PDA

View Full Version : Well after reading some previews of the nV35


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

5150 Joker
05-12-03, 06:12 PM
I'm impressed that nVidia has finally managed to create a part that will be able to compete with ATi's highest offering. The doom 3 tests seem very subjective to me and I'll wait until ATi properly addresses the game with updated drivers. That said, I'll likely stick with ATi for now and upgrade when the R390 debuts. Although I must note that I'm disappointed that ATi did not pick up more market share with almost a year of dominance over nVidia. I would have liked to see a more equal split of the market since it would've helped facilitate better competition between the two companies.

GlowStick
05-12-03, 06:16 PM
How is the doom 3 tests subjective? Id stated they are done with the enigne, just working on content, and of course they are continualy tweaking for fixes/compability.

Doom 3 is a real game that has alot of Doom fans.

5150 Joker
05-12-03, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by GlowStick
How is the doom 3 tests subjective? Id stated they are done with the enigne, just working on content, and of course they are continualy tweaking for fixes/compability.

Doom 3 is a real game that has alot of Doom fans.


I think it's plainly obvious to anyone that the ATi drivers weren't ready for the game yet. Once they are and a proper review is done, then I'll take a more serious look at Doom 3 benchmarks.

digitalwanderer
05-12-03, 06:19 PM
...that the drivers Kyle had for the 9800 Pro weren't really optimized/aimed at/ready for the final build of Doom3 yet and the shiny-new Det5's are sort of designed for Doom3.

At least, that's what I thought he meant. :)

GlowStick
05-12-03, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by 5150 Joker
I think it's plainly obvious to anyone that the ATi drivers weren't ready for the game yet. Once they are and a proper review is done, then I'll take a more serious look at Doom 3 benchmarks.

Optimized for doom3? I thought optimzing was only done by the shifty nvidia finding ways to cheet in drivers.

since ATi has been powering all the doom3 screens and demo's so far, id say their drivers have been doom3 optimzied for quite some time. How could they not be?

Fusion
05-12-03, 07:03 PM
I think it's plainly obvious to anyone that the ATi drivers weren't ready for the game yet. Once they are and a proper review is done, then I'll take a more serious look at Doom 3 benchmarks.

Oh ?
Only "obvious", to ATI owners. Funny that.

And NVidia's are optimised ? And for a brand spanking new card thats not even out yet, up against a card thats been out for months ?

Yet it still manages to crush anything ATI have, lol. And thats not even with the fabled 50.xx drivers :D Just imagine when they optimise their new drivers for this baby.

Looks like my next purchase.

muzz
05-12-03, 07:04 PM
Under what path are they running GS?

Humus
05-12-03, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by GlowStick
since ATi has been powering all the doom3 screens and demo's so far, id say their drivers have been doom3 optimzied for quite some time. How could they not be?

DoomIII leak => Not getting latest builds as often or at all.

Shadowx
05-12-03, 07:17 PM
They probably are but not on the public cat drivers, but in house this game is going to come out 4-6 month from today, NV is just trying to make nv35 the doom 3 card but ati migth have a newer card for that title, so why have doom3 ready drivers in todays cats. Ofcourse if they knew what nvidia wanted to do with the doom 3 benchmarks to hype nv35 and did nothing, they either dont have stable drivers ready or think that before nv 35 comes out (june) they will have better drivers or card

GlowStick
05-12-03, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by Humus
DoomIII leak => Not getting latest builds as often or at all.

LOL

Wait, im sure JC is purposly sabatoging the Doom3 engine so it will not run well on ATi cards, yeah thats it!

The Radeon 9800Pro 256MB is actually faster than the Gf 5900Ultra by aproxmitly 25 to 50% accross the board. This is not reflected via 3dmark03 nor Games because of hacked drivers, and IMAGE quality!

Meanwhile, even if it is ture that the Leak came from ATi it wont reflect them getting builds to test for compatability.

DivotMaker
05-12-03, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by GlowStick

The Radeon 9800Pro 256MB is actually faster than the Gf 5900Ultra by aproxmitly 25 to 50% accross the board. This is not reflected via 3dmark03 nor Games because of hacked drivers, and IMAGE quality!


