Is that the actual speed of the core on this alpha version?
What do you suppose it is then?Jallen said:Thats not a MHz speed rating...
DaveBaumann said:What do you suppose it is then?Jallen said:Thats not a MHz speed rating...
pocketmoon_ said:THE SIZE OF THAT COOLING FAN!!
don't see nothing wrong if ATI and nVidia change places. that just should make nVidia to push harder on R&D to get back on fastest. that means more competion and usually better products with less money for consumers
Maybe they're using AMD's QuantiSpeed rating for the shipping models, "real" 196MHz on this sample would probably be a 450+ on the box...DaveBaumann said:
Is that the actual speed of the core on this alpha version?
Gollum said:Maybe they're using AMD's QuantiSpeed rating for the shipping models, "real" 196MHz on this sample would probably be a 450+ on the box...
megadrive0088 said:don't see nothing wrong if ATI and nVidia change places. that just should make nVidia to push harder on R&D to get back on fastest. that means more competion and usually better products with less money for consumers
preeeecisely. As long as Nv doesn't wait 1 year+ to bring out a TRUE refresh of GeForce FX (the Nv35) things will be just fine.
Actually, NV35 SHOULD be a spring 2003 product. If NV30 was ment to be a fall 2002 product, NV35 the refresh should be spring.....
Philibob said:Does anyone know if that card was in an NVIDIA machine or an add in manufacturer one?
Maybe NVIDIA gave these lower clocked cards to stop them running benchmarks
Jallen said:Thats not a MHz speed rating...