what's better - 5900 nu or 5900 xt?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

From what I read the 5900 has some dx9 issues.. did they remedy them
in the xt / se series?

thanks,
Judge
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

In article <ft0h6057q4duq3enu1eil1m5qkni16qk7a@4ax.com>, Judge <>
says...
> From what I read the 5900 has some dx9 issues.. did they remedy them
> in the xt / se series?
>
Both cards use the same GPU core. *IF* the 5900 has any DX9 issues then
the 5900XT/SE would have the same issues.
 

Maniac

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
52
0
18,630
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Uzytkownik <Judge> nie ma racji, ale pisze, ze:

> From what I read the 5900 has some dx9 issues.. did they remedy them
> in the xt / se series?

Ultras rox.

--
maniac
maniac(at)chello.pl
http://www.tweak.pl/ Staff
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 15:15:19 -0500, Judge <> wrote:

>From what I read the 5900 has some dx9 issues.. did they remedy them
>in the xt / se series?
>
>thanks,
>Judge



No..

You will have to wait till the NV40 is out..


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Judge <> wrote in message news:<ft0h6057q4duq3enu1eil1m5qkni16qk7a@4ax.com>...
> From what I read the 5900 has some dx9 issues.. did they remedy them
> in the xt / se series?
>
> thanks,
> Judge

The FX series of nvidia can do DX9, can do.. due to nvidia seemingly
seeing the FX as a between stage card, between DX8 and DX9 it has
happened that.. the cards are not as good as Ati in DX9 as ati just
followed DX9 to the letter... while nvidia rather uesd their own
little shader extension..to bad for nvidia... that following the
standards is the best move.

Simple said, the FX will do DX9... but... not as good and as
beautifull as on a DX9 ati card.

On the other hand, in OpenGL the FX series has definitly a better
performance as ati cards.

I guess in the end..it's all about choices.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

>From: "maniac" maniac@spam.sux.chello.pl

>> From what I read the 5900 has some dx9 issues.. did they remedy them
>> in the xt / se series?
>
>Ultras rox.

Can you tell me what the difference is between the 5900nu and the 5900u? Is
the only difference that the 5900nu is 128 mb ram and the 5900u is 256 mb ram?
I'm assuming the 5900u is the better card?
 

teqguy

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
100
0
18,680
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Dark Avenger wrote:

> Judge <> wrote in message
> news:<ft0h6057q4duq3enu1eil1m5qkni16qk7a@4ax.com>...
> > From what I read the 5900 has some dx9 issues.. did they remedy them
> > in the xt / se series?
> >
> > thanks,
> > Judge
>
> The FX series of nvidia can do DX9, can do.. due to nvidia seemingly
> seeing the FX as a between stage card, between DX8 and DX9 it has
> happened that.. the cards are not as good as Ati in DX9 as ati just
> followed DX9 to the letter... while nvidia rather uesd their own
> little shader extension..to bad for nvidia... that following the
> standards is the best move.
>
> Simple said, the FX will do DX9... but... not as good and as
> beautifull as on a DX9 ati card.
>
> On the other hand, in OpenGL the FX series has definitly a better
> performance as ati cards.
>
> I guess in the end..it's all about choices.





The FX GPU did not modify any support for DirectX 9, rather, they added
their own instruction set.


Look at AMD processors, they feature the 3DNow! instruction set that
isn't included on the Intel processors.


This doesn't mean the functionality of either the ATI or NVIDIA GPUs
will be deterred from having or not having these extra instruction sets.



Look at 3DNow!. There are no optimizations or implementations for the
instruction set, and haven't been for 6 years... yet AMD continues to
implement it.

They're probably hoping that some developer will do something useful
with it, but there isn't any useful functionality... considering ALL of
the instructions in the set have been included in GPUs since the
Geforce 1.



However, Nvidia's instruction set won't fade.


They are working hand in hand with software developers to make sure
this gets done.


You haven't seen any ATI logos on game boxes lately, have you?


Nvidia is everywhere...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"teqguy" <teqguy@techie.com> wrote
> Look at 3DNow!. There are no optimizations or implementations for the
> instruction set, and haven't been for 6 years... yet AMD continues to
> implement it.

Then why Call of Duty for example, in the console says
something like "AMD with AGP/SSE/3DNow" if there
aren't any optimizations? Are those instructions just
mentioned because they exist?
 

teqguy

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
100
0
18,680
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Aki Peltola wrote:

> "teqguy" <teqguy@techie.com> wrote
> > Look at 3DNow!. There are no optimizations or implementations for
> > the instruction set, and haven't been for 6 years... yet AMD
> > continues to implement it.
>
> Then why Call of Duty for example, in the console says
> something like "AMD with AGP/SSE/3DNow" if there
> aren't any optimizations? Are those instructions just
> mentioned because they exist?





3DNow is incorporated by default, it wasn't implemented by Activision
or Infinity Ward.


The Quake engine Call of Duty uses was one of the pinnacle standpoints
for 3DNow back in the the mid 90's.


Although this engine supports such instruction sets, it hardly ever
uses them as much as the gpu's instruction sets.


3DNow was an optimization made to take some of the GPU's load off and
stress it on the processor, which was very beneficial when video cards
were slower than processors.


These days, graphics cards have double the amount of processing power
than a processor, so 3DNow isn't needed.


I'm still wondering why AMD procs have all of Intel's optimizations
such as SSE, but Intel never bothered with 3DNow.