PDA

View Full Version : is NV35 what you hoped for?


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

silence
05-12-03, 11:32 AM
reading all these reviews today (on sites that aren't currently down) i think that NV35 is what i hoped for, but for NV30. since NV30 was such fiasco, i hoped that Nvidia will do better with NV35 and issues that were there, in NV30, will be corrected.

when NV30 came out,i planned to buy one, non-ultra version, but i never saw single 5800 card where i live......so now i am planning and hoping that i will be able to buy NV35 based card in months to come.

for me.....this what i hoped for. really fast card that i will be able to use for some time without need to buy new card 6 month after i buy this one.

Nutty
05-12-03, 12:44 PM
Looks good to me.

No more stupid flowfx. Some sites say quieter than gf4!
More RAW bandwidth. Much needed, whips the 9800 in 4xAA and AF now.
Less heat created.

Looks like a winner to me, and the sites I saw were only using drivers 44.xx. Performance should go up even more when detonator 50 arrives.

I'm sold.

saturnotaku
05-12-03, 12:51 PM
This blurred textures when using AA and AF issue concerns me, though. I'm hoping it's just an oversight in drivers and it will be corrected in the 50.xx release.

But overall, I think this card is what the NV30 should have been. Time will tell if it ends up like the NV30 in the "too little, too late" department.

PreservedSwine
05-12-03, 12:53 PM
Looks OK, except for AA quality, and high level AA performance is simply rotten.

I'll reserve judgment until actual boards can be reviewed, and not reference designs.

Evildeus
05-12-03, 12:54 PM
More or less what i thought :)

Solomon
05-12-03, 12:55 PM
From the initial reviews, I came away with an impression of, "Finally! This is what the NV30 should of been"... Still will await the 50.xx series of drivers before I make a final conclusion. But ATi really screwed up bad with their 256Mb version. That board was a dissapointment.

Kudos to Nvidia for finally releasing a card that is able to at least tape into the NV3X architecture.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

nin_fragile14
05-12-03, 12:56 PM
If it was $399, I would be sold. It's definitely what I hoped for, but 500 is too much. And those Doom 3 benchmarks rock, regardless of bias or optimizations.

GlowStick
05-12-03, 01:01 PM
The card is aweosme, i cant wait for a super optimzied doom3 usieng the ultra shadow to appear!

omghi2u
05-12-03, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by nin_fragile14
If it was $399 That's way too much for me...I'd way until the $299 range. Pricing like this is obscene. I don' remember video cards being this pricey 5 years ago. I bought the R9700 for $280, and my Ti4600 was $240 when I got it. I don't wanna pass the $300 mark. Hopefully NV35 proves to be true NV quality unlike that POS FX. I'd still have to read the reviews first before buying.

MtViewGuy
05-12-03, 01:15 PM
...I'd wish nVidia came up with a better cooling solution the boards based on the NV35 GPU.

A variant of nVidia's own FlowFX cooling system but with a much quieter fan would have been nice, especially given now that the boards that use the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra GPU will most likely need two slots occupied for the fairly large internal fan that cools the GPU. That way, the GPU will get cooler outside air cooling, and that means the GFFX 5900 Ultra could be safely overclocked for even higher performance. :cool:

5150 Joker
05-12-03, 01:18 PM
Originally posted by silence
reading all these reviews today (on sites that aren't currently down) i think that NV35 is what i hoped for, but for NV30. since NV30 was such fiasco, i hoped that Nvidia will do better with NV35 and issues that were there, in NV30, will be corrected.

when NV30 came out,i planned to buy one, non-ultra version, but i never saw single 5800 card where i live......so now i am planning and hoping that i will be able to buy NV35 based card in months to come.

for me.....this what i hoped for. really fast card that i will be able to use for some time without need to buy new card 6 month after i buy this one.

Decent scores but the AA/AF are still not up to par with ATi. Now to see what ATi answers with.

Rogozhin
05-12-03, 01:23 PM
I was hoping it would trounce the 9800 in aa and af, from the looks of it that won't be happening and I suspend judgement until the 9800 is benched with cat 3.4s and the 5900 is benched with the det 50s

rogo

creedamd
05-12-03, 01:32 PM
A bit disappointed as well about the IQ.

