PDA

View Full Version : Digit-Life GeForce FX review


Pages : [1] 2

DSC
02-18-03, 06:13 AM
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/gffx-ref-p1.html

This is the English version of the huge 10 page IXBT review mentioned in a thread below.

Onde Pik
02-18-03, 08:15 AM
It puzzles me that they used both of the AF modes on the GFFX, but ONLY the very highest level of AF on the R9700P. I mean even if they thought that u needed 16xQ on the R to match the GFFX (which is preposterous) then why didnt they atleast TEST the other AF modes on the R9700P. I see no reason atall not to try both Q and P modes at both 8x and 16x.

The_KELRaTH
02-18-03, 08:17 AM
It's a long review and it all looked quite interesting till it came to page 6 and on.

Fancy testing the ATI 9700Pro's x16Quality (Trilinear AF) to Nvidias' NV30 x8 Aggressive (low Q bilinear AF) and Balanced (Hi Quality Bilinear).
Thats' no different than comparing A Ti4200 on a P3-1Ghz and on a P4-3.06 and being suprised that it runs faster on the P4!!

A more accurate test would be:
NV Aggressive v ATI Performance w/ low MipMap and low texture
NV Balanced v ATI Performance w/high quality MipMap and HQ textures
NV App v ATI Quality

Notice how they made no mention of the huge image quality advantage the 9700Pro has - just look at the detail level differences in the bottom half of those pics!

Serious Sam TSE - See visuals with x4AF and better (http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/gffx-ref-p10.html)

This review just shows there are far too many amateurs claiming to be professional reviewers

PreservedSwine
02-18-03, 10:17 AM
Yeah, it's a shame the reviewer wasn't familiar w/ how each cards settings matched IQ wise, and compared them that way as well.

Can't blame them though, who would have guessed the difference between the R9700's 4xFSAA would be comparable to Nvidia's 8Xfsaa?

ATI LoVeR 9700
02-18-03, 10:18 AM
They don't compare ATi's Performance AF. It's like taking 6xAA(ATi's, great quality) which would be 16xQ AF in this case vs nVidia's 4xAA(nVidia's poor quality) which would be 8xPerformanceAF for nVidia...

I guess the 9700 is just too fast with performance AF and looks too good. ;)

Do these reviewers sign a contract from nVidia saying "We will not embarass nVidia." ? :confused:

Hellbinder
02-18-03, 11:39 AM
Yet another complete Bull**** *review* from these guys. When they start showing that the GF4 has a higher Texel-Fillrate than the 9700pro based on their own cheesey program. I get off. It only goes downhill from there... :rolleyes:

The best part is when they use the Leaked doom-III alpha and declare that the GFFX finaly shows its strength... Yeah whatever.. Except that we know JC has stated that the current build off Doom-III has the two neck and neck. I happen to know that the leaked build of Doom-III did not even have Doubble-sidded Stencil support enabled for ATi cards yet.. :rolleyes:

Then, again their completely BS conclusions are freaking LAME. Who cares how much programability you have if its to slow to use? Who cares how fast your AA is if it looks like crap???

If 3Dmark03 is getting hammered by Nvidia because it does not show real game performance, or reflect current game design. Then why the hell are they and their little crony websites allowed to toot the Advanced programability Horn?? Its not usefull at all in todays games. Its likely never going to be usefull at all ever. This card is dead out of the gate. It will be their next generation card that has the real impact on future games, as will the R400.

and someone, please tell me why its now ok to make a statement like this about a new product???

But the NV30 is a real step toward a very flexible programmable graphics processor. The GeForce FX has its disadvantages which were mentioned above. But they do not lay deep and I suggest that in the next chip versions of the NV3X family (first of all, NV35) the errors of the NV30 will be done away with. I have got information that the NV35 may arrive already in May. Besides, we expecting the junior brothers - NV31/34 which will also include all shader capabilities of the NV3X architecture.

The cards errors dont lay deep??? Give me a damn break. Further now its suddenly acceptable to false launch a half working card, with serious design issues, and known hardware bugs...

Because it points to how cool the next generation will be???? :rolleyes: The fing Ridiculous Doubble-Standard Nvidia enjoys from the media is really getting OLD.

