Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > Other Desktop Graphics Cards

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-16-02, 08:12 AM   #37
DaveW
Its me! Hurray!
 
DaveW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brit in USA
Posts: 1,203
Default

Quote:
This type of analysis could cause ATI to investigate why a lower than expected minimum frame rate is occurring
Those numbers are very interesting. The ATI board has lower minimum frame rates. So it would actually look more jerky to play on! You can't see the difference between 100 and 200 fps, but you can see a big difference between 15 and 30 fps. I have always said that your minimum frame rate is the most important of all. It is when your frame rate is at its lowest that you cry out "I need a new graphics card". But it seems like you would be more likely to cry that out with a 9700 than a Ti 4600.

This suggests to me that the 9700 has a bottleneck in it somewhere which is holding the rest of the card back.

Hehe, I don't feel so bad about waiting for the NV30 now =)
__________________

Core2 Q9400 @ 3.0, eVGA GTX 260, 4G DDR 800, Vista64
DaveW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-02, 08:16 AM   #38
imtim83
 
imtim83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 123
Default

DaveW me neither! But i think i may be waiting for the NV35 or NV40 or beyond. I want minimum frame rates of 60 fps in all games if possible.
imtim83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-02, 01:55 PM   #39
Mono
wtf?
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 111
Default

ok, wasn't the ATi platform using 256 Rambus and the Nvidia one 512 DDR? That extra ram helps ALOT. Trust me, I just upgraded, big diffrence. It could also be that just at the opening scene it's loading extra textures for half a second and that's what causes the min rate.

<edit> you also gota take into account diffrent chipsets etc. Maybe it is an issue, but it's not an apples to apples comparision. And I can tell you from first hand expierence that I rarley expierience anything under 40 in gameplay.
Mono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-02, 02:01 PM   #40
TheFrnchTickler
Registered User
 
TheFrnchTickler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 40
Default

MikeC: Exactly, as I had commented... Extreme framerate swings should definitely be documented. Now, granted, I don't know what settings were used in the [H] graph, and how they compare to the settings used in your own, but anytime you get results like the ones the 9700 displayed, you're dealing with an unplayable situation. (especially for a $400 video card)
TheFrnchTickler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-02, 02:02 PM   #41
pelly
Registered User
 
pelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 681
Default

Review will be completed this evening and submitted to Mike for editing tonight...

All suggestions were heard and hopefully, the review will satisfy the majority of you...

Thanks for the input!!!

pelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-02, 03:14 PM   #42
MikeC
Administrator
 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Virginia
Posts: 5,477
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by TheFrnchTickler
MikeC: Exactly, as I had commented... Extreme framerate swings should definitely be documented. Now, granted, I don't know what settings were used in the [H] graph, and how they compare to the settings used in your own, but anytime you get results like the ones the 9700 displayed, you're dealing with an unplayable situation. (especially for a $400 video card)
Both sets of benchmarks were done using HardOCP's "high quality script." In their Sapphire 9700 Atlantis Pro review, Kyle also mentions the following:

"While this is showing the average FPS it is also important to note that the minimum FPS is probably the most important aspect to look at with performance regarding UT2K3. Only in 1024x768 on the Antalus map in Low Quality was I able to get a minimum FPS higher then 30FPS. Every other test resulted in minimum FPS lower then 30FPS. So even though the average FPS are high the minimum FPS are not."

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MzcwLDI=

Fortunately this thread seemed appropriate to mention these results. Had I done it anywhere else, I probably would have been blasted
MikeC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-02, 03:25 PM   #43
TheFrnchTickler
Registered User
 
TheFrnchTickler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 40
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by MikeC
Both sets of benchmarks were done using HardOCP's "high quality script." In their Sapphire 9700 Atlantis Pro review, Kyle also mentions the following:

"While this is showing the average FPS it is also important to note that the minimum FPS is probably the most important aspect to look at with performance regarding UT2K3. Only in 1024x768 on the Antalus map in Low Quality was I able to get a minimum FPS higher then 30FPS. Every other test resulted in minimum FPS lower then 30FPS. So even though the average FPS are high the minimum FPS are not."

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MzcwLDI=

Fortunately this thread seemed appropriate to mention these results. Had I done it anywhere else, I probably would have been blasted
Sad but true. I've learned a lesson or two about ATi over the years... No matter how good their card may look in initial superficial reviews, be sure to wait until someone with a shred of credibility, and the guts to dig beyond the outer crust of the situation.

Normally I don't look at [H] as Kyle's... 'personality' hasn't rubbed me very well over the years, but I might just have to patch them back into my daily rotation of news/review sites.
TheFrnchTickler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-02, 04:16 PM   #44
Bigus Dickus
GF7 FX Ti 12800 SE Ultra
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 651
Default

Unfortunately, though having a minimum number is better than just an average, it still doesn't give anywhere near the complete picture.

Where did the minimum framerates occur? When? For how long? How often?

Only a graph could give this information. It could be a momentary dip that happened only under certain circumstances and lasted for a total of 1/4 second (giving a stutter), like during certain lighting effects, or perhaps when changing weapons, or with a certain poly count on screen. It could happen often, for extended periods, or it could be a glitch that shows up once every few minutes and doesn't affect gameplay. A number just doesn't show you, a graph would.

UT2003 is capable of generating time-corrolated framerates... I wish a review would put them to good use.
__________________
IMO, Mr. Derek Smart is a hypocrite: Only someone who is either (a) lying (b) ashamed of their products (c) just plain ashamed, would hestitate to give out some simple and straight forward information. - Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Bigus Dickus is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-02, 06:10 PM   #45
Mono
wtf?
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 111
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Bigus Dickus
Unfortunately, though having a minimum number is better than just an average, it still doesn't give anywhere near the complete picture.

Where did the minimum framerates occur? When? For how long? How often?

Only a graph could give this information. It could be a momentary dip that happened only under certain circumstances and lasted for a total of 1/4 second (giving a stutter), like during certain lighting effects, or perhaps when changing weapons, or with a certain poly count on screen. It could happen often, for extended periods, or it could be a glitch that shows up once every few minutes and doesn't affect gameplay. A number just doesn't show you, a graph would.

UT2003 is capable of generating time-corrolated framerates... I wish a review would put them to good use.
eh, that's what I meant to say, you worded it better though.
Mono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-02, 12:53 AM   #46
Rogozhin
Registered User
 
Rogozhin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: oregon
Posts: 826
Default

As said before somewhere else, I wish that therew would be benchmark that would give us the percentages of the the individual marks in the mean average of a bench.

What I want to know is the frequency of the 9fps and the 253fps.


But doesn't it make sense if the 9fps was happening 80% of the time that the overall score would reflect that?

I don't know but would hope that someone would

Rogo
Rogozhin 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
Diablo 3 launch guide ' The PC Gamer Action News Team assembles News Archived News Items 0 05-16-12 01:40 AM
Product Spotlight ' EVGA GTX 670 Review Round Up News GeForce GTX 670 Reviews 1 05-11-12 12:15 AM
Former Nvidia user: 9700 impressions nin_fragile14 Other Desktop Graphics Cards 58 11-01-02 01:38 PM
FalconNW and Voodoo under ATI 9700 spell!!! mizzer Other Desktop Graphics Cards 12 09-20-02 07:53 PM
Ideal 9700 review pelly Other Desktop Graphics Cards 19 09-07-02 03:00 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:09 PM.


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