Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Nvidia, please, give it a rest.

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 8:08:19 AM

Just ran across this gem from another website.

http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MzE1NjYsLCxoZW50a...

I'd just like to say this is just nuts. G80. G92. 3 different GTS cards. 9800GTX with smaller memory stats then the 8800GTX that it replaces. The 8800GS that fits in ??? And now all of these changes? They might be making solid cards, but how are we supposed to know which on the good ones with this horrible naming scheme? I'm sure even Nvidia fanboys would admit that AMDs scheme is better...

Come on Nvidia. Stop releasing new names and start releasing new cards!

More about : nvidia give rest

April 3, 2008 10:10:46 AM

But that requires them to spend money instead of gorging us for every cent they can...
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 1:04:35 PM

I don't care what they call them. As long as my games look pretty they can call them 9999POS for all I care.
Related resources
April 3, 2008 1:36:24 PM

oooo Shiney! :) 

Look everyone, Jay2tall's got one of them new 9999POS cards!!

I want one!

Says the idiot still running the 8600gt cause he's cheap (er, broke).
April 3, 2008 1:44:11 PM

jay2tall said:
I don't care what they call them. As long as my games look pretty they can call them 9999POS for all I care.


Agreed. I'll take 2 of those for SLI please. Are they coming out with an POS-GX2? Maybe I'll just wait for that one..
April 3, 2008 1:46:11 PM

blackened144 said:
Are they coming out with an POS-GX2?


I thought that was already out...? :kaola: 
April 3, 2008 1:47:03 PM

jay2tall said:
I don't care what they call them. As long as my games look pretty they can call them 9999POS for all I care.


AMEN LOL
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 2:08:39 PM

mford66215 said:
oooo Shiney! :) 
Says the idiot still running the 8600gt cause he's cheap (er, broke).

You can get a Palit 9600gt for $109 after rebate: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=E...
Just remember selling Blood Plasma fetches more $$$ than donating blood. You can always donate sperm and bone marrow (that fetches ALOT I hear). haha
April 3, 2008 2:29:43 PM

Yeah, I hear you. Enough with refreshes and a "new" card with same old technology with downgrades and so on. Bring on the new generation already.
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 2:35:26 PM

John Vuong said:
Yeah, I hear you. Enough with refreshes and a "new" card with same old technology with downgrades and so on. Bring on the new generation already.

I understand they really did not increase performance with the g80 to g92 switch. They really brought down the prices and power consumption. THAT was a big deal to me. You no longer need a 700W+ power supply to run the top dogs. And with everything trying to go "GREEN" it was inevitable.
But the 9800 series is really bugging me, nothing is new besides label, clock speeds, and oh the GX2 that flips a card, slaps them together, and shares a cooler. WHooppppie!.. Out of the 9800 series the only one that makes sense is the GX2 because you get 2 cards in one sli'ed package. That will cater to the non SLI supported mobo group, but that is such a small market.
The 9600GT is nice because it's cheap and runs most games reasonably well, and SLI'ed they rock a hot totty for $300.
April 3, 2008 2:45:38 PM

This is more of a Blog then a Tech Question , but it has many answers to many questions currently being asked by tech hardware buyers. So read on and hopefully you gain something.

I think some of you are slightly confused about Nvidia and AMD and how this whole graphics card battle works. If most of you would stop insulting the companies and look at their mindset, you would clearly see why they do what they do.

First off, yes you might say I am an "Nvidia Fan Boy". But please.. its for good reason. They make the best video cards this side of the moon. Most of you know this to be a fact.

The naming schemes are actually quite simple,

GS = Low End version of that cards chipset, or in the past the AGP offering of a particular model, as in 6800 GS, 7800 GS ETC.

GTS = Midrange version, which typically includes more features, more power and more ram than the lower class GS.

GTX= High End, for the enthusiast or performance gamer requiring the best performance you can practically buy.

GX2= Typically two PCB's being cooled and run in Sli, but designed in function to act as one massive card, with awesome graphics capability.

ULTRA= The Best of the Best, for Extreme resolutions and gaming systems that you want to rock any game (Except Crysis) with.

They give "you" the consumer 4 separate options in quality and performance much like a car manufacturer will make a 4, 6, and 8 cylinder engine to fit into everyones budget.

Now as far as the names go, 5900, 6800, 7800, 7900, 8800, and now 9800 all represent a new generation of technology for which a new chipset or card spec as been created to meet the requirements of the latest software. Again I will reference car manufacturers who do the same thing with engine size, displacement and horse power.

