Looks like ATi won again...

[eMpTy]

What nvidia needs to do, is they need to work on lowering the costs for the geforce 4 ti line and the geforce fx line.


If they could turn those into budget minded/performance video cards the could take that market away from ATi .... possibly.


Also, it might also help them to think about coming up with a new name other than " Geforce"


because its getting sort of old now


-Mp

Right because Radeon is a brand spanking new name...

 

[bobmanfoo]

Right because Radeon is a brand spanking new name...

come on, are we going to fight about names now?

 

[eMpTy]

I just thought it was funny to single out the Geforce name as being old...pretty silly imho

-eMpTy

 

[Cybercat]

Fact is, the X800 series supports less shader instructions than the Geforce FX 5950...it is OLD technology...only reason it's faster is it's clock speed...and it's clock is that high because it has like 60 million less transistors...

-eMpTy

The amount of shader instructions the cards support has nothing to do with performance. By the time you start reaching the limitations of SM2.0 instruction limits, your card won't be powerful enough to play the game anyway. And I don't have to tell you that clock speed isn't the only factor making the X800 cards an improvement from last generation; I'd expect you to know more than that. The truth is that "old" technology is still kicking ass right now. It was an extremely advanced architecture from the very beginning, talored for games well beyond its time. Also, even while having to be clocked higher, it still produces less heat and requires less power, not that those are really factors in this day and age.

 

[nightelfmaster]

this is wut i posted on mi other thread

i gotx halo and i use antro filtering.... Its actually a lot better and it doesn't take much of a performance hit... I think for 2x it looses like 5 fps, but considering that mi 9600xt pumps out 75 fps, and mi monitor only supports 60 (flat screen), i decided to keep it... On maps with a lot of polygons like frost, it starts to lag a little, but it stays a consistant 35fps or higher, but the graphics improvement is enormous... I think if u have a decent video card, such as 9500 or higher, u should turn on filtering, cauz the image quality improvement is huge... on 9500, or 9600 i recommend 2x while for the 9800, i reccomend 4x while the new x800s can go as high as u want, o btw i use 1024x742 cauz thats all mi monitor supports... and its also good to get Temporal AA cauz it gives u free double antialiasing, and it works really well on lcds cauz of their pixel lag... u can read more on the topic at this thread...
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1026167090#post1026167090
and also, i still think the x800s are better than the nvidias, because virturally all games are backwards compatible, and by the time shader 3.0s come out, i will need a new video card, and Nivida will probably come out with shader 4.0s if they didn't learn their mistakes
i mean theres no point of PS 3.0 cauz all the games that are going to use it/use it now and in the future are most likely backwards compatible...
i mean how many games now days rely on PS 2.0, and can't run without it? Not many that i know (i know none that do)
well thats mi opinion, and the x800 is a little faster, and they also put out their cards first so u can get it sooner than the 6800.

 

[eMpTy]

The amount of shader instructions the cards support has nothing to do with performance. By the time you start reaching the limitations of SM2.0 instruction limits, your card won't be powerful enough to play the game anyway. And I don't have to tell you that clock speed isn't the only factor making the X800 cards an improvement from last generation; I'd expect you to know more than that. The truth is that "old" technology is still kicking ass right now. It was an extremely advanced architecture from the very beginning, talored for games well beyond its time. Also, even while having to be clocked higher, it still produces less heat and requires less power, not that those are really factors in this day and age.

Well taken out of context I admit that comes across a little one-sided...I was rebutting the comment that the ATI cards are "more efficient" when in fact they are less efficient given thier 20%+ clock advantage and the fact that they are just barely ahead of the 6800...

"extremely advanced architecture"...that's just gibberish for "made to run 24bit precision shaders"...There's no doubt that ATI hit the sweet spot with the R300 design, but I don't want a refresh of a 2 year old design, I want new, more, bigger, better...and I'm disappointed in ATI's offering from that viewpoint...

-eMpTy

 

[nightelfmaster]

who really cares cauz PS 3 and more advanced archetictures just draw more power, harder to make, more expensive, and need more cooling. Nothing takes advantage of it, so whats the need for it in this age?

 

[DoomMonkey]

umm...Farcry uses PS3.0 and any normal mapped game will take advantage of PS3.0. Also when DX 9.0c comes out PS3.0 will start to be used. Nvidia looks like it could win this time, i'm looking forward to the new drivers. After loving my 9800pro for awhile i wanna see if nvidia can tip my favor with PS3.0 support and a more efficient core.