ReDeeMeR
02-18-03, 12:24 PM
Wow, it's lame indeed, extremely biased, reminds me of Intel reviews :rolleyes: ...No wonder another fat ass bs corporation :mad:

I especialy like this tablet :p

Product Theoretical maximum Measured maximum (without texture) Measured maximum (with 1 texture)

Theoretical max. maximum(no texture) maximum(1 texture)

Ti 4600 1200 1175 1150
R9700PRO 2600 2340 2184
FX 5800 Ultra 4000 1957 1848

Solomon
02-18-03, 12:55 PM
I'm still waiting on a complete comparison review, which I haven't seen yet. Just getting tired of seeing all these hand picked results. Test every feature, all enabled, singlely enabled and do the same for what the competition offers.

Is this to hard to ask for these days?

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

Smokey
02-18-03, 02:14 PM
Im not posting to say if the review was good or not, because Im waiting for "Retail" cards. We dont need ATI fanboys spaming these forums, based on non retail cards, also all you ATI fanboys seem to be the blind ones! ATIs 4xFSAA is no better than Nvidias 4xS, so if you want to compare 4xFSAA, then do it against 4xS, where you get this 8x from :wtf:

jbirney
02-18-03, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by Smokey
ATIs 4xFSAA is no better than Nvidias 4xS, so if you want to compare 4xFSAA, then do it against 4xS, where you get this 8x from :wtf:

Oh please its a known fact that RG provides for a better method of removing jaggies in todays games vrs an OG pattern. Then add in the fact that the R9700pro has gamma corrected AA were as the FX does not (it only does gamma in the pixel shadders). Please name me the reviews where they the reviewer said that the GFFX had better AA ability in the x4 mode. You will find that most if not all reviews have given the edge to R9700. But yet they will run these two at the same level even though we know that ATI looks better. So then why does these run AF test at different levels? I mean if you do it one way for AA then should you not also carry over the rules in AF? Sorry you run the cards at the same level and note the differences or you try to match up IQ wise but for all test not just AA.....


The xS modes only work in DX games so its it fair to include that when it only works on a sub set of games?

Joe DeFuria
02-18-03, 03:47 PM
We dont need ATI fanboys spaming these forums, based on non retail cards,

Well, uh, if nVidia would see fit to actually RELEASE said "reatail cards", then we wouldn't have to worry about that, now would we?

What we don't need, is all of these previews of a GFFX Ultra that will see miniscule penetration into the market. Where's the GFFX non-ultra, which MIGHT actually be a product that we can buy?

creedamd
02-18-03, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by Smokey
Im not posting to say if the review was good or not, because Im waiting for "Retail" cards. We dont need ATI fanboys spaming these forums, based on non retail cards, also all you ATI fanboys seem to be the blind ones! ATIs 4xFSAA is no better than Nvidias 4xS, so if you want to compare 4xFSAA, then do it against 4xS, where you get this 8x from :wtf:

Come on Smokey, if one negative thing is said towards nvidia, you start crying fanboy, I take the remarks that people make (especially when it's a legit claim with some sort of proof) as knowledge when buying, if there is something negative towards Ati or Nvidia, I want to know just as much as the positives. It is getting to be well known through the community that these reviews are being handpicked as far as what can be shown.

Take what some people say with a grain of salt, but before blasting them, prove them wrong. I believe a lot of people that visit here are more knowledgable than some doing these reviews.

Hellbinder
02-18-03, 05:06 PM
Im not posting to say if the review was good or not, because Im waiting for "Retail" cards. We dont need ATI fanboys spaming these forums, based on non retail cards, also all you ATI fanboys seem to be the blind ones! ATIs 4xFSAA is no better than Nvidias 4xS, so if you want to compare 4xFSAA, then do it against 4xS, where you get this 8x from

There is just no way you can make a completely Ridiculous statement like that...

And call anyone else a *Fanboy*

Not only is the R300's AA Rotated Grid, it is also Gama Corrected. Of which the GFFX is neither one of those.

The_KELRaTH
02-18-03, 05:29 PM
I hate doing this but *edit Rotated Grid, add Jittered programmable pattern. Oh thats even better!

.................

What I find really amazing is that it's not as though XIBT have never played with an R300 based card before so it's unlikely this was just a simple oversight.

Nv40
02-18-03, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by The_KELRaTH
It's a long review and it all looked quite interesting till it came to page 6 and on.

Fancy testing the ATI 9700Pro's x16Quality (Trilinear AF) to Nvidias' NV30 x8 Aggressive (low Q bilinear AF) and Balanced (Hi Quality Bilinear).
Thats' no different than comparing A Ti4200 on a P3-1Ghz and on a P4-3.06 and being suprised that it runs faster on the P4!!

