Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > Benchmarking And Overclocking

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-23-03, 04:07 AM   #145
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
anyways this article should explain it better.



http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardwa...tout/page3.asp

Oh well I'm off to bed...

laters dudes.
How does this article corroborate your assertion? They don't even test IQ in UT2003. There is also a bug with ATI cards in Nascar2003 where detail is lowered because it doesn't autodetect all the memory or something. Anyway, I think we all know and acknowledge that ATI's AF doesn't look as good at certain angles.

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
The Gf2 GTS had better image that the GF 256 and the GF4 had much better IQ and the FX does indeed have better IQ. When I first saw my desktop on the FX I did notice the difference.


Want one more review?

http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews...lld19JRD01OTE=
We are not talking about 2d quality(filters), we are talking about 3d scene quality. And BTW from the conclusion of the Hexus review it says "decent 2d quality," emphasis mine.

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
???

I've been using aTuner for a long time and I never got those options untill I got my FX.

Yes using the same version too.

The best I got on my Ti 4600 was 8XS not 12X or 16X.
You need to use newer drivers.

Quote:
BTW can you confirm that the GF3 or GF4 can do 16X?
I don't think I saw that option, but I don't really remember.

Quote:
So I guess Open GL does not have the extra modes then?
It has 8xS in OGL which is probably better or just as good as 16x anyway. Is 16x FSAA really a commodity? Considering that there is barely any difference at all between 12x and 8xS in D3D...8xS is actually better than 12x. Do you really need 16x FSAA? Is 16x FSAA really better?
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 06:06 AM   #146
mrsabidji
I am the cheese...
 
mrsabidji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 506
Send a message via ICQ to mrsabidji
Default

I couldn't get my friend's CDs this week-end (had to format and re-install XP, for some reason), so no benchmarking for me right now. Sorry guys.

mrsabidji
mrsabidji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 07:43 AM   #147
Behemoth
radeon 9800 pro
 
Behemoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Darkness Falls
Posts: 841
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
You guys continue to amaze me after I posted screen shots for you to compare and all you could say is. Well far ahead there is some blurry spot. For fu@k sakes the Radeon has the blurry spot as well.
why dont you post some screenshots on icetomb with both IQ and speed comparable to 9800pro? because you cant. with fx5900u you can only get either sucky IQ/fast incomplete trilinear fps with 51.75 or ok IQ(still no full trilinear)/slooooww fps with 45.23 or previous drivers.

Quote:

saturnotaku I don't think the FX will be able to handle all DX9 games. At least not with FSAA and AF.
but nvidia is still saying otherwise. they are still making up dx9 numbers and pissing people off.

Quote:

At least Doom3 and Quake 4 I would think they would run fine.
one would expect more than that for a top dollor card.

Quote:

Both companies should have new cards soon BTW soo the FX 5900U or the Radeon 9800 pro won't be the only solution for DX9 games and future games then.
there is probably no solution to nv3x fake dx9 peformance that has been advertised by nvidia.

Quote:

You guys talk like these cards will be here for years. In fact I don't think even the Radeon 9800 Pro can last that long in future games if they will require the power HL2 does or more.
my geforce 1 and 3 are still with me and functional, when i buy a computer i expect it to run for years.

Quote:

So you saw HL2 running at 60 fps in a benchmark?
forgot

Quote:

Well what about in all other maps? What will happen when the action gets so intense in the game. I bet your FPs will drop like a wh0re on her knees.
then i will turn some details options off and the game is still playable. whereas fx card would drop like a real ***** on her knees even with all dx9 features off.
Behemoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 09:54 AM   #148
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Saulin, don't circumvent the swear filter.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 11:59 AM   #149
fivefeet8
Ngemu Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 1,886
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Behemoth
with fx5900u you can only get either sucky IQ/fast incomplete trilinear fps with 51.75 or ok IQ(still no full trilinear)/slooooww fps with 45.23 or previous drivers.
I don't think the Fx cards have sucky Iq at all. THey may not be better than ATi IQ, but you can't say they suck either. All this time you've been trying to prove your points, I've been playing the game and the IQ is definately not sucky. Lack of Trilinear filtering does lose some detail from distant ground texture, but everything else looks fine. From comparisons on this thread and other sites, the IQ of both cards is comparable with the ATi being a little better. A little better doesn't mean the other card's IQ sucks.

And the IQ difference from the 51.75's are minimal at best in UT2k3 compared to the 45.23's. I think if your expecting IQ loss, you're going to find it no matter where the shot came from. Let me do a little experiment. I'll post up 2 Ut2k3 shots in the same scene. You tell me which shot are from which drivers. 51.75's or 45.23. I'll post them later. And it's not going to be the missing fog in DM-icetomb.
__________________
[i7 2600k @4.4ghertz][2x4 GB DDR3 1600][EVGA GTX570 1.280GB SC][EVGA GTX460 physx][Asrock Extreme7 Gen3 Z68][2xSeagate 160 Gb SATA HD raid0][Seagate 250 GB SATA2 HD][Sony Bravia 40' 1080p LCD HDTV][NEC 3520a DVD+-DLw][Windows 7 Ultimate x64][Rosewill 1000w]

Last edited by fivefeet8; 09-23-03 at 12:12 PM.
fivefeet8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 12:44 PM   #150
hovz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 201
Default

ok, just make sure ur not staring at the sky or a wall
hovz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 06:55 PM   #151
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

sucky IQ eh?

Well I'm happy with the IQ and so is fivefeet8 and many FX owners and yet our cards beat the crap out the Radeon 9800 Pro in current games. Wanna talk about tomorrow games?

well for tomorrow games there are new cards in the making already since I doubt that the 9800 pro will cut it. Is like the GF4. It kicked ass but then with newer games it just could not keep up with the highest settings.