Consistently changing the product to be stronger and faster(better) to meet customers demands , is something that every manufacturer (who knows what they are doing) does to maintain product demand, ouput, and yes profits as well.

Now granted many of you might say "How come there are 2 versions of an 8800 GTS? The answer is simple again.

Because they knew that AMD was going to release its new cards before the release of the 9800 series. If they made the consumers wait all the way until the 9800 series launch with no fresh product to keep our appetites at bay, and consumers had the option of purchasing the new AMD cards instead of waiting for the new 9800's , they would and Nvidia would lose a percentage of its hold on the graphics card market.

So they release a tiny morsel to keep our taste buds craving that Nvidia flavor by putting out the new G92 chip but in a slightly toned down flavor. However still strong enough to keep us interested in whats next. Then we all jump on it, we like it and we want more power, more speed, and more frames per second.

I don't know if many of you realize this but graphics cards sure have come a long way in the 15 years I have been installing them. Let me tell you something, I remember when there was only onboard video, and when the first Geforce was released. I remember 4mb of onboard memory, and a whopping 8 mb total system memory on a 386 or a 486 DX2 processor. I also remember installing the first Pentium processor and thinking that 50 mhz was fast. Hell, we used to think 100 mb of storage space was huge. This was of course when games like Doom and Wolfenstein 3-D came on 4 or 5 floppy disks and you ran them from the DOS prompt.

People just stop complaining, find your budget, research your card choices and pick the one that best fits your needs for the time being, don't go with the latest technology if you don't need to. Or perhaps go with the best you can buy, the choice is up to you.

But what you need to realize is that nomatter what, technology will always change, there will always be some crazy name change or model number, and companies like Nvidia and AMD will always make graphics cards to fit into every persons budget at different levels of life. Whether you are a diehard gamer looking for 150 fps, or a grandma who just wants to surf the web on occasion, these companies must cater to all of us to stay profitable and in business.

Just bask in the glory of the technology as it changes around you, watch it become more powerful than you will ever need. ( Unless your playing Crysis.. HA!!)
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 3:06:47 PM

^
|
yes and I have 2 words. MARKETING GIMMICK

That's all that when on with the 8800GT/GTS and and the 9800's.
The 9800GTX uses NO new technology. The 8800GT/GTS uses the same GPU that is in the 9800, the G92 GPU. YES the 9800 GTX is a different gpu than the 8800GTX, but is not a "new" chip.

The refresh and relabeling is all PURE marketing. I see that in the company I work for. They just relabel products and affiliate company names, its the same people, the same applications, the same products, just a different label with minor changes.

I am a tech guy. I don't look at labels, I look at specifications, benchmarks, features. So to the Marketing types out there. You can take a big pile of poop, rename it, shine it up, remarket it, but it's still a steaming pile of POOP!
April 3, 2008 3:21:56 PM

I don't know if many of you realize this but graphics cards sure have come a long way in the 15 years I have been installing them

No, I hadn't noticed :heink: 
April 3, 2008 4:02:29 PM

dragoncyber said:
This was of course when games like Doom and Wolfenstein 3-D came on 4 or 5 floppy disks and you ran them from the DOS prompt.



Wolfenstein 3-D FTW!!! That was my first FPS ever. Man I miss Windows 3.1 Floppies are pretty bad axe too. Tandy 1000 rocked the HOWZ!!!
April 3, 2008 4:05:03 PM

Selling bone marrow. . . Sounds painful and not too good for your bones.
April 3, 2008 4:11:48 PM

I would rather just donate my entire leg.
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 4:16:38 PM

jfutima said:
I don't know if many of you realize this but graphics cards sure have come a long way in the 15 years I have been installing them

No, I hadn't noticed :heink: 

And stupid people have multiplied! Every see the movie "Idiocracy"? Need I say more?
April 3, 2008 4:25:38 PM

dragoncyber said:

I remember when there was only onboard video, and when the first Geforce was released. I remember 4mb of onboard memory, and a whopping 8 mb total system memory on a 386 or a 486 DX2 processor. I also remember installing the first Pentium processor and thinking that 50 mhz was fast. Hell, we used to think 100 mb of storage space was huge. This was of course when games like Doom and Wolfenstein 3-D came on 4 or 5 floppy disks and you ran them from the DOS prompt.


