Latest vid cards, what's the big deal?

[Guest]

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

Just curious about 6800's and 7800's, here at the human level... my ti4600
made by Chaintech, has a core clock speed of 300mhz standard, and DDR
speed of 600mhz, neither are OC'd! The 6800 core is 325mhz and DDR
of 700mhz? I am using Omega 6693 driver and playing Doom 3 @56-61
fps, settings:

Medium:

800x600
32 bpp
spectral lighting on
shadows off
2x fsaa

But I can't go any higher than that. Even when I change resolution I can't
see the difference.

In the game, clicking auto-detect will take it to 640x480, but it plays fine
with my settings. Can I know why a current card of such previously
mentioned tech be far better than what I've got? Explanations much
appreciated, TIA

Alex

 

[Guest]

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

In article <KegRe.15287$Us5.8434@fed1read02>, AAvK says...
>
> Just curious about 6800's and 7800's, here at the human level... my ti4600
> made by Chaintech, has a core clock speed of 300mhz standard, and DDR
> speed of 600mhz, neither are OC'd! The 6800 core is 325mhz and DDR
> of 700mhz? I am using Omega 6693 driver and playing Doom 3 @56-61
> fps, settings:
>
Yes but you're running in DirectX 8.1 so there's alot of effects not
being applied which the DX9 cards have to so you get a far better
picture with more things in but an equivalent FPS.


--
Conor

"You're not married, you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen
Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart, Extras.

 

[Guest]

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

"AAvK" <ahem@notquite.net> schreef in bericht
news:KegRe.15287$Us5.8434@fed1read02...
>
> Just curious about 6800's and 7800's, here at the human level... my ti4600
> made by Chaintech, has a core clock speed of 300mhz standard, and DDR
> speed of 600mhz, neither are OC'd! The 6800 core is 325mhz and DDR
> of 700mhz? I am using Omega 6693 driver and playing Doom 3 @56-61
> fps, settings:
>
> Medium:
>
> 800x600
> 32 bpp
> spectral lighting on
> shadows off
> 2x fsaa
>
> But I can't go any higher than that. Even when I change resolution I can't
> see the difference.
>
> In the game, clicking auto-detect will take it to 640x480, but it plays
fine
> with my settings. Can I know why a current card of such previously
> mentioned tech be far better than what I've got? Explanations much
> appreciated, TIA
>
> Alex
>
>

With a 6800 you can play doom 3 at 800x600x32bpp, everything on and
more/better fsaa, higher fps.
Or even at 1024x768 if the rest of your system can handle the stress.
Shadows off = less realism
2x fsaa pales in comparison with 4x or even 8x
And you will probably miss some special effects like reflections and such.

Newer hardware = more goodies, more tricks, better optimized = better
picture if the game knows how to use the goodies.
Pure clock speed doesn't say everything.
a 6800 does more *at the same time* than a 4600 (more 'processing'
pipelines).
Same is true when comparing a 7800 with a 6800 (even more pipelines).

This is also true for processors: a 1 GHz. Pentium 4 is faster than a 1 GHz.
Pentium 3.

To give a very simple comparison:
If you build a machine which can add and compare, you can multiply.
But if you build another machine with specialized multiplication functions
(running at the same clock speed), it can probably multiply a lot faster.

Believe me, it *is* a big deal

regards,
Marcel

 

[Guest]

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

AAvK wrote:

" Can I know why a current card of such previously mentioned tech be
far better than what I've got? "


All you seem to be considering is the GPU and RAM clock speeds. That's
just like presuming that a car's performance is judged solely by the
size of its wheels. If that were the case, then a Hummer with 26-inch
wheels would be the fastest thing on the road.

You overlooked the following:

Ti4600 = 4x2 pixel pipelines, 128-bit memory bus width.
6800 = 12x1 pixel pipelines, 256-bit memory bus width

....and then there are the differences in DirectX and Shader Model
support, and some other stuff as well that I've either forgotten or is
completely beyond me.

