Who still wants to spend $400 on the GeForce FX?

[Corben9]

Ok who still wants to buy a GFFX after these reviews

[Smokey]

You should have also put, when the price goes down, as the list price of the 5800Ultra is the same as the 9700 was at launch, and the 5800Ultra is the better card! Its like saying, who is going to buy a Barton3000+ at $600+ :rolleyes:

[Hanners]

Originally posted by Smokey
... and the 5800Ultra is the better card!

That's hugely debatable...

[AnteP]

Originally posted by Smokey
You should have also put, when the price goes down, as the list price of the 5800Ultra is the same as the 9700 was at launch, and the 5800Ultra is the better card! Its like saying, who is going to buy a Barton3000+ at $600+ :rolleyes:

so worse FSAA quality and on par performance on avarage means that it's better? ;)

[Uttar]

I'll have to see, might want to wait for a price drop.
575 Euros is truly the maximum I'm going to pay for the Ultra... Too bad the starting price is 650 Euros :rolleyes:


Uttar

P.S. : I voted that my money goes for the FX, but I insist it's really a conditional statement. I'd like to have a third option to say my money goes to the FX once there's a price drop.

[ReDeeMeR]

Even if the prices were equal of both, I would still consider ATI radeon with it's higher image quality rather then FX with it's poorer quality and heatsink that wont let you sleep @ night if you d/l something even if PC is downstairs lol

+ no overclocking, because it will eventualy set itself to even slower clocks if it gets hot - OMG what a peace of crapola.

+ power hungry hoe, needs 350PSU lmao.

+ forget one of your pci slots, orrr even buy a new mobo because FX ass wouldnt fit in your current one ;)

+ Hot hot hot, even with the air going out it's still way to hot, making poorer cpu and memory o/c, this card BLOWS.

I picked up a nice quote from Voodooextreme:

"Blows, Screams and Sucks" :D

Now I'm probably still good ol nvidiot, but I like seeing Nvidia finaly choking up because they sat in the throne for so long and became sloppy.

[McTurok]

I just bought a Sapphire 9700 NP.

Working great without a new install of 2000 Pro.

But going to wipe that out and install XP Pro this week.

[LiquidX]

I fully agree ReDeeMer. I am out of the mix however because of that 350watt requirement. I can survive with a Radeon 9700 PRO even though I prefer the big "N". $280 is a deal on card which barely looses to card comeing out 6months later. That is just not right. I can just imagine the 9800 and 9900.

[YeuEmMaiMai]

thank God I did not wait for the NV30 I wound up getting a 9500Pro and it is a very nice edition to my PC

[Uttar]

For the IQ, I'd really suggest you all wait.

My guess is that the AA IQ is just a driver bug. The Aniso IQ problems, however, seem more serious.
I think nVidia is going to make an intermediary mode between Balanced & Performance, with IQ pretty much similar to the 8X Performance of the Radeon 9700 Pro. Because right now, "Aggressive" IQ is lower than that and "Balanced" IQ is higher than that.
So poor nVidia sure isn't lucky there... But then again, their algorithm for "Aggressive" is WAY too aggressive. And they should be kinda punished for not figuring that out earlier IMO.

Performance, however, won't be influenced by that ( beside a slight Aniso performance increase if nVidia creates that mode and reviewers accept to use it instead of Balanced )
If we get performance increases, it'll be by significantly more traditional methods.

Uttar

[Nv40]

is there is an option for the GeforceFX-2 (nv35) ? :D

i have a geforce4 ,that woks great on all my games ..
not at the highest settings possible , but i think
1600x1200 + AF 2x-8x is pretty decent ..
for all the games i play... ;)

however Doom3 (something tells me :angel2: )
that will require an upgrade .. thats when i would like
to upgrade my entire PC ,and when the NV35 wil be available...

[Daelemans_G]

I guess I'm not alone in my disappointment this morning (duh). That Ti 4600 looks like it still has some time left in the ole' system. As for the FX, I'm on the fence and will wait 'til the drivers mature (if at all), and see if the price drops after a few months...and who knows what ATI will have in the ring by then.


...perhaps nVidia moved their best talent over to the nforce2 development - cause that is one nice piece of work.

[Smokey]

Originally posted by AnteP
so worse FSAA quality and on par performance on avarage means that it's better? ;)

Um yeah ok :rolleyes: Like the 9700 performance was super straight out of the box! You know this sort of reminds me of the GF3 previews/reviews, performance increase and stability was soon nailed down. The performance of the GF-FX will improve, and very quickly, then come back and put down this card, that has been judged not even on a retail board and early drivers, again :rolleyes:

[AnteP]

Originally posted by Smokey
Um yeah ok :rolleyes: Like the 9700 performance was super straight out of the box! You know this sort of reminds me of the GF3 previews/reviews, performance increase and stability was soon nailed down. The performance of the GF-FX will improve, and very quickly, then come back and put down this card, that has been judged not even on a retail board and early drivers, again :rolleyes:

Yeah the 9700 Pro WAS super out the box, go refresh your memory with the previews.

