Geforce FX

Hixup · 12-18-2002, 05:47 PM

Ok this is gonna be an awsome gfx card, but i need some input/info if anyone has some. Coupple questions
1 About how much is the cost?
2 Will i be able to buy without the vacume on it?
3 is it ture its 30% better then radeon 9700?

gogo · 12-18-2002, 07:22 PM

1. More than my 81 Rabbit that's sitting at the end of my driveway covered in snow and lillte childrens footprints.

2. No, but for the price you will get your choice of Kirby or 4 hoovers.

3. Remember, 30% is mostly hype. What tests? what games?
Kind of like the hype that went the other way around a few months back.

DarkEdge · 12-18-2002, 10:08 PM

Don't forget, ATI has a new revision of there 9700 thats suppose to be coming out around the GeForce FX launch. Atleast thats what some people say.

airspirit · 12-19-2002, 08:30 AM

I wouldn't touch that thing with a ten foot pole. It is supposed to run $400 (stripped) to $500+ (Pro), and already there are some proven DX9 features that "accidentally" got left off of this card.

The R350 Core from ATi should be available at the same time as the FX, and I dare say it will run about the same speed. If you really want revolutionary, the R400 and R450 will be out this summer, the difference being a new process on the GPU giving much more speed, and the addition of DDR2 to what is already an obscene on-card bandwidth.

Stick ATi for the time being. Besides, in a couple of months you'll be able to buy a 9700 Pro for under $200 if you shop around.

bigben2k · 12-19-2002, 09:17 AM

I see that you got caught in the DX9 incompatibility rumor! The fact is that there is a feature of DX9 which is a requirement, and the NV30 not only meets that requirement, it exceeds it. (I'll see if I can dig up the facts again).

It's actually quite common for a GPU to swap some things from specs: where DX9 has a requirement, some of the cheaper cards will implement that particular feature as part of the driver, where it should be directly available from the GPU. Consequences? More CPU utilization.

I was a big fan of ATI. I really like how they implemented output adjustments: it's tweakable to no end. What I never liked is that the card/drivers seems (for me) to develop bugs over time, causing lockups. Mind you, I never really kept up with driver updates.

This time around, I'm going with the NV30. I fully support the new Cg language, and I'm looking forward to playing with it. Also, as an occasional gamer, I'll stick to what's most popular, and what is more likely to look great with most games (which I didn't used to care about).

hara · 12-19-2002, 10:29 AM

What are the specs of your current pc bigben?

pHaestus · 12-19-2002, 11:07 AM

That is pretty funny to hear ATi users pan the NVIDIA cards for incompatibility issues.

/me throws Radeon1 on fire

bigben2k · 12-19-2002, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by hara
What are the specs of your current pc bigben?

I use 2 right now, but they're just old P166 systems. Hey, it surfs! I use a PIII 1GHz at the office.

airspirit · 12-19-2002, 03:19 PM

The Radeon line from the 8500 on are more true-to-spec than any of the NVidia offerings. The reason that there are incompatibilities are more due to the marketing muscle of NVidia who are having the software makers code around the Geforce platform, rather than to the OpenGL or DirectX specifications themselves.

Take Neverwinter Nights, for instance. Many of the advanced features only available to the Geforce 3/4 Ti platform such as pixel shading were denied to the ATi cards, even though they were perfectly capable of using them. This was an intentional marketing move by Bioware, who received a ton of money (they admitted as much directly) for doing so. It took them about a dozen patches to undo that damage and allow "on-spec" cards to use the same features that the NVidia cards enjoyed, due to the fact that the game was written around the Ti cards.

When commenting on the "compatibility" of NVidia products, the argument is severly flawed. The reason that they are typically more compatible for different applications is due to the fact that the developer of that application has whored themselves to NVidia to ensure that the product was designed for the CARD, not the SPECIFICATION.

