Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA Legacy Graphics Cards

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-14-03, 03:58 PM   #1
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Question Is the 5800 Ultra really the king?

This is NOT meant to be a flamefest, this is an honest question that I just thought of that I do NOT know the answer to and I would be very curious to know it.

Has the 5800 Ultra ever beat the 9700 Pro in benchmarks where both are using WHQL certified drivers? Or has it just been beating the 9700 Pro when it uses their "special performance review" driver set?

It IS an important distinction, as I think most understand the IQ degradation in the "performance review" set...but has anyone seen any benchmarks of the 5800 Ultra using a real set of drivers against the 9700 Pro using a real set of drivers?

Any productive input is appreciated, no nasty conspiracy theories or flames please. (<----HEY, I said please! )
__________________
[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 03-14-03, 04:15 PM   #2
SurfMonkey
QuadCore G80 PS3 Overload
 
SurfMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a small room surrounded by vast, inscrutable, machines...
Posts: 491
Default

The 5800 is a flop. To many things went wrong and too many things are still wrong.

If it had come out before the R300 it would have kicked ass, it's still faster than a GF4 and is still fast enough to cope with next gen stuff. But it just doesn't have what it takes, IMO.

Too much hype and way too much technology. IMO nvidia decided that they could push the barrier forward without waiting for DXx.x and believed that everyone would follow.

But as ATi has shown, just sticking to the current spec is the best way to go (F-buffer apart - can't see where that fits in yet!).

Nvidia bit off more than they could chew, realised it wasn't going to work out like they wanted, looked for a excuse and then made the sad mistake of believing their own marketing machine.

Oh well, there's always next time.
__________________
Folding for Beyond3D
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
Sir Winston Churchill

"Halflife2 got halfway around the world before Gabe had a chance to get his pants on."
Anon
SurfMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-03, 04:54 PM   #3
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Wink Well, duh!

I know that, you know that, most of the people on this board know that...heck, I'd even wager that nVidia knows that.

What I'm asking is are there any HARD NUMBERS besides the 5800 Ultra on the 'review drivers' that show it beating the 9700 Pro in a head-to-head?

Seriously, I think it's a good/important/signifigant little point. If nVidia is going to be claiming, "they've regained the gaming crown", I'd really like to know what they're basing it on.

If they're basing it on the 'review drivers' numbers, fine and cheesy; if they're basing it on something else I'd like to hear/know about it before I give 'em my new official title....
__________________
[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 03-14-03, 04:57 PM   #4
ReDeeMeR
The Guy Next Door *wink*
 
ReDeeMeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 605
Send a message via ICQ to ReDeeMeR
Default

It could've been an ok card for 300USD

No one is going to buy that bs for 600 Euros here in europe, Nvidia is smoking some good stuff, hope they dont choke on it as we'll get stuck with only ATi then
ReDeeMeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-03, 05:00 PM   #5
Solomon
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In a House
Posts: 502
Default Re: Well, duh!

Quote:
Originally posted by digitalwanderer
I know that, you know that, most of the people on this board know that...heck, I'd even wager that nVidia knows that.

What I'm asking is are there any HARD NUMBERS besides the 5800 Ultra on the 'review drivers' that show it beating the 9700 Pro in a head-to-head?

Seriously, I think it's a good/important/signifigant little point. If nVidia is going to be claiming, "they've regained the gaming crown", I'd really like to know what they're basing it on.

If they're basing it on the 'review drivers' numbers, fine and cheesy; if they're basing it on something else I'd like to hear/know about it before I give 'em my new official title....
The numbers show the FX 5800 Ultra smoking the ATi Radeon 9700 Pro in Tetris Baby!!!! Hehehehehehehe. I'm just waiting for the damn cards to show up in retail. I'm wondering if eVGA feels stupid now. They posted some time clock and guess what that clock expired 6 days ago! LOL... How do you feel eVGA? Hehehe.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com
Solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-03, 05:31 PM   #6
scott123
Registered User
 
scott123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 473
Default

The 5800 is the king of disasters for Nvidia. I'm not sure what Nvidia plans next, but they need to re-focus, and start fresh.

Scott
__________________
ASUS P5B Deluxe
Intel Core Duo 6600
eVGA 8800GTX
Creative Xfi
Cooler Master CM Stacker STC-T01
scott123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-03, 05:38 PM   #7
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

product = pretty good IMO for what it does.. unfortunately the marketing set it up to be something that eventually seems to have choked the enthusiasm of the customer base of the product...
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-03, 05:56 PM   #8
Moose
Cheating is for losers!!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 241
Default

Well, from the benches I've seen (with cheesy drivers) it wins slightly when there is no AA or AF on.

It wins slightly with AA and AF are on AS LONG AS IQ IS NOT MATCHED.

If you turn on AA and AF AND match quality it loses, very badly in some cases.

It wins slightly in DX9 with 12 or 16 bit drivers but it gets is ass handed to it when it is run with the 43.00 drivers.

So IMO, if the image quality is matched it loses pretty much across the board.

If you don't care how things look on the screen then it wins slightly.

Either way it is very loud, very hot and nowhere to be seen.

