• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Firing Squad Review

20 frames faster in Farcry than the 9800XT at 1600x1200 with no AA and AF, and with 4xAA. Very nice, was getting worried looking at those HardOCP benches (does this prove that the leak was bogus?)
 
Wow, that's a lot higher benchmarks than I was expecting.

Damn I hate to say it, but the benchmarks with different settings were VERY misleading.
 
thanks ThisMonsterLives
now thats what i call a review :D

apples vs apples is how i like it
you can actually tell the performance diffrence when compared on the same exact settings.

all the nv40 dissapointment is over with me :)
 
Those numbers are amazing, but there is no way in hell I'd pay $600 for a video card.

If it's not $499 or less, I won't have it. Video cards can't keep going up in price like this... soon we'll see them around $1000 for 1gig models.

People aren't making more money just because computer hardware is getting better... lol
 
very nice....plenty fast too


still a shame the IQ is lacking in the screenshots
 
hardware analysis review is retarded.. a 9800XT does not score 19XXX in aquamark3.. :rolleyes:
 
The important issue here is (and i hope [H] proves me wrong when they put up their review in a bit here) how uncool the comparisons [H] has been doing which do not properly compare video cards. 1280x1024 @ 4xAA/8xAF vs 1024x768 with no AA/AF is NOT a proper comparison god dammit.
 
Originally posted by KickAssCop
hardware analysis review is retarded.. a 9800XT does not score 19XXX in aquamark3.. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

LMFAO! Maybe they were benching it with a PIII and 256MB SDRAM....

:rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by requiem99
The important issue here is (and i hope [H] proves me wrong when they put up their review in a bit here) how uncool the comparisons [H] has been doing which do not properly compare video cards. 1280x1024 @ 4xAA/8xAF vs 1024x768 with no AA/AF is NOT a proper comparison god dammit.
Click to expand...

I agree. In doing so it's almost completely negating the whole idea of comparing cards, IMO at least.
 
whoa, ATi better have something crazy to beat this monster!

In month, I wonder who'll get my $500 ... or $600 :D
 
where are all the ati fanboys that are supposed to be telling us how much the R420 will own the GF6800 :D

Aaaah nvidia has been redeemed

/me gets ready to toss the GF4 4400 :cool:
 
Originally posted by defiant
where are all the ati fanboys that are supposed to be telling us how much the R420 will own the GF6800 :D

Aaaah nvidia has been redeemed

/me gets ready to toss the GF4 4400 :cool:
Click to expand...

I only see one fanboi here.
 
funny thing is
these are early and fresh drivers

we can expect some performance gains when the cards hit the shelves :D
 
I love firingsquad. Tests all the games I am playing :D

Yes it looks like ATI and nvidia didn´t lie saying that these cards will be about twice as fast as current top dogs. Was a bit disappointed that the NV40 aa is still not on par with the Radeons :( Wonder how the R420 will do in that area.
 
Originally posted by requiem99
The important issue here is (and i hope [H] proves me wrong when they put up their review in a bit here) how uncool the comparisons [H] has been doing which do not properly compare video cards. 1280x1024 @ 4xAA/8xAF vs 1024x768 with no AA/AF is NOT a proper comparison god dammit.
Click to expand...

I think the [H] has a great idea. They have done something original.

But I have to agree with you on this one. Since a new graphics card is being reviewed for the first time they should keep the same settings so people can see what is milk and what is water. Then they can go back to their system(I guess when people have an idea of how good or bad the new card is) when they start to do reviews of various vendors that send them cards.
 
Originally posted by defiant
where are all the ati fanboys that are supposed to be telling us how much the R420 will own the GF6800 :D
Click to expand...

They are obviously scared off with your fanboy comments seeing as how you don't know anything about R420 performance.
 
Originally posted by SnakEyez187
They are obviously scared off with your fanboy comments seeing as how you don't know anything about R420 performance.
Click to expand...

Hasnt stopped them before
 
year old radeon technology renders higher quality images than brand new nvidia technology.

maybe a shittier image quality is how these games "are meant to be played"
 
Yea, it seems that CPU is limiting almost all these games at 1024x768 and even 1280x1024 seeing how 2x performance is the norm @ 1600x1200.
 
I skimmed over a few other reviews before HardOCP's review, and although I think the card is impressive, I don't think it's quite as impressive as some of the obvious fanboys are. Sure it's great, but @2X the performance at the 1600x1200 with AA is something you typically see with a truely new generation of cards (Heck at 1600x1200 with AA the 9700 beat the GF4 by four times the performance).

