Is Elite Bastards pro-nVidia now?

[digitalwanderer]

I agree geo, except for the SM3 bit that is. By the time shader heavy games come out that really make use of SM3 the 6 series will be too slow to run them. So having SM3 for future proofing is really a moot point unless you want to run at 800x600.

True, but for PR purposes it worked miracles so it should be counted.

 

[Geo]

That certainly appears to be true, re HDR. It did appear to help in FarCry, and I imagine it will help here and there. And, y'know, SM3 at "free" will still do infinitely more for you than the SM3 on R4xx, for obvious reasons.

Now I'm irked tho at letting myself get put in a "appearing to bash ATI" position. Ah well.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Now I'm irked tho at letting myself get put in a "appearing to bash ATI" position. Ah well.

Don't be, sometimes saying what you think will make you sound fanboyish but you can't say it without sounding fanboyish.

Just say what ya think and don't worry what anyone thinks about it, it works for me.

 

[{Sniping}Waste]

That certainly appears to be true, re HDR. It did appear to help in FarCry, and I imagine it will help here and there. And, y'know, SM3 at "free" will still do infinitely more for you than the SM3 on R4xx, for obvious reasons.

Now I'm irked tho at letting myself get put in a "appearing to bash ATI" position. Ah well.

Don't worry about it. The big thing is to learn to weed out the PR crap and find out what is usable for gaming or just a cheek mark feature.

The things I hear all the time about NV4X for advice to chose a NV4X is SM3.0 and HDR. I look at both as PR crap and just a cheek mark and not realy usable because of proformans hits. The G70 as fix the proformance problem with SM3.0 but still need work on the HDR/FP blend.

ATI needs to get the F buffer up and running if it there and works( I say its PR crap). Some say the drivers need to include SSAA but its just to slow and see why ATI is leaving it out( if its not usable then don't provide it).

 

[Geo]

Heh. Thanks. Of course, you have such a bubbly personality that most people won't hold it against you anyway.

[This was not an invitation for the He-Man Digi Hater club to line up here to prove how terribly wrong I am. ]

 

[Pete]

The truth is not fanboyism.

The XTPE was a bit faster than the Ultra. Score one for ATI, at $500.

Not long after launch, when only the 6800GT and X800P appeared in any significant numbers, nV's drivers led to the GT outpacing the Pro. So, nV led at the $400 mark.

The 6800 kicked butt at $300, mainly because its only competition was the year-old 9800 series.

The 6600GT also was superior at $200 for several months.

Now, ATI is price and performance competitive across basically the whole range (X800, XL, XT, that crazy AGP AIW XT for a while)--but they're still missing the SM2++/HDR in the GF6 that allows for exclusive effects on a handful of pretty well known titles. So, let's call it pretty close to a draw. ATI has at least rebalanced the playing field....

.... up til the GTX, for which they are without an answer for another few months. Yeah, they seem to be in a better position than they were last year, and their upcoming line-up should bring them up to speed in all areas, but I'd say there's certainly been opportunity aplenty to lose fans.

I don't think this is bashing ATI, it's just pointing out the obvious as it relates to 3D gaming's two biggest features: speed and special effects. Power draw, heatsink size, noise, etc. are all of secondary importance for the majority of the market, IMO, and only really become important when the primary playing field levels.

Edit: geo, hope summers eternal.

 

[Geo]

Mass opinion tends to be a trailing indicator as well.

I actually think there is a really good chance that ATI touched bottom on the one-two punch of GTX was announced/available & Orton making the R520 delay official. . .and the rebound starts in the next month.

 

[jvd]

Now, ATI is price and performance competitive across basically the whole range (X800, XL, XT, that crazy AGP AIW XT for a while)--but they're still missing the SM2++/HDR in the GF6 that allows for exclusive effects on a handful of pretty well known titles. So, let's call it pretty close to a draw. ATI has at least rebalanced the playing field....

I would say that through out nvidia's hardware its missing usable hdr hardware .

The g70 even takes huge hits with hdr enabled as the res increases . I doubt a 6600gt user will go around talking about how great hdr is and how its the future and they are glad thier card can run it . I highly doubt they are getting playable frames even at 800x600

 

[Geo]

I don't know about that. Don't underestimate the hobbyist factor --they got a good card at the price they could afford, and they get to futz around with forward-looking features. It's not (geez, I hope!) like many of them were standing there in the aisle going "Hmm, X800 Pro or 6600GT?". No, they won't play their games that way, but as they didn't have to get a lesser card at the price to play with it, I think a lot of people would be happy to be able to "see what all the shouting is about."

6600GT is *still* eating ATI's lunch. Did you hear Orton talk about their "high/low" strategy? Just like in football, you double-team the other guys best player that is handing you a whupping by himself.

 

[trinibwoy]

I would say that through out nvidia's hardware its missing usable hdr hardware .

The g70 even takes huge hits with hdr enabled as the res increases . I doubt a 6600gt user will go around talking about how great hdr is and how its the future and they are glad thier card can run it . I highly doubt they are getting playable frames even at 800x600

From reading the boards over the past few months, the impact of NV40's superior feature support hasn't primarily been due to 'playability' (although it's the card that the detractors most often played). It was merely the fact that people could access these features and "see" them for themselves in action. You can gain a lot of mindshare by running actual game features slowly when the competition can't do it at all. I played through Far Cry on a 9800P but reinstalled it after I got my GT. I didn't play it with HDR but I got to 'see' what all the fuss was about. That is infinitely more valuable than not seeing it at all which ties back to geo's hobbyist comment earlier. NV40 was simply the more 'interesting' part hands down. Some may say that very few games made use of these features but the mere existence of these games brought those features out of the marketing docs and into reality.