Do what? Across WHAT board? Your comment makes no sense whatsoever. Even with 3.4 Catalyst drivers, the Radeon 256 is not anywhere near what you claim it is. Wow...

digitalwanderer
05-12-03, 08:20 PM
Methinks there REALLY ain't enough evidence yet to determine which is the superior card, until people can actually buy an NV35 and we get a bit broader range of benchies on it with different driver sets/clocking/set-ups/etc that the jury is still gonna be out on this one for a while.

I'm not trying to defend EITHER side here, just stating a fact. It's ok for you two to disagree about which is better, but let's not get too nasty since there really ain't any way to prove who is right right now. :)

marcocom
05-12-03, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by GlowStick
Optimized for doom3? I thought optimzing was only done by the shifty nvidia finding ways to cheet in drivers.


nvidia optimizes their drivers one time and ACTUALLY declares to the public and says 'here are drivers that can do that lame benchmark, but what it takes to excel in the benchmark is a step backwards from what it takes to excel in a real game environment" , they actually publicly say that, then back it up with an official WHQL driver that even beats those with the same hardware...and you call it shifty and cheating.

exactly how am i cheating when i get over 5500 in 3dmark2003, again, on my FX5800Ultra? im not even overclocking this card.

what then is your score, sir?

GlowStick
05-12-03, 08:33 PM
I tried to use sarcasim but no one ever gets that one.

DivotMaker
05-12-03, 08:35 PM
Originally posted by digitalwanderer

I'm not trying to defend EITHER side here, just stating a fact. It's ok for you two to disagree about which is better, but let's not get too nasty since there really ain't any way to prove who is right right now. :)

I am not defending one side or the other, but the statement that the Radeon 9800 256 MB is "25-50% faster across the board over the FX 5900 Ultra" is just plain goofy. Benchmarks using Catalyst 3.4 drivers (at THG) bear this out. Both cards are EXCELLENT choices....you could not possibly go wrong with either one if you choose to spend that much money....

DivotMaker
05-12-03, 08:37 PM
Originally posted by GlowStick
I tried to use sarcasim but no one ever gets that one.

Well, have you ever heard of emoticons? Kinda hard to "read" sarcasm when you don't give any clue to such sarcasm.

Rogozhin
05-12-03, 08:44 PM
Bertha

You're wrong. THG used the cat 3.2s to bench the 9800 pro.

Plus

they aren't very reputable as a vga source.

rogo

GlowStick
05-12-03, 09:05 PM
Originally posted by 5150 Joker
I think it's plainly obvious to anyone that the ATi drivers weren't ready for the game yet. Once they are and a proper review is done, then I'll take a more serious look at Doom 3 benchmarks.

The drivers went optimzied, as stated by Anand him self

Here are some words of forewarning though; for starters, neither ATI nor NVIDIA gave us Doom3 optimized drivers to test with, we tested using the same drivers we used in all of our other tests (both drivers will be publicly available next week from ATI and NVIDIA). We actually ended up using ATI's Catalyst 3.2 instead of 3.4 for our Doom3 tests simply because the Catalyst 3.4 drivers we had were significantly slower in Doom3 and were much more unstable than the 3.2 release.

marcocom
05-12-03, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by GlowStick
I tried to use sarcasim but no one ever gets that one.

AH. sorry glow. im too damn snappish about it i guess.

GlowStick
05-12-03, 09:28 PM
wow, after reading Anand's review i feel very informed and he hinted at alot more stuff.

Example, he said he saw the NV35 'last year'.

I also like his benches of the 'new' 5600Pro, it seems to be VERY competative with the 9600pro.

The AF test is very good, and he explanes them insted of just posting some pictures and say "well, xxx won"

marcocom
05-12-03, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by BigBerthaEA
I am not defending one side or the other, but the statement that the Radeon 9800 256 MB is "25-50% faster across the board over the FX 5900 Ultra" is just plain goofy. Benchmarks using Catalyst 3.4 drivers (at THG) bear this out. Both cards are EXCELLENT choices....you could not possibly go wrong with either one if you choose to spend that much money....

ya...but their still not clear on whether or not the 256MB version of the 9800Pro will , in fact, be DDR2...which would possibly do it if implemented with a 256bit bus. SSSSSSSSSSmokin fast. (not that its enough for me to buy ATi but even i would start to question ATi and nvidia, darkness and light, good and evil...)

it would be pretty sad to see ATi get DDR2 right by doing what nvidia should have done and TAKEN THEIR TIME with the rollout and fab/sourcing issues while putting out a DDR1 solution that capitalized on the maturity of that ram subsystem.

so like...when ATi gets a giant cooler to keep their DDR2 stable...can i then be allowed to like my 5800Ultra cooling? (because i really actually like it..i must be screwed in the head but its just not that annoying to me at all. i even prefer it to any cooling i have every owned!)

