ATI Technologies (ATYT:Nasdaq - commentary - research) disclosed an agreement Thursday to provide custom technologies for Microsoft's (MSFT:Nasdaq - commentary - research) Xbox game console.

The news sent ATI up 75 cents, or 6%, to $13 on the Instinet premarket session.

Microsoft said it made the decision "after reviewing the top graphics technologies in development and determining that ATI's technical vision fits perfectly with the future direction of Xbox." Nvidia had been the major supplier of Xbox technology and said the console accounted for 19% of its $460 million in second-quarter sales.

The news exacerbated a slide in Nvidia (NVDA:Nasdaq - commentary - research) that began two weeks ago when the company said manufacturing problems with a new chip would leave second-quarter revenue at the low end of guidance. The company further lowered its earnings outlook when it reported its second quarter last week.

From a high of $25.20 this time last month, Nvidia's shares have steadily fallen. They recently changed hands on the Instinet premarket session for $15.85, down 93 cents, or 5.5%, from Wednesday's 4 p.m. EDT close.

Quincy, that is all that someone with inside information is allowed to do.

Actually I had a typo in there. What I meant to say, is tha tit'd be better to NOT raise more questions. In other words you didn't need to answer for him.

My point is that doesn't matter even if that's true!!. You clearly do NOT understand what I'm telling you.

Obviously YOU don't understand what I'm saying. I'm saying this in addition to understanding why Dave posted the rumor. That's been clearly established Joe. I'm making a statement about the Spong website for your benefit. It has nothing to do with trying to prove dave wrong or why he shouldn't use them as a source, or anything like that.

What matters is the DAVE posted the news and the reference. Do you not understand the significance that Dave tried to tell you in his last post? HE made the post and the reference to Spong. It wasn't me, or you, or some other forum poster.

That's clearly been established, understand? What I'm saying is seperate from what Dave is supposedly trying to tell us! Can you understand that? You don't have to care or even respond to that statement about spong.

Perhaps...but it's up to Microsoft to decide on how to be forced. Does MS shoot for a post PS3 launch and a more powerful console....or a Pre PS3 post with a less powerful console? There are valid arguments to be made either way.

You left one option out, a "pre PS3 launch witha more powerful system".

 

[Joe DeFuria]

There's a number of factors that have caused the current price to fall in the last month.

I have no idea what you're talking about. I said the spong publicized rumor had a direct impact on the market (ATI and nVidia), and you said it didn't.

I gave you a link that showed how the markets reacted upon release of the Spong info. That was the first time the market reacted to any "public news" of a future X-Box deal.

And subsequent action / reaction is irrelevant. I have no idea why you are bringing it up.

You can safely say that the xbox 2 deal is now factored into the price.

I'd say it's mostly factored in, but not quite. Once (if) investment houses start chaning ratings to "buy", based in PART on the x-box deal, then we'll see it fully factored in.

Wrong perhaps in your opinion and the opinion of the article writter. That doesn't mean that's what actually caused the dip in Nvidia shares back in June.

Oh come on. Now you're just being unreasonable. A one day drop in the stock price that high, with no other "negative" news reported that day?

Actually I had a typo in there. What I meant to say, is tha tit'd be better to NOT raise more questions. In other words you didn't need to answer for him.

Pretty significant typo there, don't you think? I wouldn't attempt to answer more for him if you indicated you understood what he meant.

I'm making a statement about the Spong website for your benefit.

Please, Quincy, are you going to next make a post about the Inquirer for my benefit as well?

It has nothing to do with trying to prove dave wrong or why he shouldn't use them as a source, or anything like that.

Then why on earth bring it up. You have this knack for bringing up irrelevant information, for what, the hell of it?

That's clearly been established, understand?

If you say so.

What I'm saying is seperate from what Dave is supposedly trying to tell us! Can you understand that? You don't have to care or even respond to that statement about spong.

Yes, what you are trying to tell me now, is that Spong itself is not a particularly reliable source. Thanks for the (irrelevant) news flash.

