R420 Hints from people under NDA!

[digitalwanderer]

Oh you just wait for the r420 you'll thank me who says that is all they will have bla bla blah To bad people just leave you hanging and in the end if they are completely wrong they will just point to their vague statements and go "look I never said it would be better just that you should wait and look you saved $$ for waiting", or "look it does have pointless feature Z" now we can all jump for joy at the inanity of it, or perhaps the famous "I was right"

Well if you don't want to "wait" for the R420 why don't you go buy yourself a 6800 Ultra today? :|

Oh wait, that's right...you can't can you?

 

[radar1200gs]

First of all the above argument is what 3dfx loved to use "nevermind the features, look at our speed." Look where it got them. Regardless of what certain people in this forum like to think, its a proven fact that features sell products, especially graphics cards.

If your analogy was correct the Original Radeon should have outsold the GF2 and the 8500 should have outsold the GF4. Who are you trying to kid here, people upgrade their graphic for speed reasons 99% of the time. When they make the decision to upgrade they turn to magazines and web reviews that spend 99% of the press on speed graphs.

The other thing consumers like (especially when competition is tight in a given cycle) is reliable drivers. I don't believe any further explanation is necessary given your examples...

 

[jvd]

First of all the above argument is what 3dfx loved to use "nevermind the features, look at our speed." Look where it got them. Regardless of what certain people in this forum like to think, its a proven fact that features sell products, especially graphics cards.

If your analogy was correct the Original Radeon should have outsold the GF2 and the 8500 should have outsold the GF4. Who are you trying to kid here, people upgrade their graphic for speed reasons 99% of the time. When they make the decision to upgrade they turn to magazines and web reviews that spend 99% of the press on speed graphs.

The other thing consumers like (especially when competition is tight in a given cycle) is reliable drivers. I don't believe any further explanation is necessary given your examples...

I had reliable drivers with the radeon and 8500. What you are talking about is an old wives tale . I have never had any more problems with an ati product than i have had with an nvidia product.

IT was just fanboy fud spread about so that people wouldn't buy ati .

my radeon had the same problems as my geforce 2 ultra , my radeon 8500 had the same as my geforce 3 ti 500 , my 9700pro had less problems than my geforce fx 5800 ultra

 

[Doomtrooper]

The other thing consumers like (especially when competition is tight in a given cycle) is reliable drivers. I don't believe any further explanation is necessary given your examples...

The other problem with your reply as you have no clue what you are talking about:

Case in point if Nvidias drivers were so superior back then why did this site exist:

http://web.archive.org/web/20011229231540/www.tweak3d.net/faq/faq.html

 

[radar1200gs]

First of all the above argument is what 3dfx loved to use "nevermind the features, look at our speed." Look where it got them. Regardless of what certain people in this forum like to think, its a proven fact that features sell products, especially graphics cards.

If your analogy was correct the Original Radeon should have outsold the GF2 and the 8500 should have outsold the GF4. Who are you trying to kid here, people upgrade their graphic for speed reasons 99% of the time. When they make the decision to upgrade they turn to magazines and web reviews that spend 99% of the press on speed graphs.

The other thing consumers like (especially when competition is tight in a given cycle) is reliable drivers. I don't believe any further explanation is necessary given your examples...

I had reliable drivers with the radeon and 8500. What you are talking about is an old wives tale . I have never had any more problems with an ati product than i have had with an nvidia product.

IT was just <bleep> fud spread about so that people wouldn't buy ati .

my radeon had the same problems as my geforce 2 ultra , my radeon 8500 had the same as my geforce 3 ti 500 , my 9700pro had less problems than my geforce fx 5800 ultra

You have almost rendered me speechless with that gem of a post. I hardly know what to say in response.

ATi themselves admitted their old drivers were utter crap. Thats why Catalyst came about.

 

[jvd]

You have almost rendered me speechless with that gem of a post. I hardly know what to say in response.

ATi themselves admitted their old drivers were utter crap. Thats why Catalyst came about.

Please post where ati has said that .


Ati's drivers may have not been the best but then again neither was nvidias . Did u ever use a radeon or 8500 ? did u compare them to the geforce cards at the time ?

Because I have. Between my sisters and i , we have owned at least one card from each card maker since the voodoo2

 

[Johnny Rotten]

You have almost rendered me speechless with that gem of a post. I hardly know what to say in response.

ATi themselves admitted their old drivers were utter crap. Thats why Catalyst came about.

Please post where ati has said that .


Ati's drivers may have not been the best but then again neither was nvidias . Did u ever use a radeon or 8500 ? did u compare them to the geforce cards at the time ?

Because I have. Between my sisters and i , we have owned at least one card from each card maker since the voodoo2

Cant speak about the 8500, but the radeon drivers of my [clean] office machine were JUNK compared to the GF2 GTS drivers I had in my home pc.

 

[Miksu]

Did u ever use a radeon or 8500?

Simply put: hell would have to freeze over before ATi got to even look at my cash, let alone take it.

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=251555&highlight=#251555

 

[martrox]

Of course by that I am not saying that you are wrong in your assumption (or right for that matter). Just pointing out something that strikes me as odd in the logic you used.

My point exactly........

 

[jvd]

Did u ever use a radeon or 8500?

Simply put: hell would have to freeze over before ATi got to even look at my cash, let alone take it.

