Was the FX series a failure?

[Rollo]

The FX series was certainly inferior to R3xxx. I think the series was Nvidia's worst to date. It allowed ATI to catch up to Nvidia and surpass it.
Hmmm. What do you do Pantherman? Are you the best in the world now, and have been since you've been doing it?
If not, are you a failure?


It was definitely a bump for Nvidia. DX9 games had to be highly optimized for NV3x to get any kind of decent performance.
Which games were those Pantherman?

the 6800 series works much better with shader-intensive games and doesn't need such optimizations.
That's usually the way it works, things get better as time goes by. :rolleyes:

I guess calling the FX series a failure may be somewhat drastic, but it certainly can't be called a complete success.
Neither can you be called a complete success, most likely. If the 5800U was a "failure" as the second best achievement of it's kind, I wonder what your parents think of you, wallowing in the middle of the pack?

Nvidia lost the crown to ATI and who can forget the dismal FX 5800 Ultra. THAT card was definitely a complete failure
Nice how you come on the nVidia fan board and flame away at a card many of us hold near and dear to our hearts. (unlike the utterly boring 9700P/9800Ps we all had as well)

What do you do when you're not here? Post pro Nazi propaganda on Jewish discussion forums? :rolleyes:

I started this post to get people thinking about the FX series and how Nvidia has bounced back with the 6800.
No you posted it because you're an immature lil' fella and you wanted to anger people and stir up controversy. :lame:

I personally had a 5900 nu in one of my systems. I liked its performance in OpenGL and DX9 games, but I knew its time was over when Far Cry came out.
Perhaps you should consider the feelings of those who lack your means to buy a new card when they get a game that doesn't run great on their backup computer. :rolleyes:

The FX 5950 Ultra was the only FX series card worth anything.
So says the oracle of all knowledge video. :angel2:

[aAv7]

The FX was surely not a success.....which means in corporate money making America, if it didnt succeed...it failed.

The 52/5600 were garbage. Nvidia had problems with the high-end sector and didnt focus enough on the mid-range until it was too late. The 5600nu and U were getting their butts handed to them by ti 4200 and 4600's. That isnt good buisness. Especially when you try to tout " dx9 ready" ...to justify the purchase of a mid range solution over the previous generations best. It's bad because their touting of dx9 was a shot to their foot. It couldnt handle dx9 at all and to be blunt..still cant.

The 5800 was too warm, too big, too loud, too slow, too late.

The 5900 ran cooler, quieter and was pushed out the door immediatlely...but still lacked performance.

When the competition has a card that kills your card at the same price range-it's considered failure.. And the only reason to NOT get a 9800 pro over a 5900 is due to being a fan of a company. Which is fine if thats your thing-but the FX line was a failure-nvidia suffered tons of cheating allegations, their cards ran at only 4 pipelines...not the 8 claimed, and games like tomb raider : aod, far cry, halo, flight simulator 04, and other dx9 titles also didnt help the credibility of the card. Jen himself said it was a failure-isnt that proof enough? I dropped my 5900nu like a bad habit and jumped right for a 9800 pro. Best choice I made last cycle.

The nv40 is a much better product...but nvidia still has a dark cloud hanging over their head from the FX line-which also points to it being a failure.

[grimreefer]

my 5950 ($280 5900nu flashed to 5950, overclocked to 550core 1.00mem, at the time i bought it, the 9800xt was 499) pwns in doom 3........
550 core with 8x0 ...... 1280x1024 ultra 8xaf, 25-40 fps
i think it can match a stock x800pro in doom3......
but what do i know...im a fanboi

[ChrisRay]

Its interesting. Makes me wonder how many people actually owned the FX line, Rather than pretending they did.

[Pantherman]

Every company will have its share of "hits" and "misses." That's just the way things are in this business. ATI had its share of misses until the 9700 Pro came along. Nvidia was working magic until the FX came out. Nvidia came out with an entirely new architecture with the 6800 series while ATI continued the R3xx legacy with the X800 Pro and XT. Nvidia definitely has a winner on its hands with the 6 series.

As for the immature rantings and petty jealousies of some on this board, I say GROW UP!!!!! I'm not trying to show up anyone here. While I have two systems with 6800 GTs, I'm not trying to show off to anyone. My systems are hardly "state-of-the-art" anyway. Don't always assume that someone's motives are bad.

The bottom line is that Nvidia is back and has proven to be a real competitor.
The FX series is now in the past. Soon the 6600 GT will be released and everyone will be able to use the 6 series technology. That's certainly good news. Let's see how ATI responds to this new product.