 

[Guest]

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

Good explanation. However, a the original Pentium 4 run 1 GHz would be
considerably slower than a Pentium 3 at 1 GHz.

Phil Weldon

"Marcel Overweel" <moverweel@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:431599f7$0$11067$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
>
> "AAvK" <ahem@notquite.net> schreef in bericht
> news:KegRe.15287$Us5.8434@fed1read02...
>>
>> Just curious about 6800's and 7800's, here at the human level... my
>> ti4600
>> made by Chaintech, has a core clock speed of 300mhz standard, and DDR
>> speed of 600mhz, neither are OC'd! The 6800 core is 325mhz and DDR
>> of 700mhz? I am using Omega 6693 driver and playing Doom 3 @56-61
>> fps, settings:
>>
>> Medium:
>>
>> 800x600
>> 32 bpp
>> spectral lighting on
>> shadows off
>> 2x fsaa
>>
>> But I can't go any higher than that. Even when I change resolution I
>> can't
>> see the difference.
>>
>> In the game, clicking auto-detect will take it to 640x480, but it plays
> fine
>> with my settings. Can I know why a current card of such previously
>> mentioned tech be far better than what I've got? Explanations much
>> appreciated, TIA
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>
> With a 6800 you can play doom 3 at 800x600x32bpp, everything on and
> more/better fsaa, higher fps.
> Or even at 1024x768 if the rest of your system can handle the stress.
> Shadows off = less realism
> 2x fsaa pales in comparison with 4x or even 8x
> And you will probably miss some special effects like reflections and such.
>
> Newer hardware = more goodies, more tricks, better optimized = better
> picture if the game knows how to use the goodies.
> Pure clock speed doesn't say everything.
> a 6800 does more *at the same time* than a 4600 (more 'processing'
> pipelines).
> Same is true when comparing a 7800 with a 6800 (even more pipelines).
>
> This is also true for processors: a 1 GHz. Pentium 4 is faster than a 1
> GHz.
> Pentium 3.
>
> To give a very simple comparison:
> If you build a machine which can add and compare, you can multiply.
> But if you build another machine with specialized multiplication functions
> (running at the same clock speed), it can probably multiply a lot faster.
>
> Believe me, it *is* a big deal
>
> regards,
> Marcel
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

Yeah P3 had a shorter pipeline than P4 and stalling the pipeline wasn't as
severe.

--
NoRemorse
"Expect me when you see me."

"Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in message
newsIjRe.4660$9i4.2785@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Good explanation. However, a the original Pentium 4 run 1 GHz would be
> considerably slower than a Pentium 3 at 1 GHz.
>
> Phil Weldon
>
> "Marcel Overweel" <moverweel@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:431599f7$0$11067$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
>>
>> "AAvK" <ahem@notquite.net> schreef in bericht
>> news:KegRe.15287$Us5.8434@fed1read02...
>>>
>>> Just curious about 6800's and 7800's, here at the human level... my
>>> ti4600
>>> made by Chaintech, has a core clock speed of 300mhz standard, and DDR
>>> speed of 600mhz, neither are OC'd! The 6800 core is 325mhz and DDR
>>> of 700mhz? I am using Omega 6693 driver and playing Doom 3 @56-61
>>> fps, settings:
>>>
>>> Medium:
>>>
>>> 800x600
>>> 32 bpp
>>> spectral lighting on
>>> shadows off
>>> 2x fsaa
>>>
>>> But I can't go any higher than that. Even when I change resolution I
>>> can't
>>> see the difference.
>>>
>>> In the game, clicking auto-detect will take it to 640x480, but it plays
>> fine
>>> with my settings. Can I know why a current card of such previously
>>> mentioned tech be far better than what I've got? Explanations much
>>> appreciated, TIA
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>
>>
>> With a 6800 you can play doom 3 at 800x600x32bpp, everything on and
>> more/better fsaa, higher fps.
>> Or even at 1024x768 if the rest of your system can handle the stress.
>> Shadows off = less realism
>> 2x fsaa pales in comparison with 4x or even 8x
>> And you will probably miss some special effects like reflections and
>> such.
>>
>> Newer hardware = more goodies, more tricks, better optimized = better
>> picture if the game knows how to use the goodies.
>> Pure clock speed doesn't say everything.
>> a 6800 does more *at the same time* than a 4600 (more 'processing'
>> pipelines).
>> Same is true when comparing a 7800 with a 6800 (even more pipelines).
>>
>> This is also true for processors: a 1 GHz. Pentium 4 is faster than a 1
>> GHz.
>> Pentium 3.
>>
>> To give a very simple comparison:
>> If you build a machine which can add and compare, you can multiply.
>> But if you build another machine with specialized multiplication
>> functions
>> (running at the same clock speed), it can probably multiply a lot faster.
>>
>> Believe me, it *is* a big deal
>>
>> regards,
>> Marcel
>>
>>
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