Graphics adapters have been available as seperate cards since the days of 8088 processors and hercules 64k monochrome adapters for PC's Im sure I remember first time I saw onboard video thinking it was a new technology, bit like integrated IO, I remember building PC's and having a huge choice of different IO cards to choose from (fdd IDE serial parralel ports etc were all controlled by an add in card :D  ) and thinking that onboard ones were likely to be cheap and nasty :D 

Mind you I also remember building PC's with half a megabyte of ram :lol:  and later drooling over 1mb cirrus logic VESA video cards I had to make do with a 512k one at the time but upgraded later :D  About the same time as I was humming and harring over EDO ram :lol: 

Mind you my first IT job I worked with 8" floppies :D  But as far back as I can remember PC's have had Video on a seperate add in card, rather than being on motherboard only!
April 3, 2008 5:06:24 PM

what if we all just threw away our gaming pcs and didn't buy a new one or any upgrades for lets say five years. then consoles would die and computers. then we don't have to worry. we need to get 6 billion people(at least) to do this.
April 3, 2008 5:13:31 PM

blackened144 said:
Are they coming out with an POS-GX2? Maybe I'll just wait for that one..


basketcase said:
I thought that was already out...? :kaola: 


ROFL. Good one, basketcase. [:wr2] :sol: 
April 3, 2008 5:15:55 PM

jay2tall said:
... You can take a big pile of poop, rename it, shine it up, remarket it, but it's still a steaming pile of POOP!
Yeah, but the next one is coming out with a golden lining!
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 5:20:51 PM

ctbaars said:
Yeah, but the next one is coming out with a golden lining!

NOO! but it now has (2) PCI-E power connectors and another SLI connector for TRI-SLI

OH yeah and we rounded the corners on the coolers cover.
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2008 6:14:49 PM

At one point they were talking about graphics chips looking like processors, interchangeable. Whatever happened to that project?
Nvidia get back to work!!! You are slacking off!
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 6:49:29 PM

evongugg said:
At one point they were talking about graphics chips looking like processors, interchangeable. Whatever happened to that project?
Nvidia get back to work!!! You are slacking off!

I can never see this happening. They do 2 totally different things. They are good at 2 totally difference things. I can see a single chip with CPU and GPU on it, but not one universal chip. It would be like making an engine that work in both a sports car and Pickup Truck (not sports truck, I mean utility truck so don't give me crap about SRT-10 and Lightning)
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 7:06:25 PM

Quote:
I think some of you are slightly confused about Nvidia and AMD and how this whole graphics card battle works.


Oh goodie, and a "newbie" is here to save the day and enlighten us all! Lets all sit down and listen to the pearls of wisdom.

Quote:
First off, yes you might say I am an "Nvidia Fan Boy". But please.. its for good reason. They make the best video cards this side of the moon.


Hmmm, off to a rough start. Lets start providing links.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
3650 with a free copy of witcher, $62 counting shipping and rebates.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Cheapest non open box 8600GT/GTS on newegg. $82 counting shipping, no extras in the bundle.

Here is an AMD card $20 cheaper then the Nvidia one. Comes with a nice RPG with it. For the price, you might even say you get a free copy of the game. So is the 3650 as good as the 8600GT?

http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/03/05/the_best_gaming_...

"NOTE: Avoid the DDR2 versions of the 8600 GT! The GDDR3 versions are the recommended cards, DDR2 equipped 8600 GTs will be notably slower."

Yes, the cheap Nvidia card that I listed is a DDR2 model. I know that talks about the 2600XT. The 3650 is more or less a die shrink, and pretty much behaves as a 2600XT. Same speed (or possibly faster), cheaper, and a free game? Who really makes the better cards? Perhaps you meant to say that Nvidia makes the fastest available cards. That I believe, but that doesn't make them the best.

Quote:
The naming schemes are actually quite simple,

GS = Low End version of that cards chipset, or in the past the AGP offering of a particular model, as in 6800 GS, 7800 GS ETC.
GTS = Midrange version, which typically includes more features, more power and more ram than the lower class GS.
GTX= High End, for the enthusiast or performance gamer requiring the best performance you can practically buy.
GX2= Typically two PCB's being cooled and run in Sli, but designed in function to act as one massive card, with awesome graphics capability.
ULTRA= The Best of the Best, for Extreme resolutions and gaming systems that you want to rock any game (Except Crysis) with.


Where is the GT? (payback for your car model "rant" I'm not that dumb.) Did you even bother to read my link? This is what I'm upset about. (from my link)

Quote:
There will be some lower end migrations of 8600 series parts to GDDR3 memories and they will get bumped to 9500 series names.


So the 9500(GT?) will be the same as a 8600? Its the same chip, but with a new name?