This is not speculation, but a fact that the industry needs to wake up to. There is not a Geforce card made today in the 3/4 lines that doesn't use "hack" workarounds to function. Without those workarounds, the cards are poor performers, and sometimes do not function correctly at all. This is why in some games my 8500LE will smoke a GF4TI4400: it is all in code optimization, not in compatibility. The ATi 8500, 9000, 9500, 9700, and the Matrox Parahelia in all its flavors are the only cards I know of that are true to the DirectX and OpenGL specifications AS THEY ARE WRITTEN, not as NVidia hacks around them.

A similarity can be found in the difference between Sun and MS Java: even though you write a program with perfect coding in MS Java, there is no guarantee that a SPEC Sun JVM will be able to parse it correctly.

Keep that in mind when choosing your video cards. Contrary to belief, the ATi cards are more TRULY compatible than any NVidia card available.

pHaestus · 12-19-2002, 03:35 PM

I freely admit that I carry a grudge against ATi. I bought a Radeon1 DDR (with ViVo) and then had financial constraints that stopped me from upgrading for 15 months. ATi support for Win2k + that card was TERRIBLE. Games not working at all until patches, missing textures, slow performance, and general unpleasantness were the rule. And things would only be THAT good if you used beta drivers that broke some of the ViVO features. All the while the card was getting rave reviews everywhere. I honestly felt ripped off by that card, and so I don't buy ATI or trust user comments.

And at the end of the day, whether by hack or not, an NVIDIA card is going to work in games. Every time. The same was not my experience with ATi cards a year ago (and I still dont have the disposable income to take another chance).

bigben2k · 12-19-2002, 03:37 PM

I wish that all the game manufacturers respected and followed DX standards. I'll put it on my xmas list.

Actually, I'm not into games that would be affected by the brand of most cards out there: I just play simple strategy and simulation games, none of which really require a fast VC.

I remember seeing a lot of games optimized for this and that card, a few years back. I don't believe that NVidia was the only culprit: I suspect that everyone did this, back then.

The ATI offerings were always more impressive, back then, and were ahead of the pack: it just wasn't perceived that way.

I wish I had the time to sort through some of this stuff. Anyone know a good game review site?

airspirit · 12-19-2002, 03:49 PM

Notice how I said 8500 and up? The old Radeons weren't anything to write home about, and they had a ton of problems, both physical and driver related. Oddly enough, at that time the Geforce cards were perfectly on spec. The tables have turned, requiring NVidia to buy developers rather than make a proper product. Anymore, the only reason that a Geforce card will run better than an ATi card (8500 and up) is if the game was specifically written to do that. For example: NVidia payed out their ass to ensure that UT2K3 would work well on their GF4TI cards and cripple it on the Radeons (some of this was fixed in the latest patch). In the end, it is becoming harder for them to cripple ATi solutions, since doing so would similarly cripple NVidia solutions as well, since it would require severely damaging the DX and GL systems. In the UT2K3 example, while it was optimized for the GF4, the Radeon cards weren't hurt too bad (and now run perfectly, on the new "fixer" patch).

Whenever you see a NVidia label on a game box, you really need to ask why this is so, since the only thing that label gets you in the end is a more expensive graphics card if you buy one to play the game. If they didn't pay off developers, their cards would be as much as 30% less than they cost now, but on the flipside, they wouldn't work for crap in any games nearly as well as they do now.

I urge you guys not to support this kind of Microsoftish behavior.

hmorgoth · 12-19-2002, 04:25 PM

Hi i have used ati cards for 2 years now. and although only 16 i feel that they have turned a new leaf. i owned a radeon 64Mb Vivo card untill i got my nice 9700Por a mounth ago. the new drivers are amazing and they keep briging out newer drivers every mounth or near enough. admitidly My old ViVo was a pain to get working but it now runs in my brothers PC fine with recent drivers( 6mounths and counting.) I really feel ATI have made an effort and have finally sorted there driver problems. i have seen Nvidia cards in friends PC's and i feel that they cost more and yes they give better performance in fps but i have always felt that teh ATI cards offer better wulity and more features such as Mpeg decoding... WEll that is just my two cents.
P.S I love my 9700

pHaestus · 12-19-2002, 04:34 PM

What you see as NVIDIA buying off developers to fight off the superior ATi offering, I see as ATi cards not working with games when the games come out. The cause is irrelevant to the end user: If I pay $3-400 for a top end video card then I expect the games to WORK fast as hell out of the box.

