NV35 = lower clock than NV30

[StealthHawk]

come on guys, WHQL doesn't mean squat...seriously. i'm pretty sure both camps have released WHQL drivers there were buggy on people's systems, moreso than the "beta" drivers.

I have a 8500 at home and 2 9500pros here at work and NONE of them have had one hickup with any DX9 games

DX9 games? what DX9 games. please hook me and everyone else up.

[jbirney]

Originally posted by StealthHawk
come on guys, WHQL doesn't mean squat...seriously.

OEM wins will not happen with out WHQL certification.

[Gar]

Originally posted by GlowStick
Yet these still occur with an offical WHQL certafied drivers, while the reviewers are useing unoffical beta drivers. You cant complain because the Gffx is unavalible to the public, while hte 9700p is.

I won the case, end of discussion, can we please stay on topic.

Of course compatibilties occur with WHQL certified drivers. Just because they are MS certified doesn't mean they are suppose to work with every game that was released and that will be released. WHQL = "Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL) is a Microsoft procedure for certifying that the hardware for peripherals and other components is compatible (works as expected) with Microsoft Windows operating systems". Do you see it say anywhere that since its WHQL certified that it should work perfectly with previous games or even ones that haven't been released? *slaps forehead* That fact is that ATI tunes their drivers to be compatible with M$ DX9.0 specifications, somethign that Nvidia has yet to do and probably won't do with the FX (unless they twist their arm to add FP16, which they won't).

In addition, what reviews used beta drivers for the 9700/9500 series? Thats right, none. They used the 2.2 WHQL's with the 9700 and the 2.4WHQL's with the 9500. The 9800 is the only card right now had beta drivers used during its numerous reviews. If you want me to respond to anything please come back with some SPECIFIC examples that support you arguement otherwise, I suggest you stop replying because you're reducing my IQ by 10 points evertime I try to reason with your posts.

edit by StealthHawk: removed flamebait.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by jbirney
OEM wins will not happen with out WHQL certification.

hmm, computers were shipping from OEMs with the gf3 before it had WHQL drivers. major OEMs if i remember correctly.

though your point is taken. given equal cards with equal prices, OEMs might be more inclined to select the card with WHQL drivers.

[GlowStick]

Originally posted by Gar
Of course compatibilties occur with WHQL certified drivers. Just because they are MS certified doesn't mean they are suppose to work with every game that was released and that will be released. WHQL = "Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL) is a Microsoft procedure for certifying that the hardware for peripherals and other components is compatible (works as expected) with Microsoft Windows operating systems". Do you see it say anywhere that since its WHQL certified that it should work perfectly with previous games or even ones that haven't been released? *slaps forehead* That fact is that ATI tunes their drivers to be compatible with M$ DX9.0 specifications, somethign that Nvidia has yet to do and probably won't do with the FX (unless they twist their arm to add FP16, which they won't).

In addition, what reviews used beta drivers for the 9700/9500 series? Thats right, none. They used the 2.2 WHQL's with the 9700 and the 2.4WHQL's with the 9500. The 9800 is the only card right now had beta drivers used during its numerous reviews. If you want me to respond to anything please come back with some SPECIFIC examples that support you arguement otherwise, I suggest you stop replying because you're reducing my IQ by 10 points evertime I try to reason with your posts.

Why dose ATI Offical drivers not work with Half-Life?

Why has Firingsquad never been able to run all of their benchmarks for over a year from 2.5 to 3.1?

Why is there no linux support?

Why dose the 3.1 reduce preformance (compared to 3.0) on the 9700pro (as documented on firingsquad)?

Why dose 3.2 reduce preformance (compared to 3.1) on the 9700pro?

[Paul]

That's does.

DOES.

Sorry, just couldn't stand seeing that row after row...

[Gar]

Originally posted by GlowStick
Why dose ATI Offical drivers not work with Half-Life?

Why has Firingsquad never been able to run all of their benchmarks for over a year from 2.5 to 3.1?

Why is there no linux support?

Why dose the 3.1 reduce preformance (compared to 3.0) on the 9700pro (as documented on firingsquad)?

Why dose 3.2 reduce preformance (compared to 3.1) on the 9700pro?

ROFL, I can't get enough of this kid and his precious Firing Squad. You think that because ONE review said they had problems with ATI'S drivers that this proves their "incompatibilities" as fact??? What the hell are you smoking? Look at all of the other dozen reviews and then come back to me with some substance.