This review just shows there are far too many amateurs claiming to be professional reviewers


mmmm..

well ,i see the anand review of the GeforceFXultra to be no more fair
than the digit-life geforcefx review..

using the RAdeon9700pro AF8x->performance /against
NV30 AF8x->balance... :rolleyes:

with that so generous and noble advantage for ATI in high quality benchmarks even the vanilla radeon9700 non-ultra with similar Bandwidht than the geforcefxultra outscored the Nv30 in almost all games in HIgh
resolutions.

also ANand seems to have no-clue about ATI lacks of anisoF
or poor aniso in non flat angles..never used an AF ultility (like digitlife) ;)
to show how well each video card filters surfaces
and diferent angles..

the last digit-life benchmarks seems to be the way to go..

1)just post the numbers of every possible setting in AF and AA.. for
both the R300 and Nv30 . and let people choose wich graph are
apple vs apples comparison.. which btw is not 100% possible.
because every card have diferent ways of doing AA/AF.

my impression from Worse to best is..
aa-> NV2x,ATi2x,NV4x,ATI4x,NV6xs,ATi6x
(not really sure about NV8Xs is more vertical antialiasing than
any other thing ,i like more NV6xs)

for AF in flat surface games .. like first person shooters (quake3/unreal)
-> Nv8X Balance,ATI8x HQ ,NV8x aplication ,ATI16x HQ

for AF in space/flight/race and other simulation games ..
here a good filtering for all surfaces flat and non flat angles matters ..
->Radeon8500 16xHQ ,ATi8x HQ ,NV8x balance ,ATi 16x HQ ,NV 8x aplication.. ;)

for the new people here ,its well known the Radeon8500 aniso
only!!! works at 0 and 90 angles..

2) post many screenshots of games including diferent angles
side by side of both cards and let people decide wich one looks better.

3)finally your opinions about each card IQ/ performance/
and overall impressions.

this is the way reviews shoud be done..
my only complain about DIgit life review is the lack of 1600x1200 benchmarks in many test , but it was interesting anyway. ;)

Smokey
02-19-03, 08:14 AM
God people read my damn post! I said that 4xS is much better than Nvidias 4x, there is NO need to compare ATIs 4x to Nvidias 8x, just 4xs :rolleyes:

I say fanboys, because most of you have come straight off the ATI boards to post here, and most of you havent had anything positive to say about the GF-FX since day one!

If you would read a little, you would know the GF-FX is due to go retail in most places early March, yes the delay has been way too long, yes the 9700 is a great card, but there is no denying that the GF-FX is also a great card, even if it is late.

You see I think some of you mistake for a person that cares about all the technical lingo of each card, this is better than that etc. well I dont, I base things on what I see in front of me, hense why I said 4xS looks as good as ATIs 4x and would like to see benchmarks comparing the 2.

Oh and you are fanboys :p even if you dont know it ;)

The_KELRaTH
02-19-03, 08:43 AM
Hi'yer NV40

I certainly agree that multiple angles should be shown to better show the pro's n con's of each AA/AF implementation.

But, if I were doing a comparative review I wouldn't mention from which card the shots came from. I'd take a number of popular games, just like you mentioned, run a set of screenshots, including closeups, using all the setting options available on each card.
After each AA and AF comparative demonstration I would have a poll so readers could choose which they thought was best.
Also, unlike so many polls, you couldn't view the poll results till you voted (small attempt at removing brand Bias).

jbirney
02-19-03, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by Smokey
God people read my damn post! I said that 4xS is much better than Nvidias 4x, there is NO need to compare ATIs 4x to Nvidias 8x, just 4xs :rolleyes:

I like the xS options. But you have to remember they only work in D3D mode. So games like, Doom3 will have to run in standard x4 mode...



If you would read a little, you would know the GF-FX is due to go retail in most places early March, yes the delay has been way too long, yes the 9700 is a great card, but there is no denying that the GF-FX is also a great card, even if it is late.

The more I think about it the more I dissagree. The NV30 would have been a great card if it had been out before the R300. Now that its 6 months late? It does not have any features over the r300 that end user can use. It has worse AA. It seems to have some issues with rendering fog in hardware. It seems that when it runs in full floating point mode its too dam slow, ect. Its a good card at best.