 

[eMpTy]

who really cares cauz PS 3 and more advanced archetictures just draw more power, harder to make, more expensive, and need more cooling. Nothing takes advantage of it, so whats the need for it in this age?

So you're gonna drop $500 on a card that, in 6 months time, won't be able to run games at their highest settings?

-eMpTy

 

[nightelfmaster]

but how much better will PS 3.0 actually look, and all of them would be backwards compatible because many are gonna buy the new ATIs. Most companies won't take advantage of it unless they have enough money, and how many people do you think are actually gonna go out and spend $400 on a video card. I can only think of one group, people with money, and are tech savvy (some of us lol)

 

[DoomMonkey]

let's see have you seen the Unreal engine 3 demo or any normal mapped games?

 

[Ludic]

So you're gonna drop $500 on a card that, in 6 months time, won't be able to run games at their highest settings?

-eMpTy

I expect to get at least 2 years for $500 =\

 

[eMpTy]

I expect to get at least 2 years for $500 =\

same here...that's why I'm waiting to see what these new drivers and the ps3 version of farcry can do to close the speed gap...

-eMpTy

 

[eMpTy]

but how much better will PS 3.0 actually look, and all of them would be backwards compatible because many are gonna buy the new ATIs. Most companies won't take advantage of it unless they have enough money, and how many people do you think are actually gonna go out and spend $400 on a video card. I can only think of one group, people with money, and are tech savvy (some of us lol)

Shader model 3.0 doesn't make anything look better, it just makes it faster...I'm thinking Nvidia didn't put 60 million transistors in there for PS3 unless it's going to do something for them...so before I invest in an X800 series card (which introduces absolutely zero new technology) I'm going to wait and see if this PS3 stuff is all it's cracked up to be...

-eMpTy

 

[Ludic]

I have an nForce 3 250GB motherboard, and all I've read said that there are substantiated claims of a boost in performance by running an Nvidia GeForce 6800 in conjunction with this motherboard. Something like 10-20% I've heard. Also with the introduction of PS3.0, and the fact that I happen to like Nvidia for some strange reason (nothing against ATI, just never owned one), I'm going to be going with a GeForce.

 

[M4d-K10wN]

This is exact same thing as AMD vs Intel. Neither is better; and fanboys spend countless characters flaming each other over which makes better cpu's. I'll go as far as to mention that ATi is similar to Intel, and NV is similar to AMD.

Oh, and yeah, nForce loves NV cards...

 

[chrisf6969]

This is exact same thing as AMD vs Intel. Neither is better; and fanboys spend countless characters flaming each other over which makes better cpu's. I'll go as far as to mention that ATi is similar to Intel, and NV is similar to AMD.

Oh, and yeah, nForce loves NV cards...

I think you mixed it up.... Nv is similar to Intel, and ATI is similar to AMD.

NV has more market share mostly due to their huge OEM sales of their MX lines.... GF4MX (and GF2MX) were huge sales successes, even though their performance was lackluster.

nforce + nv6800 = great performance especially on professional openGL apps. (workstation stuff)

FX architecture was weak and that is why they HAD to do a bigger rehaul. However, ATI chose not to do anything differently.

Wait until ATI's next generation and they decide they have to support 128/32bit (instead of 96/24) b/c of Intel/DirectX, etc. and their new card takes a step backwards in performance because of it. And technically their old cards are outdated.

 

[IceWindus]

Nvidias trump card may very well be their cards ability to do PS3.0. Lets face it, if developers are able to utilize the enchacnments of PS3.0 to the point were Nvidias cards runs better then Ati's X800 in 2.0 mode, ATI is in serious trouble.

Only time will tell.

Oh, and I live in Missoula with FiZ as well, I graduated from the UM.

 

[bountyhunter]

let's see have you seen the Unreal engine 3 demo or any normal mapped games?

Unreal 3 has nothing to do with these cards. Epic said that a 256mb card would be the minimal requirement to run actually be able to play the game. They said that 512mb would be recomended and a gig card would be better. By the time Unreal 3 is finished these cards will be obsolete, and long off the market. Maybe even the generation after next of cards. God knows what could happen by then. XGI or S3 could come back, or maybe some new company.