I remember Serious Sam 2 would kill my GF4. Now that game is not so tough anymore.

So you still have your GF1 eh?

Well good go and play some Ut 2K3 with it. I'm sure with everything in lowest you can still kick as$ at the game.

If you think IQ is sooo much important than performance then I guess you are not a true gamer. Specially when the difference in quality even without trilinear filtering is that freaking small.

Oh BTW Behemoth I'm sure my card can beat your mighty 9800 Pro on just about any map in UT 2K3 using the same settings. It is a fact that UT 2K3 runs faster on the FX. so don't even go there. Of course if you wanna bring the new maps the dets 50s probably would still kick the 9800 pro butt. But I rather wait for the official release before switching Dets.
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 07:02 PM   #152
saturnotaku
Apple user. Deal with it.
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The 'burbs, IL USA
Posts: 12,502
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
If you think IQ is sooo much important than performance then I guess you are not a true gamer.
That's some 1997 thinking if I ever saw it. If this was everyone's stance, we'd all be playing games at 640x480, 16-bit color. FSAA would be a pipe dream and anisotropic filtering wouldn't be on anyone's radar. Hardware and game development would be stymied and far behind the curve that it's at today.

Wtih today's technology and what's on the horizon for next year, there is no reason why gamers can't have their cake and eat it, too.
saturnotaku is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-03, 07:10 PM   #153
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

saturnotaku you must be kidding.

As fast as todays video cards are. they are not fast enough for a lot of todays games.

Sure these cards can do 12x and 16X FSAA. But really not many games would be playable with those settings.


You could say heck I can run game "x" at 12X FSAA and 8X AF and get playable fps 20+.

Well good luck having fun with that game. Anything that lags is not playable for me.

It is nice to have nice IQ and speed. But having the best IQ possible and the speed is still a dream.
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 07:27 PM   #154
mrsabidji
I am the cheese...
 
mrsabidji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 506
Send a message via ICQ to mrsabidji
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
Oh BTW Behemoth I'm sure my card can beat your mighty 9800 Pro on just about any map in UT 2K3 using the same settings. It is a fact that UT 2K3 runs faster on the FX. so don't even go there. Of course if you wanna bring the new maps the dets 50s probably would still kick the 9800 pro butt. But I rather wait for the official release before switching Dets.
Bah... you really have to convince yourself your card is beating everyone else's to enjoy it ? See, I have a 5900 too, and I know it actually gets smashed by a 9800 in Dx9 apps. So what ? It's still a good card anyway. It's not a contest, you know... If you're a real gamer, then you know that what really matters is play games at decent framerates, not necessarilly the highest. 5900s will run HL2 at about 40fps (or a bit more with the new 5x.xx) whereas 9800s will run it at about 65fps in the same conditions. That won't make the whole game unplayable so you should stop trying to fool yourself with those BS (no offense intended, but your 5900 beating Behemoth's 9800 looks like BS, unless you omitted something). Well, if you opted for the nv35 thinking it would be a Radeon killer, like I did, I can understand you're a bit disappointed, but you don't HAVE TO own the fastest card in the world to get a real good experience from a game. I will buy HL2 and enjoy it on my not-the-fastest-in-the-universe card, and so you should do. enough said.

mrsabidji
mrsabidji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 07:31 PM   #155
Behemoth
radeon 9800 pro
 
Behemoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Darkness Falls
Posts: 841
Default

yes this is sucky IQ, in my defination:

also, i have helped my friend finish half life story mode on his 486/matrox millenium/voodoo2 machine, everything set to very low if not the lowest, we definately had a good time.
if you dont appreciate trilinear filtering and if you can stand sucky IQ, so be it, i cant care less. nv38 and nv40 are coming out, its unacceptable to have 5800/5900 users to play things with disabled fog, disabled trilinear(for peformance sake) in a just a dx8 game and still ask 5800/5900 to wait the oh-so-fix-everything-magical-working-driver, bloodly hell....

p.s. see you all in a few days
Behemoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-03, 07:45 PM   #156
Hellbinder
 
Hellbinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: CDA
Posts: 1,510
Default

Quote:
Oh BTW Behemoth I'm sure my card can beat your mighty 9800 Pro on just about any map in UT 2K3 using the same settings. It is a fact that UT 2K3 runs faster on the FX. so don't even go there. Of course if you wanna bring the new maps the dets 50s probably would still kick the 9800 pro butt. But I rather wait for the official release before switching Dets.
I'm Sorry but that is simply not correct.

There are many a review out there that Show Nvidia Generally scores higher on their highly tweaked application detected common benchmark levels... But Tie or LOSE (by a lot) on any of the other levels.

This can be carried through virtually any commonly benchmarked Game. Whats more the cat 3.7's increased FSAA scores on the 9800pro's by a little bit. Which should put them a FPS or Two over the 5900U even on the common benchmarked levels. Leaving it much further in the dust when looking at the rest of the game.

Generally Speaking though.. depending on the game and settings (not counting Dx9 or any Heavy PS games) the 5900U and 9800pro perform about the same. With the main difference being the vastly superior AA on the 9800pro and the sometimes slightly better AF on the 5900U.
__________________
Overam Mirage 4700
3.2ghz P4 HT
SIS 748FX Chipset 800mhz FSB
1Gig DDR-400
60Gig 7200RPM HD
Radeon 9600M Turbo 128 (400/250)
Catalyst 4.2
Latest good read. [url]http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTc4LDE=http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTc4LDE=[/url]
Hellbinder 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
My UT2003 Tweak Guide DXnfiniteFX Gaming Central 48 10-31-02 12:59 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:10 PM.


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