And it might remind you of the GF3 review but that doesn't mean much to those in touch with reality who realize the fact that nVidias card is soo damn late because of manufacturing problems that they've had MONTHS to produce good drivers for it, something that the GF3 (nor the R300 for that matter) never had.

Besides if you've even bothered to read the previews you'd probably realize that it's not only in practice that the FX FSAA is worse, it's also in theory.
It doesn't even have anything beyond 4x MSAA for gods sake.
That's not even mentioning that it doesn't have Rotated Grid when you do anything beyond 2x FSAA etc.

Besides how much quality and how much performance do you really think a driver will bring?
GeForce FX (http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA0MzYyMDg1OTVjVVNkMzFISXhfNV8xM 19sLmpwZw==)
Radeon 9700 Pro (http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA0MzYyMDg1OTVjVVNkMzFISXhfNV8xN F9sLmpwZw==)

That's a 130% performance lead on R300s part and of course the obviously better AA (look at the "lines" in the background for the best examples)

[legion88]

I voted no.

I always buy the fastest video card available. However, the GF FX is not worth the price tag of $399 compared to the current competition. You get a measely small percentage increase in performance (a noticeable drop in some cases) for $100 more when purchasing the FX.

[Smokey]

Originally posted by AnteP
Yeah the 9700 Pro WAS super out the box, go refresh your memory with the previews.

And it might remind you of the GF3 review but that doesn't mean much to those in touch with reality who realize the fact that nVidias card is soo damn late because of manufacturing problems that they've had MONTHS to produce good drivers for it, something that the GF3 (nor the R300 for that matter) never had.

Besides if you've even bothered to read the previews you'd probably realize that it's not only in practice that the FX FSAA is worse, it's also in theory.
It doesn't even have anything beyond 4x MSAA for gods sake.
That's not even mentioning that it doesn't have Rotated Grid when you do anything beyond 2x FSAA etc.

Besides how much quality and how much performance do you really think a driver will bring?
GeForce FX (http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA0MzYyMDg1OTVjVVNkMzFISXhfNV8xM 19sLmpwZw==)
Radeon 9700 Pro (http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA0MzYyMDg1OTVjVVNkMzFISXhfNV8xN F9sLmpwZw==)

That's a 130% performance lead on R300s part and of course the obviously better AA (look at the "lines" in the background for the best examples)

Silly me, I forgot that they could develop drivers for months without the product :rolleyes: Nothing beyond 4xFSAA again :rolleyes: I myself have found a resolution "above" 1024*768. Oh btw, didnt you find it strange to say the least, that 1280 w/ 4xFSAA + 8x aniso the fps on the 9700 in UT2003 are bad to say the least (same for the GF-FX ;) ) yet @ 1024 w/ 6xFSAA + 16xaniso the fps are above 60fps!!!
As for judging the quality from SS, for me this is mute, why? Because I will never compare FSAA screenshots, unless both ss are taken at exactly the same pixel and this should be obvious as to why.

[lagadu]

Originally posted by Smokey
Silly me, I forgot that they could develop drivers for months without the product :rolleyes:
yes they can. they already have testing systems of the card working the khz range, configured like every little transistor in the chip, so yeah they can develop drivers a rather large amount of months before they actually have the final taped out chip in their hands.

[The One]

i wonder if you can water cool the geforece fx it might get a little boost if it ram much cooler . i think it take a performance hit running to hot

[Smokey]

Originally posted by lagadu
yes they can. they already have testing systems of the card working the khz range, configured like every little transistor in the chip, so yeah they can develop drivers a rather large amount of months before they actually have the final taped out chip in their hands.

I never said that they didnt have a moc up, but it is fact the the first tap outs were buggy. Fact, you cannot make super drivers on buggy hardware. Fact, you would need to use some workarounds when using that buggy hardware. And to add to your theory shall we say, then ATI had plenty of time for perfect drivers before going retail with the 9700 also :rolleyes:

[lagadu]

yes they did, and i bought the 9700pro as soon as i could and guess what, it was perfect, i never had any issue at all with it, the FX has, nvidia themselves told that the 4xS mode was broken, and aparently so is the 2xAA mode. this never happened with the 9700pro.