Quote:
those 100,000 “8800 GS” GPUs are still floating around after having been out of the reach of even folks with 10 foot poles…enter the GeForce 9600 GSO


Can't sell them as an 8800, so we'll slap a 9600 name on them and see how they do? I get the feeling you saw I was picking on Nvidia, and decided to leap to their defense. READ MY LINK! I don't give a crap who makes what. I've been very tempted to replace my x1800XT with a 9600GT. (can't find one in my price range that has VIVO.) What I take exception to is give new card the same name as old ones. (8800GTS) Renaming old cards that did poorly with new names. (9500, 8600GSO.) If you are going to do this, at least give them a different final two numbers. 8650, 9550, etc. How many different cards do we need that have the 8600 number? One of which could be 8800 based?

Quote:
I remember when there was only onboard video, and when the first Geforce was released.


Huh? Geforce was not the first video card. Even my 286 had a video card. I don't think I was on onboard until my dell 700MHz Celeron.

Quote:
I also remember installing the first Pentium processor and thinking that 50 mhz was fast.


Didn't the first pentiums ship in 60 and 75MHz flavors? I remember having 20MB and 80MB harddrives in my 286. Thanks for the flash back.

Quote:
But what you need to realize is that nomatter what, technology will always change, there will always be some crazy name change or model number, and companies like Nvidia and AMD will always make graphics cards to fit into every persons budget at different levels of life. Whether you are a diehard gamer looking for 150 fps, or a grandma who just wants to surf the web on occasion, these companies must cater to all of us to stay profitable and in business.


Ok, finally something I can agree with. They do need to cater to different markets, but to make our (read: my) life easier, they shouldn't do this. Change the #%#$^# number, don't just keep adding suffex's, or worse, just name them all 8800GTS.

April 3, 2008 7:42:45 PM

Nvidia defanatly blew it with the naming scheme. The G92's should have been the 8900 series, with the new G100 (or N200 or watever they've changed the codename to) being the 9800. Why they didnt do it this way like they did with the 7 series is beyond me.
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 3, 2008 8:01:59 PM

LOL, everything was fine with the seven series. Made sense, no problems.

Seeing as the current 9 series is more of a refresh of the 8 series, I wonder if the problems are due to stretching out the current line until AMD gets its act together. We might not have seen any of these cards if Nvidia had to actually release something new to compete.
April 3, 2008 8:16:40 PM

Hey man, you apparently have alot of hostility inside you. At no time did I insult you, or your ranking on this forum. Just to let you know I have been posting on this websites forums for years and only changed my account, that's why it says "Newbie", and if you are going to judge someones knowledge or wisdom by ranking them on how many posts they have written on a forum , then your are worse off then I thought.

I was not jumping to Nvidia's defense, only clarifying some of the things you stated , and why the naming and numbering structure exists the way that it does. But apparently since you dont like to read someone's post, only pick what you dont like about it out and try to shred it apart.

Like when I said I remember the first Geforce, and you come back with:

"Huh? Geforce was not the first video card. Even my 286 had a video card. I don't think I was on onboard until my dell 700MHz Celeron."


If you had any understanding of the english language you'd see that at no time did I state that the Geforce video card was the first graphics card. I only stated that I remember the first Geforce card, so I salute you Captain grammar and comprehension.

Also onboard video was available on a motherboard way before any 700mhz processors existed. Way before Dell existed for that matter. Despite what you may remember having in your system, or what you might have read on Dell's website. Just the fact that you owned a Dell shows how wise and knowledgable you are.

Also about your little Pentium comment , I never said that the first pentium was 50mhz, I said I remember installing the first pentium and thinking that 50Mhz was fast. I'm only stating that I remember those things.

But you are one of those guys that likes to pick fights for no reason at all, nowhere in my message did I single out anything that you wrote or point fingers at your knowledge level. I wrote what I did only to clear the air about the cards differences and naming sequences and the purposes behind the marketing strategy.

OH, and for the record I said Nvidia makes the best graphics cards this side of the moon. Which most of you know to be fact. So if you have something on the AMD side thats faster than a 9800 GX2, thats a single slot design not 4 cards plugged into four PCI Express slots, then bring it forward, and I will gladly retract my statment. But until AMD makes it's next biggest baddest card that Nvidia can't top within a 2 month time frame , my statement stands as......YES!!! NVIDIA HAS THE BEST GRAPHICS CARDS THIS SIDE OF THE MOON!!

Have a nice day.


April 3, 2008 9:31:57 PM

jay2tall said:
I don't care what they call them. As long as my games look pretty they can call them 9999POS for all I care.


Exactly.

