Wich card is the king of the hill (nv40 or R420)

[jimmyjames123]

But tell me as a *gamer*, what advantages does the NV40 bring to me?

Clearly you haven't been following this thread closely where it has been stated many times what potential advantages that the 6800 has for a *gamer*. How about: full support for SM 3.0, ultrashadow II technology and hardware that is very suitable for shadow-intensive games like Doom3, arguably sharper/clearer AF quality, arguably better OpenGL performance at the moment. That's not to say that the X800 does not have advantages too, such as 3dc, temporal AA, lower power consumption, very suitable for games like HL2, etc. You just have to be open-minded enough to realize that gamers will flock to whatever card best suits their wants and needs.

 

[Heathen]

I wouldn't expect 50-50 parity, but a 12% lead given the error margins and uncertainty of the market right now might just constitute an irrelevent or statistically insignificant data point.

 

[jimmyjames123]

I think it would be more appropriate to say that the poll question is fundamentally flawed (no offense intended to the person who started the poll).

For one, the use of "R420" and "NV40" is much too general, as there are various cards that belong to each family. Secondly, "King of the Hill" needs to be qualified. In what way is the card a "King of the Hill"? This is somewhat vague. We could be talking about pure performance, we could be talking about advanced feature set, we could be talking about combination of pure performance and advanced feature set. And even then, performance and advanced feature set needs to be be qualified. Performance with what game, and at what settings? Advanced feature set catering to what needs?

Obviously, the question is much more complex than it seems.

 

[madshi]

Clearly you haven't been following this thread closely where it has been stated many times what potential advantages that the 6800 has for a *gamer*. How about: full support for SM 3.0, ultrashadow II technology and hardware that is very suitable for shadow-intensive games like Doom3

Of course I did follow this thread (and most reviews and all the other information available). But as a gamer what does SM3.0 bring me? What does ultrashadow bring me? Sounds nice. But what does it bring in practise? What does a hardware which is suitable for Doom3 bring me? All this might bring me *additional speed*. But there are no benchmarks yet that show how much additional speed those features will bring. We don't know exactly how NV40 and R420 will compare in Doom3, do we? As things look like, NV40 might be faster in Doom3 and R420 might be faster in HL2. So what?

arguably sharper/clearer AF quality

Please show me a review which states that. As far as I remember AF quality is nearly identical now, since NV40 is angle dependent now, too.

arguably better OpenGL performance at the moment.

Correct. Thanks to this fact the NV40 wins some of the benchmarks. However, it loses a lot of the Direct3D benchmarks. Again: So what? Overall NV40 and R420 look almost equal in speed to me. And as you probably know, ATI is rewriting their OpenGL driver from scratch right as we speak. So while NV40 might gain speed thanks to SM3.0 and driver improvements, ATI might gain speed thanks to the OpenGL rewrite and their own driver improvements (DEC compiler guys, anyone?). We don't know how performance will change in future. Right now the cards look roughly identical in speed to me.

That's not to say that the X800 does not have advantages too, such as 3dc, temporal AA, lower power consumption

Exactly. The performance seems to be roughly identical between NV40 and R420, while the R420 has better AA and lower power consumption. That's why I favor the R420 right now.

 

[DemoCoder]

madshi, I haven't said which card I prefer for gaming. I voted "both" on the poll.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Roll your eyes all you want. You have still provided no rebuttal to the criticism that online polls are bunk and polls without random sampling are unscientific and inaccurrate. Try searching on "straw poll" or "literary digest" to learn some history, or take a basic course in statistics. It simply doesn't matter if a previous straw poll turned out correct.

You have provided no evidence that the poll is bunk either. Merely thrown out some suppositions. I would guess it's a fairly random sampling of people who decided to click on the thread and who have registered for the forums at B3D (you can't vote if you haven't). To say that there are a bunch of people who are biased doesn't invalidate the results. Biased people would be expected to make up a certain portion of the people buying video cards wouldn't they?

