nv35 still the fastest card in 3dmark with 330?

[Nv40]

when AA/AF is on .. at 1600 x1200 it looks like the extra
bandwidth in the Nv35 does it job .. in the 330 patch using Fp32 the one
that put everything "right on track" .

http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-1107-404-21217902.html

[reever2]

Your point being....?

[Gar]

Originally posted by Nv40
when AA/AF is on .. at 1600 x1200 it look like the extra
bandwidth in the Nv35 does it job .. in the 330 patch using Fp32 the one
that put everything "right on track" .

http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-1107-404-21217902.html

Keep digging...

[john19055]

What about at 1024x768 what does the FX5900ultra do.

[bkswaney]

Originally posted by john19055
What about at 1024x768 what does the FX5900ultra do.

There is no point in running a 5900 at 1024. It does not show it's true HP till u crank it up.

The 5800 ultra beat the 5900 at 1024. The higher clock speed come into play.

[muzz]

Is that still allowing the 16 bit cheat?

Obviously the clipping planes cheat is gone.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by muzz
Is that still allowing the 16 bit cheat?

Obviously the clipping planes cheat is gone.

No, 3dmark03 330 doesn't allow the drivers to detect the app and use optimizations.

[Nv40]

Originally posted by muzz
Is that still allowing the 16 bit cheat?

Obviously the clipping planes cheat is gone.


nope.. patch 330 runs everything in Nv3x cards without optimizations ..
or hacks ,with Fp32 as precision . what you see there is the "legal" way
according with 3dmark. there is a huge drop in Nv3x performance..
but is nice to see still manage a good score .

[Dazz]

Originally posted by Nv40
when AA/AF is on .. at 1600 x1200 it looks like the extra
bandwidth in the Nv35 does it job .. in the 330 patch using Fp32 the one
that put everything "right on track" .

http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-1107-404-21217902.html Well i don't know with the 'cheating' drivers it kicks ass but with the 330 patch it is tied with the Radeon 9800Pro unless you think 60 extra points is opening a can of w00pass?

[bkswaney]

Originally posted by Dazz
Well i don't know with the 'cheating' drivers it kicks ass but with the 330 patch it is tied with the Radeon 9800Pro unless you think 60 extra points is opening a can of w00pass?

Yes but in most games the 5900 really does kick ass. :)
Like UT2003. :D

[MrNasty]

These numbers would actually mean somthing if the nv30s image quality wasent so piss poor. ATi > *

[PreservedSwine]

LOL- so which is it this time?

Nvidia is cheating ay 3Dm03; nVidiot response: 3dM03 is a crappy bench, it means nothing test games!

Nvidia is not cheating in 3dM03, but wins; nVidiot response: LOOK Nvidia RULES, they have the best card b/c it wins 3dM03!

This is great- keep up the fine work!:D

[MrNasty]

Here is some evidence that Nivida is STILL degrading image quality in 3dmark03 to gain more performance than ATI !

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/radeon/herc-r9800-r7500.html

For those of us with keen eyes and a taste for quality, ATI is the only way to fly.

[Rogozhin]

BKswankey

From the review of at hards and exteme tech it seems the UT2003 score fluxuate between the two cards and that it's hard to say who is faster in that game BUT the 9800 kick the snot out of the 5900 in SC and W3.


rogo

[Skuzzy]

Guys, you have to know that whenever you enter a thread that NV40 has started, you are in for nothing but praise and admiration for NVidia.

I only say this for the unsuspecting, to prevent Pepsi from being spewed on monitors or through the nose. :D

Nothing personal NV40, but that appears to be your pattern.

[Solomon]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Guys, you have to know that whenever you enter a thread that NV40 has started, you are in for nothing but praise and admiration for NVidia.

I only say this for the unsuspecting, to prevent Pepsi from being spewed on monitors or through the nose. :D

Nothing personal NV40, but that appears to be your pattern.

LOL! Doesn't the screen name say it all as well? Hehe.

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

[solofly]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Guys, you have to know that whenever you enter a thread that NV40 has started, you are in for nothing but praise and admiration for NVidia.

I only say this for the unsuspecting, to prevent Pepsi from being spewed on monitors or through the nose. :D

Nothing personal NV40, but that appears to be your pattern.

What are you talking about!? This place/site is dedicated to nVidia and anything else is off topic.

NV40 keep up the good work!

[Nv40]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Guys, you have to know that whenever you enter a thread that NV40 has started, you are in for nothing but praise and admiration for NVidia.

I only say this for the unsuspecting, to prevent Pepsi from being spewed on monitors or through the nose. :D

Nothing personal NV40, but that appears to be your pattern.


and in what way you comments change my observations in this post?

is the same thing again and again .when people doesnt have anything interesting to say ,they always look for ways to change the original disscussion. :)

[extreme_dB]

What AF setting is the NV35 at though? We already know the 4xAA isn't a direct comparison at all...

ATI should add a second label to their settings for "NV-comparison mode". :)

Nvidia has an advantage in AF quality, but with ATI's 16x AF many games will appear equal or better on the ATI based on the predominant angles of the environment.

Don't be fooled by Nvidia's "texture sharpening", since that only raises the AF setting one level to make tweaking easier for people who don't know what AF is. At 8x AF, it does nothing.

The NV35 has superior FP precision that's useful for professional work, but for games it will always be inferior to maintain performance. The performance advantage gained is only marginal, but then again, the quality difference between FP24 and FP16 will most likely be marginal as well, unless high-precision is truly required as in HDR lighting.