ATi would have better luck dealing with developers if they wouldnt do idiotic things like leaking the Doom3 demo (or so I heard anyway).

nicozeg · 12-19-2002, 04:56 PM

I know my case is not common, but my main interest in 3D cards is for acceleration in 3D design software. Gaming is a nice bonus. These programs tend to adhere strictly to OpenGL standard; and guess what: Nvidia cards blow away ATI. I’m sure this is not from some cheating in software, but excellent developed drivers.

airspirit · 12-19-2002, 06:27 PM

You want workstation CAD type stuff? Think Parahelia and its ilk. My bro uses one and it rages in CAD, but it sucks a fatty nut in gaming.

jtroutma · 12-19-2002, 06:47 PM

Here is my 0.02cents. I was a BIG Voodoo lover back in the days (had the Voodoo1, Voodoo2, and Voodoo3

), then I made the jump to Nvidia. My Nvidia jump was very nice and I did enjoy all the compatability that the card and drivers offered.

I had heard about tons of problems with the Radeon line and that is why I never considered them. It also didnt help when an old roommate was ALWAYS having problems with one of his ATI cards (Rage Fury MAXX to be exact) and even I grew to hate it. Forced 2 IRQ handles that HAD to be non-sharing, crappy driver support, slow performance, and absolue NO WIN2K drivers!!!! Major turn off!!

I now own the Radeon 9700 Pro and I must say that ATI seems to have made a comeback in all that I hated them for. The card is DAMN fast, driver support seems to be there (at least much better than before) and very few problems in games. I should note that I am a big up-to-date driver fan.

Personally, ATI deserves to be reconised and so far, my experience with their LATEST product is a very good one.

/me gets off soap box

nicozeg · 12-19-2002, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by airspirit
You want workstation CAD type stuff? Think Parahelia and its ilk. My bro uses one and it rages in CAD, but it sucks a fatty nut in gaming.

AHHHHHH... MATROX.... Nobody beats that image quality. I remember the times when they fight hand by hand with ATI for world domination. They made the finest GFX cards. They had that amazing drivers that enabled realtime 3D inside Autocad in DOS. But now that times are gone, stupid management destroyed them. Parhelia shows part of that ingenuity mixed with stupid mistakes that cripple it horribly. That professional CAD market orientation they try now is more a desperate move than real performance.

I know that one benchmark doesn’t tell all, but this one from Xbit Labs is my actual reference for graphics cards. I know they have the best multimonitor support, color fidelity and image sharpness, but when you’re modeling a complex scene with hundreds of thousands polygons, performance is more relevant. There Nvidia is the king, you just need to buy any GeForce, easily convert it to a Quadro; and you’re ready.

dreamie · 12-20-2002, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by airspirit
You want workstation CAD type stuff? Think Parahelia and its ilk. My bro uses one and it rages in CAD, but it sucks a fatty nut in gaming.

that's for sure.. matrox never make cards for gaming

MadDogMe · 12-20-2002, 03:59 AM

Why so polarised?, why does it have to be ATi all the way to the exclusion of nVidia?, or visa~versa?. when people are that one sided I usualy discount their opinion as totaly biased...

nVidia make excellent cards, each and every time, regardless of how & why they work, they work, and work well, this does'nt mean that ATi cards are the shite of the Earth, far from it, but when a company is constantly running to catch up with the compitition bugs abound :shrug: , trouble with ATi IMO is by the time a particular cards driver has matured the next generation is already out, because the drivers are rushed, ATi need to sort the driver situation out to really get level with nVidia, not just playing the 'top spot for the month' 'catch~up game', if they had put all the right time&work into the drivers the 9500 would'nt come out until the same time as the nVidiaFX...

Does'nt make their cards shite though, they still have the visual quality of AnisotropicFiltering that nV does'nt have...