Anyways, the way I see it, ATi won this one. Most people that are going to upgrade their VidCards aren't going to have a 500w power supply, and they probably won't have 2 free molex conectors. I know I don't, and I don't plan on upgrading my psu to acomadate an arguably lesser card. Plus, If I'm not mistaken the 6800 overclocks nill, while the x800 seems to be able to be very overclockable. Plus, what about the notebook cards? the 6800 is way to hot for that.

 

[M4d-K10wN]

I think you mixed it up.... Nv is similar to Intel, and ATI is similar to AMD.

NV has more market share mostly due to their huge OEM sales of their MX lines.... GF4MX (and GF2MX) were huge sales successes, even though their performance was lackluster.

nforce + nv6800 = great performance especially on professional openGL apps. (workstation stuff)

FX architecture was weak and that is why they HAD to do a bigger rehaul. However, ATI chose not to do anything differently.

Wait until ATI's next generation and they decide they have to support 128/32bit (instead of 96/24) b/c of Intel/DirectX, etc. and their new card takes a step backwards in performance because of it. And technically their old cards are outdated.

You'd think, but it's the opposite.

-Intel has high speed but ineffecient CPU's, that must have a very high frequency to keep up with lower clocked AMD CPU's.
Same thing here, NV has more effecient GPU's that scale better; and they keep up with higher clocked ATi GPU's.

-Intel doesn't miss launch dates. ATi doesn't miss launch dates. Both AMD and NV paper launch with no products on the market for a while...

-Intel and ATi attempt using the "more numbers is better" marketing strategy.

I could think of more striking similarities, but I am very sleepy and they escame me ATM. I'll go zzzzz.

 

[eMpTy]

I think you mixed it up.... Nv is similar to Intel, and ATI is similar to AMD.

NV has more market share mostly due to their huge OEM sales of their MX lines.... GF4MX (and GF2MX) were huge sales successes, even though their performance was lackluster.

nforce + nv6800 = great performance especially on professional openGL apps. (workstation stuff)

FX architecture was weak and that is why they HAD to do a bigger rehaul. However, ATI chose not to do anything differently.

Wait until ATI's next generation and they decide they have to support 128/32bit (instead of 96/24) b/c of Intel/DirectX, etc. and their new card takes a step backwards in performance because of it. And technically their old cards are outdated.

I couldn't agree more.

-eMpTy

 

[Brent_Justice]

Yeah, I'd say so. IMO what should be more embarassing than being beaten by better hardware, is the fact that they paper launched the 6800 and were beaten to the market in the first place.

Of course you'll hear the BS Shader 3.0 issue, but an entire video card product cycle will pass before we'll even see games using it. It's kind of sad really. It reminds me of Apple's G5 PC/Workstation argument. If it's faster than the G5 then it's not a fair comparison because it's not a "PC", it's a "Workstation (with an AGP slot for gaming)". WTFE

FarCry will be the first to use SM 3.0, what parts exactly and how it will benefit are unknown until the patches are out and it is tested.

 

[Brent_Justice]

I am not really sure if this is true as of yet but, from what I have seen it's very neck and neck, also drivers are very immature for both cards. As they mature things my change ether way... I also think the PCI-E stuff is way to early to really tell whats going to happen with that...

it is definitely way to early to tell with PCI-E

it does have other benefits that a lot of people keep forgetting

 

[Brent_Justice]

Ati really amazed me this time, I thought it was going to be impossible to top the 6800u, not only did they do it, but with sleeker design, lower heat, and smaller size. To me that is going to make for a cheaper card. I have a hard time believing that Nvidia will be able to compete in price/performance brackets.

price and availability is definitely going to be the main deciding factor this round IMO

 

[Brent_Justice]

I don't think nVidia lost; to an extent yes. nVidia (for what they have recently been producing) did make a really good card. So in those regards nVidia did win/over come their crappy streak they going for them. In terms of performance and maybe IQ yeah they lost to ATI. But you will always have a loser; someone always will come in 2nd. Especially when there are only 2 runners running the race.

My money wil and has gone to ATI for a couple of years now.

the nv40 hardware itself is lightyears ahead of what the nv30 was, it really is packed full of features

 

[Brent_Justice]

..dang ..I'm in between both you guys in Thompson Falls ...yay

..and its gonna be nice when pci x goes main stream .. Viva La Upgrades!

argh, pci-x is NOT pci-e

 

[HRslammR]

i'd say ATI won because they're doing more with less and not changing their manfacturing very much.