Those who know, get their card, and then carry on, knowing they have got the best for their money & their set up / resolution.

Those who don't, can log on to forums like these and ask for help.
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 4, 2008 6:39:48 AM

What hostility am I supposed to have? Am I really hostile, or are you taking exception to my calling you out?

There is a difference between calling someone a newbie and calling them a "newbie". Do you see the quotes? That means you are new to the forums, not new to computers. Although based off of your ideas about computers, I do wonder about how much you really know about them.

Quote:
I was not jumping to Nvidia's defense, only clarifying some of the things you stated , and why the naming and numbering structure exists the way that it does. But apparently since you dont like to read someone's post, only pick what you dont like about it out and try to shred it apart.


Wrong. What I do is try to prevent FUD from being spread. There was no Pentium 50MHz. Nvidia doesn't always make the best cards. (they still haven't released a DX10.1 card for crying out loud.) Up until the 8 series, they weren't even on top.

Quote:
But you are one of those guys that likes to pick fights for no reason at all, nowhere in my message did I single out anything that you wrote or point fingers at your knowledge level. I wrote what I did only to clear the air about the cards differences and naming sequences and the purposes behind the marketing strategy.


Again, not trying to pick a fight at all. I like facts. They make sense to me. Math is good, english sucks because your feminist instructor gives you a C while giving girls in the class B's enough though the paper isn't typed which is supposed to be a requirement for submitting the paper. I'm not calling you out because I hate you, or feel that everything you said was wrong. I made mention of what I did because I felt, just like you did, that some air needed to be cleared so that people didn't get the wrong facts. If you get mad about that, sorry. You could engage me in some rational discussion about what I wrote, or you could just accuse me of being a nut and end your post with a sentence written in caps. Up to you. If it makes you feel better...

Quote:
Now granted many of you might say "How come there are 2 versions of an 8800 GTS? The answer is simple again.

Because they knew that AMD was going to release its new cards before the release of the 9800 series. If they made the consumers wait all the way until the 9800 series launch with no fresh product to keep our appetites at bay, and consumers had the option of purchasing the new AMD cards instead of waiting for the new 9800's , they would and Nvidia would lose a percentage of its hold on the graphics card market.

So they release a tiny morsel to keep our taste buds craving that Nvidia flavor by putting out the new G92 chip but in a slightly toned down flavor. However still strong enough to keep us interested in whats next. Then we all jump on it, we like it and we want more power, more speed, and more frames per second.


I don't see anything in there I would disagree with. It at least seems reasonable. I don't think you have inside knowledge of Nvidia's business plans, but what you wrote is not outside the realm of possibility, so I ignored it. But if you want a pat on the back, well said.

What I take exception to, and the point you seemed to have missed in that post, is that they can release the g92, but they should have called it something else. 8800GTS was already taken. Calling it 8800GTS 512MB is dumb. Whats wrong with 8850GTS? 8900GTS? 8800g92? Any of these would have been better then what they did. The bigger problem seems to be that they STILL haven't learned their lesson if the link I provided is right. If they are going to turn the 8600 into the 9500, that is a bad move. Leave the 8600 alone and if you really want a 9500, bring out a new chip.
April 4, 2008 7:59:51 AM

4745454b said:


What I take exception to, and the point you seemed to have missed in that post, is that they can release the g92, but they should have called it something else. 8800GTS was already taken. Calling it 8800GTS 512MB is dumb. Whats wrong with 8850GTS? 8900GTS? 8800g92? Any of these would have been better then what they did. The bigger problem seems to be that they STILL haven't learned their lesson if the link I provided is right. If they are going to turn the 8600 into the 9500, that is a bad move. Leave the 8600 alone and if you really want a 9500, bring out a new chip.



The confusion started when 8800GT 512mb got released. According to past releases, the GT has always been a notch below the GTS. Had they called the 8800GT, the 8900GT... much of the confusion could have been avoided. From there on, the new 8800GTS 512mb version could be named 8900GTS.

Gotta admit, it's a mess right now.
April 4, 2008 11:01:34 AM

Seriously, why is NVIDIA waiting for ATI to catch up to them? Can't they just release a monster card already?