 

[Pete]

I would say that through out nvidia's hardware its missing usable hdr hardware .

Technically, ATI is the one that's missing usable HDR hardware. The only complaint you can level at nVidia (and I have) is that's it's not buttery-smoothly usable HDR hardware.

Yeah, rediscovering resolutions lower than 10x7--and without AA--is tough after the 6800U and X800XT/PE gave us truly HRAA gaming, but, for the same money, choice is better than no choice. That's why nV's been kicking butt and taking names for the past year, and that's why I'd be surprised if forums hadn't begun to at least lean back toward nV, if not away from ATI.

 

[Kombatant]

My take, in retrospect.

Last April, when I was in London and learned about the R420 in detail, I felt somewhat discouraged. It's biggest feature (apart from speed, that is) was 3Dc, and when I learned what that was, and how it was implemented, I knew that there wasn't going to be any mass acceptance of the feature in the foreseeable future (meaning: within R420s life span as a high-end product, that is). R420 might be faster, but NV40 had more features. In fact, the R420 reminded me of Voodoo3 heh. Yes, I know that when true SM3.0 games will hit the market, the NV4x will probably be too slow to play them. But think about this: have you ever stopped to consider how many games you can play today on your Radeon 8500 and not on your Geforce4? Why? Because the 8500 is a more feauture-rich card. And yes, NV40 may be slow in those games, but two years from now where some games will require at least a SM3.0 part, NV40 owners will be able to play them. R420 owners will not. And yes, us enthusiasts will have moved on from our R4xx and NV4x cards then, but many people will still have them installed.

So for people like you and me, an R4xx card was an excellent choice, and I still believe that. But if you planned to keep your card for two years or more, you'd be better off with an nVidia card.

 

[jvd]

The problem is some of us with lcd monitors can't rediscover those reses and some of us don't want to period


I liken the nv40 to the r8500. More features that were barely used .

anyone with a nv40 will wnat a g70 or more to play games with hdr and true sm3.0 games .

 

[dizietsma]

Maybe it's not a swing too far towards nvidia but simply a swing more towards the middle because no doubt in the era of the FX range nvidia did things that made a lot of people swing massively to Ati, ie the state of nvidia's cards and the things that nvidia did to manage that poor card. Nearly all nvidia fans were stockaded up in Fort nvnews trying to dodge incoming, most specifically's DW's and Hellbinders minguns !

Peoples expectations of nvidia in those days were very low. The first sign of things improving was not nv40 but the FX 5700U which was a decent card that overclocked well and was, for reasons only known to Ati, up against a fairly poor 9600Pro card. I still cannot figure out why Ati went from a strong performing and rather magnificent 9500Pro to the relatively weedy 9600Pro .. that's not progress.

Now it's pick and mix time, for high end I would go 7800, for high midrange a nice X800XL, for low midrange the 6600GT and for low the 9800Pro from a seedy backstreet shop in Hong Kong.

 

[ANova]

Now it's pick and mix time, for high end I would go 7800, for high midrange a nice X800XL, for low midrange the 6600GT and for low the 9800Pro from a seedy backstreet shop in Hong Kong.

I would personally prefer the X800 over the 6600 GT. And for the price you can get 9800 Pros for now, excellent deal, especially considering they are marginally slower then the 6600 GT.

And yes, NV40 may be slow in those games, but two years from now where some games will require at least a SM3.0 part, NV40 owners will be able to play them. R420 owners will not.

I don't know. SM3 becoming the bare minimum in just 2 years? That sounds like the wrong direction to go. Look at the ruckess BF2 is making by not supporting anything less then the 8500.

 

[Kombatant]

I don't know. SM3 becoming the bare minimum in just 2 years? That sounds like the wrong direction to go. Look at the ruckess BF2 is making by not supporting anything less then the 8500.

Yes I see it; it has surpassed Counter Strike in online players In any case, we'll see...

 

[Martin Eddy]

I don't know. SM3 becoming the bare minimum in just 2 years? That sounds like the wrong direction to go. Look at the ruckess BF2 is making by not supporting anything less then the 8500.

Yes I see it; it has surpassed Counter Strike in online players In any case, we'll see...

I think more game developers should take this route. They keep complaining about development times getting longer and longer, well there's an easy way to cut 6 months worth of coding, compatibility testing, bug fixing etc. Just stop supporting old hardware.

It will also help push hardware sales. The biggest problem facing PC's is "Legacy Support". I'm not saying there shouldn't be any support for old technology but how are we supposed to move forward if we tied to the big old anchor called LEGACY.

 

[Richteralan]

a seedy backstreet shop in Hong Kong.

actually no need backstreet shop in Hong Kong.
Just teh "New Golden Computer arcade" is enough....

And I agree that if you gonna keep your display card for a few years, you'd better go with nvidia.

 

[Richteralan]

Ah...and for the topic.
I really didn't notice that EB is pro-nv now.
And I didn't feel it's very pro-ati before. I know that dig is there so they must be more or less the same , but when compared with some other fanboyish sites(reads: driverheaven), EB is quite neutral.

 

[jb]

Yes I see it; it has surpassed Counter Strike in online players In any case, we'll see...

No it passes CS:Soruce in on-line players for a breif moment but it did not pass CS However CS/CS:Soruce players are down to an all time low..they only had about 60,000 combined this AM...down from their normally 100,000+ numbers....