What does everyone think about the ATI video presentation?

i seriously doubt there will be a lot of actual software that won't run acceptably on a 9200 that will run acceptably on a 5200 during their lifetimes (and i mean acceptably for the kind of person who buys a 5200 or 9200 -- say 30 fps 1024x768).

 

That 3dMark test with the 50 fps vs. 2 was a shocker.

Very good video and some cool music.

Too bad no one technical asked about the F-buffer.

Speng.

 

Re: HUH!

Yep, that was very suprising. A lot of crow died for that statement.

Also pretty intresting that they're already demoing the nv35. Deffinately promising. Hopefully for nVidia it will help them regain parity with ATI till their respective 5th gen products come out.

 

Just viewed both presentations in full.

Lots of Ham over at ATI. Not to mention a bit of gloating.

I think NVIDIA probably gained some ground with this PR wise with the el cheapo DX9 card. Not that I think they will necessarily be all the much cheaper than ATI, if they have a well performing part, ATI's products will drop in price, if it doesn't perform as well, then they won't and they will be left with lower margins, so whether or not it does them any good is up in the air.

I found the 1.5M GFX cards to be shipped by April comment to be interesting, if hard to believe. Also the large list of companies making NVIDIA cards was impressive. Not really sure how that relates to ATI's list. The adoption of Cg was vaguely threatening and the Way it's meant to be played thing was very threatening to anybody that wants competition and not a monopoly. And yeah, they have an NV35 coming it looks like, nothing really new there. Main thing is that they are selling thier nv30 varients in the markets where it's performance puts them, good strategy, but about the only choice they had really.

 

Does anyone have a link to the NVIDIA presentation ?

Thanks

 

No direct link cause they've got some crappy javascript thing with a per-session key going on. Go to nvidia.com and it's right on the front page, "Video: GFFX family launch event".

 

here ya go...

http://biz.yahoo.com/oo/030307/77806.html

 

Yea, the thing about Cg being adopted by colleges is quite bizzar. Wouldn't it be more practible for them to use HLSL??? The fact that the Cg book is a best seller on amazon and an elective in major colleges is impressive (in a decidedly frightening way).

I just finished the gloating, er, I mean ATI video. Can't help but laughing. Just one punch after another aimed at nVidia

 

Nvidia CEO is completly full of crap...

He says that it was Nvidias vision to move the PC market from VGA cards to 3d accelerators like seen in flight sims etc. Complete CRAP. To me this is just another indicator of why Nvidia is rotting from the inside out.

3dfx, Imagine and Rendition are the ones who ORIGIONATED and had the vision for the 3daccelerator market for the PC. Not Nvidia.

I lasted about 10 min into the presentation. I just cant take it. One complete LIE and twisted partial truth after the next..

 

but i thought 99% of gamers don't even play flight sims?

 

I believe you are mistaken in that remark. NV1 was the FIRST 3daccelerator chip that came to the market. Granted it did not have much success but still nVidia has been doing 3D for a Very long time. Whatever else may be wrong with the company or its products or PR or whatever this fact remains.

 

Was the nv1 really the first? I remember it coming out in 95, were there really no other 3d capable cards for the PC back then? (no the virge doesnt count)

I think the nv3 was the first true 3d card that was actually shipped in OEM computers such as Dells also and the first to come with a full opengl and directx compliant driver. beat 3dfx and rendition on that one by several years

 

Creative Labs had some Glint-based (should probably be spelled with capital letters in strange places) consumer product, I believe that was at the same time; the first 3D-Blaster! I also believe it was only for VESA local bus.

The NV1 was like Saturn-on-a-board, wasn't it? I recall it worked as a soundcard too. That may of course have been only Diamond's board implementation.

 

3D Timeline

Gotta make a first post sometime so here's a nice little chart showing announcement and availability dates for 3D cards. http://accelenation.com/?ac.id.123.1

 

I hated the streaming quality because those Far Cry clips were messy as hell

Fortunately the first Far Cry movie is coming out soon...