If you asked me both ATI and NVIDIA needs to get their hand out of the sandpit already and make better cards, not releasing refreshes that nobody really wants.
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2008 11:40:01 AM

Im still waiting for the newbie to come on here asking why his sawed in two 9800GTX2 doesnt give him true SLI?
April 4, 2008 12:14:54 PM

I own two 9800GX2s as well as two 9800GTXs and they are fastyerv than my 8800ultras and my 8800G92 GTS. Thats all that matters to me.The graphics have improved and look fantastic. What more do you need. If you do not like it dont buy it. I ran a single 9800GTX yesterday with my whole system at stock settings and scored 16,102 in 3dm06 on a single GTX. In SLi 17,999. If i overclocked them, they will do better, but for $600 [2 9800GTX's] i'm happy. [$`1200 for my two GX2s] and like it shows in Toms review, the 9800GTX beat AMDs x2
April 4, 2008 1:39:42 PM

I am going to have to repost..
An important point to make on the subject of allowing Nvidia to pass off their remaining wafer inventory and rebranding it under the umbrella of a hyped up marketing plan designed to maximize shareholder value whilst taking advantage of their existing customer base..

It is important for those who have currently and through our hard work purchased a fine GPU specimen from the Nvidia 8800 line to thoroughly examine exactly how Nvidia's marketing department decided that '08 was to be the year that garbage dumping their remaining inventory upon the unknowingly, not mindful, and negligent general population has set the stage for a 40% drop in the stock price, forfeiting market share to ATI as well as served to take for granted the fact that like most of us on this forum take our time and have the intelligence to examine thoroughly what we are buying and why. Cheers! may we share drink and be merry!

The rest that don't see the obvious and relinquish themselves to blissful negligence and thoughtlessness -
CAVEAT EMPTOR
Thank goodness for these forums empowering us towards informed decision making.
Best of luck with your purchases..

Crysis @ 35-40 FPS AA @ 1920X1080 = Worthless.. Crysis has now been out how long?

The infamous GX2? Even though Nvidia took their sweet time in getting the drivers right and delayed the release, still has driver problems = Worthless

A card that "points inward" and traps the heat only to dissipate it through tiny slots not even exiting the case = Worthless

Running quad SLI without drivers and a heat problem as well as a horrible electricity bill = Worthless

If I were running the show I would have the whole marketing department and the developers line up and get it over with. "You're fired, you're fired, you're cool, you're fired, you're fired, you're fired, pack your *&%$ and get out, You're finished, you're fired".. on down the line.

ATI needs to get it's head out of it's %SS and we might see Nvidia taking the GPU production a little more seriously.

Now is the time for ATI to transition market share. They already posted a loss of $3.38 billion for 2007. If I were ATI, I would take market share by developing the fastest cards ever offered to the public and take another loss in 2008. The new cards should incorporate physics processing and run 2-3 times faster than the ultra. They should also be tendering offers for a buyout and look to leverage off the cash flow position from the new partnership.

Oh yeah and one more thing.. Dragoncyber, you know what the problem with your BULL*&^% logic is.. The guys on this forum are too smart and have the ability to read between the lines so you can take your stance on defending Nvidia to another forum - WE ARE NOT BUYING IT.. Thanks anyway.

Forever faithful to truth and honesty,

BW11
April 4, 2008 3:03:21 PM

Hey guys, again at no time was I jumping to their defense, I am just stating that as of right now, (this very moment in time) they do have and currently manufacture the fastest graphics cards available. But yes only less than 2-3 months ago ATI was on top w/ the 3870X2.

All I am saying is give credit where credit is due. I am not an Nvidia fan because the cards looks cool, or their naming schemes are confusing to the general public or even that they always have the best cards for the best prices. I am a tech and I build computers, and have been since I was 14, and the truth of the matter is that Nvidia just works. The drivers are (in most cases) more refined and easier to install saving time and effort.

Nvidia cards when compared with ATI of the same price point typically out perform their ATI counterparts by a healthy margin. Benchmark tests show this to be true all over the web, including here on TOM's.
Just look at the VGA Charts here on TOMS's the top three cards for almost every benchmark are Nvidia. You cant argue that.

Most of the software companies who develop games for the pc do their development and testing with Nvidia based graphics cards, and why?? To insure maximum compatibility, since the majority of the world utilize Nvidia graphics cards everyday for their gaming and 3D rendering needs.

I personally am not very enthusiastic about shelling out almost 600.00 for a graphics card (9800 GX2) that only marginally performs better than an 8800 Ultra. 30-50% increases are not at all what I was expecting. I wanted a doubling effect to occur like when we went from 6800 series to 7800 and 7900 series.. that was a performance leap.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with some of the things you guys say that yes; just increasing the clock speeds a little to gain small margins of performance and calling it a new card is wrong and lazy. But again I go back and state, that Nvidia is still on top. This is a fact, and nomatter how much you guys get pissed off about it; we are at the mercy of the marketing and development gods. Sorry.