I have actually taken several college courses on statistics. You don't need a large sample to get a meaningful result in a poll, a smaller sample merely means that there will be a larger margin of error.

Professional polls may sample as few as 1000 people out of a population of 30 million and claim to be accurate with in 3% 19 times out of 20. I would call the 350 or so who have taken part is more than enough to call this poll an accurate sampling of the B3D readership.

If you don't like my counting strategy, you can do more to criticize it then an emoticon can't you? I choose as my starting point, equal bias, e.g. the position that "both cards are about the same". Let people decide which video card to buy by flipping a fair coin. Heads, ATI, tails, NVidia. Now, let's bias this coin so that 12 out of 100 flips, a tails will become heads. With no bias, after 100 flips, you will have 50 for NVidia, and 50 for ATI. The baseline for our experiment is that if the cards were equivalent, roughly half the time people would pick ATI. Now we want to measure how far we deviate from perfect equality. With the bias in decision making, 12 of NVidia's flips will become ATIs, giving you 38 vs 62.

Of course I can do more than it just seems rather pointless. The problem with your math is, you choose to pick an arbitrary point for the neutral case when one already exists in the sample. 19% of the people voted neutral.

I can continue to extrapolate in this manner. Anytime a consumer has to choose between the two cards, roughly 12% of the time, he will choose against NVidia and for ATI. My model has the same predictive power as your "24%" model, and will agree with experiment, but without the "figure inflation"

No. Of the people that chose in the poll, 78% favored ATi, and 22% favored nVidia.

It never was 'my' 24%. I never made an effort to analyse the data. I merely took issue with your misguided attempt.

Now, I'm being somewhat facetious here on purpose to show you how the statistics are bogus and won't map to real sales figures, especially given the sample bias.

I realize that, but your 12% makes absolutely no sense at all.

But you know what, if you're going to argue, could you atleast argue intelligently?

It doesn't really seem worth the trouble bothering with this, it's not like I am going to change your mind. I don't believe the poll is a terribly accurate judge of X800 vs nv40 sales or anything, however, that doesn't mean the results of the poll are completely meaningless. You will note that I did mention above that I believe an I Like Pie option would have taken it.

I am being reasonable. I haven't changed my position, period. I have consistently said "let's wait and see" and "I think they are mostly evenly matched". You're the one who's prematurely committed. I'm merely responding to people who are prematurely making conclusions.

Not changing your position doesn't necessarily equate to being reasonable merely consistant. Who said I was committed to anything? The poll doesn't have a wait and see option. I stated in my first post in this thread I won't be buying either of these cards.

You, on the other hand, did nothing but join the thread to make a personal quip, followed by information free emoticons. Wow, you make such great arguments.

I've been in the thread since page three, have made a dozen or so posts. The only thing I have sniped at is your attempt at butchering stats.

What I take out of the poll is that more people favour features and performance they can use now and not some future potential that may or may not ever materialize. Wait and see always works in the computer industry because in 6 months I guarantee there will be something faster.

 

[DemoCoder]

If you have taken a stats class, you'd know the sample has to be random if you want to be able to claim your sample is representative. You can't "guess at a random sampling" after the data has been collected. The data collection has to be designed to be random and representative. Time to retake your stats class.

 

[AlphaWolf]

If you have taken a stats class, you'd know the sample has to be random if you want to be able to claim your sample is representative. You can't "guess at a random sampling" after the data has been collected. The data collection has to be designed to be random and representative. Time to retake your stats class.

Ever hear of an exit poll?

 

[DemoCoder]

Exit polls use random samples. You don't volunteer for them. They select voters and precincts at random. Try again.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Exit polls use random samples. You don't volunteer for them. They select voters and precincts at random. Try again.

They can still only select people who are willing to answer the questions can't they? They don't force people to answer, so yes, they get volunteers.

 

[jimmyjames123]

But as a gamer what does SM3.0 bring me?

As a gamer, what does it not bring you?

Several developers have spoken at length about some of the things that we can expect in *games* using SM 3.0. Do the research.