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=251555&highlight=#251555

thanks now i know how bad his bais is . No need to reply any further to him.

 

[martrox]

thanks now i know how bad his bais is . No need to reply any further to him.

Once again..... my point exactly....

 

[Sxotty]

Well if you don't want to "wait" for the R420 why don't you go buy yourself a 6800 Ultra today? :|

Oh wait, that's right...you can't can you?

I don't think you understood what I was saying very well at all, in fact you completely missed the point, but I don't really mind.

edit: Don't mean to be an ass btw, so I will clarify my point. I don't care about waiting, or buying any of them, I am simply tired of people trying to sound clever and in the know w/o expressing any real info. Any person could make up sly sounding statements that would make them seem correct in retrospect, just like a fortune teller can make you beleive that they have some mystic power... charlatan's is the feeling I get... or simply people trying to... nevermind but I suppose I am simply tired of this sort of thing and I realize there is no point of saying anything about it, but I already did so I had to elucidate to avoid people misconstruing what I said.

 

[WaltC]

The thing is, there are those at ATI who are not bound by such agreements. If ATI was to support PS 3.0 on the R420, you would expect that we would have heard from a higher-up from ATI by now that it would.

Why would "those at ATi," who obviously aren't under 3rd-party NDA's since they aren't 3rd parties, violate the the very NDA's they are using to control 3rd-party information release on their unannounced products? I'm not sure that makes any sense... It seems to me that whatever R4x0 actually is and entails, that "those at ATi" will be talking about it when they announce R4x0 and their NDA's lapse, right?

Instead, we have ATI at GDC talking about this "PS 2.0b" profile, a profile which no current hardware supports, and no denial of lack of PS 3.0 support.

Maybe that was a tactic undertaken to try and get nVidia to talk about what they were going to do? (Which worked, apparently.) Just a thought.

It seems apparent to me that PS 2.0b sums up the R420's capabilities pretty well. The only question remaining is whether or not it will support longer programs in OpenGL (the PS 2.0b supports the maximum number of instructions that PS 2.x allows).

Nothing will "seem apparent" to me about R4x0 until the official specs are announced by the company, just as was the case for me with nV40.

 

[WaltC]

The other thing consumers like (especially when competition is tight in a given cycle) is reliable drivers. I don't believe any further explanation is necessary given your examples...

Which would be a good reason for me to stick with ATi, if I was thinking like that... I've been using the Catalysts for 18 months (R300 & R350), and have yet to have occasion to contrast them negatively with the nVidia Dets I was using before. I believe that those who assume a "driver problem" relative to ATi at this point in time are working on very slanted information. As well, over the last 18 months it's been nVidia, not ATi, receiving tons of negative publicity about "cheating" and "optimizing" in its drivers--shunting ps2.0 game code to ps1.x, diminishing image quality, and many other concerns raised at various times. If anything at this stage it is nVidia with an uphill trek for its driver rep as opposed to ATi. (Where have you been for the past year?...)

 

[digitalwanderer]

Well if you don't want to "wait" for the R420 why don't you go buy yourself a 6800 Ultra today? :|

Oh wait, that's right...you can't can you?

I don't think you understood what I was saying very well at all, in fact you completely missed the point, but I don't really mind.

You missed my point, it's silly to be annoyed at people saying "wait to see what the competition is before buying" when neither product is actually available yet! (And I'll bet dollars to donuts that you'll be able to buy a next-gen ATi card before you'll be able to buy an nVidia one)

NINJA EDIT: Ah, you clarified. I still think my point remains valid.

 

[martrox]

I'm not sure that makes any sense...

Hmmm....Chalnoth not making sense......... I'm shocked!!!

 

[Sxotty]

DW your point is valid we were just talking cross ways, and not about the same thing. As I said I do not mind people saying "Wait for the competition" I think it is good advice and have said it myself. I will wait and see which is released first and if it is ATI and if they beat the 6800 reviews that we have seen I will Still WAIT until both are actually released into the wild to make a choice .

 

[WaltC]

Hmmm....Chalnoth not making sense......... I'm shocked!!!

Heh... I don't know what it is, but his brain cells seem to get overstimulated whenever the word "nVidia" reaches them, and the neurons fire in an orgy of titillation, and his imagination leaps tall buildings in a single bound... 8)

(Just kidding, C...)

 

[digitalwanderer]

DW your point is valid we were just talking cross ways, and not about the same thing. As I said I do not mind people saying "Wait for the competition" I think it is good advice and have said it myself. I will wait and see which is released first and if it is ATI and if they beat the 6800 reviews that we have seen I will Still WAIT until both are actually released into the wild to make a choice .

Sorry, my bad...for some reason I thought you were complaining about ATi fans saying to hold off giving the next-gen crown to nVidia until we saw both.

My apologies Sxotty.

 

[KimB]

Why would "those at ATi," who obviously aren't under 3rd-party NDA's since they aren't 3rd parties, violate the the very NDA's they are using to control 3rd-party information release on their unannounced products?

Um, because it's their reponsibility if they feel they should release some information?

I mean, please, with all this information about the R420 not supporting PS 3.0, if it were not true, it seems like a sound business strategy to squash those rumors pretty quickly. But they have not been squashed.

And if the PS 2.0b, which definitely appears to be a profile for ATI hardware, is not for the R420, then what hardware, pray tell, could it be for?