*invests in ATI*

 

[Brent_Justice]

The truth is, the performance is so close, it's not fair to call one the winner over the other. There are places that have recently published benchmarks showing NVIDIA's cards on top. This could be due to their new drivers. Don't forget, their first drivers were beta and very new, not exploiting the new architecture to its full impact. You can say the same for ATI, but I think NVIDIA's latest drivers may just give them the edge they needed. I could be wrong, but I just feel as though NVIDIA still has a lot to work with, and has yet to really bring out the 6800's strength. When they start producing solid, aggressive performing drivers, things could get heavy for ATI. We'll have to see...

you are correct about drivers, they can make huge impacts on performance as compilers are tweaked

 

[bobsaget]

Quote HRslammR: "i'd say ATI won because they're doing more with less and not changing their manfacturing very much."


Hey HRslammR: what do you mean?

 

[Brent_Justice]

Show me, that does not sound right...

If a lower 12 pipe X800 Pro did better then a 16 pipe 6800 ultra. there would be some major problems for nvidia.

now the x800 pro might be on par with the 6800GT...

our reviews have shown that the X800Pro competes with the 6800U in performance, it either matches or beats it in games right now...

 

[eMpTy]

You'd think, but it's the opposite.

-Intel has high speed but ineffecient CPU's, that must have a very high frequency to keep up with lower clocked AMD CPU's.
Same thing here, NV has more effecient GPU's that scale better; and they keep up with higher clocked ATi GPU's.

-Intel doesn't miss launch dates. ATi doesn't miss launch dates. Both AMD and NV paper launch with no products on the market for a while...

-Intel and ATi attempt using the "more numbers is better" marketing strategy.

I could think of more striking similarities, but I am very sleepy and they escame me ATM. I'll go zzzzz.

I think the idea here is that Nvidia is the establishment, like Intel...and ATI is always nipping at the heels of the leader...much like AMD...

People who have only been watching video cards for a couple of years don't realize that the R300 core is the first time ATI ever surpassed Nvidia...and the X800 series is essentially the same core...kinda funny when you think about it...

So to round out the analogy, the R300 (9700 pro) would be the 700Mhz K-7 Athlon...which marked the start of tough times for intel...so then you can think of the 6800Ultra as the Pentium 4 Willamette and PS3.0 as SSE...brand new core from the ground up...initial performance was lackluster...but later frequency boosts and frontside bus speed increases pushed it to the top...where it remained for quite a while...

Lucky for us we don't have to wait for speed increases...we get drivers and video game patches and the like...time will tell...I'm looking for the 6800U to pull out a win late in the 10th round...

-eMpTy

 

[Brent_Justice]

Well crap, I missed that, I thought it was the old review, So I stand here corrected, the x800 pro -IS- doing a very nice job keeping up with the 6800U, and we are not even looking at the x800XT yet. I would not go as for to say that it's stomping the 6800U, but for the price different, jezzz the x800 pro looks like a good deal....

But as you point out, there are some real driver/software updates that can change this.... When it's all done, I think we will see no major different between the the 6800U and x800XT, and it will just come to pricing... only a little time will tell...

Is there any x800XT vs. 6800U reviews out yet?

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

 

[eMpTy]

our reviews have shown that the X800Pro competes with the 6800U in performance, it either matches or beats it in games right now...

With beta drivers...we all know the drivers are immature...and I've heard that leaked versions of the upcoming WHQL release drivers are showing the GT ahead of the Pro...

Care to comment on your expectations of performance on a 6800Ultra in Farcry with the PS3.0 patch and WHQL drivers?

-eMpTy

 

[Brent_Justice]

I couldn't agree with you more. If I'm buying top of the line, I want the HIGHEST POSSIBLE IMAGE QUALITY to be an OPTION. I shouldn't have to hack a $450 video card to get it to run full quality mode. Hopefully ATI will realize this and add it to the drivers.

-eMpTy

i just don't understand what it is with you people, you want to disable optimizations???????????????

crazy

but i agree they should have a toggle in there in some advanced setting menu, nvidia finally did it after we pushed and pushed, ati needs to as well

but when i game i'll have the optimization ON, because I liked the added performance with no iq loss

 

[Brent_Justice]

I have been folloowing this whole debate closely and been reading all the reviews and I have come to this decision... (If anybody cares)

ATI is making a really good card and it is available now. (My father-in-law just got his Saphire X800XT yesterday)

I even had an order put in for one a couple weeks ago. However, I canceled it.