[Gargr]

Im getting a DELTA CHROME
This card will rule them all :p

lol

[chubbysox]

I'm not sure I would even pay $200 or even $150 for this card since I can't stand fan noise and have built my system to be as quiet and cool as possible. Why did they have to use such a small high rpm fan on the cooling? Everyone knows that leads to the most annoying fan noise ever. That's all i need is a delta high rpm 60mm noise coming from my video card :mad: because I use to have one and man It drove me nuts after about 30 minutes of gaming. If this is the future of cooling for video cards I thinks I'm going to stick whit my ti4400 for quiet some time. If it wasn't for the fan noise and the super late release and the price per perfomance ratio this could of been a decent video card to pit against the 9700 pro but as it is now you have to be a huge nvidia fanboy or hold stocks in nvidia to try and defend this pile of doo as a -good- release.

[AnteP]

Originally posted by Smokey
Silly me, I forgot that they could develop drivers for months without the product :rolleyes: Nothing beyond 4xFSAA again :rolleyes: I myself have found a resolution "above" 1024*768. Oh btw, didnt you find it strange to say the least, that 1280 w/ 4xFSAA + 8x aniso the fps on the 9700 in UT2003 are bad to say the least (same for the GF-FX ;) ) yet @ 1024 w/ 6xFSAA + 16xaniso the fps are above 60fps!!!
As for judging the quality from SS, for me this is mute, why? Because I will never compare FSAA screenshots, unless both ss are taken at exactly the same pixel and this should be obvious as to why.

Ehmm, nVidias has had working SAMPLES for quite some time. Even though they had lots of problems with MASS production that doesn't mean that they couldn't produce samples.

Yeah I've also found a res beyond 1024
I actually enjoy gaming at 1600x1200 with 6x FSAA and 16x ANiso
and for those who can't use 1600 there's 1280
4x OGMS will not remove jaggies anywhere near what 6x RGMS does at mid res

and I appriciate your opinion on not comparing screenshots, I also think they did a pretty bad job
but that still doesn't tale away the fact that the differences here are quite extreme

just load up 8xs on your current GF3 or 4 and run some comparisons and you'll see which sollution is suporior
ATis 6x or nVidias 8x

as for ATi having as much time to spend on driver before launch, hello who are you kidding
was ATi 4-6 months late?

[Smokey]

Originally posted by AnteP
Ehmm, nVidias has had working SAMPLES for quite some time. Even though they had lots of problems with MASS production that doesn't mean that they couldn't produce samples.

Yeah I've also found a res beyond 1024
I actually enjoy gaming at 1600x1200 with 6x FSAA and 16x ANiso
and for those who can't use 1600 there's 1280
4x OGMS will not remove jaggies anywhere near what 6x RGMS does at mid res

and I appriciate your opinion on not comparing screenshots, I also think they did a pretty bad job
but that still doesn't tale away the fact that the differences here are quite extreme

just load up 8xs on your current GF3 or 4 and run some comparisons and you'll see which sollution is suporior
ATis 6x or nVidias 8x

as for ATi having as much time to spend on driver before launch, hello who are you kidding
was ATi 4-6 months late?

Firstly unless I am wrong, ATI had a working sample which was used to demo DoomIII was it not? Still a few months before the card was released, games were having driver problems at least until the cat3 drivers, still dont know if that has fixed the problem with Ravenshield? The GF3/GF4 were not designed to use 8X FSAA, just like the 8500, try playing Ravenshield on a 8500w64mb ram, all settings high @1280*1024 w 4X FSAA or even 2x.

As for you playing games @ 1600*1200 w/6xFSAA + 16x aniso, I dont know which games, certainly not UT2003, Ravenshield, Splintercell.....

Anyways, the Geforce FX has shown up here in France for €599 (http://www.grosbill.fr/index.php3?id=6141&site=kelkoo)

The Terratec GeforceFX Ultra, comes with UT2003 + Splintercell

All I need to do is wait for the price to come down ;)

[Steppy]

Originally posted by Smokey
Firstly unless I am wrong, ATI had a working sample which was used to demo DoomIII was it not? Still a few months before the card was released, games were having driver problems at least until the cat3 drivers, still dont know if that has fixed the problem with Ravenshield? The GF3/GF4 were not designed to use 8X FSAA, just like the 8500, try playing Ravenshield on a 8500w64mb ram, all settings high @1280*1024 w 4X FSAA or even 2x.

As for you playing games @ 1600*1200 w/6xFSAA + 16x aniso, I dont know which games, certainly not UT2003, Ravenshield, Splintercell.....

Anyways, the Geforce FX has shown up here in France for €599 (http://www.grosbill.fr/index.php3?id=6141&site=kelkoo)

The Terratec GeforceFX Ultra, comes with UT2003 + Splintercell

All I need to do is wait for the price to come down ;) Unless I am wrong, Nvidia did have a card that was used to demo their FX demos on that german site a couple months ago did they not?(You know, the rusting truck demo...etc, I remember people commenting on it crashing)