How come I don't see you saying "But as a gamer what does 3Dc bring me?". Obviously, this is just you being hypocritical.

What does ultrashadow bring me?

See above.

What does a hardware which is suitable for Doom3 bring me?

See above.

All this might bring me *additional speed*.

And what's wrong with that?

But there are no benchmarks yet that show how much additional speed those features will bring.

Well then wait for the benchmark data to be available. As a gamer, are you not willing to wait before making a more informed choice?

We don't know exactly how NV40 and R420 will compare in Doom3, do we?

Well duh, of course we don't know exactly how they will compare in a game that is not even out yet. And we don't know exactly how they will compare in Half Life 2, and Tiger Woods 2005, LOTR Battle for Middle Earth, and Stalker, and Splinter Cell X, and Madden 2005. So what's your point?

Please show me a review which states that. As far as I remember AF quality is nearly identical now, since NV40 is angle dependent now, too.

This was mentioned in several reviews, including Toms and 3dCenter I believe. The NV40 is using an angle dependent algorithm now, but it is still different than ATI's algorithm, and most reviewers have noted the NV40's AF as being slightly sharper/clearer than ATI's.

Correct. Thanks to this fact the NV40 wins some of the benchmarks. However, it loses a lot of the Direct3D benchmarks. Again: So what?

So what? Looks like you have no clue what you are talking about. You are the bright fellow who originally asked what the NV40 can provide for a gamer, and anyone who doesn't have their head in the ground can see that OpenGL performance is a very strong plus for the NV40. For a *gamer* who enjoys these OpenGL games, that is important, whether you like it or not.

And as you probably know, ATI is rewriting their OpenGL driver from scratch right as we speak. So while NV40 might gain speed thanks to SM3.0 and driver improvements, ATI might gain speed thanks to the OpenGL rewrite and their own driver improvements (DEC compiler guys, anyone?).

Here again is your hypocritical nature. Earlier, you were arguing about what benefit do untested hardware and software features bring if there are no benchmarks to test it...and now you are using the unquantifiable OpenGL rewrite to boost your pro-ATI argument? Way to go.

Exactly. The performance seems to be roughly identical between NV40 and R420, while the R420 has better AA and lower power consumption. That's why I favor the R420 right now.

You are really only telling half the side of the story. The 6800 GT is a single slot/single molex card that has power requirements that are no more strict than a 9800XT or 5950 Ultra (although it is still true that the X800 Pro/XT cards have lower power consumption). The NV40 also has arguably better AF quality, and arguably a more advanced feature set. What you favor right now, especially considering that you have zero experience with any of the cards mentioned here, is really inconsequential. However, preferences are preferences, no matter how one-sided they are.

P.S. Like DemoCoder, I also did not vote for either the R420 or the NV40 as the "winner" or as what I "favor". It is just not that simple this go-around.

 

[Dave Baumann]

What you favor right now, especially considering that you have zero experience with any of the cards mentioned here, is really inconsequential.

Most people are not going to pick every card up and test them - this is the entire point of reviews, to give people the opportunity to look at their performances and give them some understanding of the capabilies and features of the boards. Opinions formed from reading reviews and assessing relative valaues based on the output of those reviews are not inconsequential.

 

[DemoCoder]

Exit polls use random samples. You don't volunteer for them. They select voters and precincts at random. Try again.

They can still only select people who are willing to answer the questions can't they? They don't force people to answer, so yes, they get volunteers.

Proper exit poll design accounts for this bias. It can't completely eliminate it (and it can't sample mail-in votes) which explains why exit polls are *wrong* in some elections. Also, people lie about their vote too, which is one reason why the Iowa Political Stock Market has been more accurate at predicting elections than exit polls.

Your emoticons simply do not help your argument. The fact is, you are wrong, but continue to pretend you can sneer at me in the argument.

Let's quote Voter News Service (the ones who run the exit polls in the US)

METHODOLOGY STATEMENT
The VNS exit poll was developed and conducted by Voter News Service. The exit poll results are based on interviews with a probability sample of voters exiting polling places on Election Day, 2002.

