NV18 And NV28

I wouldn't have been commenting on it in the fashion I had if I were under NDA.

 

Yes, although I haven't discussed anything that I've currently recieved under NDA.

 

The MX brand since introduction and to this present day should be called the "rip off brand". They have been slow, underperforming parts all along that sell because stupid people see GF4 and don't realize they're getting a dumbed down version of the better card. Most people probably never realize how badly their card performs though, so no big loss. I still hate these "value" cards though. As if you can get a seriously performing card for <$100.

I think the point is: if it's late, it's late.

I just hope they finish it soon. If ATi gets the R9500 to market before the NV30, I think it's going to be bad for Nvidia.

 

It ain't even a dumbed down version. Think geforce4 MX(aka geforce 2.1 at best), thet biggest slap on the face at consumers to this day. Completely overpriced and underspeced.

Oh yeah, and where is the almighty 63 million transistor NV18??

Yes it was all an evil conspiracy against Nvidia. Give me a break. Nvidia saw R300 on .15micron with full floating point pipelines and ran back to the drawing board so scared, they forgot to plug the earlier leaks about it being taped out. That's what you get for resting on their laurels for so long

I guess the 3dfx butchering is biting them in the ass now. Huge cards, BIG production delays exactly like 3dfx. It seems to have paid off dont ya think?

 

While I agree that the GF4 MX isn't a hot card I couldn't disagree more on the GF2 MX. It had excellent value with good performace when it first appeared. It also had all the features of its big brother. I wouldn't call this a "rip off".

Patrik

 

I think there is a good chance nVidia are waiting for the radeon 9500 to show its colours before deciding on the final specs on a AGP 8X 4600 so they can position it correctly against ATI's offerings. This way they can avoid a repeat of the Radeon 8500/MX460/Ti4200 situation.

Patrik

 

They don't compare at all and never will. The ATI-9500 is DX9 compliant, Nvidia-4600-8xAGP isn't. As I believe an Nvidia rep said, this fall you're either DX9 or you're not. No two ways about it.

--|BRiT|

 

Considering that there will be no DX9 games to play the next 2 years or so the cards are most definately comparable IMO. It will be different in a year or so when the first DX9 games will be on the horizon but until then they will compete on performace (and IQ, FSAA and aniso).

Patrik

 

Its NVIDIA problem for 'not' choosing 0.15, ATI did fine with R300 on 0.15, so should NVIDIA. Perhaps R300 is what Geforce 4 should have been.

 

I also would like to add to V3's post that there are other designs that have been shipping for a "while" now on .13 micro process. So its a combination of nV complexed desgin and a still un-mature process. However since no one was forcing nV to use a .13 process they have to be held accountable for thier chocies...

 

In fact it was supposed to have 81M transistors (if one read the slide wrong, that is). And where is the NV28 with 86M transistors?

And no, not even the Crush18 will have that many transistors. The nForce1 had some 40M transistors, both NB and SB included.

 

I know its marketing speak, but this stands out;

'Today’s fast-paced “fly-through” applications and games will see significant improvements in overall performance due to the doubled AGP 8X speed. By combining the performance and scalability of AGP8X GPU and a high performance 128MB DDR frame buffer; the GeForce4 Ti 4200 with AGP 8X GPU delivers more than two times the graphics performance of competitive products'

As I know 2 9700 reviews are in the offing at this site, any chance they will involve testing on an 8x AGP mobo?

 

Dammit! I've been given the opportunity to get the first (UK) access to one of the only two reference boards in the UK, on the proviso that I have an AGP8X board (or else there will be little point!). Time to make some motherboard contacts...

 

Which makes the MX440 a complete dof as its still not faster than the 9000Pro.

Anyway I wasnt talking about compatibility, I was talking about B3D's normal testing of performance gains going from 2x to 4x AGP being extended to 8x AGP.

 

Oh, that would be something we'd look at if we can. I suspect that by the time we get an 8X MB others will have done it already though!

 

Here is an article of NV28/18 vs NV25/17 vs R9000/Pro (Chinese):

http://www.pcpop.com.cn/read.asp?id=584

Actually, NV28/18 is nothing more than NV25/17 with AGP 8x. If and only if volume vertex data and/or texture data excess the capacity of the local video memory, AGP 8x can show its muscle. However, there is almost no game which needs more than 64MB video memory currently, including UT2003.