12-18-2002, 05:47 PM	#1
Hixup Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: By the computer Posts: 51	Geforce FX Ok this is gonna be an awsome gfx card, but i need some input/info if anyone has some. Coupple questions 1 About how much is the cost? 2 Will i be able to buy without the vacume on it? 3 is it ture its 30% better then radeon 9700? __________________ AMD Athlon XP 1900+ Water Cooled Soyo SY-K7V Dragon plus! 512 DDR radoen 9500 Soft Mod Give Me Money

12-18-2002, 07:22 PM	#2
gogo Cooling Savant Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: AK Posts: 246	1. More than my 81 Rabbit that's sitting at the end of my driveway covered in snow and lillte childrens footprints. 2. No, but for the price you will get your choice of Kirby or 4 hoovers. 3. Remember, 30% is mostly hype. What tests? what games? Kind of like the hype that went the other way around a few months back. __________________ Now, with Retsyn®

12-18-2002, 10:08 PM	#3
DarkEdge Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Sugar Land, Tx Posts: 176	Don't forget, ATI has a new revision of there 9700 thats suppose to be coming out around the GeForce FX launch. Atleast thats what some people say. __________________ Intel p4 2.26@3.0 Abit BD7II-Raid,1gb Corsair 3200 ATI Radeon 9700 3 80gb Seagates 3 40gb Maxtors

12-19-2002, 08:30 AM	#4
airspirit Been /.'d... have you? Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Moscow, ID Posts: 1,986	I wouldn't touch that thing with a ten foot pole. It is supposed to run $400 (stripped) to $500+ (Pro), and already there are some proven DX9 features that "accidentally" got left off of this card. The R350 Core from ATi should be available at the same time as the FX, and I dare say it will run about the same speed. If you really want revolutionary, the R400 and R450 will be out this summer, the difference being a new process on the GPU giving much more speed, and the addition of DDR2 to what is already an obscene on-card bandwidth. Stick ATi for the time being. Besides, in a couple of months you'll be able to buy a 9700 Pro for under $200 if you shop around. __________________ #!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;} mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;} {sleep;} finger: permission denied

12-19-2002, 09:17 AM	#5
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	I see that you got caught in the DX9 incompatibility rumor! The fact is that there is a feature of DX9 which is a requirement, and the NV30 not only meets that requirement, it exceeds it. (I'll see if I can dig up the facts again). It's actually quite common for a GPU to swap some things from specs: where DX9 has a requirement, some of the cheaper cards will implement that particular feature as part of the driver, where it should be directly available from the GPU. Consequences? More CPU utilization. I was a big fan of ATI. I really like how they implemented output adjustments: it's tweakable to no end. What I never liked is that the card/drivers seems (for me) to develop bugs over time, causing lockups. Mind you, I never really kept up with driver updates. This time around, I'm going with the NV30. I fully support the new Cg language, and I'm looking forward to playing with it. Also, as an occasional gamer, I'll stick to what's most popular, and what is more likely to look great with most games (which I didn't used to care about). __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

12-19-2002, 10:29 AM	#6
hara Cooling Savant Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Malta, Mediterranean Posts: 662	What are the specs of your current pc bigben?

12-19-2002, 11:07 AM	#7
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	That is pretty funny to hear ATi users pan the NVIDIA cards for incompatibility issues. /me throws Radeon1 on fire

