Well, I'm going 9800 Pro but I just want to state that, the NV30 is just garbage. Why? Because the design of the thing does not have DX9 in mind. They shouldn't have hot wired features in the card that wouldn't work with DX9 gracefully. So now it needs special attention for it to work properly, which is BS imo. The R300 isn't as programmable as the FX but the R350 is far more programmable than the FX. From proof I've seen, from both sides and examples, there is just no convincing me that the NV30 is a great product.
It's design is flawed and did not go with what MS had called for in DX specs. That's not MS's fault and Nvidia has alot of gall requesting for MS to lower the precision requests in DX9 when they KNEW what DX9 was going to call for. CG might be useful and then again CG could just be Nvidia's way of fixing their mistake. I see CG as another Glide 2.0 if it doesn't support other programmable GPU cards. And frankly, for NV35, if its the same GPU like the NV30 but with a 256-bit memory interface...big whoop then. Sure it'll be faster, but it still will be a crap design product. Have to wait and see for that one.
I'm not nvidiot nor atidiot but I know what's been delivering the goods and whats been honest. Both sides have screwed up before, but now Nvidia is really in the corner with their own drivers and hardware and where ATi is trying to aim high in quality and performance. I've heard alot of you guys argue with techniques and specs but in the end, in just direct tests, both cards are fairly fast agains't one another but I'm just tired of over hype. Nvidia burned me with their BS pr and I certainly had enough of that with Mark Rein from Epic.
Uttar, I read that link but since DX9 is it's own api, of course it won't use FX12 which is Nvidia's own proprietary. Again, a dumb move to have support features that won't be called for in an API unless given special attention.