Kombatant
Regular
The sad part is that (as it was previously mentioned) these guys have NO AFFILIATION whatsoever with Rage3D; they have even stolen gfx from our site, altered them a bit and have them as their own. All they do is give R3D a bad name with this. So we are talking about Fake benchmarks from a fake website here...flexy said:L233 said:
ROFLMAO
ps. /me == native german
glw said:
I took that to mean (and I was going to post a sepearte topic about it) if you are limited to1024x768 or 1280x1024(960) then the R420 may be more attractive as you have better looking/better performing MSAA modes in 6x and at least 8x (IMO) sparse sampled on the 420 compared to the 4xMSAA or 8x hybrid mode on the NV40.
I was going topost a topic that I think ATI may win over gamers who like AA and are cpu/resolution limited even if performance is a wash as you can get better looking MSAA on a R300 with 6xSparse in CPU limited scenarios.
Add to that the fact that many many gamers (with money, i.e. the target market for enthusiasts) switched to 16/20ms response time LCD's this year, primarily at 15" or 17", and a lot of people will be looking at performance comparisons of 6x/8x AA at 1024x768/1280x1024 rez's.
You would expect the 420 to win those outright even if it's not an apples to apples comparison, a lot of people wont know/care.
Now if ATI were to at least offer a 6xhybrid mode..
FUD in the waters
This is whole mess is just FUD in the waters.. The real truth will only come out when both the NVidia and ATI's are both in stores. I think NVidia is not going to release 6800 until atleast ATI release info on the X800. ATI is probably waiting for NVidia to release the real 6800 ( higher clock speeds ) before releasing info on X800.
This is whole mess is just FUD in the waters.. The real truth will only come out when both the NVidia and ATI's are both in stores. I think NVidia is not going to release 6800 until atleast ATI release info on the X800. ATI is probably waiting for NVidia to release the real 6800 ( higher clock speeds ) before releasing info on X800.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Re: FUD in the waters
Yeah, it is interesting to watch this cat and mouse game.
Though nvidia does have a practical upper limit on how high their non-ultra product can go...they can't have it perform too close to the Ultra, otherwise the Ultra is dead in the water.
So ATI is basically in the driver seat here. Nvidia shot first with the NV40 Ultra specs, and ATI gets first crack at picking speeds (find a yield / profit vs. performance trade-off.)
It will be interesting to see if ATI announces specs for ALL their X800 products on May 4th...or just the specs for the product that will be shipping first. (X800 Pro, based on rumors.)
It's interesting that ATI appears to be shipping their Pro first, while at the same time, nVidia appears to be shipping the Ultra first.
hstewarth said:
Yeah, it is interesting to watch this cat and mouse game.
Though nvidia does have a practical upper limit on how high their non-ultra product can go...they can't have it perform too close to the Ultra, otherwise the Ultra is dead in the water.
So ATI is basically in the driver seat here. Nvidia shot first with the NV40 Ultra specs, and ATI gets first crack at picking speeds (find a yield / profit vs. performance trade-off.)
It will be interesting to see if ATI announces specs for ALL their X800 products on May 4th...or just the specs for the product that will be shipping first. (X800 Pro, based on rumors.)
It's interesting that ATI appears to be shipping their Pro first, while at the same time, nVidia appears to be shipping the Ultra first.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
It's also interesting to see how many times I said "interesting" in that last post...
Re: FUD in the waters
I'm still counting this as the battle of the mid-end cards, I don't care how they label 'em.
Well, sort of. Let's not forget that nVidia's "Ultra" was the non-Ultra until they premiered it.Joe DeFuria said:
I'm still counting this as the battle of the mid-end cards, I don't care how they label 'em.
Re: FUD in the waters
That's what i'm thinking also. And this is what's going to be fun with this generation since it should make the prices go down quicker. The 299$ 6800 NU is already a good indication of this.
digitalwanderer said:Well, sort of. Let's not forget that nVidia's "Ultra" was the non-Ultra until they premiered it.Joe DeFuria said:
I'm still counting this as the battle of the mid-end cards, I don't care how they label 'em.
That's what i'm thinking also. And this is what's going to be fun with this generation since it should make the prices go down quicker. The 299$ 6800 NU is already a good indication of this.
Re: FUD in the waters
ATI is not actually in the drivers seat. In a lot of aways both companies are. But what will be outcome of this battle. Will the games keep to the Old 2.0 stuff or move to new 3.0 stuff. NVidia wants games to move to 3.0 and ATI wants games to stay with old 2.0.
I think NVidia is actually in drivers seat this time. Time will only tell.
Joe DeFuria said:
ATI is not actually in the drivers seat. In a lot of aways both companies are. But what will be outcome of this battle. Will the games keep to the Old 2.0 stuff or move to new 3.0 stuff. NVidia wants games to move to 3.0 and ATI wants games to stay with old 2.0.
I think NVidia is actually in drivers seat this time. Time will only tell.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Re: FUD in the waters
I am talking strictly in the sense of being able to react / adjust to the competitors product by tweaking your specs.
hstewarth said:
I am talking strictly in the sense of being able to react / adjust to the competitors product by tweaking your specs.
Re: FUD in the waters
Well in time, they will code to 3.0... but in the next year? not a chance. Yes some 3.0 enable settings for low fps and cool IQ ( maybe). No its a 2.0 world right now and will be for a long time. Even when ATI brings out a 3.0 part. .hstewarth said:
Doomtrooper
Veteran
OLD PS 2.0 stuff ?? If anything is old it is PS 1.1 which still dominates most game releases.
