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

Features, Hey America has more features, Way more features than any other land. There seems to be a broken record with some of you. "Features", well there is sm3.0 { we dont now much about it yet} oh and the shtinzils shadows, to compare to higher IQ at higher RES with Higher FPS.

There is some Future proof { or poof} ness for "games " that will have sm3.0. And D3 will look real good with shinizel shadows. But i will buy another card when they become more importian than higher IQ at higher RES with Higher FPS.
Now if i wanted a workstaioncard from ATI with sm3.0 im f^_ked, and that sux. But this is a game rig refresh (and what a refresh!). So im all over the " higher IQ at higher RES with Higher FPS ".

 

I'll agree that sometimes it can be a choice of features vs. performance, but other times it can be features vs. features.

For example, which is more important to you? Nvidia's SM3.0 support or ATI's 6xAA (12-18xTAA)? I can see valid arguments for both being more desirable features. They're both good choices, and neither is clearly better overall than the other.

Having said that I do have a definite preference. I just think that the other choice has more merit this time around than it did on the last cycle.

 

Isnt it obvious that the 6800 is made in america?
Heh, they must be compensating for something...

 

R420.

As fast or faster than NV40, normal cooling and power requirements. I would say that it's an easy victory.

 

Hey guys, I'm been going through the reviews and I'm wondering if there is something you can answer. Take a look at the max playable settings of the 6800 Ultra here:



Now, look at these:


http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040504/ati-x800-15.html

Why is HardOCP's performance lower or vice versa? The other two links seem to indicate that the 6800 Ultra should be very playable at 1600x1200 with 4xAA/16xAF given that it's averaging nearly 50 FPS.
Granted, they're not from the same map but would that really have that big of an effect? Anyone have any ideas?

Btw, if you want me to do links instead just let me know.

 

Same drivers ?

 

Different map?

 

The reason could be a different map, there is a huge differnce between the maps in UT2K4.

But I think that there is something wrong with the max playable settings. If you look at their own apples to apples tests.




The 6800 Ultra stills look good at 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 16AF.

 

Did you even read the rest of my posting?

 

You mean your completely unsupported assertions? I choose to ignore them.

 

The 6800 ultra is dropping below 30fps for a significant amount of time, the X800 cards are not.

 

It's a simple of matter of deduction.

1. The 6800 kills the X800 Pro unless AF is used
2. AF won't be feasible in EQ2

-> the 6800 will be the better card for EQ2, especially considering that SOE have been whoring themselves to NVidia for quite a while.

Honestly, I wouldn't spend $400 just so I can play some more games with a higher AF setting. AF is nice but come on. The reason why I will go high-end this generation is because there are games on the horizon that might actually utilize their features and rendering power.

 

Care to substantiate or are you just trying to be an asshole troll? What exactly are my "unsupported assertions"?

 

Why will AF not be feasible in EQ2? just curious, Havent heard anything about that.

 

Maybe you are not aware but particles effects changed in April. And for raids as i play in the first raiding guild on my server, i have a good idea

 

EQ1 != EQ2

 

They demonstrated it at FanFaire on 3 GHz, 1 GB RAM machines with 256mb GF 5950 video cards and the best they could do was medium settings for graphics. It was also mentioned that a GF6800U won't be good enough to play it with all the eye-candy turned to max.

Doesn't sound like there was any room to waste fillrate on AF/AA .

 

Really ?

Stop patronizing guy and think you know everything better than others.

 

Does it have to always come to personal attack?

 

Can't really say that I understand what the fact that EQ1 is CPU limited has to do with EQ2, either.