I'd hardly call that a win at all.
Moose is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-03, 06:13 PM   #9
SurfMonkey
QuadCore G80 PS3 Overload
 
SurfMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a small room surrounded by vast, inscrutable, machines...
Posts: 491
Default

OK, I guess one to look at is that in plain DX7 to DX8 games. Played straight from install with no fancy FSAA or AF applied, then the GF FX wins the fight.

If, on the other hand, you count FSAA and AF as being indespensible in todays games then the GF FX loses big time.

So I would say that if you just wanted to play games and not stand around and look at the scenery then, yes the GF FX is the fastest card you can buy (and that maybe by clockspeed only ). Otherwise... who cares
__________________
Folding for Beyond3D
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
Sir Winston Churchill

"Halflife2 got halfway around the world before Gabe had a chance to get his pants on."
Anon
SurfMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-03, 06:42 PM   #10
Grrrpoop
Wey aye man!
 
Grrrpoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newcastle, UK
Posts: 162
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by SurfMonkey
So I would say that if you just wanted to play games and not stand around and look at the scenery then, yes the GF FX is the fastest card you can buy (and that maybe by clockspeed only ). Otherwise... who cares
I guess that's the real difference..

A m8 of mine is heavily into online gaming and has Q3 tweaked like I'd never seen b4, looked absolutely hideous but played like butter.

On the other hand I play with way more eyecandy on because I'm not some FPS nut. In games like Splinter Cell and Deus Ex you want as much eyecandy as possible as they're about immersion, especially DeusEx as it's FP.

I want a card that can give the fps with lots of eyecandy.. atm that doesn't seem to be an FX based card. I think nV35 might raise the nVidia IQ level a little tho, hopefully they'll take the criticism they're getting seriously (and not stick their heads up their ass like 3Dfx did when challenged about 16bit colour - people DO care about IQ!).

What I find most ironic about all this is the hardcore nVidiot reviewers on some publications touting the FX's 128bit precision above ATI's 96bit, completely ignoring the fact that at 128bit precision the FX's performance suffers noticeably. The claim that ATI only just supports DX9 looks a little shaky when to gain FPS they drop precision to 64bit, below the DX9 minimum of 96bit (yet ATI happily toodles along at it's "bare minimum" 96bit).

There's so much BS and bias flying around..

btw DigiWand, if someone posted a similar thread at Rage3D they'd get flamed all to hell, I'm amazed nobodies went off the deep end yet..

To answer the topic Q tho, I don't see the FX Ultra as King. But neither is the 9800 (or 9700).

I think the brand loyalty for each is strong enough for the weaknesses of each card to be forgiven and a purchase made.

Personally I think the FX is a pile of w*nk and I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole, but I hate unecessary noise and heat; I didn't spend a pile of money on a CM case with low dB fans and a Rheo just to negate it all with a gfx card.
__________________
Don't be Care Less with your language
Grrrpoop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-03, 06:45 PM   #11
digitalwanderer
 
digitalwanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Highland, IN USA
Posts: 4,944
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Moose
Well, from the benches I've seen (with cheesy drivers) it wins slightly when there is no AA or AF on.

It wins slightly with AA and AF are on AS LONG AS IQ IS NOT MATCHED.

If you turn on AA and AF AND match quality it loses, very badly in some cases.

It wins slightly in DX9 with 12 or 16 bit drivers but it gets is ass handed to it when it is run with the 43.00 drivers.

So IMO, if the image quality is matched it loses pretty much across the board.

If you don't care how things look on the screen then it wins slightly.

Either way it is very loud, very hot and nowhere to be seen.

I'd hardly call that a win at all.
I'm not disagreeing with you on any of that...but on WHICH set of drivers is that based on is my big question?

They're pinning their "victory" on the 'review drivers' unless I'm badly mistaken, which means they ain't only not king but they cheated to try and usurp the title.

EDITED BITS: This got posted while I was posting

Quote:
Originally posted by Grrrpoop
btw DigiWand, if someone posted a similar thread at Rage3D they'd get flamed all to hell, I'm amazed nobodies went off the deep end yet..
You'll get a chance to see how accurate that statement is, once a bit of other fun dies down there I'm gonna pose the same question over there to see the response.
__________________
[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]

Last edited by digitalwanderer; 03-14-03 at 06:48 PM.
digitalwanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-03, 06:49 PM   #12
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is the 5800 Ultra really the king?

Quote:
Originally posted by digitalwanderer
Has the 5800 Ultra ever beat the 9700 Pro in benchmarks where both are using WHQL certified drivers?
there have never been WHQL NV30 drivers....right?
  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
King Arthur Devs Reveal Broken Sea News Archived News Items 0 06-11-12 05:30 AM
$899.99 - CyberpowerPC Gamer Ultra 2126 Desktop PC AMD FX-Series FX-8120(3.1GHz) 8GB News GeForce GTX 560 0 05-25-12 04:00 PM
$1,259.99 - CyberpowerPC Gamer Ultra 2103 Desktop PC AMD FX-Series FX-8150(3.6GHz) 16 News GeForce GTX 570 0 05-23-12 11:20 AM
The King Is Dead.Long Live The King! crawdady Other Desktop Graphics Cards 42 07-30-02 09:57 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:37 AM.


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