Also the Willamette had only half the cache of the Northwood; it took the
Northwood Pentium 4 @ 1.6 GHz and the 512 KByte L2 cache to definitively
move past the Pentium III. Of course, the Northwood Pentium 4 had a good
chance to overclock to 2.4 GHz, so the jump was huge for overclockers;
another Celeron 300a B^). Now if I could just get a 50% overclock on my 2.6
GHz Northwood, but 3.2 GHz seems to fit my RDRAM and the CPU best.

Phil Weldon

"NoRemorse" <m-jastrzebski@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:R6udnZ2dnZ2YmjGVnZ2dnWFHiN6dnZ2dRVn-zp2dnZ0@comcast.com...
> Yeah P3 had a shorter pipeline than P4 and stalling the pipeline wasn't as
> severe.
>
> --
> NoRemorse
> "Expect me when you see me."
>
> "Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in message
> newsIjRe.4660$9i4.2785@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> Good explanation. However, a the original Pentium 4 run 1 GHz would be
>> considerably slower than a Pentium 3 at 1 GHz.
>>
>> Phil Weldon
>>
>> "Marcel Overweel" <moverweel@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:431599f7$0$11067$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
>>>
>>> "AAvK" <ahem@notquite.net> schreef in bericht
>>> news:KegRe.15287$Us5.8434@fed1read02...
>>>>
>>>> Just curious about 6800's and 7800's, here at the human level... my
>>>> ti4600
>>>> made by Chaintech, has a core clock speed of 300mhz standard, and DDR
>>>> speed of 600mhz, neither are OC'd! The 6800 core is 325mhz and DDR
>>>> of 700mhz? I am using Omega 6693 driver and playing Doom 3 @56-61
>>>> fps, settings:
>>>>
>>>> Medium:
>>>>
>>>> 800x600
>>>> 32 bpp
>>>> spectral lighting on
>>>> shadows off
>>>> 2x fsaa
>>>>
>>>> But I can't go any higher than that. Even when I change resolution I
>>>> can't
>>>> see the difference.
>>>>
>>>> In the game, clicking auto-detect will take it to 640x480, but it plays
>>> fine
>>>> with my settings. Can I know why a current card of such previously
>>>> mentioned tech be far better than what I've got? Explanations much
>>>> appreciated, TIA
>>>>
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> With a 6800 you can play doom 3 at 800x600x32bpp, everything on and
>>> more/better fsaa, higher fps.
>>> Or even at 1024x768 if the rest of your system can handle the stress.
>>> Shadows off = less realism
>>> 2x fsaa pales in comparison with 4x or even 8x
>>> And you will probably miss some special effects like reflections and
>>> such.
>>>
>>> Newer hardware = more goodies, more tricks, better optimized = better
>>> picture if the game knows how to use the goodies.
>>> Pure clock speed doesn't say everything.
>>> a 6800 does more *at the same time* than a 4600 (more 'processing'
>>> pipelines).
>>> Same is true when comparing a 7800 with a 6800 (even more pipelines).
>>>
>>> This is also true for processors: a 1 GHz. Pentium 4 is faster than a 1
>>> GHz.
>>> Pentium 3.
>>>
>>> To give a very simple comparison:
>>> If you build a machine which can add and compare, you can multiply.
>>> But if you build another machine with specialized multiplication
>>> functions
>>> (running at the same clock speed), it can probably multiply a lot
>>> faster.
>>>
>>> Believe me, it *is* a big deal
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Marcel
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