After more reading and the new driver releases, I think nVidia has the most going for them when it comes to supporting future games. Thier tech is definitely newer then ATI's and, to me, more exciting.

I do not think ATI has made a bad product (In fact it sounds like it is a very good product), but it just doesn't seem like enough of a tech change. It is basically a faster version of my 9800 pro with the same shader/AA/AF options.

I generally like to be on the cutting edge when it comes to tech. Also, it is kind of cool to play with new stuff and be able to actually "see" the changes new drivers make. I beta test new games a lot, and this may be kind of like beta-testing hardware. So I am now waiting for a my 6800U to get here. (If it will ever ship...)

Just my two cents...

i love new tech too, aint this stuff fun

 

[Brent_Justice]

All numbers seen thus far on Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 were on the NV3x architecture which is wildly different than the NV4x architecture. I bet it's gonna be a close match on both games with the new cards out. You can take the radeon 9800 numbers and multiply by 2 to see what the X800 series will do...but nobody knows what the NV4x is capable of yet.

The X800s are not more efficient...they are clocked faster. Note that the X800XT PE will be clocked at 520Mhz, a full 120Mhz faster than the stock frequency of a 6800U...and it still doesn't beat the 6800 by that much.

Don't confuse simpler technology with efficiency. Fact is, the X800 series supports less shader instructions than the Geforce FX 5950...it is OLD technology...only reason it's faster is it's clock speed...and it's clock is that high because it has like 60 million less transistors...

-eMpTy

none of that matters, it is only how you use the technology in games

right now there is NO visual shader difference between SM 2.0 and 3.0, in fact there are NO SM 3.0 games, now of course there will be, FarCry first, but even then I don't think we are gonna see an IQ difference between the 'old' X800 technology as you put it vs. the 'new' 6800U tech as you put it

quite frankly, if the R300 tech was working, as it has been shown to, then why not just improve on it?

we'll see how it all pans out through the year

when the next patch for FarCry comes out I am going to do an IQ/Performance comparison

 

[eMpTy]

i just don't understand what it is with you people, you want to disable optimizations???????????????

crazy

but i agree they should have a toggle in there in some advanced setting menu, nvidia finally did it after we pushed and pushed, ati needs to as well

but when i game i'll have the optimization ON, because I liked the added performance with no iq loss

I'm sure the optimizations are great...but I've heard here and there that issues are arising from these optimizations...while that may or may not be true...it should be an option...I mean, I'm a kid who looks at this stuff for fun and it's blatantly obvious to me that it should be an option, so I assume it's obvious to ATI as well...so why are they holding back?

-eMpTy

 

[Brent_Justice]

Well taken out of context I admit that comes across a little one-sided...I was rebutting the comment that the ATI cards are "more efficient" when in fact they are less efficient given thier 20%+ clock advantage and the fact that they are just barely ahead of the 6800...

"extremely advanced architecture"...that's just gibberish for "made to run 24bit precision shaders"...There's no doubt that ATI hit the sweet spot with the R300 design, but I don't want a refresh of a 2 year old design, I want new, more, bigger, better...and I'm disappointed in ATI's offering from that viewpoint...

-eMpTy

a 12 pipe card is matching or beating a 16 pipe card

how is that "barely ahead" again?

if the current tech is working why not re-use it if that is all that is needed right now?

effeciency at its best

again, we'll see how it all pans out over the course of this year

 

[Brent_Justice]

umm...Farcry uses PS3.0 and any normal mapped game will take advantage of PS3.0. Also when DX 9.0c comes out PS3.0 will start to be used. Nvidia looks like it could win this time, i'm looking forward to the new drivers. After loving my 9800pro for awhile i wanna see if nvidia can tip my favor with PS3.0 support and a more efficient core.

FarCry does not use PS 3.0 yet, and when it does it is debateable whether there will be any IQ differences over PS 2.0. The CryTek guys said there won't be. I'll make sure to test it to find out though.

Any game that uses normal mapping has nothing to do with PS 3.0. Normal Mapping is a 3D technique that can be implemented regardless of shader version.

 

[Brent_Justice]

So you're gonna drop $500 on a card that, in 6 months time, won't be able to run games at their highest settings?

-eMpTy

that is debateable

if there is no IQ difference, then your statement is not valid