Sampling
The samples were selected in two stages. First, a probability sample of voting precincts within each state was selected that represents the different geographic areas across the state and the vote by party. Precincts were selected with a probability proportionate to the number of voters in each precinct. Each voter in a state had the same chance to have his or her precinct selected. There is one exception. In some states, precincts that have large minority populations were sampled at a higher rate than other precincts. The sample weighting (described below) adjusts the representation of these precincts to their correct share of the total vote. Second, within each precinct, voters were sampled systematically throughout the voting day at a rate that gives all voters in a precinct the same chance of being interviewed.

The National sample is a subsample of the state sample precincts. The probability of selecting these precincts was the same as if the sample had been selected at a uniform rate nationwide, with the exception that minority precincts were again selected at a higher rate.

Weighting
The exit poll results are weighted to reflect the complexity of the sampling design. That is, the weighting takes into account the different probabilities of selecting a precinct and of selecting a voter within each precinct. For example, states that were selected at a higher rate receive a smaller weight than other precincts of the same size. There is also an adjustment for voters who were missed or refused to be interviewed, which is based on their observed age, race and sex.

Do I get to use my symbol now? Can I look down on you now?

 

[jimmyjames123]

Most people are not going to pick every card up and test them - this is the entire point of reviews, to give people the opportunity to look at their performances and give them some understanding of the capabilies and features of the boards. Opinions formed from reading reviews and assessing relative valaues based on the output of those reviews are not inconsequential.

Of course, professional reviewer impressions and data are not inconsequential. I have always felt that professional reviews are extremely important in helping to mold one's purchasing decision. At the same time, consumer reviewer impressions are not inconsequential. As far as I know, the consumer reviews and impressions are almost non-existent on the next gen cards at this time.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Consumer reviews are rarely done from an objective comparative point of view. Mostly they are about justifying their particular purchase.

 

[Bjorn]

Consumer reviews are rarely done from an objective comparative point of view. Mostly they are about justifying their particular purchase.

That's true. Though you could of course argue how "professional" most professional reviwers are.

 

[jimmyjames123]

Consumer reviews are rarely done from an objective comparative point of view. Mostly they are about justifying their particular purchase.

What makes you so sure about that? At times, a consumer review can be even more realistic than a pro review (assuming that the consumer is honest), because we are seeing the review from the actual consumers point of view, using their favorite games only, and not simply a general test suite.

In some sense, there is inherent bias in all reviewers, whether professional or not. This may be reflected in choice of game tests, choice of test settings, subjective commentary, etc. The key is to balance a wide variety of professional reviews with a wide variety of consumer reviews in order to get a better feel for the product that one is interested in.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Proper exit poll design accounts for this bias. It can't completely eliminate it (and it can't sample mail-in votes) which explains why exit polls are *wrong* in some elections. Also, people lie about their vote too, which is one reason why the Iowa Political Stock Market has been more accurate at predicting elections than exit polls.

Your emoticons simply do not help your argument. The fact is, you are wrong, but continue to pretend you can sneer at me in the argument.

I'm not wrong. I never said that the poll was the best methodology, or the most accurate, did I? I merely said it was a large enough sampling to be representative of the B3d readership. If you have a larger sample error goes down. Considering the membership of B3D forums is currently under 4000 I would call the 350+ who have voted a huge sample size.

Polling isn't an exact science, if it was they wouldn't say accurate to within 3%, 19 times out of 20.

 

[Dave Baumann]

(assuming that the consumer is honest)

Often, spending $500 on something colours the perception becuase you don't want to feel a fool for buy buying it. However, its also the case that many will not be able to do a direct comparison so they have no competing frame of reference.

Anyway, its the minority of people that read "consumer reviews" in forums - the majority of perceptions will come from the web and magazine reviews.

 

[madshi]

But as a gamer what does SM3.0 bring me?

As a gamer, what does it not bring you?

I don't expect to see big IQ improvements, if any. It might bring additional performance, but we don't know how much.