So, if anyone were to take your philosophy and say apply that to buying car stereo equipment, we would all end up buying from one store because of course, what they sell or, in FS's case, favor is the absolute best and from the bad experiences they had with other car equipment manufacturer's products we should consider those other products as poor/bad performers. Like I said, please stop.......please.....

Edit: show me where the numerous amounts of people (specifics please) claim to have slower performance with the cat 3.2s?

[GlowStick]

Originally posted by Gar
ROFL, I can't get enough of this kid and his precious Firing Squad. You think that because ONE review said they had problems with ATI'S drivers that this proves their "incompatibilities" as fact??? What the hell are you smoking? Look at all of the other dozen reviews and then come back to me with some substance.

So, if anyone were to take your philosophy and say apply that to buying car stereo equipment, we would all end up buying from one store because of course, what they sell or, in FS's case, favor is the absolute best and from the bad experiences they had with other car equipment manufacturer's products we should consider those other products as poor/bad performers. Like I said, please stop.......please.....

Edit: show me where the numerous amounts of people (specifics please) claim to have slower performance with the cat 3.2s?

I have not found a site that runs all of the benches FS(firingsquad) runs.

FS documents very well, i havent seen any sites claim they have better preformance from the 3.2's on the 9700pro. Please point them out.

[tamattack]

Originally posted by StealthHawk
hmm, computers were shipping from OEMs with the gf3 before it had WHQL drivers. major OEMs if i remember correctly.

Things were a little different back then tho. MS hadn't yet introduced that annoying little warning (this driver does not have a valid digital signature...), so WHQL certification arguably wasn't as important back then from OEM standpoint.

[tamattack]

Originally posted by Gar
... especially since the last time they released WHQL drivers was back in Dec 02.

Actually, the last WHQL drivers are dated November 8, 2002.

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=winxp-2k_archive

What is that? 5.5+ months (and counting) between official drivers? Very unimpressive.

[tamattack]

Originally posted by Smokey
[...] I suggest you go take a look at ATIs support page for the 9700, and even the 9500, then you will see the list of games that have had problems since the cards release. Nvidia cards have problems from time to time also, Im not saying they dont, but to say ATIs drivers havent had problems with "alot" of games is just false :p

Absolutely correct. However, I expect that NV also includes numerous bug fixes in their drivers. It's just that NV doesn't tell us what bugs are fixed.

Personally, I find ATI's approach to disclosure to be refreshing.

[Gar]

Originally posted by GlowStick
I have not found a site that runs all of the benches FS(firingsquad) runs.

FS documents very well, i havent seen any sites claim they have better preformance from the 3.2's on the 9700pro. Please point them out.

I never once said 3.2's increase performance, its actually the 3.3s that will. Please go away.

[GlowStick]

Originally posted by Gar
I never once said 3.2's increase performance, its actually the 3.3s that will. Please go away.

The only benches show that preformance is lost progressivly since 3.0.

Ive seen sites go both ways on those 'hacked' drivers that recognise the 9700p as a 9800p.

[INNOVISION]

Glowstick won...Nuff said.

[Gar]

Originally posted by INNOVISION
Glowstick won...Nuff said.

Won what? The "I have no clue nor support for any claim I made and will make in the future" award? I guess you have something to add to the discussion that might pickup off of Glowsticks ramblings? Admin...close this thread its attracting mindless 15 year old zealots who don't a clue about hardware!

[Steppy]

Glowstick won? I don't think either of them "won". Yes the 9700 has some problems. But glowstick is drawing every single conclusion it seems based on Nvidia's GF4 and lower drivers in saying that ATI drivers are not "up to par with Nvidia's". From the reviews/testamonials I've seen shows the FX drivers to NOT be up to par with ATI's even at the 9700 release. I've seen numerous people using GF4 drivers(which are very much the same as GF3's and have been out for two years) as a basis for comparison with the 9700's, and then drawing the conclusion that FX drivers are better. The FX architecture will mean much of the driver is new so the GF4 is basically irrelavant here. The 9700 isn't as perfect as Gar said, and glowstick's argument really has zero relevance to the FX and/or its drivers.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by Gar
Won what? The "I have no clue nor support for any claim I made and will make in the future" award? I guess you have something to add to the discussion that might pickup off of Glowsticks ramblings? Admin...close this thread its attracting mindless 15 year old zealots who don't a clue about hardware!

since you're the thread creator i'll honor that request.