Go Back   nV News Forums > Software Forums > Gaming Central

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-11-04, 03:21 PM   #37
Ninjaman09
Takin 'er easy
 
Ninjaman09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Jowjah
Posts: 6,687
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbirney
Actaually it was an nV fanboy that started this thread
Heh heh, good point. Then again, a thread like this is just begging for an ATI vs. nV flame war.
__________________
Core i7 920 @ 3.2 | ASUS P6T Deluxe V2
6GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 RAM
eVGA GTX 570 SC | Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1
CORSAIR CMPSU-850TX
Dell U2410
Ninjaman09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-04, 04:43 PM   #38
jbirney
Registered User
 
jbirney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,430
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninjaman09
Heh heh, good point. Then again, a thread like this is just begging for an ATI vs. nV flame war.
Come on, Flamming is more fun then playing CS:Soruce

I think either card is fine for the game...and I found my old R9700pro gives me the same experince that it did in CS..., by experince I mean "the rush to gaurd passway, peek around corner, get headshotted, spend the next 3 minutes waiting to repeate this all over again...only with a lucky spray and pray by me to offset my dying". I was hoping for something different..but nope there I am again..dead 20 seconds into the round.

jbirney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-04, 08:35 PM   #39
Xav
Professional NV Lurker
 
Xav's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 361
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

I don't care to play at 1600x1200 either. I guess I just don't see enough visual improvement over 1280x1024 to justify the performance hit..dunno if I ever will. My other issue would be straining my eyes to read the text at that resolution.

1280x1024 2xAA/8xAF and I'm a happy camper.
__________________
System I: intel 2500k || Asus P8P67 Pro || 4GB Gskill DDR3 Ripjaws || EVGA GTX570SC || SB X-Fi || OCZ GameXstream 600W || Klipsch PM 5.1 Ultra || Gateway FHD2401 LCD

System II: C2D E8400 || Gigabyte GA-EP35 || 2GB Gskill DDR2 1066 || XFX GTX 260 Black Edition || Audigy 2 || Corsair TX650 || Klipsch PM 2.1 || Gateway 2185W LCD

Consoles: 360/PS3
Xav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-04, 09:13 PM   #40
AthlonXP1800
Registered User
 
AthlonXP1800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4,352
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xav
I don't care to play at 1600x1200 either. I guess I just don't see enough visual improvement over 1280x1024 to justify the performance hit..dunno if I ever will. My other issue would be straining my eyes to read the text at that resolution.

1280x1024 2xAA/8xAF and I'm a happy camper.
me too, cant do it on Sony CRT at 1600x1200 as the texts are very small and hard to read on 19 inch monitor, it should be readable with 24 inch monitor, I think very few people have 24 inch monitor running at 1600x1200.
__________________
Intel Core i7 3770K, Corsair H80 liquid cooler with Noctua S12-1200 fan, ASUS P8Z77V with UEFI 2104, 16GB Samsung Green 30nm DDR3-RAM, Pioneer BDR-S09XLT 16x Blu-ray writer, Corsair AX850 PSU, Western Digital 2TB SATA3 hard drive, CanonScan LiDE 210 scanner, Microsoft Internet Keyboard, Microsoft Touch Explorer mouse, 32inch Sharp LC32LE600 LED TV, EVGA Geforce GTX 670 SC 4GB with Geforce 370.50 driver, 50Mb broadband Virgin Media VMDG480 Super Hub, Aspire Xplorer Midi Tower, Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit.
AthlonXP1800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-04, 01:44 AM   #41
Xav
Professional NV Lurker
 
Xav's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 361
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Yup, my Mitsu 22" CRT kills my eyes at 1600x1200 and my 26" LCDTV is 1280x768 native lol. I usually alternate between em depending on the game but with either one 1280 is definately the sweet spot for me.

Someone earlier said that ATi won cause it is faster at 1600 since it's the res "they" use...so if the 6800 is typically faster at the res "I" use does that mean the 6800 won?
__________________
System I: intel 2500k || Asus P8P67 Pro || 4GB Gskill DDR3 Ripjaws || EVGA GTX570SC || SB X-Fi || OCZ GameXstream 600W || Klipsch PM 5.1 Ultra || Gateway FHD2401 LCD

System II: C2D E8400 || Gigabyte GA-EP35 || 2GB Gskill DDR2 1066 || XFX GTX 260 Black Edition || Audigy 2 || Corsair TX650 || Klipsch PM 2.1 || Gateway 2185W LCD

Consoles: 360/PS3
Xav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-04, 03:55 PM   #42
AthlonXP1800
Registered User
 
AthlonXP1800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4,352
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Here another CS: Source benchmarks from FiringSquad, I was very surprised 6800 Ultra won in just about every benchmarks included all 1600x1200 4xAA 16xAF and ATI gone home emptied hand, their X800 XT PE never ever won a single benchmark , hmmm it will make you think again.
__________________
Intel Core i7 3770K, Corsair H80 liquid cooler with Noctua S12-1200 fan, ASUS P8Z77V with UEFI 2104, 16GB Samsung Green 30nm DDR3-RAM, Pioneer BDR-S09XLT 16x Blu-ray writer, Corsair AX850 PSU, Western Digital 2TB SATA3 hard drive, CanonScan LiDE 210 scanner, Microsoft Internet Keyboard, Microsoft Touch Explorer mouse, 32inch Sharp LC32LE600 LED TV, EVGA Geforce GTX 670 SC 4GB with Geforce 370.50 driver, 50Mb broadband Virgin Media VMDG480 Super Hub, Aspire Xplorer Midi Tower, Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit.
AthlonXP1800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-04, 05:01 PM   #43
Riptide
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 8,303
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Sony recommends 1600x1200 for their flagship 21" display, the GDM-F500 series. Most 21" LCDs have native resolutions of 1600x1200.
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-04, 05:43 PM   #44
anzak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,553
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	chart.GIF
Views:	163
Size:	11.3 KB
ID:	8239  
anzak is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-04, 05:53 PM   #45
jbirney
Registered User
 