 

Re: 3D Timeline

Yes, that chart deffinately shows the nv1 as the first. The Matrox Melinnium comes in before it, but I would venture that the nv1 was deffinately more advanced in terms of 3D (or less advanced if you consider how dismal it was that they tried to use quadratic texturing). Was texturing even possible on the Melinnium though? I dont think it was.

a side note, the length of time for the PVR250 from announcment to availability is very sad when put in such perspective I love my dreamcast though.

edit: btw thanks for that link!

 

freaking tried to watch the ati presentation, but the video was too shoppy even with broadband. Anyone have a direct link to download the video.

later

 

Haven't seen the presentations but saw some pics online. I think the most telling thing is that while ATI has no problem comparing it's cards to the GFFX Nvidia only compares the GFFX to the GF4 TI 4200 and 4600 (at least in the pics I saw).

 

Hrm, just finished watching the nvidia presentation....... I thought that it was slightly more professionally presented then the ATi presentation. I think ATi should take some notes with regards. I found it silly though that nvidia have bus loads of drunken fan-boys loaded in buses circling the ATi conference. So what nvidia made for credibility in terms of its presentation it loses with that immature act. ATi certainly was not humble in their presentation either. While I understand that nvidia is playing second fiddle to ATi presently I don't understand all the immature nature expressed at these events. I guess maybe I am being too critical of ATi, after all it is a party. I don't know what normally occurs at these things I guess and if this is all par for the course, then fine. I just thought some of this stuff (on behalf of both companies BTW) is not really necessary.

While ATi compared the 9200 to the MX440 I found that comparison rather unbalanced. But after thinking about it I figured it prolly was the correct thing to do. Considering the 9200 is not DX9 but DX8.1a and the GFMX440 is supposed to be DX8(actually DX7 but nvidia advertises it as though it is a fully DX8 compliant card.) and that there is no other card out there from nvidias newest generation yet to compare it too and that it will be focus on the same price range I figured it was appropriate. It looks like a great DX8 card really.

With regards to nvidias marketing campaign "DX9 for $79".( I believe this is deceptive to a degree BTW). I really think this card will be directed towards OEM market and will put price pressure on ATi and the RV350 core.(Radeon 9600) While the price point is very aggressive I don't think that this card is something that any one of us here will want to have. Most certainly am not interested in buying a low performance anything and would much rather have a higher performing DX8.1a card then a extremely low performance DX9 card. The question is will the OEM market bite at this product? If so then we will have an extremely low bar for performance on DX9 development and end up with another MX scenario. Further if indeed the Radeon 9700 pro is the point of reference for DX9 software development then nvidia is really pushing crapy hardware on unsuspecting consumers. If developers have adopted the idea that the Radeon 9700 is the target platform for which they should develop for, then consumers with these FX5200 will be sorely disappointed with DX9 features that barely perform. As a DX9 card this product ought to be rejected in my opinion, particularly if DX9 features are performed in software rather then hardware. If indeed the features of DX9 are done in software then the architecture is technically not DX9. I don't think that this product is something that will get rave reviews except as a low end product with a low end price. I hesitate to call this card a "value" card in terms of DX9. While I have not seen any extensive performance benchmarks from what I have seen leaked it looks like a real bummer of a card in terms of DX9 performance but cheap as snot.

The GFFX5600 is looking like a real competitive product in terms of DX9 and ought to give the RV350 a real run for its money. In terms of performance I think it would be effective enough to be considered a decent DX9 card. But this is where nvidia gets the shaft from ATi with the Radeon 9600. I don't think that nvidia will be able to be very competitive in terms of pricing on the GeforceFX5600 since I believe that it is using the full NV30 core unlike the NV34. It appears that it is simply a more reasonably clocked Geforce FX 5800. (BTW there was little talk of this card at that conference from nvidia which could only be confirmation that indeed the Geforce FX 5800 Ultra has been cancelled as was mentioned by AnandTech.) At the end of the presentation nvidia left us with a taste of the NV35 which apparently has taped out already with little else said about it. Far from a launch but they prolly will have this by the fall for the return back to school/Christmas season. There really is little talk though however about what ATi will have in response and the assumption that nvidia will regain the performance lead in the future needs, given ATIs inroads on the high end, to be doubted and for good reason.

