Pre-order X800 Pro - ?NDA? - 8 extreme / 12 normal PS pipes

[BRiT]

Well let's see, the rendering of the following items are broken: walls, lighting, shadows, weapons, and fog. What's left to render?

Alright, so I should have said "could count for doing x% less work" or better yet, "incorrectly render x% of the game". But then that wouldn't have made people think about it for themselves, now would it?

 

[jimmyjames123]

All these "bugs" would count for doing 90% less work to gain 20% performance:

That's probably more what you would like to think, as opposed to what is really happening.

What makes you think that the NV40 is not capable of legitimately achieving these higher framerates? It was pretty obvious that there were a lot of FarCry bugs using Forceware 60.72 drivers, and the NV40 card was defaulting to NV3x optimized hardware settings too. Yes there are still major bugs in Forceware 61.11, but more buggy than 60.72? Not so sure about that.

One thing is for sure, the bugs need to be fixed before we can make any more reliable comparisons between NV and ATI in FarCry.

 

[BRiT]

What makes you think that the NV40 is not capable of legitimately achieving these higher framerates? It was pretty obvious that there were a lot of FarCry bugs using Forceware 60.72 drivers, and the NV40 card was defaulting to NV3x optimized hardware settings.

Nvidia's prior behavior over the last 15 months, especially including the 6800 Ultra launch where they tried to pass less-than PS-1.1 effects off as PS-2.0 and PS-2.0 effects off as PS-3.0. If NV40 is that good, why would they have to resort to such underhanded tactics?

 

[T2k]

All these "bugs" would count for doing 90% less work to gain 20% performance:

That's probably more what you would like to think, as opposed to what is really happening.

What makes you think that the NV40 is not capable of legitimately achieving these higher framerates? It was pretty obvious that there were a lot of FarCry bugs using Forceware 60.72 drivers, and the NV40 card was defaulting to NV3x optimized hardware settings too. Yes there are still major bugs in Forceware 61.11, but more buggy than 60.72? Not so sure about that..

Probably that consistent deceiving, cheating, clear faking, the most obvious and disgusting falsifying NV was making since end of 2002 over whole 2003, even nowadays.

 

[jimmyjames123]

So now NV should be considered guilty until proven innocent? Sheesh, even our legal system is not that harsh. And what does showing some pictures have to do with this boost in FarCry performance?

And as far as I know, NV never stated in their San Fran presentation that they were comparing PS 2.0 pics with PS 3.0. What they were doing was trying to highlight some effects that can be used with SM 3.0., and now we also know that many of these effects can be used with SM 2.0 as well.

 

[DemoCoder]

Well let's see, the rendering of the following items are broken: walls, lighting, shadows, weapons, and fog. What's left to render?

Alright, so I should have said "could count for doing x% less work" or better yet, "incorrectly render x% of the game". But then that wouldn't have made people think about it for themselves, now would it?

Something that's broken or incorrect does not neccessary mean it's not rendering it, or that it's getting a performance bonus. Lots of bugs could lead to *decreased* performance.

 

[T2k]

So now NV should be considered guilty until proven innocent?

This is simply not true, my friend. They lied about their architecture to paint it more powerful. They have been caught on falsifying benchmarks, programs to deceive the customers. They did these things continuously, multiple times and always deliberately.

After the last 18 months they simply did not have any credit to play with. Nope, nothing, zero.

They have to prove it first.

 

[T2k]

Well let's see, the rendering of the following items are broken: walls, lighting, shadows, weapons, and fog. What's left to render?

Alright, so I should have said "could count for doing x% less work" or better yet, "incorrectly render x% of the game". But then that wouldn't have made people think about it for themselves, now would it?

Something that's broken or incorrect does not neccessary mean it's not rendering it, or that it's getting a performance bonus. Lots of bugs could lead to *decreased* performance.

That's true.

 

[jimmyjames123]

They have to prove it first.

Aren't you being overdramatic? My goodness. Trust me, none of these corporations are saints. They are first and foremost held accountable to their shareholders.

The NV40 has already been tested, using many synthetic and gaming benchmarks, and the high performance is undeniably real. What more do they have to prove to you?

 

[Eronarn]

The NV40 has already been tested, using many synthetic and gaming benchmarks, and the high performance is undeniably real. What more do they have to prove to you?

That it's as good as they say it is. It's better than a 9800XT, yeah, but the question is how much better legitimately without reducing IQ.

 

[BRiT]

So now NV should be considered guilty until proven innocent?

Do you find it wise to believe a pathological liar?

 

[jimmyjames123]

That it's as good as they say it is. It's better than a 9800XT, yeah, but the question is how much better legitimately without reducing IQ.

Where are they reducing IQ in the NV40? Essentially all of the original NV40 reviews stated that IQ between NV40 and R3xx was essentially a wash. Most of them gave a very slight edge to ATI for AA quality, and a slight edge to NV for AF quality.

 

[jimmyjames123]

Do you find it wise to believe a pathological liar?

I don't converse with NVIDIA. I formulate conclusions based on a large set of pro reviews on the actual products.

 

[jvd]

man this thread def makes me see its no point in talking to jimmy

 

[jimmyjames123]

I'm trying to get people to be a little bit more open minded. Trust me, the easiest thing that one can do right now is bash NV for all their "sins" committed with the FX series. When are we going to move on?

 

[T2k]

I'm trying to get people to be a little bit more open minded. Trust me, the easiest thing that one can do right now is bash NV for all their "sins" committed with the FX series. When are we going to move on?

ROTFLMAO!

 

[Eronarn]

That it's as good as they say it is. It's better than a 9800XT, yeah, but the question is how much better legitimately without reducing IQ.

Where are they reducing IQ in the NV40? Essentially all of the original NV40 reviews stated that IQ between NV40 and R3xx was essentially a wash. Most of them gave a very slight edge to ATI for AA quality, and a slight edge to NV for AF quality.

See: new drivers.

 

[digitalwanderer]

I don't converse with NVIDIA. I formulate conclusions based on a large set of pro reviews on the actual products.

I remember a whole bunch of folks doing that back after the first round of nV30 reviews too, I prefer to wait until the actual product hits retail.

 

[BRiT]

I don't converse with NVIDIA. I formulate conclusions based on a large set of pro reviews on the actual products.

I remember a whole bunch of folks doing that back after the first round of nV30 reviews too, I prefer to wait until the actual product hits retail.

July

 

[Geeforcer]

That it's as good as they say it is. It's better than a 9800XT, yeah, but the question is how much better legitimately without reducing IQ.

Where are they reducing IQ in the NV40? Essentially all of the original NV40 reviews stated that IQ between NV40 and R3xx was essentially a wash. Most of them gave a very slight edge to ATI for AA quality, and a slight edge to NV for AF quality.

See: new drivers.

See what?