nvidia cards are not even(suposebly)close to DX9 standards

Based on the title, this is anti-nVidia thread.

DIE FANBOY DIE!!!

I agree somewhat, although not the die part, but see your statement as being justifiable homicide.

Really, I think this should stick more to the other thread as it's a little less inflamatory, and less accusatory before we have all the facts in.

Also I think the other post being posted in the nV forum will garner better attention for responses, but surprisingly the ATi one got more hits sofar.

Yeah I'd agree somewhat, seems more like he's amped about the new card he's getting, but he is begining to stray into the area of fanboi, and I'd hate to have to address that after the good posts we've exchanged.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

Funny thing is that it does raise some intereting points in my mind. Check the other post for my reply and see what I mean.

Funny thing is I just wrote to Fuad this morning about a different post (I bet you can guess which one if you really try ).

lol, I won't try, cuz I won't guess

Pretty much that's all PR stuff, and why you would take that over anything the InQ says I don't understand.

nV said they don't do partial precision in their drivers, but they did. They said they didn't put benchmark specific optimizations in their drivers, they did. Ati also did some things similar, and really I wouldn't take anything they say without a grain of salt. However remember it's technically not the InQ that's saying this so much as Fuad relaying what the developers are saying about Rydermark, and how it reacts to nV's hardware and software, which is something that can be verified by others.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=31799

And what you are posting to is the hardware specs, what I was mentioning earlier is what it likely is a software glitch/aspect, which seems to be what they were saying also, especially since the article expressly states;

"Nvidia doesn’t let developers use more than 16 bit and of course it is much faster than 32 bit precision.. ..Nvidia doesn’t leave you any choice, it's claimed. You simply cannot turn 24 or 32 bit precision on, you are always locked at 16 bit."

They don't say the GF6&7 can't do it, just that nV won't let them enable it.

However regardless of the performance hit, if the program calls for FP32 it should be FP32, if one can and does operate in the mode called for by the developer, that the others doesn't or can't is important to know when comparing results A to B.

What if this wasn't known and the results just showed nV as being 25% faster than ATi, but no one knew why? Would that be fair if ATi could use that 'floptimizatin' as well but didn't force it on the user?

The most important thing I think we've learned from the whole cheating/floptimizing/optimizing era, regardless of who does it, is that in the end it should be user/developers who have the ability to enable disable features, not the driver overriding all, especially not for artificial gains.

nah lol when something is good i admit it, so far i prefare ati, i had problems with nvidia cards, but now i think nvidia is the champ with its new card, isnt it? ....and to the post below lol yup i cant wait to get the new gpu lol

yup so far the Geforce 7950 GX2 rocks,but that will change with the new 1950xt/xtx cards which i think might be atis caunterpart, before the atis dx10's wil go against the newer nvidia card(forgot its name)

I don't need to know the manufacturer, all I need to know is what's the cheapest, has the best warranty, and the best performance per dollar.

They can be made by Krusty the Klown for all I care...

And yes, quality components (thanks to Illuminatirex)

A lot to ask for, I know.

But if you find all that, the brand is irrevelent.

I feel the same way about Intel and AMD. I nearly bought a Pentium D, but went AMD because of currently better performance (according the the CPU charts).

I am loyal though. If I find a manufacturer with the above qualities, I'll stick with them.

Unless the competition is cheaper, better performing, better warrantied, and has better components (not sure how you'd judge that).

Actually that's not true the FireGL cards had HDCP on DVI as an option before the GF7950GX2, and more importantly Sapphire's got the X1600-HDMI for sale;
http://www.ncix.com/products/index [...] e=SAPPHIRE

Which IS the ONLY HDMI equipped HDCP card on the retail market (sony sells PCs with specialized GF6200s, but you can't buy the cards alone).

So perhaps a little more research to get your facts stragiht, eh!

But it looks like it won't matter for a while;
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multi [...] 35206.html

Once again you missed the X1600pro, which can also do HDR+FSAA FP16 throughout (as you already know), which the GF7950GX2 still can't despite costing almost as much a the FireGL.

To me HDCP makes more sense on a HTPC type card anyways, so the X1600 pro is perfect for it (and HDMI), and for nV it's be perfect on the GF7600 series. I had heard someone else like eVGA/BFG/ASUS/Gigabyte was going to launch an HDCP-DVI GF7600 based card this summer, but nothing yet.