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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-02-03, 07:12 AM   #85
Hanners
Elite Bastard
 
Hanners's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 984
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
I was only being semi-serious with my statement. I defintely don't believe ATI paper launching the r9600 and r9200 is doing anyone a service. if you can even call it a paper launch, since there have been no benchmarks. I heard there were going to be benchmarks today....so far there is nothing.
I certainly think you have a point here - After ATi's commitment to launching products quickly after paper launches (which they certainly delivered with the R300-series cards), they do seem to have slipped up somewhat, especially in the case of the 9600.

The lack of seeing anything to do with the 9200 is even more baffling really - It's only an AGP 9100 after all.

I'd love to know the reason for the delays, particularly in the case of the 9600, seeing as we have seen working silicon of the Mobility Radeon 9600 tested and benchmarked.
__________________
Owner / Editor-in-Chief - Elite Bastards
Hanners is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 07:37 AM   #86
jbirney
Registered User
 
jbirney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,430
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
I was only being semi-serious with my statement. I defintely don't believe ATI paper launching the r9600 and r9200 is doing anyone a service. if you can even call it a paper launch, since there have been no benchmarks. I heard there were going to be benchmarks today....so far there is nothing.
Paper launches are becoming the norm. Also if my source is correct some sites did have 9600 but were not allowed to post benchmark scores as the clock speed was not finalized. Remember back when R300 was first offically benchmarked? Remember how they tried to guess the performance of the 9500/pros (using downclocked boards, or boards with memory missing)? Remember how far off they were? Its my guess that ATI wanted to avoid all of that and wait till they had the final cards speced before allowing bechmarks out on them. Again big guess on my part.

BTW you really did not epect to see benchmarks on April 1st did you?

Quote:
but the point of my post was more to poke fun at CaptainBeige. he said ATI wasn't "standing still" while nvidia pushed DX9 to the mainstream. and yet I don't think that paper launching said cards by a month is anything but standing still. with no benchmarks, that probably means cards won't ship for a few weeks after benchmarks appear, get my drift? in other words, even if benchmarks are released today, we still have a wait ahead of us.
Today ATI annouces that the 9800 cards are shipping which is within the 30day window they promissed on the 9800s.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5164

Now if the above is correct the 9200/9600 should ship before the end of this month. Which puts them on par or close when you can buy a FX5200/5600.

Aslo ATI has said that they will have a Rv350 version prices at the $100 MSRP to combat the DX9 for $79 campain. So they are not really standing still
jbirney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 08:42 AM   #87
Uttar
Registered User
 
Uttar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via AIM to Uttar Send a message via Yahoo to Uttar
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by mongoled
Please get back to topic I was enjoying the points Uttar was trying to put across and some of the comments received by peeps here.
I already know what card is deemed the best buy right NOW irrespective of programabilty, I want to listen to Uttar's theory, I hope this thread gets back on track.
Eh, thanks

Anyway, to resummarize my points...

- nVidia is NOT violating the DX9 spec by using INT12 for Game 1, Game 2 and Game 3. This is perfectly legal, AFAIK.
- nVidia *is* violating the DX9 spec by forcing FP16. And thus Game 4 on 43.45 is not representative of the performance of legal drivers.
- nVidia's 3DMark 2003 optimizations for Game 1/2/3 are nothing illegal - both ATI & nVidia did such optimizations for 3DMark 2001 in the past and both had WHQL status. I'm sure ATI is likely optimizing for 3DMark 2003 a little too.
- The 3DMark 2003 score is calculated using a known formula.

Conclusion:

It is possible to use the 43.45 drivers to benchmark Game 1, Game 2 and Game 3, while using 43.03 ( or another driver set, that'd have to be determined ) to benchmark Game 4. Then you'd manually compute the score.

That would give a much fairer score, IMO.

As for the whole NV30 vs R300 vs R350 thing...
IMO, the NV30 is superior to both R300 & R350 in texturing and Vertex Shading. The NV30 is howeve badly inferior in Pixel Shading: while it is more flexible, it's also a LOT slower unless you use INT12 ( and you can't even use INT12 in a PS2.0. D3D program )


Uttar
Uttar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 09:21 AM   #88
Chalnoth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,293
Default

Uttar, there's still no evidence that forcing FP16 could be the cause of the lack of dynamic range in the output. If forcing a lower-precision color calculation is the case, then it's forcing FX12.