[ChrisRay]

Every company will have its share of "hits" and "misses." That's just the way things are in this business. ATI had its share of misses until the 9700 Pro came along. Nvidia was working magic until the FX came out. Nvidia came out with an entirely new architecture with the 6800 series while ATI continued the R3xx legacy with the X800 Pro and XT. Nvidia definitely has a winner on its hands with the 6 series.

As for the immature rantings and petty jealousies of some on this board, I say GROW UP!!!!! I'm not trying to show up anyone here. While I have two systems with 6800 GTs, I'm not trying to show off to anyone. My systems are hardly "state-of-the-art" anyway. Don't always assume that someone's motives are bad.

The bottom line is that Nvidia is back and has proven to be a real competitor.
The FX series is now in the past. Soon the 6600 GT will be released and everyone will be able to use the 6 series technology. That's certainly good news. Let's see how ATI responds to this new product.


The FX card in my system and the FX cards still being sold disagree with this assertion. Nvidias continued support of the card does as well. It's not like Nvidia is going to bury the cards existence.

[Cota]

It's not like Nvidia is going to bury the cards existence.

but yes it will.

Most probably by the end of the year nvidia will replace the complete FX line with nv 4x cards. Just like they did when the FX series replaced all the previous line up.

[grimreefer]

Its interesting. Makes me wonder how many people actually owned the FX line, Rather than pretending they did.
was that comment directed at me?
cause i actually own one?(who lies about owning a 5950, if i were gonna lie, i would say i have a 6800u, and a 3.4ee@ 4.0ghz)

[ChrisRay]

but yes it will.

Most probably by the end of the year nvidia will replace the complete FX line with nv 4x cards. Just like they did when the FX series replaced all the previous line up.


Thats a little bit of the obvious cota, Of a course future generation will replace the last, But the FX line is still recieving support from Nvidia, It's still being sold. So long as there is a supply they will still sell them. Last I heard they have a ton of chips still on backorder. The New drivers dont hurt the FX series,

The idea that the FX series is being buried is preposterous, So lets please not make master of the obvious statements, in an effort to correct a statement taken way out of context.

[-=DVS=-]

This is debatable , other companys with total failure also support and sell cards that doesn't make them winers ! XGI sell they cards even if they are crap :rolleyes:
(Noone specifyed what is a Failure)
So yes you can say none of the cards is a failure they do run games , maybe even at playable 30FPS or more + , but if competition runs it twice as fast its pretty obvious one is better.

Situation is same when we compare Nvidias FX series with Atis R300.
Both cards can run games at acceptable 30FPS in any DX9 games so does that make them both winers ? :D
1 != 2 , there can't be two winers one must be Successor other a Failure :POKE: see my point Chris

Its realy easy to compare FX to R300 , would be harder with X800 and 6800.

[Arevires]

I do indeed believe that the FX series was a failure. Nvidia was getting beat at all the different segments of the market. The AA was seriously lacking compared to the competition. (Though some may disagree on this point) The card was great at playing older games but the card should have been playing the DX 9 games (the few that were on the market) and not DX 8.1 games. If the FX series were the only cards on the market they would have been great cards but compared to ATI the FX series were lackluster.

[ChrisRay]

This is debatable , other companys with total failure also support and sell cards that doesn't make them winers ! XGI sell they cards even if they are crap :rolleyes:
(Noone specifyed what is a Failure)
So yes you can say none of the cards is a failure they do run games , maybe even at playable 30FPS or more + , but if competition runs it twice as fast its pretty obvious one is better.

Situation is same when we compare Nvidias FX series with Atis R300.
Both cards can run games at acceptable 30FPS in any DX9 games so does that make them both winers ? :D
1 != 2 , there can't be two winers one must be Successor other a Failure :POKE: see my point Chris

Its realy easy to compare FX to R300 , would be harder with X800 and 6800.



I'm sure you can find all sorts of XGI cards for sale DVS, Go find me one for sale. Who said this was about winning or losing? You seem to be under this false premise that success verses failure has anything to do with winning and losing.


Success:

The achievement of something desired, planned, or attempted: attributed their success in business to hard work.


Failure:

The condition or fact of not achieving the desired end or ends


Win:

To achieve victory or finish first in a competition


Lose:


To not achieve victory or finish first in a competition



(obviously there are multiple meanings in the english language but these are the most relevent)



The FX series fits into the category of a loss to the competition. Not as a "failure". You keep clammering on about ATIS success and recording Nvidias loss as a failure. It's just doesnt work that way. Your argument is not really relevent DVS because you are trying to compare two different semantics to an obviously different issue.

