View Single Post
Old 02-13-03, 01:39 PM   #84
digitalwanderer's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944

Originally posted by saturnotaku
But the numbers can be misleading. I had a Radeon 8500 and a GeForce3. The 8500 would score consistently 700-1000 points higher in 3dmark than my GF3. But in games, that ATI card would choke with low framerates and/or graphical errors whereas the NVIDIA card would deliver smooth performance and no visual errors to speak of.

Mere benchmarks do not a great video card make. It's all about trial and error to determine which card works best for you for the reasons you need it.

I still have a GF3 & 8500 and have found the exact same thing to be true....I've just never seen anyone else who had before.

The GF3 is me gaming card, but it's getting long of tooth and I'm really needing to upgrade. U2 is showing it's age off too much.
[SIZE=1][I]"It was very important to us that NVIDIA did not know exactly where to aim. As a result they seem to have over-engineered in some aspects creating a power-hungry monster which is going to be very expensive for them to manufacture. We have a beautifully balanced piece of hardware that beats them on pure performance, cost, scalability, future mobile relevance, etc. That's all because they didn't know what to aim at."
-R.Huddy[/I] [/SIZE]
digitalwanderer is offline   Reply With Quote