I'm not gonna buy a card like this for speed. Hell, most of the games today play fine on the ti4600.

If I am going to pay top money, it's going to be for I/Q and speed. Not one without the other.

Shadowx
05-12-03, 01:44 PM
What i dont really get is why ati realease the r9800 256 the same day as the 5900 ultra, i mean they didnt do anything to the 9800 acxcept add 128m more of ram. If they would have up the core speed or something its just kind of stupid.

creedamd
05-12-03, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by Shadowx
What i dont really get is why ati realease the r9800 256 the same day as the 5900 ultra, i mean they didnt do anything to the 9800 acxcept add 128m more of ram. If they would have up the core speed or something its just kind of stupid.

It makes it a toss up for top end card. The two cards are similar in speed. But Ati still owns the IQ crown. I think most buyers will still goto the Ati because of this.

If doom3 was out currently, I think this would be different.

nVidi0t
05-12-03, 01:52 PM
I would buy it just based on those Doom 3 benchmarks.

And to be honest, I barely use above 4X AA and AF anyway, so the 5900 is a winner any way I look at it.

GlowStick
05-12-03, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by creedamd
It makes it a toss up for top end card. The two cards are similar in speed. But Ati still owns the IQ crown. I think most buyers will still goto the Ati because of this.

If doom3 was out currently, I think this would be different.

I dont think most people will go for the 9800pro 256mb, looking at the benchies for CURRENT games the extra memory didnt much from the 9800pro 128mb.

And if anyone was going to spend the extra cash for a 256 board i am positive they would go for the NV35, it would be insane no too.

creedamd
05-12-03, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by GlowStick
I dont think most people will go for the 9800pro 256mb, looking at the benchies for CURRENT games the extra memory didnt much from the 9800pro 128mb.

And if anyone was going to spend the extra cash for a 256 board i am positive they would go for the NV35, it would be insane no too.

It all depends on if they fix the "Blur Bug"

GlowStick
05-12-03, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by creedamd
It all depends on if they fix the "Blur Bug"

Hm i cannot see people paying 499$ for the preformance of a 399$ card when they could use the same amount of money and get a great preformance increase. Espically in Doom3, like it or not it seems that Doom3 is being optimized for nvidia cards (i hope he uses the ultra shadow, that should provide another boost).

I belive doom3 will become a standard game engine for alot of new games, Just like Quake 3 was, so if it is optmized for nvidia cards it is just something you have to live with, and cannot change.

Shadowx
05-12-03, 02:15 PM
people wanted a 256 ddr2 card and ati deliverde they are the only one with that kind of card and this card will come out soon not june like nv35 but to launch it besides nv35, if they just wanted a 9800256 great but to pair it against the nv35 (and it held its own) why not up the core when you know it can do it very easylly and will have been a better competitor against nv new offering. i just seems stupid to me to get a card out to compete when you could have made it better atleast than your last high end product.

nVidi0t
05-12-03, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by CoWBoY
The engine is just the engine. Not everyone has to code for Nvidia's shaders but that ability is there for the taking. So if it is only optimized for Nvidia, they are going to be shooting themselves in the foot as far as sales go.

That doesn't seem like a wise business decision to me, then again... that is just my opinion. :D

I wouldn't call optimizing an engine for a graphics manufacturer which has over 50% of the market share shooting themselves in the foot. :D

bkswaney
05-12-03, 02:18 PM
For the most part yes it is.
But I've only been able to get into 2 site reviews so far.
All the sites are slow right now.

nVidi0t
05-12-03, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Shadowx
people wanted a 256 ddr2 card and ati deliverde they are the only one with that kind of card and this card will come out soon not june like nv35 but to launch it besides nv35, if they just wanted a 9800256 great but to pair it against the nv35 (and it held its own) why not up the core when you know it can do it very easylly and will have been a better competitor against nv new offering. i just seems stupid to me to get a card out to compete when you could have made it better atleast than your last high end product.

When did ATI deliver a 256mb DDR2 card? lol.

Shadowx
05-12-03, 02:24 PM
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/30657.html

9800 pro 256 ddr2

nVidi0t
05-12-03, 02:26 PM
It's not DDR2 :) that news site are pretty misinformed.