Humus
05-12-03, 09:38 PM
Originally posted by GlowStick
LOL

Wait, im sure JC is purposly sabatoging the Doom3 engine so it will not run well on ATi cards, yeah thats it!

<snip>Some rubbish</snip>

Meanwhile, even if it is ture that the Leak came from ATi it wont reflect them getting builds to test for compatability.

That was not what I said. JC isn't sabotaging anything. But if ATi doesn't get builds as often or maybe not at all they have less chances of optimizing. If I were JC I wouldn't send builds as often to ATi after the leak (and yes, I got it confirmed from ATi themselves during my time there that they were to blame). Only if I would note a problem would I send a build. Partly due to distrust, but also as a way to punish them.

bkswaney
05-12-03, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by marcocom
nvidia optimizes their drivers one time and ACTUALLY declares to the public and says 'here are drivers that can do that lame benchmark, but what it takes to excel in the benchmark is a step backwards from what it takes to excel in a real game environment" , they actually publicly say that, then back it up with an official WHQL driver that even beats those with the same hardware...and you call it shifty and cheating.

exactly how am i cheating when i get over 5500 in 3dmark2003, again, on my FX5800Ultra? im not even overclocking this card.

what then is your score, sir?


Well Sir mine is higher than yours. " with a 5800 ultra" :angel: hehehe

I'm not sure where this other guy gets the 9800-256 is faster. :confused:
WOW I missed all those benches. :rolleyes:

bkswaney
05-12-03, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by marcocom
ya...but their still not clear on whether or not the 256MB version of the 9800Pro will , in fact, be DDR2...which would possibly do it if implemented with a 256bit bus. SSSSSSSSSSmokin fast. (not that its enough for me to buy ATi but even i would start to question ATi and nvidia, darkness and light, good and evil...)

it would be pretty sad to see ATi get DDR2 right by doing what nvidia should have done and TAKEN THEIR TIME with the rollout and fab/sourcing issues while putting out a DDR1 solution that capitalized on the maturity of that ram subsystem.

so like...when ATi gets a giant cooler to keep their DDR2 stable...can i then be allowed to like my 5800Ultra cooling? (because i really actually like it..i must be screwed in the head but its just not that annoying to me at all. i even prefer it to any cooling i have every owned!)


ATI Technologies Inc. (TSX: ATY, NASDAQ: ATYT) is now shipping its RADEON™ 9800 PRO visual processing unit (VPU) with 256MB of fast DDR-2 (double data rate-2) memory. The RADEON™ 9800 PRO 256MB –available in limited quantities to OEM, retail and online customers – is the most advanced 3D



What do u mean IF it's DDR2?

There DDR2 is only clocked at 350. That is why they do not need anykind of nice cooling.
If ati were trying to run the DDR2 at 1000 they would need a FlowFX. ;)
All the reviews today with the 256meg WAS a DDR2 9800.

Badash
05-12-03, 09:56 PM
That's the problem with ATI's driver's their never "ready". I had an 8500 that couldn't run any game bug free for quite some time after I bought it (and I'll never forget it). And seeing ATI"s cards tested at EA's compatibility labs I can tell you that when you boot up a pre release or released game nvidia's cards will play em while ATI's cards will always have some kind of artifact/bug and I mean ANY ati card from rage 128-9800pro. People just jumped on ATI's bandwagon when 9700 came out cause reviewers said "look it has the best 3dmark score". People are like lemmings. I honestly think ATI cards should be 30% cheaper and considered budget cards like SIS video cards. If a company comes out with a better performing, more stable graphics card than nVidia I'll buy it, I don't care if nVidia gets my money I don't own stock in it. But for now their the best overall. There's always pros and cons to any pc hardware otherwise they wouldn't make new ones. I just and to rant a bit becuase I remembered my 8500 when the reviewers said we'll have to assume the cat 3.4's weren't "ready" yet for Doom 3, whatever. :o