The RV350 ..... now this is something I think that will be very appealing to the mainstream market and a very competitive price/performance card. I think that it will give high performance at a relatively good price and be considerably better performance as a DX9 card compared to the GFFX5200 and be on par with the GeforceFX5600. I don't know enough about the performance but I get the impression that it will be a great price/performance DX9 card that will give the GFFX5600 a good run for its money and be considerably more flexible in terms of pricing. I think this card will have great appeal to OEMs but will face pricing pressure as a result of the GFFX5200 being a "DX9" card as well and cheap. Hopefully OEMs will consider that the GFFX5200 is a poor performer with regards to DX9 and take the Radeon 9600 over it being a better performer thus giving a better low end bar for DX9 development then is offered from nvidia.

As far as the Radeon 9800 pro is concerned..... well it is self explanatory it is "kik ass". Clearly its shader performance is considerably faster then the GeforceFX. ATi deserves the acclaim they receive from creating this product and it likely will give the NV35 a good run for its money much in the same way the Radeon 9700 did with the GeforceFX 5800.(I don't like how everyone refers to this card as something that is actually will be available but since nvidia has let the bloody thing "preview" well we have to use it for comparison don't we? We ought to compare the Radoen 9700pro/Radeon 9800pro to the GeforceFX5600 shouldn't we.) From what I have seen with regards to this card it really is a great performer and hence the price while high is also appropriate. Nvidia running @ FP16 was a laugh in the presentation though and even with that degraded implement they still lost the benchmark on Command and Conquer : Generals to the Radeon 9800 in the demonstration. There really is no question about the performance superiority of the Radeon 9800.

I can see that while nvidia is throwing support behind HLSL(re: "Our goal is to make DirectX 9.0, HLSL and the Windows platform, one of the most pervasive graphics platforms ever."http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/030306/sfth006_1.html ) they are still pushing Cg very heavily, particularly in the academic arena. I don't think that Cg will take the industry by storm as was originally suggested but it may have some effect but with nvidia so late in the game with DX9 parts and developers having the Radeon 9700 part as a reference for so long I can't see them adopting Cg quickly. Don't know enough about with regards to how it is really being accepted yet so.. I see RenderMonkey from ATi not as an alternative in any way to Cg but rather a diversion away from nvidia in that "hey look here we got something for you too" kind of development tool. Thus nvidia won't own developers hearts. Don't know how important RenderMonkey is though and in the grand scheme of things am not sure if it will make a difference for ATi in the way adoption of Cg would for nvidia. These things are not the same so it becomes difficult too say "yeah but ATi has renderMonkey" or vis versa.

After it is all said and done though one could only come to one conclusion. ATi has really given nvidia a bloody nose with the Radeon 9700/Radeon 9800. They have really raised the bar, shown that nvidia is not the end all beat all of the graphics industry and have made a name for themselves. While nvidia still retains a larger portion of the market and mind share of it I suspect that indeed ATi will begin to make some serious inroads with OEMs as ATi are developing some real brand name recognition with their high end products being touted as the best.(and they are.) This is good. The market needed it as I think that competition was becoming stagnant with nvidia dragging its feet, particularly with advancement of technology.(re: DX8.1a /DX9.) They were becoming too comfortable and arrogant IMO Cg is the embodiment of that.

Anyhow there has been a lot to digest lately so much so it makes ones "head spin". Its been very interesting to say the least... now on that note where are the cards?

PS: Sorry for the long post so many things recently it seems that it was a build up.

 

Why settle for the 9600 ? Make it only R9800 PRo's instead, and get a really good low end bar for DX9.

And maybe we should wait with judging the GF FX 5200 to after we know more about it. f.e it's Doom3 performance.