> All you seem to be considering is the GPU and RAM clock speeds. That's
> just like presuming that a car's performance is judged solely by the size of its wheels. If that were the case, then a Hummer
> with 26-inch wheels would be the fastest thing on the road.
>
> You overlooked the following:
>
> Ti4600 = 4x2 pixel pipelines, 128-bit memory bus width.
> 6800 = 12x1 pixel pipelines, 256-bit memory bus width
>
> ...and then there are the differences in DirectX and Shader Model support, and some other stuff as well that I've either forgotten
> or is completely beyond me.


So it is about higher tech advancement in the electronics, cards can
handle much more now. That makes a bit of sense, too bad we have
to spend so much to upgrade, but we have have to buy new games
because we are gamers.

Thanks EVERYONE for the explanations.

Alex

 

[Guest]

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

"Marcel Overweel" <moverweel@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:431599f7$0$11067$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
>
> "AAvK" <ahem@notquite.net> schreef in bericht
> news:KegRe.15287$Us5.8434@fed1read02...
>>
>> Just curious about 6800's and 7800's, here at the human level... my
>> ti4600
>> made by Chaintech, has a core clock speed of 300mhz standard, and DDR
>> speed of 600mhz, neither are OC'd! The 6800 core is 325mhz and DDR
>> of 700mhz? I am using Omega 6693 driver and playing Doom 3 @56-61
>> fps, settings:
>>
>> Medium:
>>
>> 800x600
>> 32 bpp
>> spectral lighting on
>> shadows off
>> 2x fsaa
>>
>> But I can't go any higher than that. Even when I change resolution I
>> can't
>> see the difference.
>>
>> In the game, clicking auto-detect will take it to 640x480, but it plays
> fine
>> with my settings. Can I know why a current card of such previously
>> mentioned tech be far better than what I've got? Explanations much
>> appreciated, TIA
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>
> With a 6800 you can play doom 3 at 800x600x32bpp, everything on and
> more/better fsaa, higher fps.
> Or even at 1024x768 if the rest of your system can handle the stress.
> Shadows off = less realism
> 2x fsaa pales in comparison with 4x or even 8x
> And you will probably miss some special effects like reflections and such.
>
> Newer hardware = more goodies, more tricks, better optimized = better
> picture if the game knows how to use the goodies.
> Pure clock speed doesn't say everything.
> a 6800 does more *at the same time* than a 4600 (more 'processing'
> pipelines).
> Same is true when comparing a 7800 with a 6800 (even more pipelines).
>
> This is also true for processors: a 1 GHz. Pentium 4 is faster than a 1
> GHz.
> Pentium 3.
>
> To give a very simple comparison:
> If you build a machine which can add and compare, you can multiply.
> But if you build another machine with specialized multiplication functions
> (running at the same clock speed), it can probably multiply a lot faster.
>
> Believe me, it *is* a big deal
>
> regards,
> Marcel
>
>

A fantastic source that helped me get my head around what pipelines are, and
all the other bits and pieces that make each new card better than the
previous (clock speeds asides), was www.answers.com (which, yes, in this
instance provides info from wikipedia, but it can also find results from
other sources, and it ties them all together).

Get hits from 'GeForce 7 series' or 'GeForce 6 series', or this one:

http://www.answers.com/topic/graphics-card?method=6



http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=Graphics+processing+unit&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1&linktext=Graphics%20processing%20unit

 

[Guest]

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

> This is also true for processors: a 1 GHz. Pentium 4 is faster than a 1
> GHz.
> Pentium 3.
The reverse is actually true. The P4 suffers a huge penalty hit from
pipeline stalls. That's why Intel's future chips are based on the Pentium M
( Pentium 3 derivative ).

At the same clockspeed the Pentium 3 is faster.