I dont think you will find many people here arguing that the FX series was superior to the r300 in every concievable way, Tho some might argue there a few points about the FX series that were. They sold, And they have sold fairly well. They are still selling. They are well supported by the Nvidia driver team. I hardly call that a "Failure"

[-=DVS=-]

Heh what do you mean it doesn't work that way wasn't companys goal to be first , they obviously didn't succeed :wong: to be first , that would be category of ( Failure , Looser )

Offcourse maybe you work for Nvidia and know what they goal was , maybe it was to sell some cards, in that case sure they succeeded and i was wrong :rolleyes:

And XGI card are available some people brought some , there was a thread i think Rage3d with webpage .

[ChrisRay]

Heh what do you mean it doesn't work that way wasn't companys goal to be first , they obviously didn't succeed :wong: to be first , that would be category of ( Failure , Looser )

Offcourse maybe you work for Nvidia and know what they goal was , maybe it was to sell some cards, in that case sure they succeeded and i was wrong :rolleyes:

And XGI card are available some people brought some , there was a thread i think Rage3d with webpage .



I think calling the FX line a failure is a bit childish and premature yes. And no, I dont think Failure and Loser belong in the same category, How do you know the FX 5900 Ultra/5800U werent what they were made to be?

Yes I know XGI cards are available. But from a sales standpoint? Nvidia sold alot of graphic cards this year, Maybe not as many high end cards as they used too. But they arent hurting. And it's not they are have brought down by a product that didnt sell.

And eyerolls? Give me a break DVS. Cut it with rhetoric personal attacks. Throwing around silly replies like "Do you work for Nvidia" adds nothing useful to the conversation.

[Kamel]

i think a lot of you are missing a very vital point... at the time these big boys were up in the $400 range... you say "the ati series were better", but that doesn't mean if i get a $200 5900xt that's slower than the ati cards that it's a bad deal. basically what i'm trying to emphasize is that it's value for money. sure a dodge viper can't outrun a mclauren f1, but that dont mean the dodge viper is any less successful than the mlf1. actually, the viper has made more money than the mf1, because at $1M a pop, not many own a mclaurenf1.

that's the point i'm making. ati did not offer a competatively priced answer to the 5900xt... allbeit the other cards they had were better than the even more expensive nvidia cards, the 5900xt was still a _great_ value. that's why the 5900xt was a success and the faster 5950u was IMO a failure. not because ati has better cards. of course, it's all a matter of preception. sure you can say the 9600xt was competition, but the 9600xt was darn expensive when it came out, you'd be better off getting the 9700pro at that time.

of course, i didn't follow the timeline of the entire release and the prices the entire time of it, so i only have like a small fragment of that time in a freeze frame in my memory, so your opinion on the issue might differ greatly from mine; though they could both be accurate.

[zakelwe]

I actually think that for nvidia the FX range was a failure, a failure to reach what they wanted ( to beat down a resurgent Ati ) but to the end user it was not really a failure because it played well.

The lack of performance over the previous generation was an issue though, I bought a 5200U, 5600U andd then 5700U and it was only the 5700U that outpaced my GF4 4400ti. All were playable though ,to be honest.

If you have a 6800 now though I think you can be glad that nvidia thought it a failure and decided to do better next time. Never pays to be lazy and nvidia are not lazy. Ati seem to have slipped a bit in this respect.

Regards

Andy

[Rollo]

As for the immature rantings and petty jealousies of some on this board, I say GROW UP!!!!! I'm not trying to show up anyone here. While I have two systems with 6800 GTs, I'm not trying to show off to anyone. My systems are hardly "state-of-the-art" anyway. Don't always assume that someone's motives are bad.

LOL- my don't you think a lot of yourself? Assuming others are "jealous" of you?

:lame:

Your post is assinine trolling is the reason I flamed you.

Your childish summarization of the video card industry adds nothing to the board, and is disrespectful of those here who own nV3X cards and those who have.

"Yes, nVidia was on top of the game until the nV30 brought them to their knees. The revelations of Shady Days showed us all how the 9700Pro would be a better DX9 card if HL2 ever comes out. nVidia lost the crown."

Your post reads like a sixth graders essay for a nightly homework assignment.
I'll grade it like they would have when I was in school, before we had to make everyone feel good:
C-: lacks specificity, over generalized, no examples.

(newb)

[MUYA]

Hey let's have a lot of needless pie throwing.....


Not!

Closed temporari;y...until MikeC decides to open it.