[H]OCP does the 9600Pro... nVidia's in even more trouble!

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by martrox, Apr 16, 2003.

  1. martrox

    martrox Old Fart
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,065
    Likes Received:
    16
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida USA
    http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDU4

     
  2. Ostsol

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    1,765
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Well, the reason for the huge performance difference is the fact that [H] used "Application" settings, rather than NVidia's "Balanced" or "Aggressive". True, this provides us with an "apples to apples" comparison, but it's unlikely that anyone who actually buys the 5600 will actually use "Application" quality, based on these numbers. Looking at other reviews, which did use NVidia's other quality settings, the 9600 Pro appears at least equal to the 5600 Ultra, on average.
     
  3. martrox

    martrox Old Fart
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,065
    Likes Received:
    16
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida USA
    Very true... so, you can spend the same amount of money and get the same performance with much worse IQ..... sounds like a really good deal to me.... :roll:
     
  4. whql

    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    1
    Interesting way of phrasing it. Surely you meant to say "By dialing down the IQ settings NVIDIA 5600 Ultra just about remains competetive with 9600 PRO"?
     
  5. Ostsol

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    1,765
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    *shrugs* I have yet to see confirmed prices. . .
     
  6. demalion

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    CT
    I agree that for mainstream cards, (A)Performance versus (N)Balanced benchmarks would have been a better choice, especially for the tests where the 5600 was choking significantly.
     
  7. Hellbinder

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ok then. Ati will use Performance AF from now on. Since you seem to be all about lowering the IQ. Im all for it to. Lets see how bad the 5600U gets crushed when ATi gets to use its Perf AF.

    But let me guess.. You ahve some reason why thats not fair right?
     
  8. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,902
    Likes Received:
    218
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    GeForce FX in Application mode vs. Radeon 9600 in quality mode is not strictly apples to apples. The FX still doesn't have the off-angle problems that the 9600 has. ATI's shortcuts have forced nVidia to take their own to get performance up.

    My own tests with a Radeon 9700 show that there are cases where this card actually takes a higher performance hit from enabling anisotropic filtering than the GeForce4 when there are absolutely no off-angle surfaces (It was a contrived scenario with high degrees of anisotropy over most of the image), meaning that a fair amount of the R300's "superiority" in anisotropic filtering performance comes from the reduced filtering on offangle surfaces.
     
  9. jb

    jb
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,636
    Likes Received:
    7
    As well as the FX x4 AA is a lower quality to the R300 serries of x4 AA but thats all we have. So by your own aurgement we should also test the GF at a higher degree of AA to make up for the OG sampling pattern and lack of gamma corrected AA found on the FX? The idea here is to get as close as possible. I am not saying its right or wrong but you have to make a call somewhere...
     
  10. BoddoZerg

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    481
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting... screenshots?
     
  11. Althornin

    Althornin Senior Lurker
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    5
    Actually it IS apples to appples, without AF, and using either 0x or 2x AA.
    Nice how you can blame everything on ATI though. You know, you constantly bitch about how bad ATI's AF implimentation is, yet we dont see the same level of complaints against nVidia AA or against nVidia control panle crap from you. Please take off your bias hat.
     
  12. IceKnight

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    yah show me the screen shot and I believe you, also state your driver version and what game settings. Or are we supposed to believe you becouse u said so? bah...
     
  13. Ostsol

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    1,765
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Actually, I think NVidia's "Application" filtering does look better than ATI's. . . ATI certainly has done a whole lot better since the 8500, but it'd be nice to see even better filtering appear.
     
  14. mczak

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,015
    Likes Received:
    112
    This is only true for no AF, no AA. Strictly speaking, the R9600 will have better iq at 2xAA because of the gamma corrected AA.
     
  15. Grall

    Grall Invisible Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,801
    Likes Received:
    2,172
    Location:
    La-la land
    *Cough*, you never checked out Anand's GFFX review did you? The aniso quality comparisons that switched when moused over showed ATIs implementation to be either equal or superior.

    *G*
     
  16. Dave Baumann

    Dave Baumann Gamerscore Wh...
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2002
    Messages:
    14,079
    Likes Received:
    648
    Location:
    O Canada!
    In motion I have to say I do prefer NV full IQ (texturing, not AA) settings to ATI's.
     
  17. Ostsol

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    1,765
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Um. . . That's Aggressive and Ballanced settings. I know they're crap. Take a look at these shots, though:

    GeforceFX 5800 Ultra "Application" 8x
    Radeon 9800 Pro "Quality" 16x

    You can't be telling me that ATI's looks better. . . NVidia's is a bit weak on the 45° than other angles, but it's still superior to ATI's.
     
  18. Sxotty

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    4,894
    Likes Received:
    344
    Location:
    PA USA
    But the human eye doesn't see the start pattern that ATI displays unless you have colors like that. That is why people like it.

    oh by the way you checked this out

    http://www.ukgamer.com/article.php4?id=232&page=1

    I think that this is a good idea personally but who knows.
     
  19. Ostsol

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    1,765
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    The thing is that with the NVidia implementation, you never see that at 22.5° the surface is receiving less aniso -- with the colours or without. If the ground was for some reason at 22.5° in a game, you'd certainly notice the lack of aniso treatment even without the colours.
     
  20. Althornin

    Althornin Senior Lurker
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    5
    Blatant fanboism aside, i think we can all agree here that nVidia's Application AF is superior to anything aTI has to offer (quality wise) and ATI's AA is superior (quality wise) to anything nVdia has to offer. Honestly, i'd prefer a card that could do BOTH the "perfect" aniso and the "perfect" AA - but i cant have one.

    As far as performance, there is only one (yeah i was wrong earlier) mode that is strictly comparable - no AF, no AA, trilinear filtering (ATI) Application (nVidia). For everything else, its kinda subjective. Honestly, with all the complaints about ATI's AF implimentation, all i mostly hear is "theorycraft" so to speak. In practice, i dont really notice the problems much - and it looks vastly better than no AF at all.
    My direct experience with AA/AF comparisons (GF3 vs 9700) tell me that overall, the 9700 has far better IQ.

    Anyways, I am sure i have wandered far off topic.
    Back to the modes - one problem as i see it is how can you compare modes that do things differently? the answer is, you cannot, exactly. The proper thing to do is to remark on the dfferences while providing numbers.


    Also, in that tunnel test - would it be possible for SOMEONE to test that with some texture in it, other then the checkerboard, and with color mip maps off, and post some comparative pics? I know how dramtic those color differences look, but IMO, they arent that glaring in game. I'd like to see what effect it ACTUALLY has on texture quality, in a non-game setting.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...