As a side note, do we even know whether PS 2.0 or PS 1.4 are being used in the particular shaders that are causing the apparent problems? It could just be that FX12 is being used in a part of each PS 1.4 shader.
__________________
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - Richard P. Feynman
Chalnoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 02:54 PM   #89
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by jbirney
Paper launches are becoming the norm.
that hardly makes it acceptable

Quote:
Also if my source is correct some sites did have 9600 but were not allowed to post benchmark scores as the clock speed was not finalized. Remember back when R300 was first offically benchmarked? Remember how they tried to guess the performance of the 9500/pros (using downclocked boards, or boards with memory missing)? Remember how far off they were? Its my guess that ATI wanted to avoid all of that and wait till they had the final cards speced before allowing bechmarks out on them. Again big guess on my part.
right, so are speeds finalized yet? this is something you have failed to comment on. when do you think they will give us benchmarks?

Quote:
BTW you really did not epect to see benchmarks on April 1st did you?
no, but I was giving the person who said it the benefit of the doubt.

Quote:
Today ATI annouces that the 9800 cards are shipping which is within the 30day window they promissed on the 9800s.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5164

Now if the above is correct the 9200/9600 should ship before the end of this month. Which puts them on par or close when you can buy a FX5200/5600.

Aslo ATI has said that they will have a Rv350 version prices at the $100 MSRP to combat the DX9 for $79 campain. So they are not really standing still
great. so they launched 3 cards on the same day on the 6th of March. they are now shipping one of those cards. and we still don't even have benchmarks from the other two cards that were launched!
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 03:11 PM   #90
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
that hardly makes it acceptable



right, so are speeds finalized yet? this is something you have failed to comment on. when do you think they will give us benchmarks?



no, but I was giving the person who said it the benefit of the doubt.



great. so they launched 3 cards on the same day on the 6th of March. they are now shipping one of those cards. and we still don't even have benchmarks from the other two cards that were launched!

well tom has a 9200 card benched...
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 04:53 PM   #91
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ChrisRay
well tom has a 9200 card benched...
I guess that's true. I find it a bit weird that he didn't do a full r9200 review though, and just stuck in some numbers for comparison in the gfFX5200/5400 review.

were final r9200 silicon and drivers used?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 06:40 PM   #92
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
I guess that's true. I find it a bit weird that he didn't do a full r9200 review though, and just stuck in some numbers for comparison in the gfFX5200/5400 review.

were final r9200 silicon and drivers used?

At the end of the article he mentioned, When FX 5200/5600 had new drivers, and the 9600 Pro was released, he was going to do an in depth review on all of these cards, Also comparing it to the Radeon 9500 Pro.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 04-02-03, 08:42 PM   #93
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

lol, the Inquirer reports that RV350 is shipping at the end of this month.....instead of in June!

God, if they were planning to ship it in June then no wonder there have been no benchmarks. but if they ship this month then there should be some......soon. the urge to buy a r9500Pro is getting stronger
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 10:15 PM   #94
Steppy
Radeon 10K Pro
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 351
Default

I have a feeling that urge will get stronger AFTER the 9600Pro comes out. I think the 9500 will perform better on games for the forseeable future and the 9600 will perform better on games down the road...but neither card will be speed by the time those games come.
__________________
Here's my clever comment
Steppy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-03, 10:34 PM   #95
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Steppy
I have a feeling that urge will get stronger AFTER the 9600Pro comes out. I think the 9500 will perform better on games for the forseeable future and the 9600 will perform better on games down the road...but neither card will be speed by the time those games come.

I am curious how you come to that conclusion? Even with its higher clock rates its Vertex Shaders are castrated by half. if anything I would think its shader aplications are weakened

Btw thats just a question.. I am curious if there is something about the card I do not know?
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-03, 12:08 AM   #96
Steppy
Radeon 10K Pro
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 351
Default

I figure having its own more advanced memory controller will have it perform better than the 9500 Pro with basically a crippled 256-bit memory controller. Had the 9500 had its own 128-bit memory controller I think it would be different.
__________________
Here's my clever comment
Steppy 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
Nforce AGP & unreal 2003 nichos NVIDIA Linux 1 10-18-02 05:21 PM
Does anyone like the cool water reflection effect in unreal 2003? imtim83 Gaming Central 15 09-20-02 10:18 PM
NV30 not shipping until Feb. 2003? sbp Rumor Mill 40 09-17-02 10:41 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:19 AM.


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