Several developers have spoken at length about some of the things that we can expect in *games* using SM 3.0.

And a lot of developers said there would be no IQ gains with SM3.0.

How come I don't see you saying "But as a gamer what does 3Dc bring me?". Obviously, this is just you being hypocritical.

I never ever mentioned 3Dc. What do you want from me? I didn't advertise 3Dc as a feature I was looking forward to. Besides, I believe 3Dc is meant to improve IQ. That's different to most of the NV40's advanced features which are about ease of programming and increasing speed for the most part.

All this might bring me *additional speed*.

And what's wrong with that?

Nothing wrong with that at all. I just don't expect the performance jump to be so big that the NV40 in the end will significantly overtake the R420 in performance in the majority of games. I might be wrong, but right now it's just everybody's guess.

Well then wait for the benchmark data to be available. As a gamer, are you not willing to wait before making a more informed choice?

I'll soon buy a new PC. That's a fixed point in time. If additional benchmarks are gonna show up in the next few weeks, fine, then I'll wait for that. But I can't afford to wait some months. I do need a new computer.

And we don't know exactly how they will compare in Half Life 2, and Tiger Woods 2005, LOTR Battle for Middle Earth, and Stalker, and Splinter Cell X, and Madden 2005. So what's your point?

My point is that we simply don't know how much of a performance advantage NV40 will have when its special features you advertised are fully used. Perhaps you expect wonders in performance increase, I don't.

Please show me a review which states that. As far as I remember AF quality is nearly identical now, since NV40 is angle dependent now, too.

This was mentioned in several reviews, including Toms and 3dCenter I believe.

If you base your claims on Toms Hardware alone, then nobody is going to give any meaning to what you say. 3dCenter sais:

"Zwischen Radeon 9800XT, Radeon X800 Pro und GeForce 6800 Ultra bestehen bei der Ausführung des anisotropen Filters [...] nahezu keine Unterschiede."

The NV40 is using an angle dependent algorithm now, but it is still different than ATI's algorithm, and most reviewers have noted the NV40's AF as being slightly sharper/clearer than ATI's.

I think you are incorrect. Please proof your claim. And please NOT with Toms Hardware only, please.

So what? Looks like you have no clue what you are talking about. You are the bright fellow who originally asked what the NV40 can provide for a gamer, and anyone who doesn't have their head in the ground can see that OpenGL performance is a very strong plus for the NV40. For a *gamer* who enjoys these OpenGL games, that is important, whether you like it or not.

What has this to do with what I like or not? I like a fast card which runs cool and has good IQ. If I check out the reviews, the NV40 wins most OpenGL benchmarks. Nevertheless the R420 seems slightly faster overall, especially in high resolutions with high AA+AF.

Here again is your hypocritical nature. Earlier, you were arguing about what benefit do untested hardware and software features bring if there are no benchmarks to test it...and now you are using the unquantifiable OpenGL rewrite to boost your pro-ATI argument? Extremely pathetic.

Well, you were advertising features, which might improve performance of NV40, but we don't know how much of an improvement those features will bring. So why do you suddenly have a problem with me completing the picture by also mentioning that R420 might have performance improvements in store, too?

You are really only telling half the side of the story. The 6800 GT is a single slot/single molex card that has power requirements that are no more strict than a 9800XT or 5950 Ultra.

Even the X800 XT draws less power than the 6800 GT.

The NV40 also has arguably better AF quality

I still think you're wrong here.

and arguably a more advanced feature set.

But the feature set will probably "only" bring more speed. And we don't know yet how much speed it will bring. And there is also room for performance improvements with R420. So I don't see that feature set advantage in NV40 as a big advantage for a normal gamer. But only time will tell.

Maybe what I said was not fully clear: I do like SM3.0. I just see no big gain in it for me as a gamer. 6xAA and less power consumption is simply more important to me than SM3.0.

What you favor right now, especially considering that you have zero experience with any of the cards mentioned here, is really inconsequential.

Ah, so you have experience with the cards mentioned here?