BTW Quincy, I think the butler did it in the kitchen with a rope. Please understand that I'm just trying to tell you something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

You left one option out, a "pre PS3 launch witha more powerful system".

No, You mis-read my statement.

When speaking about "relative power", I was speaking in terms of relative to itself, not to PS3.

In other words, I'm not saying MS can choose to ship later than PS3 and more powerful than PS3. I'm saying MS can choose to ship later than PS3, and be more powerful than if they ship a product before PS3..

How x-box can stack up to PS3, whenever it's launched, is an open question which I did not attempt to address at all.

 

[bdmosky]

it seems you can't get decent directx9 performance from the low cost DX9 part from nvidia. (fx 5200). it's more a marketing gimmick that something usable.. should be called DX9 marketingware instead.

Agreed, but I would add that it seems you can't get decent directx 9 performance at a low cost from anyone at the moment.

in the same range ATI offers cards whose performances are decent, and have no problem doing what they claim they do.

Nvidia's low cost parts offer decent performance... just not in DX9 games, or at high resolutions, but then again, the people who buy these cards probably don't even know what the resolution does or even own a monitor that can handle higher resolutions.

and we should soon see low cost *usable* DX9 part from them.

Still waiting...

MX was only ever launched in order to give OEMs something that met the marketing criteria for a nominally DX8 card with a new GForce4 moniker. As before, it made nice marketing tickboxes, but made lousy game playing.

And the 9000 series from ATI does what?

It is accepted as being part of Nvidia's refusal to support PS 1.3 because they didn't want to use a ATI derived spec, and so flooded the market with cheap, misleading cards that held back the development of advanced PS support for nearly a couple of years.

That was PS 1.4, and the MX part was long in development before ATI released PS 1.4 capable cards. If anything, fault them for not having good PS 1.4 performance in their latest generation of cards. And are you going to say the same now of ATI for not releasing a low cost DX9 card which is "holding back the development of advanced PS support?" I don't see how you can straddle the fence like that...

 

[KimB]

Nvidia's low cost parts offer decent performance... just not in DX9 games, or at high resolutions, but then again, the people who buy these cards probably don't even know what the resolution does or even own a monitor that can handle higher resolutions.

But there aren't DX9 games to compare yet. This is speculation, and I see no reason why users who own 5200's won't be able to play DX9 games just fine. They'll probably have to run at low resolution, and may have to turn texture detail down, but everything else they should be able to crank up (just fyi, I'm lumping FSAA and aniso into resolution...those may need to be low or off...).

 

[Qroach]

I have no idea what you're talking about. I said the spong publicized rumor had a direct impact on the market (ATI and nVidia), and you said it didn't.

... What I'm saying is that I don't think spong actually has an impact on the market, despite what CBS market watch mentioned. Now if all the news media outlets picked up on Spong, then I think more people would have known about it and then there's a greater chance for the stock price being affected. That's my take on it,, I'm not saying that I know for certain one way or the other.

I'd say it's mostly factored in, but not quite. Once (if) investment houses start chaning ratings to "buy", based in PART on the x-box deal, then we'll see it fully factored in.

I'd agree with that stament.

Oh come on. Now you're just being unreasonable. A one day drop in the stock price that high, with no other "negative" news reported that day?

That's not unreasonable IMO. As I said it could have been a dip in the entire market. Not only that, but negative news doesn't always have an impact on stock prices right away, which is why I posted that article about how the recent Nvidia slide has occured over many weeks due to negative news. Or do you think that is me "just being unreasonable"?

Pretty significant typo there, don't you think? I wouldn't attempt to answer more for him if you indicated you understood what he meant.

Full circle...

Please, Quincy, are you going to next make a post about the Inquirer for my benefit as well?

I actually already did make a post about the inquirer in the same statement about spong.

Then why on earth bring it up. You have this knack for bringing up irrelevant information, for what, the hell of it?