By the way, questions have been raised about Nvidia cheating in the Antalus flyby, but that remains to be seen.

Sorry to everyone for rehashing the same tired info, but NV40 never seems to learn. :D

[Nv40]

Originally posted by extreme_dB
What AF setting is the NV35 at though? We already know the 4xAA isn't a direct comparison at all...

ATI should add a second label to their settings for "NV-comparison mode". :)

Nvidia has an advantage in AF quality, but with ATI's 16x AF many games will appear equal or better on the ATI based on the predominant angles of the environment.

By the way, questions have been raised about Nvidia cheating in the Antalus flyby, but that remains to be seen.




the game of equal comparisons works in the other way too..

ATi AF should be set to 16x and Nvidia in 8x.. since we already know
the shortcuts that ATI does in ANisoF. and since Nvidia is using 32bits more than ATI 96bits, a more real comparison will be Nvidia without AA/AF settings and ATI with all their settings to the high.. since is obviously Nvidia is rendering more and using a lot more precision and IQ . and dont be
fooled with texturing sharpening ,it does an excelent job with IQ . ;)

[extreme_dB]

There are two problems there NV40:

First, the point is to make the IQ as equal as possible to compare performance. Nvidia's 4xAA is similar to ATI's 2xAA. ATI's 4xAA is too far ahead. Your proposal to compare no AA/AF on Nvidia with high AA/AF on ATI is therefore ridiculous. :)

If you look at 2 screens and have a hard time seeing the quality difference, then the comparison can be considered fair, right? Is my suggestion for 4xAA vs 2xAA fair? How about your suggestion for no AA/AF against high AA/AF? :p

Second, there's 2 categories for FP precision: high and low, or full and half. FP32 and FP24 are both high, and FP16 is low. One category meets the DX9 standard, and the other does not. We want to compare "similar" quality, so which is more fair: high against high, where Nvidia's is superior, or high against low, where ATI's is superior?

In all these reviews, ATI is hanging right up there with Nvidia in performance even though it's doing "more work". If Nvidia was doing more work, then ATI would dominate the benchmarks! So you see, you have to give a little credit to ATI this time around. :)

My point is that it's not really fair to claim that the 5900Ultra is the fastest overall based on those kinds of benchmarks.

[NickSpolec]

the game of equal comparisons works in the other way too..

ATi AF should be set to 16x and Nvidia in 8x.. since we already know
the shortcuts that ATI does in ANisoF. and since Nvidia is using 32bits more than ATI 96bits, a more real comparison will be Nvidia without AA/AF settings and ATI with all their settings to the high.. since is obviously Nvidia is rendering more and using a lot more precision and IQ . and dont be
fooled with texturing sharpening ,it does an excelent job with IQ

Uhh.....

Ok, so what your bizarre and flawed logic is trying to say is..

Because Radeon's uses 96Bit (FP24), and GeForce FX's use 128bit (FP32) for percision, then the Radeon's should be benched with full features on (full AF/AA), while the GFFX's are benched with 0 (zero) features turned on?

Do you smoke so much "Nvidia-issued crack" that this is your train of thought? And you BELIEVE it?

Ok, so.. theoretically, let's say that FP32 DOES provide such a leap in visual quality over FP24 that to get the quality of FP32 on FP24 you have to run in with full AA/AF (obviously the most outrageous idea ever posted)... What games actually use FP24 or FP32 TODAY to test this out?

Obviously, you need to be smacked in the face with a hatchet if you think that when the GFFX's uses FP32 (very slowly, mind you)
it equals the quality of an FP24 Radeon running with full AA/AF...

edit by StealthHawk: now, now, let's not circumvent the swear filter. And watch the personal insults....I'm watching this thread ;)

[Skuzzy]

I have plenty to say on this topic NV40, but I learned a long time ago that it is a waste of time to address people with blind bias, supported by ignorant or out of context data.
People that repeatedly get proven wrong and never admit it, are not worth my time.

[John Reynolds]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
I have plenty to say on this topic NV40, but I learned a long time ago that it is a waste of time to address people with blind bias, supported by ignorant or out of context data.
People that repeatedly get proven wrong and never admit it, or not worth my time.

Word, baby, word! Regurgitating erroneous data out of some zealot-like desire to constantly support a particular IHV rather than just being a fan of computing technology in general does no one any good.

[digitalwanderer]

Originally posted by NickSpolec
Uhh.....

Ok, so what your bizarre and flawed logic is trying to say is..

Because Radeon's uses 96Bit (FP24), and GeForce FX's use 128bit (FP32) for percision, then the Radeon's should be benched with full features on (full AF/AA), while the GFFX's are benched with 0 (zero) features turned on?

Do you smoke so much "Nvidia-issued crack" that this is your train of thought? And you BELIEVE it?

Ok, so.. theoretically, let's say that FP32 DOES provide such a leap in visual quality over FP24 that to get the quality of FP32 on FP24 you have to run in with full AA/AF (obviously the most outrageous idea ever posted, you sir, are a dumbf*ck)... What games actually use FP24 or FP32 TODAY to test this out?

Obviously, you need to be smacked in the face with a hatchet if you think that when the GFFX's uses FP32 (very slowly, mind you)
it equals the quality of an FP24 Radeon running with full AA/AF...



P.S. Lord, why do you make such morons?
Oh good lord that made me spit some fine java on me monitor! :lol:

On subject....YES! The nv35 IS the fastest card in the whole frigging universe! Go buy one NOW! No, buy TWO...no THREE!!! That way you can have some REAL bragging rights!

Man, my penis sure feels small with just this lowly 9700 Pro... :(