[H]ardocp Review for the Geforce FX

From the Tomshardware and Hardocp reviews, it really looks like the GeForce FX is ahead in most situations that give playable framerates. The very low 1600x1200x32 w/ 4x FSAA results are almost certainly due to drivers.

Regardless, at the very least, nVidia really needs to get moving on their drivers before the R350 shows up.
 
Chal, I can't quite understand your inner workings...

Due to drivers? That's utterly laughable, we all know drivers play a lesser part the higher in res you go. Time to stop making excuses for hardware shortcomings dude.

*G*
 
HOLY MOLY!
Who looked at the IQ comparisons at the end of HardOCP's review?
The "ultimate IQ" pics are nice.
I'd have to say, in those pics, the 9700 wins in both texture clarity and edge aliasing, not to mention double the framerate.
wow.
I guess that 8xS is slow...
 
Grall said:
Chal, I can't quite understand your inner workings...

Due to drivers? That's utterly laughable, we all know drivers play a lesser part the higher in res you go. Time to stop making excuses for hardware shortcomings dude.

*G*

How did Ati then manage to get a 30% perfomance boost in Serious Sam in 1600*1200 ? (one of the catalyst driver revisions,all other resolutions was not affected that much, if at all afair)

A note about the GeForce FX. This review paints a little bit brighter picture. But, it seems like the AA quality is much worse (as feared) so even if it ends up being as fast as the R9700 in most playable resolutions, we still have to keep that in mind. Now, i don't know how big of a difference it'll be when seeing it in motion though so i won't make any final judgement on that yet.

And i think we need at least 2 more driver revisions from Nvidia until we have the final info regarding perfomance.
 
i think im cursed when it comes to IQ, i seem to pick out jaggies very easily on any card and am never satisfied...

my overall impression regarding AA, 9700 6xAA > FX 8xS
AF on the otherhand, at 8x, they are both pretty much on par
 
Yeah, those IQ comparisons are very telling. nV's 8x AA seems to work better on some spots and worse on many others. It also doesn't seem to be fully correct, unless the color of those beams all in the background can vary from dusty to steely.

So the [H] review seems to show the GFFX as slightly faster than other reviews, but it reveals the IQ to be somewhat lacking. Interesting.
 
I mean seriously..how can you do a video card review and not show ONE screen shot :rolleyes:


Good job Brent, at least we have a idea of IQ.
 
To me it actually sounds just like...a dustbuster. Only thing missing is the sharp crackling sounds as tiny crumbs of food fly in and get spit out the other end at a couple hundred mph... :LOL:
 
Hot damn, that fan is loud!! Never mind joking about a free set of headphones, I'd be wanting a free set of industrial earplugs!! :oops:
 
Well after reading most of the reviews I have to say that this is probably going to be a very hollow 'victory' for nvidia. Essentially 9700Pro performance + a few percent here and there for ~$100US more plus that god forsaken cooling system. At the very least this just reinforces what a superb job ATI did on the R300. Provided that the R350 isnt saddled with some ridiculous cooling system its all basically a surety that my next card this spring will be an ATI.

I will say that their AA/AF performance is actually quite impressive given the bandwidth deficit they are running compared to the R300.

/edit: Hmm. Now anand's review is up and the FX is demonstrably weaker. Nvidia may not even have a 'hollow victory'... :?:
 
Back
Top