jbirney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,430
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Quote:
Originally Posted by AthlonXP1800
Here another CS: Source benchmarks from FiringSquad, I was very surprised 6800 Ultra won in just about every benchmarks included all 1600x1200 4xAA 16xAF and ATI gone home emptied hand, their X800 XT PE never ever won a single benchmark , hmmm it will make you think again.
Something is weird with thoes numbers. These scores are SLOWER then the beta scores. Usally you go the other way. Also the 6800U only loses 5/6 FPS going from no AA/AF to full AA/AF? Also the AI was turned off in FS bench and dont forget the moorie patteren 6800 users are reporting in CS:Source...so I would not call the performance in CS:Source done yet...
jbirney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-04, 07:48 PM   #46
Ninjaman09
Takin 'er easy
 
Ninjaman09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Jowjah
Posts: 6,687
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Regarding Anzak's post:

So...the 6800 Ultra and 6800 GT beat their equally-priced competitors EXCEPT for the 6800 Ultra losing to the X800 XT by about 3 FPS in one map? And the rest of the time, the 6800s beat the X800s by only about 2 fps. Looks like a dead even tie to me.

I can play with FSAA and AF too, and I do. But there's no point in 8xFSAA at 1600x1200 when you can't see the pixels anyway. That was my point, in a REAL WORLD environment pretty much nobody plays at that level, so the benchmark numbers at this stage are pretty much pointless.

I also don't really understand what you were trying to point out with your post, since I made it clear that I like both cards and feel they offer excellent performance. The benchmark certainly confirms this. Your tone seems defensive - I didn't mean to offend you, but I was just trying to point out that very few people run their games in 1600x1200 w/ 8xFSAA and 16xAF, there's just no point really. 4xAF looks the same as 16xAF and runs a lot better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbirney
Also the 6800U only loses 5/6 FPS going from no AA/AF to full AA/AF? Also the AI was turned off in FS bench and dont forget the moorie patteren 6800 users are reporting in CS:Source...so I would not call the performance in CS:Source done yet...
My 6800 GT doesn't show any noticable drop in frames in any of the games I play when I put 4xFSAA on. I don't know about 8xFSAA, never used it.

Moire patterns are only with optimizations enabled, which nVidia gives you the option of disabling. Since it runs an avergae 90fps when I play it, it seems to me like a 6800 GT is a great card to play CS:Source with.
__________________
Core i7 920 @ 3.2 | ASUS P6T Deluxe V2
6GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 RAM
eVGA GTX 570 SC | Auzen X-Fi Prelude 7.1
CORSAIR CMPSU-850TX
Dell U2410
Ninjaman09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-04, 08:33 PM   #47
Doom_Machine
Registered User
 
Doom_Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 29
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

its funny seeing ati and nv loyalists argue pointless bench results over a few frames......both cards will give the user a good experience and since human eyes can only see a maximum of 60 fps at 75-80 mhz and even an occasional drop to 30fps isnt noticable if your into the game,so who cares
__________________
P4c-3.4ghz
6800 gt golden sample 425/1100
2 Raptors 10krpm raid 0-32k stripe
Hyper x 512mb ddr400
Antec 350 case (shown in avatar)
Doom_Machine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-04, 02:43 AM   #48
jolle
Registered User
 
jolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,804
Default Re: 6800 Ultra win in Xbit's CS: Source benchmarks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doom_Machine
its funny seeing ati and nv loyalists argue pointless bench results over a few frames......both cards will give the user a good experience and since human eyes can only see a maximum of 60 fps at 75-80 mhz and even an occasional drop to 30fps isnt noticable if your into the game,so who cares
Sooo.. you wouldnt mind putting your mouse on PS/2 port and underclock it to 30hz then?
I mean your not gonna se the difference anyway right? with your human eyes..
hehe, IMO it feels more responsive the higher FPS you got, and CS:S is a comepetative game..
Im not that picky about it in SP games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbirney
Something is weird with thoes numbers. These scores are SLOWER then the beta scores. Usally you go the other way. Also the 6800U only loses 5/6 FPS going from no AA/AF to full AA/AF? Also the AI was turned off in FS bench and dont forget the moorie patteren 6800 users are reporting in CS:Source...so I would not call the performance in CS:Source done yet...
Scores are lower due to CPU bottlenecking I guess, which explains why AA doesnt lower the FPS alot either..
The benches arent made on the map the beta was running, it only had 1 map, and the maps are diff in CPU load depending on ex amount of loose objects handled by physics..
FS benchmarks timedemos with lots of action in them, Xbits benches uses timedemos with no action in them, no players, so that prolly puts less strain on CPU..
__________________
Q6700, Abit X38 QuadGT, 8Gb (4x 2GB) OCZ Reaper DDR2 1066MHz, Gainward GTX 285 1Gb, X-Fi XtremeMusic
jolle 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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:58 AM.


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