Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-08-03, 05:48 AM   #1
silence
 
silence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 425
Default anybody planning to buy 400Mhz FX?

since the day FX was "released" everybody is talking about ultra version which is too loud and too expansive.........and no talk at all about non-ultra 400Mhz version.
so i wanna see if there are others that consider buying it >>like me.
without dustbuster and with price much more realistic do you think it is worthy??.......i mean it still is the best nvidia card around and looking at results of quadro (i know it's not the same) FX core isn't bad thing.
what's ur opinion,what's better - ti4600 or fx 400Mzh??
silence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 06:08 AM   #2
zakelwe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 768
Default Re: anybody planning to buy 400Mhz FX?

Quote:
Originally posted by silence
since the day FX was "released" everybody is talking about ultra version which is too loud and too expansive.........and no talk at all about non-ultra 400Mhz version.
so i wanna see if there are others that consider buying it >>like me.
without dustbuster and with price much more realistic do you think it is worthy??.......i mean it still is the best nvidia card around and looking at results of quadro (i know it's not the same) FX core isn't bad thing.
what's ur opinion,what's better - ti4600 or fx 400Mzh??
I think a non ultra would be a good purchase if :-

1) you want to play fps at up to 1600x1200 .

2) the 400MHz chip is out of the same bin as the Ultra 500 and clocks up to that speed ( like the GF4 4400 did to the 4600 )

3) One of the card companies takes the lead and puts on 2ns DDR2 memory of the Ultra ( Abit ? Gainward ? )

$300 for that would be nice. Need to wait for reviews though.

Last edited by zakelwe; 02-08-03 at 11:00 AM.
zakelwe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 10:04 AM   #3
Fotis
Radeforce GTX7970
 
Fotis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Greece
Posts: 1,346
Default

silence, GFFX is better than gf4 ti 4600(performance,features) but there are some software bugs and a few hardware bugs that should give you trouble like the fog bug.If you want an nvidia card it would be better to buy a cheap gf4 for now and wait for nvidias next product.

If on the other hand you want to put the best card in your rig radeon 9700pro is your card.I converted from a geforce card to a radeon 9700pro and I can tell you the drivers are very solid

As with every driver there are a few bugs which are beeing fixed.Ati's driver problem are a thing of the past.
If you read the GFFX reviews there where some problems with the drivers because GFFX is a new architecture but can you wait 4-6 months until they are fixed?

But don't take my word for it,scan the forum for nvidia to ATi converts and make your desicions.
__________________
Intel Core i7 920 @3.8GHz|Corsair H50|MSI X58 Platinum|3x2GB Mushkin DDR3 1600 7-8-7-20|Gigabyte Radeon 7970 OC 3GB windforce|Samsung SSD 830 256GB/Intel SSD X25M 80GB|Seagate Ext. 2TB eSata|Corsair TX 750W|Microsoft Wireless Laser Desktop 7000|Silverstone Grandia GD-01 MX Black|Dell UltraSharp U2412M| Windows 7 x64 Pro
Fotis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 10:10 AM   #4
gstanford
Registered User
 
gstanford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 799
Default

I'm interested in the non pro GF-FX, but, I'll probably wait for NV31 to arrive before making any decisions (probably better to skip high end for the moment and wait on R350/NV35). I could never see myself owning the GF FX Ultra anyhow - the fan was just ridiculous.

The top end cards will go through one more iteration before Doom 3 arrives anyhow, so, in a way it's fortunate nVidia stumbled when they did and not when Doom 3 really drives demand for high end cards up.
gstanford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 10:28 AM   #5
Typedef Enum
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 191
Default

I would love to understand the reasoning for wanting a 400 MHz. part. Quite frankly, it makes no sense whatsoever.

The 9700 has been out all of this time, with extremely mature drivers. It pretty much steamrolled the FX Ultra (where it counts, IQ), and wasn't even in the same league as the non Ultra.

Furthermore, the non Ultra would still be regarded as more expensive than 9700 Pros that can be obtained online right now! I mean, talk about going backwards!

On top of all of that, the ATI stuff is here right NOW! There's no need to preorder...wait...hope...etc.
Typedef Enum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 10:28 AM   #6
SamuraiCatJB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: in a cave, in the desert.
Posts: 36
Default

I will get one for work just for the advanced shaders. I've got a project that I think could utilize the 128bit color (or misuse it as the case may be) for solving 3d volume problems.... but we have never had plans to populated dozens except at the 2/4/NV35 levels anyhow....

all it does is slow my graphics research I had allocated...
SamuraiCatJB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 10:45 AM   #7
gstanford
Registered User
 
gstanford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 799
Default

The following is not to be taken as an ATi flame: I don't care what ATi might or might not have available; I am interested in nVidia products, not ATi products. I don't care if that makes sense to you or not - it's my money, not yours.

