Was the FX series a failure?

[Arevires]

I do indeed believe that the FX series was a failure. Nvidia was getting beat at all the different segments of the market. The AA was seriously lacking compared to the competition. (Though some may disagree on this point) The card was great at playing older games but the card should have been playing the DX 9 games (the few that were on the market) and not DX 8.1 games. If the FX series were the only cards on the market they would have been great cards but compared to ATI the FX series were lackluster.

[ChrisRay]

Originally Posted by -=DVS=-

This is debatable , other companys with total failure also support and sell cards that doesn't make them winers ! XGI sell they cards even if they are crap
(Noone specifyed what is a Failure)
So yes you can say none of the cards is a failure they do run games , maybe even at playable 30FPS or more + , but if competition runs it twice as fast its pretty obvious one is better.

Situation is same when we compare Nvidias FX series with Atis R300.
Both cards can run games at acceptable 30FPS in any DX9 games so does that make them both winers ?
1 != 2 , there can't be two winers one must be Successor other a Failure see my point Chris

Its realy easy to compare FX to R300 , would be harder with X800 and 6800.

I'm sure you can find all sorts of XGI cards for sale DVS, Go find me one for sale. Who said this was about winning or losing? You seem to be under this false premise that success verses failure has anything to do with winning and losing.


Success:

The achievement of something desired, planned, or attempted: attributed their success in business to hard work.


Failure:

The condition or fact of not achieving the desired end or ends


Win:

To achieve victory or finish first in a competition


Lose:


To not achieve victory or finish first in a competition



(obviously there are multiple meanings in the english language but these are the most relevent)



The FX series fits into the category of a loss to the competition. Not as a "failure". You keep clammering on about ATIS success and recording Nvidias loss as a failure. It's just doesnt work that way. Your argument is not really relevent DVS because you are trying to compare two different semantics to an obviously different issue.

I dont think you will find many people here arguing that the FX series was superior to the r300 in every concievable way, Tho some might argue there a few points about the FX series that were. They sold, And they have sold fairly well. They are still selling. They are well supported by the Nvidia driver team. I hardly call that a "Failure"

[-=DVS=-]

Heh what do you mean it doesn't work that way wasn't companys goal to be first , they obviously didn't succeed to be first , that would be category of ( Failure , Looser )

Offcourse maybe you work for Nvidia and know what they goal was , maybe it was to sell some cards, in that case sure they succeeded and i was wrong

And XGI card are available some people brought some , there was a thread i think Rage3d with webpage .

[ChrisRay]

Originally Posted by -=DVS=-

Heh what do you mean it doesn't work that way wasn't companys goal to be first , they obviously didn't succeed to be first , that would be category of ( Failure , Looser )

Offcourse maybe you work for Nvidia and know what they goal was , maybe it was to sell some cards, in that case sure they succeeded and i was wrong

And XGI card are available some people brought some , there was a thread i think Rage3d with webpage .

I think calling the FX line a failure is a bit childish and premature yes. And no, I dont think Failure and Loser belong in the same category, How do you know the FX 5900 Ultra/5800U werent what they were made to be?

Yes I know XGI cards are available. But from a sales standpoint? Nvidia sold alot of graphic cards this year, Maybe not as many high end cards as they used too. But they arent hurting. And it's not they are have brought down by a product that didnt sell.

And eyerolls? Give me a break DVS. Cut it with rhetoric personal attacks. Throwing around silly replies like "Do you work for Nvidia" adds nothing useful to the conversation.

[Kamel]

i think a lot of you are missing a very vital point... at the time these big boys were up in the $400 range... you say "the ati series were better", but that doesn't mean if i get a $200 5900xt that's slower than the ati cards that it's a bad deal. basically what i'm trying to emphasize is that it's value for money. sure a dodge viper can't outrun a mclauren f1, but that dont mean the dodge viper is any less successful than the mlf1. actually, the viper has made more money than the mf1, because at $1M a pop, not many own a mclaurenf1.

that's the point i'm making. ati did not offer a competatively priced answer to the 5900xt... allbeit the other cards they had were better than the even more expensive nvidia cards, the 5900xt was still a _great_ value. that's why the 5900xt was a success and the faster 5950u was IMO a failure. not because ati has better cards. of course, it's all a matter of preception. sure you can say the 9600xt was competition, but the 9600xt was darn expensive when it came out, you'd be better off getting the 9700pro at that time.

of course, i didn't follow the timeline of the entire release and the prices the entire time of it, so i only have like a small fragment of that time in a freeze frame in my memory, so your opinion on the issue might differ greatly from mine; though they could both be accurate.

[zakelwe]

I actually think that for nvidia the FX range was a failure, a failure to reach what they wanted ( to beat down a resurgent Ati ) but to the end user it was not really a failure because it played well.

The lack of performance over the previous generation was an issue though, I bought a 5200U, 5600U andd then 5700U and it was only the 5700U that outpaced my GF4 4400ti. All were playable though ,to be honest.

If you have a 6800 now though I think you can be glad that nvidia thought it a failure and decided to do better next time. Never pays to be lazy and nvidia are not lazy. Ati seem to have slipped a bit in this respect.

Regards

Andy

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Pantherman

As for the immature rantings and petty jealousies of some on this board, I say GROW UP!!!!! I'm not trying to show up anyone here. While I have two systems with 6800 GTs, I'm not trying to show off to anyone. My systems are hardly "state-of-the-art" anyway. Don't always assume that someone's motives are bad.

LOL- my don't you think a lot of yourself? Assuming others are "jealous" of you?



Your post is assinine trolling is the reason I flamed you.

Your childish summarization of the video card industry adds nothing to the board, and is disrespectful of those here who own nV3X cards and those who have.

"Yes, nVidia was on top of the game until the nV30 brought them to their knees. The revelations of Shady Days showed us all how the 9700Pro would be a better DX9 card if HL2 ever comes out. nVidia lost the crown."

Your post reads like a sixth graders essay for a nightly homework assignment.
I'll grade it like they would have when I was in school, before we had to make everyone feel good:
C-: lacks specificity, over generalized, no examples.

[MUYA]

Hey let's have a lot of needless pie throwing.....


Not!

Closed temporari;y...until MikeC decides to open it.