12-19-2002, 03:19 PM	#9
airspirit Been /.'d... have you? Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Moscow, ID Posts: 1,986	The Radeon line from the 8500 on are more true-to-spec than any of the NVidia offerings. The reason that there are incompatibilities are more due to the marketing muscle of NVidia who are having the software makers code around the Geforce platform, rather than to the OpenGL or DirectX specifications themselves. Take Neverwinter Nights, for instance. Many of the advanced features only available to the Geforce 3/4 Ti platform such as pixel shading were denied to the ATi cards, even though they were perfectly capable of using them. This was an intentional marketing move by Bioware, who received a ton of money (they admitted as much directly) for doing so. It took them about a dozen patches to undo that damage and allow "on-spec" cards to use the same features that the NVidia cards enjoyed, due to the fact that the game was written around the Ti cards. When commenting on the "compatibility" of NVidia products, the argument is severly flawed. The reason that they are typically more compatible for different applications is due to the fact that the developer of that application has whored themselves to NVidia to ensure that the product was designed for the CARD, not the SPECIFICATION. This is not speculation, but a fact that the industry needs to wake up to. There is not a Geforce card made today in the 3/4 lines that doesn't use "hack" workarounds to function. Without those workarounds, the cards are poor performers, and sometimes do not function correctly at all. This is why in some games my 8500LE will smoke a GF4TI4400: it is all in code optimization, not in compatibility. The ATi 8500, 9000, 9500, 9700, and the Matrox Parahelia in all its flavors are the only cards I know of that are true to the DirectX and OpenGL specifications AS THEY ARE WRITTEN, not as NVidia hacks around them. A similarity can be found in the difference between Sun and MS Java: even though you write a program with perfect coding in MS Java, there is no guarantee that a SPEC Sun JVM will be able to parse it correctly. Keep that in mind when choosing your video cards. Contrary to belief, the ATi cards are more TRULY compatible than any NVidia card available. __________________ #!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;} mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;} {sleep;} finger: permission denied

12-19-2002, 03:35 PM	#10
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	I freely admit that I carry a grudge against ATi. I bought a Radeon1 DDR (with ViVo) and then had financial constraints that stopped me from upgrading for 15 months. ATi support for Win2k + that card was TERRIBLE. Games not working at all until patches, missing textures, slow performance, and general unpleasantness were the rule. And things would only be THAT good if you used beta drivers that broke some of the ViVO features. All the while the card was getting rave reviews everywhere. I honestly felt ripped off by that card, and so I don't buy ATI or trust user comments. And at the end of the day, whether by hack or not, an NVIDIA card is going to work in games. Every time. The same was not my experience with ATi cards a year ago (and I still dont have the disposable income to take another chance).

12-19-2002, 03:37 PM	#11
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	I wish that all the game manufacturers respected and followed DX standards. I'll put it on my xmas list. Actually, I'm not into games that would be affected by the brand of most cards out there: I just play simple strategy and simulation games, none of which really require a fast VC. I remember seeing a lot of games optimized for this and that card, a few years back. I don't believe that NVidia was the only culprit: I suspect that everyone did this, back then. The ATI offerings were always more impressive, back then, and were ahead of the pack: it just wasn't perceived that way. I wish I had the time to sort through some of this stuff. Anyone know a good game review site? __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

12-19-2002, 03:49 PM	#12
airspirit Been /.'d... have you? Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Moscow, ID Posts: 1,986	Notice how I said 8500 and up? The old Radeons weren't anything to write home about, and they had a ton of problems, both physical and driver related. Oddly enough, at that time the Geforce cards were perfectly on spec. The tables have turned, requiring NVidia to buy developers rather than make a proper product. Anymore, the only reason that a Geforce card will run better than an ATi card (8500 and up) is if the game was specifically written to do that. For example: NVidia payed out their ass to ensure that UT2K3 would work well on their GF4TI cards and cripple it on the Radeons (some of this was fixed in the latest patch). In the end, it is becoming harder for them to cripple ATi solutions, since doing so would similarly cripple NVidia solutions as well, since it would require severely damaging the DX and GL systems. In the UT2K3 example, while it was optimized for the GF4, the Radeon cards weren't hurt too bad (and now run perfectly, on the new "fixer" patch). Whenever you see a NVidia label on a game box, you really need to ask why this is so, since the only thing that label gets you in the end is a more expensive graphics card if you buy one to play the game. If they didn't pay off developers, their cards would be as much as 30% less than they cost now, but on the flipside, they wouldn't work for crap in any games nearly as well as they do now. I urge you guys not to support this kind of Microsoftish behavior. __________________ #!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;} mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;} {sleep;} finger: permission denied