The real problem with NV30 is that it hasn't been fabbed on the process it was designed for (Black Diamond). Severe heat and power consumption issues are the end result.
http://www.tsmc.com/download/enliter...3_bro_2002.pdf
If you read that brochure you will see that Black Diamond (the low-k process) is supposed to be unecessary below 1 gig.

You can speculate that nVidia was originally aiming for a 1 gig core (? the dawn of a new era in graphics ?). They could only get halfway there on the plain 0.13 process, yet even at only half designed clock speed compete very well with R300.

Also bear in mind most other manufacturers planning to use the plain 0.13 process won't exceed 350 mhz - nVidia got the process to 500 mhz (under stress) and 400 mhz reliably - not bad going I'd say.
gstanford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 10:48 AM   #8
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default You know what I can't wait for?

I can't wait for ATI to get a couple of sets in a row out like the last set, just to give me more ammo to fight with people like this on.

I think time is on ATI's side right now, I really do. The next set of drivers is coming soon from ATI, and the 6292 set has always been a magic number for 'em*.

I'll admit that ATI has got a bad driver history, and I really can understand some people having reluctance to just accept "they're better now" at face value since it's been said before....but the big diffence 'tween then and now is then it was ATI saying "we're better now" even though they weren't, now it's the community saying "they're better now" just because they are.

The truth will out in time, and I'm hoping that ATI keeps delivering the goods and nVidia wakes up and starts to again.




*Sorry, it's an idiotic insider fanATIc reference to the 6292 driver set for the Rage128...it was the set of drivers that took ATI two years to put out and they WORKED! This new set coming out is also numbered 6292, and I've spoken to some people beta testing 'em and they're better than the last set...so I'm just waiting to be impressed.
__________________
[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

Old 02-08-03, 10:56 AM   #9
Gator
Unreal Tournament Gamer
 
Gator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 2,279
Default

Lower the price to $250 and give it a normal/quiet cooling method, and I would consider it. Why $250? Because for $220 you can buy a R9700 non-pro right now which can be clocked at R9700Pro speeds, has better AA and Aniso scores, and close enough overall scores to the GFFX. If I'm gonna buy a GFFX, better gimmy a good reason. But quite frankly, I'd get more boost from an AXP2600 then either of them right now.

Gator hugs his TI4400... good girl, good girl
__________________
Athlon64 3200 Clawhammer / Asus K8N-E Deluxe / 1GB Crucial DDR400 / Geforce 6600GT 128MB AGP / Windows XP Pro
Gator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 11:05 AM   #10
ClyssaN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 145
Default

Quote:
I would love to understand the reasoning for wanting a 400 MHz. part. Quite frankly, it makes no sense whatsoever.

The 9700 has been out all of this time, with extremely mature drivers. It pretty much steamrolled the FX Ultra (where it counts, IQ), and wasn't even in the same league as the non Ultra.

Furthermore, the non Ultra would still be regarded as more expensive than 9700 Pros that can be obtained online right now! I mean, talk about going backwards!

On top of all of that, the ATI stuff is here right NOW! There's no need to preorder...wait...hope...etc.
Exactly ...

I really don't understand, we are in 2003, we are paying 400$ for a video card, and it seems most people just look to the raw performance of a card...

I really don't care if the nv30 ultra or the nv35 are 50%-100% faster then a radeon 9700PRo or r350, if the IQ don't improve at least to the same level as the radeon i don't want it...
ClyssaN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 11:07 AM   #11
zakelwe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 768
Default

I edited my original post to take out the claim that Ati drivers are still worse.

For brotherly harmony !

Regards

Andy
zakelwe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-03, 11:07 AM   #12
panzaman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 94
Default

..I agree no way I am going to pay $400 for that card.
__________________
Athlon Sempron 3100+ @ 1600mhz
ABIT NF8
1GB Crucial PC3200
BFG 6600GTOC 128mb
Windows XP SP2
panzaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What You Can Expect From GeForce GRID News Archived News Items 0 06-04-12 04:20 PM
Nvidia GeForce 301.42 WHQL drivers DSC NVIDIA Windows Graphics Drivers 5 05-29-12 10:12 PM
New GPU from Nvidia Announced Today, the GeForce GTX 670 News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 01:50 PM
Gainward Unleashes the Sexy GeForce GTX 670 Phantom Graphics Card, Also launches the News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 09:28 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.