There is nothing 'old' about PS 2.0, it is about a year old and still wating for some real uses. Far Cry is about the best example out there presently.
Then factor in PS 2.0 profiles that include longer instruction counts, what we see happening is Nvidia trying to use the one marketing angle they got...SM 3.0 but as already said is no different then what was attempted by ATI with PS 1.4 vs PS 1.1...visually they are no different and in this case may actually be slower in some cases.
The truth of the matter is, there is Zero SM 3.0 parts on the market but millions of PS 2.0 boards, and still waiting for decent titles to expose them.
There is nothing 'old' about PS 2.0, it is about a year old and still wating for some real uses. Far Cry is about the best example out there presently.
Then factor in PS 2.0 profiles that include longer instruction counts, what we see happening is Nvidia trying to use the one marketing angle they got...SM 3.0 but as already said is no different then what was attempted by ATI with PS 1.4 vs PS 1.1...visually they are no different and in this case may actually be slower in some cases.
The truth of the matter is, there is Zero SM 3.0 parts on the market but millions of PS 2.0 boards, and still waiting for decent titles to expose them.
Re: FUD in the waters
well it be kinda hard for games to move that way with only nvidia supporting it .
You have to figure that all cards since the geforce 3 support 1.1 p.s . The radeon 8500 , geforce fx , radeon 9x00 , r420s and nv40s support 1.4
half the geforce fx line , all the radeon 9500+ line , r420s and nv40s support p.s 2.0
the nv40s support 3.0
So as you can see 1.1 is the sweet spot but slowly as the r300 cores and geforce fx cores phase out the new sweet spot will be 2.0.
Esp since there are going to be a crap load of r3x0 based cards still being sold for at least another year in the low end where the mosto f the cards are sold and the nv40s are slowly going to move down that way .
So ati will have a much easier time getting devs to stick to p.s 2.0 than nvidia will have getting them to move to p.s 3.0
Just like when ati was ahead with 1.4 .
hstewarth said:
well it be kinda hard for games to move that way with only nvidia supporting it .
You have to figure that all cards since the geforce 3 support 1.1 p.s . The radeon 8500 , geforce fx , radeon 9x00 , r420s and nv40s support 1.4
half the geforce fx line , all the radeon 9500+ line , r420s and nv40s support p.s 2.0
the nv40s support 3.0
So as you can see 1.1 is the sweet spot but slowly as the r300 cores and geforce fx cores phase out the new sweet spot will be 2.0.
Esp since there are going to be a crap load of r3x0 based cards still being sold for at least another year in the low end where the mosto f the cards are sold and the nv40s are slowly going to move down that way .
So ati will have a much easier time getting devs to stick to p.s 2.0 than nvidia will have getting them to move to p.s 3.0
Just like when ati was ahead with 1.4 .
Re: FUD in the waters
Well I am beginning to wonder how good a part it will be for $299. If it's clocked lower than the Ultra with only 128mb of ddr1(meaning 500/1000 at the outside, likely more like 450/900 for ram) how big of an advantage will it have over currently shipping products (5950/9800xt)?
With all the talk of SM3.0 there has been no talk of a part that most people will actually be buying that support it, $299 is still way too much for most. If nvidia really wants to push PS3.0 they need to get a card out there that supports it in the 150 dollar range.
Bjorn said:
Well I am beginning to wonder how good a part it will be for $299. If it's clocked lower than the Ultra with only 128mb of ddr1(meaning 500/1000 at the outside, likely more like 450/900 for ram) how big of an advantage will it have over currently shipping products (5950/9800xt)?
With all the talk of SM3.0 there has been no talk of a part that most people will actually be buying that support it, $299 is still way too much for most. If nvidia really wants to push PS3.0 they need to get a card out there that supports it in the 150 dollar range.
Re: FUD in the waters
EDITED BITS: I wouldn't buy one at $299, I'm way too cheap...but if nVidia release an "Ultra EXTREME" at 475/1600-whatever then they're going to be bumped down in price pretty quick and at $229 or so I think I'd damn near just buy one blind just to play around with it!
Man, I'm am still in shock that they're going to sell 6800 NU's for $299! That is gonna be a card I'm gonna have to seriously check out.AlphaWolf said:
EDITED BITS: I wouldn't buy one at $299, I'm way too cheap...but if nVidia release an "Ultra EXTREME" at 475/1600-whatever then they're going to be bumped down in price pretty quick and at $229 or so I think I'd damn near just buy one blind just to play around with it!
Not to mention that MSI is offering a 256 Mb version at that price.
http://www.jscustompcs.com/products.php?parent=Video Cards:NVIDIA
12 pipes, 256 Mb on a 256-bit memory bus.....all for $299. Something doesn't quite add up. :?
http://www.jscustompcs.com/products.php?parent=Video Cards:NVIDIA
12 pipes, 256 Mb on a 256-bit memory bus.....all for $299. Something doesn't quite add up. :?
Either something don't add up or else nVidia is getting ready to buy back a big chunk of market share by taking a huge loss on 'em.kemosabe said:
Can ya imagine if it's like the original 9500 Pro with modability? I can almost see nVidia doing just that to win back the enthusiast crowd.
Shit, I'd have to be a hypocrite and get one...I just couldn't pass up the value!