Hey I said it for your benefit, I don't know if you regularly follow console news or not. You may see it a not being relevant, but you're the one that felt the need to talk about WHY I'm posting that info. Anyone else would just ignore it if they couldn't care less.

If you say so.

ok

Yes, what you are trying to tell me now, is that Spong itself is not a particularly reliable source. Thanks for the (irrelevant) news flash.

BTW Quincy, I think the butler did it in the kitchen with a rope. Please understand that I'm just trying to tell you something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Right. If the "butler" was mentioned in this discussion at ALL, then I'd (ignore or ) thank you for that information instead of asking "WHY did you post that?" while being sarcastic over and over again.

When speaking about "relative power", I was speaking in terms of relative to itself, not to PS3.

In other words, I'm not saying MS can choose to ship later than PS3 and more powerful than PS3. I'm saying MS can choose to ship later than PS3, and be more powerful than if they ship a product before PS3..

Ok, so you're saying the more time MS has, the more powerful Xbox 2 can be. The way I see it is whatever they ship will be relative to the PS3 in terms of power. At least that's the only way it can be marketed to the public in a way they can understand.

How x-box can stack up to PS3, whenever it's launched, is an open question which I did not attempt to address at all.

I'm not going to attempt it either, it's just a guessing game at this point.

 

[WaltC]

Actually spong as a source didn't have any impact at all on the stock market. The market only reacted about two - three weeks ago when the Nvidia/ATI thing was a done deal.

The thing not generally understood sometimes about the stock markets is that they often flow and ebb based on rumors. Rumors are the life-blood of the stock analyst.

I didn't pay any attention to the Spong story when it ran because it was 100% unattributed to anybody (I don't even recall an author's name being used for the Spong story itself on the Spong site) and therefore was 100% the stuff of unverifiable rumor. Thing to remember is that just because a rumor is clearly presented as a rumor, with no attribution to suggest it's anything except a rumor, there's no reason to suspect that some people won't believe it, just because it's clearly a rumor. Heh.. the purpose of all rumors is to persuade people of certain things, the veracity of those rumors being secondary.

Rumors affect the stock market on a daily basis, unfortunately. (Or fortunately, depending on your perspective.)

 

[OpenGL guy]

Nvidia's low cost parts offer decent performance... just not in DX9 games, or at high resolutions, but then again, the people who buy these cards probably don't even know what the resolution does or even own a monitor that can handle higher resolutions.

But there aren't DX9 games to compare yet. This is speculation, and I see no reason why users who own 5200's won't be able to play DX9 games just fine. They'll probably have to run at low resolution, and may have to turn texture detail down, but everything else they should be able to crank up (just fyi, I'm lumping FSAA and aniso into resolution...those may need to be low or off...).

Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness is DX9.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

That was PS 1.4, and the MX part was long in development before ATI released PS 1.4 capable cards. If anything, fault them for not having good PS 1.4 performance in their latest generation of cards. And are you going to say the same now of ATI for not releasing a low cost DX9 card which is "holding back the development of advanced PS support?" I don't see how you can straddle the fence like that...

I don't agree with ATI renaming the 8500 core as a 9000 series card. I think that is misleading. However, AFAIK, they are not saying that it is a DX9 card, whereas the GF4 MX was shipped as a DX8 card when it had very poor DX8 qualities. The GF4 MX wasn't just named like their GF4 series when it had much lower capabilities, it was *presented* as part of the same DX8 family, when it only was from a Nvidia marketing point of view.

Nvidia is widely accepted as having stunted PS support by actively refusing to follow the spec because they did not develop it themselves. It's just part of their long running historical compaign to control the 3D world the Nvidia way, rather then follow API's directly.

This very nearly takes us back to the original point. Nvdia introduce new features that are not usable for a couple of generations, while touting them as innovative developments for marketing purposes. They have for many years relied on the brute force power of smaller fabrication processes, increased clockspeeds, and faster memory to eek out incremental evolutions of the same products. To me, that is being staid, and sluggish.

Other companies like ATI have been showing us that there is another way than just relying on process improvements - build clever, innovative designs.