It wouldn't surprise me to see ATi come up about the same level of performance as the 6800.

Don't get me wrong I think the 6800 is a great card, and something I will probably buy unless ATi comes up with much better performance (If things are close to equal I will probably buy nVidia since their cards work better with my old games). But it isn't something that looks like a "must have" for me, like I thought it would.
 
Originally posted by requiem99
The important issue here is (and i hope [H] proves me wrong when they put up their review in a bit here) how uncool the comparisons [H] has been doing which do not properly compare video cards. 1280x1024 @ 4xAA/8xAF vs 1024x768 with no AA/AF is NOT a proper comparison god dammit.
Click to expand...

While your argument is valid, I personally think what [H] did was good. I mean, we are talking about cards that cost quite a bit of money. Generally when purchasing one of these cards one is looking for better FPS and better quality. What [H] did was show how much higher resolution and more FSAA/AA you can play with and still run faster than the competition.

However, I do have one complaint, which I can't really blame [H] for: the lack of r420 vs nv40. ;) Sure, there is the whole NDA thing on the r420, but I still want to know :D
 
At 1600x1200 which is where fillrate becomes a limiting factor. The 6800 outperforms the 9800 by roughly the amount of its fillrate advantage.

http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/geforce-6800ultra/index.x?pg=5

9800XT=8 x 412 = 3296 Mpixels/sec
6800=16 x 400 = 6400 Mpixels/sec
X800XT=16 x 500 = 8000 Mpixels/sec

But if the X800 is released at 500Mhz like every expects it will have a 25% fillrate advantage over the 6800 Ultra. If ATi maintains roughly the same efficiency per pipeline they have show in the past, I wholly expect it to perform on the same level if not a little better than the 6800.

In terms of sheer speed the X800 might come out on top. The advantage the 6800 has going for it is VS/PS3.0, it doesn't mean a whole lot to me, but it certainly is a nice marketing feature. Like I said if performance is roughly equal I will likely stick with nVidia, but I certainly wouldn't make bold fanboy statements like "where are all the ati fanboys that are supposed to be telling us how much the R420 will own the GF6800".
 
Originally posted by Particleman
At 1600x1200 which is where fillrate becomes a limiting factor. The 6800 outperforms the 9800 by roughly the amount of its fillrate advantage.

http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/geforce-6800ultra/index.x?pg=5

9800XT=8 x 412 = 3296 Mpixels/sec
6800=16 x 400 = 6400 Mpixels/sec
X800XT=16 x 500 = 8000 Mpixels/sec

But if the X800 is released at 500Mhz like every expects it will have a 25% fillrate advantage over the 6800 Ultra. If ATi maintains roughly the same efficiency per pipeline they have show in the past, I wholly expect it to perform on the same level if not a little better than the 6800.

In terms of sheer speed the X800 might come out on top. The advantage the 6800 has going for it is VS/PS3.0, it doesn't mean a whole lot to me, but it certainly is a nice marketing feature. Like I said if performance is roughly equal I will likely stick with nVidia, but I certainly wouldn't make bold fanboy statements like "where are all the ati fanboys that are supposed to be telling us how much the R420 will own the GF6800".
Click to expand...

The GPU clock on the R420 will be 600 Mhz last time I checked but this can be altered I guess.
 
Originally posted by number69
Looks like the 6800Ultra is a winner. Finally.
Click to expand...

Everything is relative. The NV30 was a winner against the Geforce 4 ;) But I agree so far so good :)
 
Originally posted by oqvist
Everything is relative. The NV30 was a winner against the Geforce 4 ;) But I agree so far so good :)
Click to expand...

But the NV30 wasn't a winner against the 9700Pro ;) The 6800Ultra is a winner against the competition this time. :)

The R420 is around the block and i'm sure things will be neck and neck real soon.

I think what can be a ace up Nvidia's sleeve is if games that support shader model 3.0 hit the market within the year.
 
Originally posted by number69
....

I think what can be a ace up Nvidia's sleeve is if games that support shader model 3.0 hit the market within the year.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't count on that, from what I'm told (despite the optomistic PR). Hell, we'll be lucky if we get LAST YEARS big games out this year (D3 and HL2). I think good ps2.0 performance is what will be important this gen, and it looks to me like nv40 has solved nVidia's problems in that arena. Good job, nVida. Now you can stop the cheating and apologize to everyone who bought the nv30. :p
 
How new a core is the 420? Is it a complete redesign? I hope not... can you imagine the drivers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top