View Full Version : Ok Im not a happy camper
I just saw this on 3dmarks.
GRRRRRRRR (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1562697)
Mine is the one on the left:( Every thing is a perfect match and the Radeon 9800 pro beats my FX 5900 bad.:eek:
saturnotaku
11-18-03, 10:40 PM
Do your games play fine? If so, then quit yer bellyaching.
It plays them pretty well but sometimes I do see a slight stutter almost like something has hung it up for a second.
Is yer 5900 a Non-Ultra?
Why do you think a 5900 Non-Ultra is $220 or so and a 9800 Pro is $300? :confused:
Regards,
Taz
Yep Taz the non ultra one with 400/850 core and clock
saturnotaku you gotta take a chill pill a fact is a fact I just want to know why. Every thing is the same even more ram for me. I notice that My card in my CPU range scored nice for an FX5900 but that Radeon beat it bad was looking for an answer.
Anybody had problems with their soundblaset live card I wonder if thats a problem.
digitalwanderer
11-18-03, 11:04 PM
Uhm, could it be that the 9800 is simply a better card than 5900? :angel2:
ChrisRay
11-18-03, 11:07 PM
Uh All I see is a 9800 Pro results. 5900 Non Ultra really isnt able to be classified with a 9800 Pro anyway.
Originally posted by Line01
Yep Taz the non ultra one with 400/850 core and clock
Well... clock speed of the cards (between an ATi and an nVidia card) has little to do with it. When it comes to DX 9 stuff... an ATi card doesn't need as much clock, to beat nVidia. I understand you were specifiying the clockspeed of yer 5900 Non-Ultra, for clarity... just making sure you weren't getting hung up on a comparison of clocks between ATi and nVidia.
ATi has 8x1 pipes and FP 24 (The DX 9 standard).
nVidia has 4x2 pipes and FP 16 / 32 (Combo that don't work as well).
While your card may keep up / possibly spank a 9800 Pro in certain DX 8 applications and certain OpenGL applications... it'll get stomped "by default" on DX 9 applications (Unless the game was optimized for nVidia, or nvidia optimized their drivers for a paticular game).
Hence why a 5900 Non-Ultra is $220 and a 9800 Pro is $300. ;)
Hope that helped,
Taz
Mine was around 4400 His was around 5300. With everything equal but I had more memory.
It did Taz thinks:) For some reason I thought the FX 5900 was 8 pipeline
if I had known that I would not bought it.:( Because when I used modded drivers on my Radeon 9500 when it opened up the 8 pipelines it was a lot faster then in 4 pipeline mod even though it had only 64 megs.
digitalwanderer
11-18-03, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by Line01
Mine was around 4400 His was around 5300. With everything equal but I had more memory.
And different video cards, 3dm2k3 is kind of sensitive to that kind of thing. ;)
bah, run patch 320 or 330... :afro: :afro:
Just wait for the next set of Nvidia drivers, you will get 500-1000 mark boost :afro:
Originally posted by Line01
Mine is the one on the left
No it's not. That one is mine! It doesn't work that way. The one on the left is only your score when viewed on your computer. You have to post a screenshot for us to see what you are talking about or at least post a direct link to your score.
Ruined
You were right the new drivers kicked me up to within a 100 points or so off him. Now we know nvidia kicks out drivers like the crazy so I should catch him and pass him in a month or so.:) I went from 4400 to 5200
on the 03marks.::scarey: HeHe ATI be AFRAID
digitalwanderer
11-19-03, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by Line01
Ruined
You were right the new drivers kicked me up to within a 100 points or so off him. Now we know nvidia kicks out drivers like the crazy so I should catch him and pass him in a month or so.:) I went from 4400 to 5200
on the 03marks.::scarey: HeHe ATI be AFRAID
Seeing nVidia panicking to put out a beta set of drivers to get around the fairplay 3.40 patch don't make ATi afraid, it makes 'em mirthful! :lol:
Could you please post up a compare URL wtih these new drivers? I'm really curious. :angel:
Hellbinder
11-19-03, 06:43 PM
Wow amazing.. Nvidia released new drivers that reenable all their Cheats. Awesome..
We should all be afraid if that.. :rolleyes:
I only wish people actually were!
ChrisRay
11-19-03, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by Ruined
Just wait for the next set of Nvidia drivers, you will get 500-1000 mark boost :afro:
Or we could do something useful and stop supporting Futuremark. Ya I'm Somewhat hypocritical because I tested it last night,
I really wish 3dmark had never existed. For several reasons. And some of it is Nvidias Fault.
john19055
11-20-03, 10:31 AM
I was just wondering is that what you FSB is set at 66mhz,looking at the benchmark it says 66mhz and that don't look right.
Youguys all know this is just flamebait so why bother.
digitalwanderer
11-20-03, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by sxotty
Youguys all know this is just flamebait so why bother.
'Cause it's 50f outside in late November and I'm looking for just about any excuse to avoid going out and mowing the lawn. ;) (And I'm quickly running out of excuses! :eek: )
Rogozhin
11-20-03, 01:20 PM
"Or we could do something useful and stop supporting Futuremark."
I'm more inclined to stop supporting Nvidia-they're the spurious ones.
rogo
ChrisRay
11-20-03, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by Rogozhin
"Or we could do something useful and stop supporting Futuremark."
I'm more inclined to stop supporting Nvidia-they're the spurious ones.
rogo
I bet you dollars to pesos XGI optimises the hell out of 3dmark03, (They even said they had no problem doing optimising for benchmarks)
Rogozhin
11-20-03, 02:17 PM
Futuremark doesn't "optimize" for 3dmark2k3 but nvidia does -XGI is irrelevant.
rogo
ChrisRay
11-20-03, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by Rogozhin
Futuremark doesn't "optimize" for 3dmark2k3 but nvidia does -XGI is irrelevant.
rogo
How is a 3rd company optimising for 3dmark2k3 irrelevent? It further shows that the benchmark is compromisable.
Saying XGI's optimisations, and SiS, ect are irrelevent is like covering your ears and ignoring that it happens.
We'll wait and see what happens, But like I said. I'm a betting man and I'll take anyone on that bet that XGI is going to optimise for 3dmark03.
Rogozhin
11-20-03, 02:48 PM
"Or we could do something useful and stop supporting Futuremark."
You made the proposition to chose between supporting futuremark or Nvidia-and you said you chose nvidia because futuremark has been invalidated by the cheating of 3d companies-I think this is simply naive and therefore said that I'd rather support a benchmark that is trying level the playing field and not the PRIMARY cheating 3d company.
THis would be like saying the SCAA is a worthless piece of infrastructure because a green bean importer is trying to pass off blue lintong as blue mountain-I sure as hell wouldn't support the importer that's fleecing the public-I'd support the SCAA.
Rogo
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.