12-19-2002, 04:25 PM	#13
hmorgoth Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: UK Posts: 55	ATI... turned a new leaf? Hi i have used ati cards for 2 years now. and although only 16 i feel that they have turned a new leaf. i owned a radeon 64Mb Vivo card untill i got my nice 9700Por a mounth ago. the new drivers are amazing and they keep briging out newer drivers every mounth or near enough. admitidly My old ViVo was a pain to get working but it now runs in my brothers PC fine with recent drivers( 6mounths and counting.) I really feel ATI have made an effort and have finally sorted there driver problems. i have seen Nvidia cards in friends PC's and i feel that they cost more and yes they give better performance in fps but i have always felt that teh ATI cards offer better wulity and more features such as Mpeg decoding... WEll that is just my two cents. P.S I love my 9700 __________________ Time to make my own case. Its cheaper

12-19-2002, 04:34 PM	#14
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	What you see as NVIDIA buying off developers to fight off the superior ATi offering, I see as ATi cards not working with games when the games come out. The cause is irrelevant to the end user: If I pay $3-400 for a top end video card then I expect the games to WORK fast as hell out of the box. ATi would have better luck dealing with developers if they wouldnt do idiotic things like leaking the Doom3 demo (or so I heard anyway).

12-19-2002, 04:56 PM	#15
nicozeg Cooling Savant Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 403	I know my case is not common, but my main interest in 3D cards is for acceleration in 3D design software. Gaming is a nice bonus. These programs tend to adhere strictly to OpenGL standard; and guess what: Nvidia cards blow away ATI. I’m sure this is not from some cheating in software, but excellent developed drivers.

12-19-2002, 06:27 PM	#16
airspirit Been /.'d... have you? Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Moscow, ID Posts: 1,986	You want workstation CAD type stuff? Think Parahelia and its ilk. My bro uses one and it rages in CAD, but it sucks a fatty nut in gaming. __________________ #!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;} mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;} {sleep;} finger: permission denied

12-19-2002, 06:47 PM	#17
jtroutma Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: SLO, CA Posts: 837	Here is my 0.02cents. I was a BIG Voodoo lover back in the days (had the Voodoo1, Voodoo2, and Voodoo3 ), then I made the jump to Nvidia. My Nvidia jump was very nice and I did enjoy all the compatability that the card and drivers offered. I had heard about tons of problems with the Radeon line and that is why I never considered them. It also didnt help when an old roommate was ALWAYS having problems with one of his ATI cards (Rage Fury MAXX to be exact) and even I grew to hate it. Forced 2 IRQ handles that HAD to be non-sharing, crappy driver support, slow performance, and absolue NO WIN2K drivers!!!! Major turn off!! I now own the Radeon 9700 Pro and I must say that ATI seems to have made a comeback in all that I hated them for. The card is DAMN fast, driver support seems to be there (at least much better than before) and very few problems in games. I should note that I am a big up-to-date driver fan. Personally, ATI deserves to be reconised and so far, my experience with their LATEST product is a very good one. /me gets off soap box __________________ Athlon64 X2 4200+ @ 2.5Ghz (250FSB x 10) OCZ VX 1GB 4000 @ 250FSB (6-2-2-2 timmings) DFI LANParty nForce4 Ultra-D SCSI Raid 5 x (3) Cheetah 15K HDDs LSI Express 500 (128MB cache) OCZ PowerStream 520W PSU ATI X850XT PE (Stock) DTEK WhiteWater + DTEK Custom Radiator Eheim 1250

12-20-2002, 03:59 AM	#20
MadDogMe Thermophile Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Just shut up ;) ... Posts: 1,068	Why so polarised?, why does it have to be ATi all the way to the exclusion of nVidia?, or visa~versa?. when people are that one sided I usualy discount their opinion as totaly biased... nVidia make excellent cards, each and every time, regardless of how & why they work, they work, and work well, this does'nt mean that ATi cards are the shite of the Earth, far from it, but when a company is constantly running to catch up with the compitition bugs abound :shrug: , trouble with ATi IMO is by the time a particular cards driver has matured the next generation is already out, because the drivers are rushed, ATi need to sort the driver situation out to really get level with nVidia, not just playing the 'top spot for the month' 'catch~up game', if they had put all the right time&work into the drivers the 9500 would'nt come out until the same time as the nVidiaFX... Does'nt make their cards shite though, they still have the visual quality of AnisotropicFiltering that nV does'nt have...

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)