Hellbinder
02-19-03, 01:36 PM
Further.. all of you go look at this page of the review..
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/gffx-ref-p10.html

Look at the SS:SE 8x Quality AF comparrison. Notice a difference??? Thats right. The 9700's is much sharper. You can see litterally every little dot of the detail texture map. Where both the GF4 and GFFX are clearly a little Blurry in comparrison.

Thats what we are talking about with the base angles on teh 9700pro having much better AF quality. Very sharp, crisp and detailled. How does that compare to the very obsure 30 or 60 degree angles tht you may notice once in a blue moon??? If youa re looking for it really hard?

Now, combine that superior AF quality, along with ATi's FAR superior 4x FSAA and you simply knock teh GFFX completely out of the park. Its not even close. Adjust the GFFX's FSAA to a high enough level to try and compensate and you lose by an AVERAGE of 30 FPS.

Smokey
02-19-03, 02:08 PM
Originally posted by Hellbinder

About AA

Its does not matter. Maybe YOU need to get a clue??? if Nvidias 6xs and even 8xs in many ways looks worse than ATi's 4x.. how the hell is 4xs supposed to help them???

Looking at all examples of 6xs and 8xs, I dont see them any better than 4xs, if you look, they are not different, to me that means that they are not working, even though they take a bigger hit :confused:

I do realise that 4xs is d3d only, but even if I had the 5800 or 9700, I wouldnt be using 4xFSAA, I would be using 2x + highest res with good performance, either 1280*1024 or 1600*1200, I will never run games at 1024 even again, that would be going backwards IMO. DoomIII, DuesX2 and the likes, I dont think you will be playing with 4xFSAA, maybe at 640*480 ;)

ragejg
02-19-03, 02:12 PM
***PURE SPECULATION. BASICALLY A JOKE. HA HA.***



nvidia bigwig:

"ok, team, we're about to 100% roll the ball on nv30... on our non-Xbox hours (3-5pm, mon/wed/fri) and as you know, there's a war going on right now between "highest rez, no AA/AF" and "high rez/AF&AA"... this has us at a crossroads...

employee interrupts:

"well, as of today anyway (june 2K2 or so), I've seen a few forums argue it out, and it seems that at this juncture, gamers prefer the highest rez!! Ppl are actually sorta irritated by AA & AF, and just want hi-polys, hi-rez, and sharp testures!"

nvidia bigwig:

"that sounds like some very impressive research, young man! ... Here's a cookie... Well, I gues it's settled! Driver team: when your're not giving tech support for the xbox to 3rd party dev's, focus on highest possible poly's given the bandwidth we have to work with... errr... wait, memory team! What DDR type are we using again? We'll never know, will we?"

---5pm arrives, employees start filing out door on way to the bar...

nvidia bigwig:
"remember, guys... high rez, and fillrate!!"





... this decision smacked the company in the coming months, while gamers became accustomed to AF & AA, esp the High IQ on the ATI dx9 parts...



PURE SPECULATION. BASICALLY A JOKE. HA HA.

Solomon
02-19-03, 02:17 PM
What seems to be neglected by some of the responses, the calling of Fanboys and what not. You have to realize that Nvidia is the one to blame for what you call Fanboys making all these bad points on the GeForce FX.

Why is Nvidia to blame? If you overhype a product so much with all these "Are You Ready" updates for months and then when we finally see the product, which the majority responded with, "Are You Serious?" to the "Are You Ready" ads, you have to realize that the card was short on promise.

When big sites even say this card was a disaster from the get go, how can you ignore the analyst? When Nvidia only told some of the preliminary results you can only run this and that setting. What did you expect? I mean seriously. The delays and delays and all this hype and anticipation you have to give leway to the people that think this product suck.

I personally don't think a alot of folks would be so up in arms over this card if it wasn't over hyped. When you get overhyped you get a ton more critisicism.

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

solofly
02-19-03, 03:19 PM
I just like one thing out of that review. NV35 it's on its way sooner than we might think.

Joe DeFuria
02-19-03, 04:53 PM
I just like one thing out of that review. NV35 it's on its way sooner than we might think.

Yeah...that's great! Don't buy a 9700 Pro...wait a "short time" for the FX, then compare! It'll only be like 3..no...4...no..5...no...6...no 7 months for the FX and then decide....no wait...FX "blows". Hrmmm....wait another "short time" because before you know it, the NV35 will be here!

Do I hear 2 months? 3?..... ;)

silence
02-19-03, 05:05 PM
lol

i think you meant to ask -> "are u ready for nv35?":angel: