PDA

View Full Version : Are we ALL hoping the NV35 rocks?


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

muzz
05-04-03, 06:50 PM
I just figured I would ask, cuz I was wondering what the difference of opinion was here regarding this issue.

I personally hope it rocks, as it'll push graphic Co's AS A WHOLE to move forward quicker, with innovation... slow progress blows IMO.........
If you intend to start bs fanboy behavior, don't bother, I'm looking for honesty here.

Steppy
05-04-03, 06:57 PM
I hope it does well(though I'd like ATI to remain in the lead until there's about an equal split marketsharewise between NV and ATI, THEN have them duke it out). The 5900 moniker isn't inspiring a lot of confidence of it performing that much better than the 5800.

monkeydust
05-04-03, 07:03 PM
I think that it is in everybody's best interest that it does well.

muzz
05-04-03, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by monkeydust
I think that it is in everybody's best interest that it does well.

I agree here.

muzz
05-04-03, 07:19 PM
I dunno Cowboy, I would HOPE they have at least a little leeway on that front, for their ( and their buyers ) sake.

RobHague
05-04-03, 07:43 PM
http://www.theinformationminister.com/press.php?ID=612132691

Sorry it got neglected over there in the "NV35 has a new name" thread. :D Its NVIDIA sorting out the NV30 vs NV35 mess. ;)

Yeah I hope the NV35 takes back NVIDIAís reputation. I think thatís something the NV35 is key too at the moment - restoring the faith in its consumer base that "NVIDIA is best" kind of thing. Iím not really though, honestly expecting the NV35 to be any huge leap over the NV30. If it is, hey ill be in there saving and pre-ordering but I really donít think its bringing anything 'earth shattering' that the NV30 has not already brought. I think its just about building on the NV30's strengths and improving the design to make it perform better in the area's its been criticized for and making the card cost less to produce - because lets face it. The 5800 Ultra is costing a fortune to be practical with the 'special factories' and DDRII prices/supplies. I try not to look too much into the fluff sites like the Inquirer spit out because as you know Ė we have heard it all before. :)

muzz
05-04-03, 07:49 PM
Hey IMO ( and admittedly being an ATi fan, but NOT BLIND) I just want it to be an HONEST comparison with the R350... if it's ALOT better all the better IMO........... ( and remeber I am an ATi fan, but in reality there is a reason for that that........MO)as it will make ATi grow faster, which will help us all.

Skenzin
05-04-03, 11:45 PM
I think when a doom test or half-life demo is released between now and the end of the Fall its gonna shake up benchmarks as we know it. Whichever core handles those engines better is gonna sell like hotcakes. I just hope the nv35 can handle Raven Sheild at 1024x768 2xAA 4xAF. then im sold.

I also think its sad I can't enable AF in d3d games on my ti4400 without a massive performance drain.

Behemoth
05-05-03, 12:36 AM
actually i want nv35 and r350 to be around equal, i think its more balance, more healthy of a market and it usually brings down prizes, honestly. ;)

LORD-eX-Bu
05-05-03, 12:59 AM
just like NV30, I am not waiting for the NV35. So nah, couldn't care less how bad it performs;)

bkswaney
05-05-03, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by [eNv]-LORD-eX-Bu
just like NV30, I am not waiting for the NV35. So nah, couldn't care less how bad it performs;)

If it's on par with the fastest ati offering I'll buy Nvidia.
That is if they pick there drivers backup to where they should be.

DorXtar
05-05-03, 02:01 AM
I sure hope so. This way all you Nvidiats won't need to make excuses for the shortcomings of the FX 5800 Ultra (Counter-Strike plays better on it than the 9800 PRO :rolleyes: )

You will be able to honestly say "nvidia is better" without having to cross your fingers.

Kruno
05-05-03, 02:18 AM
I care only for IQ.

nVIDIA falls short in that area and the NV35 will not be using new AF and AA algorithms so there is simply no competition between a 9500 and a NV35 in IQ.

Until I see RGMS and better AF quality on an nVIDIA chip I will stay with Ati's offerings.

Amazingly (for some people) I found Ati having better drivers than NV's drivers. My Blood 2 issue was worked out on my Radeon, which was never fixed in the Detonator drivers.

The Half-Life bug I never encountered, simply because I play HL in D3D.

ChrisRay
05-05-03, 02:22 AM
Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
I care only for IQ.

nVIDIA falls short in that area and the NV35 will not be using new AF and AA algorithms so there is simply no competition between a 9500 and a NV35 in IQ.

Until I see RGMS and better AF quality on an nVIDIA chip I will stay with Ati's offerings.

Amazingly (for some people) I found Ati having better drivers than NV's drivers. My Blood 2 issue was worked out on my Radeon, which was never fixed in the Detonator drivers.

The Half-Life bug I never encountered, simply because I play HL in D3D.


I have the exact oposite opinion of you, Unless ATI gets there act together and offers an implementation of Super Sampling Anti Aliasing. I will not be buying another ATI card.

Behemoth
05-05-03, 02:39 AM
I care only for IQ.
but you dont understand IQ.

The AF algorithm cuts so much corners its not even funny, its even slower than nvidia's AF.

Until you understand more about ati AF you will love nvidia.

How you found ati has better driver than nvidia just because you dont have issue with it would even amaze ati driver's team. lol

LORD-eX-Bu
05-05-03, 02:54 AM
heh, you can talk all the algorithm mumbo-jumbo that you want, results are results. ATI's IQ simply is better and performs better than its competition;)

Behemoth
05-05-03, 03:07 AM
if you like ati AF i wont bash you, i prefer nvidia AF, its more correct, faster, here is result
http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030127/geforce_fx-21.html

bkswaney
05-05-03, 03:28 AM
Originally posted by Behemoth
if you like ati AF i wont bash you, i prefer nvidia AF, its more correct, faster, here is result
http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030127/geforce_fx-21.html

I agree on that. AF looks better to me on the 5800.

ChrisW
05-05-03, 03:29 AM
Originally posted by Behemoth
if you like ati AF i wont bash you, i prefer nvidia AF, its more correct, faster, here is result
http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030127/geforce_fx-21.html
LOL! You are using Tom's Hardware as a credible source of benchmarks! That is about the worst review I've ever read. He doesn't even bother to tell you what settings he is using. Everyone knows the GFFX only beats the 9700 by using lower image quality settings. He is using performance/aggressive anisotropic filtering against ATI's quality. There is no comparison between the two. The GFFX isn't even doing trilinear filtering.

Behemoth
05-05-03, 03:33 AM
nv30 competes very well against r3xx at 1024*768, if 9800pro can run raven shield pretty good, nv35 is gonna handle it with ease. :D

Kruno
05-05-03, 03:34 AM
Originally posted by Behemoth
but you dont understand IQ.

The AF algorithm cuts so much corners its not even funny, its even slower than nvidia's AF.

Until you understand more about ati AF you will love nvidia.

How you found ati has better driver than nvidia just because you dont have issue with it would even amaze ati driver's team. lol

Oh, I understand lots about Ati's AF algorithm. I own an NV20 and I can easily say that Ati's algorithm is far superior to NV's in terms of IQ.

It doesn't matter how much corners are "cut", it all comes down to the final result. So far it's proven much better looking than NV's.
My hit with 16x Tri is less than <3 fps in ALL games. I tried NWN, UT 2003, Unreal 2, WC3, AOM
, Q3.
I have showed benchmarks of this a few months ago. Take a look around. I don't read many reviews as I tend to get completely different results, such as framerate.
My system eats Unreal 2 for breakfast. My performance in heavy firefights with max IQ never goes below 40fps, yet I see many people with far more powerfull systems struggling to even hit 40fps. I am talking with maximum shadows and low cull distances.

I am only talking from experiences.

So far:
NV's drivers have proven to give me more problems than Ati's.
NV's IQ is far less in both AF and AA.

You can find me as many reviews, pictures, comaprisons, technical documents but that still doesn't change my experiences which I have noted.

Anyone who disagrees with my experiences finds out that it's their choice. I somehow don't care if you think that NV has good IQ or better/faster than Ati's.

I dismissed your opinion and will dismiss everyone elses opinion. I have little respect for anyones opinion in these matters as all they are doing is bull****ting me.

I trust my experiences more than any human.

When talking about the technical side of things, NV may be doing a better job in AF, practically NV has worse IQ.

Behemoth
05-05-03, 03:46 AM
ChrisW

ati AF is not even correct in AF to begin with. right, no comparsion, 2 AFs are different why compare, but i prefer nvidia, it offer both fastest mode and most quality mode and lots of flexible in-between modes. when i want speed, i have it, when i want quality i have it, when i want both i also have it, if i want incorrect funny AF, guess i cant afford another card sorry :p
i didnt say tomshardware was credible but i consider those say ati has better AF incredible.

Kruno
05-05-03, 03:50 AM
Originally posted by bkswaney
If u say so. :rolleyes:

I didn't say anything. :)
I typed down the things I noticed from my experience with the NV20 and R300. :)

I can't help it if no one agrees. I'm just saying that if anyone says differently that I'm not going to worry about it.

I just wanted to make it clear that I am talking from experience.

I always found reviews to say 1 thing and then when I get the card I have a different experience than the reviewer has.

Isn't that funny? :lol:

On another note, my friend has a more powerful system than I do with a 9700 Pro (like I have) and his framerate blows Donkey hooves. He practically gets half the framerate than I do in lots of scenarios in different games.

Overclocking my card wouldn't double my framerate either AFAIK. I haven't done any extensive 'before and after' testing yet.
I have done some but not a lot for me to warrent me noting it down.

Behemoth
05-05-03, 04:07 AM
kiler,

My hit with 16x Tri is less than <3 fps in ALL games. I tried NWN, UT 2003, Unreal 2, WC3, AOM
unbelievable, no comment, are you playing in 640*480 using performance mode?
I have showed benchmarks of this a few months ago. Take a look around. I don't read many reviews as I tend to get completely different results, such as framerate.
your lucky, i tend to have same result with everyone else so i have to read reviews.
My system eats Unreal 2 for breakfast. My performance in heavy firefights with max IQ never goes below 40fps, yet I see many people with far more powerfull systems struggling to even hit 40fps. I am talking with maximum shadows and low cull distances.
there are even systems that are far more powerful than yours? i guess you use middle range cpu, and you never goes below 40fps in UT2003? no comment, i wish my card works differently like yours.

ChrisW
05-05-03, 04:08 AM
Originally posted by Behemoth
ChrisW

ati AF is not even correct in AF to begin with. right, no comparsion, 2 AFs are different why compare, but i prefer nvidia, it offer both fastest mode and most quality mode and lots of flexible in-between modes. when i want speed, i have it, when i want quality i have it, when i want both i also have it, if i want incorrect funny AF, guess i cant afford another card sorry :p
i didnt say tomshardware was credible but i consider those say ati has better AF incredible.
Sure, nVidia's method does more AF in certain angles, but ATI's method does more than nVidia's method at the other angles. ATI's method also does trilinear filtering and does it at a higher degree (16x). If you believe it is more correct to do the same amount of filtering at all angles then I won't argue with that. The benchmarks, however, clearly state that ATI's method it faster than nVidia's when trilinear filtering is enabled on both cards.