I wish I was at the helm steering the graphic giant. It would make sense to better last generations cards by atleast a 100% performance margin at every level. But thats not what they have decided to do and it sucks, but they still make the best graphics cards this side of the moon. The tests, the sales, the developers, the numbers, THE FACTS, all show it's true.
April 4, 2008 4:50:02 PM

stan116 said:
I own two 9800GX2s as well as two 9800GTXs and they are fastyerv than my 8800ultras and my 8800G92 GTS. Thats all that matters to me.The graphics have improved and look fantastic. What more do you need. If you do not like it dont buy it. I ran a single 9800GTX yesterday with my whole system at stock settings and scored 16,102 in 3dm06 on a single GTX. In SLi 17,999. If i overclocked them, they will do better, but for $600 [2 9800GTX's] i'm happy. [$`1200 for my two GX2s] and like it shows in Toms review, the 9800GTX beat AMDs x2



Oh and Stan116, I don't know how you have your system configured or maybe there is a bottle neck somewhere, but with only (2) 8800 GT' s in SLI I hit 17,500 easily. So I would hope that (2) 9800 GTX's could stomp me for more than a mere 400+ points in 3DMARK06.

Maybe your processor is the issue, but I am running a Q6600 (go stepping) @ 3.2 ghz on air cooling , w/ 4gb DDR2 6400 ram. My cards are running 715/1000 overclocks, on stock cooling. I am running raid (3x Western Digital Hdd striped) all on a BFG 680i Sli board, and I am powering it with a ThermalTake Toughpower 1200 watt psu. I leave the side of my case off and I have (5) 120mm fans blowing during benching, + (2) 80mm's blowing directly across the CPU heatsink, which is a Zalman CNPS9000.

I just think there must be a kink somewhere in your system, because I have seen those cards perform much better than that on other sites. GoodLuck.
April 4, 2008 5:20:25 PM

I really wish ATI hadn't been purchased by AMD; if they had remained independent, they wouldn't have missed release dates, which would then mean more money, and would be able to produce faster products. Nvidia on the other hand has the money, but will not release a new product until they're forced into creating a card faster than the competition's.
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 4, 2008 6:19:44 PM

Wait a minute stan, adding another card gets you less then 1900 more points? Might want to look into that, I would think that you should get a bit more.

Quote:
Nvidia cards when compared with ATI of the same price point typically out perform their ATI counterparts by a healthy margin. Benchmark tests show this to be true all over the web, including here on TOM's.


Not true, I already proved this in a previous post with the 3650/2600XT and the 8600GT. Not only are the AMD cards cheaper, but they cost less to. Depending on settings, there are either faster, or just behind. The problem with your thinking is the last half of that paragraph.

Quote:
Just look at the VGA Charts here on TOMS's the top three cards for almost every benchmark are Nvidia. You cant argue that.


I never tried to argue that. I wouldn't be surprised if the top three or four cards for every benchmark came from Nvidia. Might even be the top 5 cards now that we have some high end 9 series cards on the market. But the problem is with your logic. The top cards for a benchmark doesn't prove that Nvidia is the best choice for each price point. Again, as I already showed, If you are spending ~$50-$75 dollars, your best best is the 3650/2600XT. Seeing as you liked to quote Toms, I did also. Look at the under $100 price point, how many Nvidia cards do you see?

Quote:
I am a tech and I build computers, and have been since I was 14, and the truth of the matter is that Nvidia just works. The drivers are (in most cases) more refined and easier to install saving time and effort...Most of the software companies who develop games for the pc do their development and testing with Nvidia based graphics cards, and why?? To insure maximum compatibility, since the majority of the world utilize Nvidia graphics cards everyday for their gaming and 3D rendering needs.


I believe some of this is related. First, when was the last time you used an AMD/ATI video card? I have used then since the rage days, never had a problem with drivers. (Neither did I have problems with my Voodoo3, or Nvidia TNT2.) A 4MB AGP Rage card was in the first computer that I had a DVD drive in, worked great. (P2 @ 300MHz with 384MBs of ram watching Resident Evil 1 on my 21" CRT) Second, did you ever stop to wonder if many people use Nvidia simply because they remember these supposed horrible ATI drivers? Third, as I already showed, Nvidia isn't the best at every price point. How many times should I say this before people stop to listen?

Although my last three video cards were ATI, I'm not tied to them. Again, I hear that $109 9600GT calling. I have limited funds however, and I have other things that need to be replaced first, so I doubt I'm upgrading any time soon.

AMD is supposed to be releasing some new cards soon. I don't believe the 4870 is all that people think it will be, but perhaps we'll see some nice discounts on current cards, and maybe the 4650 will be a good performer. With any luck Nvidia will run out of old stock and never repeat this again. 3-4 years from now we will have all forgotten this.
April 4, 2008 7:02:07 PM

Not sure why Nvidia would be waiting for AMD/ATI to catch up when the 3870x2 was the fastest card available until the GX2 was released.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 4, 2008 7:04:57 PM

Yeah, I don't buy it. I think they just couldn't find a way to improve their "perfect" 8800 series :lol: 
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2008 7:35:08 PM

Its soo old saying ATIs drivers are bad, as bad and old as saying that ATI has better IQ. Both ATI and nVidia are capable of matching IQ, you just may have to tinker with nVidias a little. I agree with 4745454b, it sounds like more of a lack of knowledge using ATI products hearing some of these statements. I equate nVidias current situation to AMDs current cpu situation in one way. Disappointment. Like was said, its been 17 months nVidia, and this is the best you can do? nVidia makes the best gpus currently, true, but all this 8xxx and 9xxx crap is to only make money for them, and had benefitted us little or not at all. I remember highly anticipating ATIs 2900, and was let down by that offering, and simply went with nVidia. I remember reading these forums, and every pro nVidia fanboy was laughing at ATI, and all pounding their chests saying "wait until the G100" Problem is, their chests are caved in, and their arms are tired, cause its been sooo long with the no show, and weve had how many number changes, and no decernable improvements with nVidias cards, I thing more than a few nVidia fanboys are going the way of the AMD cpu fanboys. nVidias only, and Ill repeat ONLY savings grace is that they currently have the fastest product, unlike AMDs cpu. So really nVidia, after 17 months, is this the best you can do and the confusing to Joe blow out there number scheme, which insilts us, its time to get it together
April 4, 2008 7:42:33 PM

Dont understand why ppl need to vent so much, Its your money spend it on w.e you want. Don't call us stupid for spending money on w.e:) 

Our money our rules. K I think that should be the case closer.

Nvidia doesn't have a gun to your head to buy different varieties.

What's next? Are you going to go to McDonalds and bitch at them for having different chicken burgers???

Nvidia has this many because of cost reduction. ITs been 1 year and a half since a series release...I think it was about time they release another don't you??

Anyways Stop bitching and buy w.e you want. Your money! bye bye
April 4, 2008 7:43:30 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Its soo old saying ATIs drivers are bad


Oops, did I use that excuse already this week? :lol: 
April 4, 2008 7:46:03 PM

if your stupid enough to go by a naming scheme to buy a video card, u shouldnt be buying in the first place.

do your homework before you buy, and before u talk.

nub

and 9600gt is actually a good name for the card. new core.

shows less power, less stream processors, but it runs with the big boys
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2008 7:46:51 PM

lol
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2008 7:56:16 PM

Understand this, Ive always said, going from a DX9 solution, going to a nVidia card for top performance IS the way to go. If youve upgraded from a G80 88xx series, I dont think youve seen better than a 30% improvement, and thats NOT including the Ultra or the GTX. And the 8800GTS has been out forever as well. I cant say alot about ATI either since theyve improved, and even held the top breifly, but the only thing thats done any of us any good is that ATI DID compete, which subsequently dropped the prices for all these different solutions. Im still waiting for something/some company to come in with a much improved solution, one thatll rock Crysis, and any future games, that runs DX10.1, doesnt eat a hole in the ozone, and I can afford without guilt (tho thatd be hard, cause Im mostly guilt free)
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 4, 2008 8:30:06 PM

I will bitch at McDs if they sell 8 piece nuggets that have less meat in them then the 6 piece. Of if to get rid of their extra 6 piece meals they sell them as 5 piece. You get the picture.

No body is holding a gun, and you should do your research, but it would be helpful if the naming scheme made a bit more sense. Thats what I've been saying. If the link I provided is true, then Nvidia hasn't figured this out yet, as they want to muddy the water some more.
April 4, 2008 8:40:22 PM

business will be business. The same thing happens with cars too. Corolla CE, S , XRS. Different name, different features, different power.

If people are dumb enough to fall into the gap, that's their prob for not researching it. I would do the same if I were nvidia. Why not make money off the absent minded and idiots?? Thats what today's market strives on.

:) 
April 5, 2008 5:53:53 AM

maybe they, like me think people should know a little more about comps if they are going to be buying something like the new products.

if u dont know anything about specs, or reviews. why bother

and amen liquid lol
!