Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

"GeForce FX notes"updated in buyers' guide

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 5, 2003 9:39:36 PM

I apologize for taking too much time. It's done at last.

Post your comments.

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
December 5, 2003 10:10:16 PM

where's FX5950 and 5700 dude? keep in mind FX5700Ultra is nearly identify in terms of performance in DX8 and 9 against 9600XT

RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
FX5700Ultra, the next Ti4200? seems so
December 5, 2003 10:31:23 PM

FX5950 Ultra is not better than R9800 XT

FX5700 is surely very compeatitive with R9600XT in DX8 games, but in DX9 it's still slower than R9600XT/PRO (though lot better than FX5600 Ultra). Moreover, it doesn't cost equal to R9600 PRO or lot less than R9600XT. I wouldn't say it's the best buy even if I included it in the buyers' guide.

Do we really need to buy GeForce FX cards? I don't want to add them just because to make people beleive that the buyers' guide not is ATI biased.

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
Related resources
December 5, 2003 11:24:07 PM

You don't understand, just because the FXs dont perform AS well as the Radeons doesn't mean they're crap, they are still very Capable cards. I know people who can play all the games they like using a FX5600 and be completely satisfied.

I would like all the FXs to be put back, there's nothing wrong with them, its like saying because Nissan is better than Toyota in every way, we all should boycott Toyota.

RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
FX5700Ultra, the next Ti4200? seems so
December 5, 2003 11:58:37 PM

That took way to long! You're fired!!






























































Ok, you can come back but at half the pay.

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"
December 6, 2003 12:00:27 AM

Quote:
I would like all the FXs to be put back, there's nothing wrong with them, its like saying because Nissan is better than Toyota in every way, we all should boycott Toyota.

In this case, we shouldn't boycott Toyota, but Nissan would be the automatic choice.

nVidia cards have no advantage over ATI cards. The FX5700 does a decent job in DX8 games, but DX9 is still inferior. Radeons have equally good DX8 performance and better DX9. And both cards cost roughly same. So what's the automatic choice? The buyers' guide can't help people if he wants to stick to ATI/nVidia.

I'm waiting for more response.

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
December 6, 2003 12:03:04 AM

I'd have the FX's in there and then just not recommend them at all.
December 6, 2003 12:59:45 AM

I agree that they belong on there. I would stress that they are a good card but that the competition from ATI is better. That will make everyone happy. If someone is dead set on buying a Nvidia card, which we have seen here, then let them see what the best is from Nvidia at least. It's their loss if they go that route but we might as well try to help them find the best card from Nvidia.

My 2 cents.

_________________________________________
<font color=red>12 bit... The way games are meant to be played!</font color=red>
December 6, 2003 5:23:54 AM

I think the 5900 nonultra certainly deserves to be in there...
along with the 5700 and 5950 also.
There is nothing WRONG with those cards.
I mean, even the el-cheapo 5200 is as fast as a Geforce3..granted not the fastest thing out but its not SLOW.
I didnt say it was uber but its not pisspoor slow. In DX9 games it might be but that doesnt mean the card is automatically disqualified.
To my knowledge, ATI doesnt have a circa $50 DX9 card like NV does.. regardless of speed.

Remember, a 5200 is around GF3 speed, which isnt entirely much slower than a 4200. And the GF3 was as fast as the GF2 Ultra (and later faster).

Current games are completely playable on a Geforce2 GTS card.. if not even an MX with more settings turned down.

I suppose for those of us who havent been in the gfx card market for long it would be easy to spite anything not brand new... but the truth is the GF2 era was a fast time for video cards, anything that fast or faster (5200 and the rest of the FXs) are 'good' cards.

They should be in there, if you dont want to endorse them as the 'best buy' then fine...
but the 5900 non ultra at $200 is the best value for its price range IMO and I think NV has that price segment down for any educated buyer.

I was the one who pushed for the 9800 nonpro to be the best buy for $150-300!!! When for some reason everyone else said 9700NP(?)
But when supply of the 9800nonpros are drying up, and fast at that... the 5900 nonultra is easily the next in line and should be in the $150-300 slot.

Now the 5950 isnt worth picking up, and neither is the 5200 over the alternatives (9800XT or GF4 in the 5200s case), but they do deserve mention as an alternative.

From low end to mid end- NV owns. Especially once those nonpros dry up.
High end, I think NV has priced themselves out of the competition with the 5950.

edit- <b>and besides all that... everyone said that we should wait until the big NV driver release (52.16) before we pulled the FXs out... and the driver release was a huge success for Nvidia, and we're still pulling them out???!!!?? Then why did we even wait?</b>

and edit #2- plus, some of us have problems with ATI driver support, and some even problems with the quality of their actual product! I dont think ATI is anywhere NEAR a "one size fits all" gfx provider!
Is this place ran by the bandwagoners? Or actual common sense?

I know if the more openminded members see this, such as Cleeve (who had a helluva time with you guys over the 9600 vs 5900 debate), that they would support my ideas.

I'm sorry guys, but things DO change.. u are going to have to adapt faster.

----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by kinney on 12/06/03 01:38 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
December 6, 2003 5:47:33 AM

Agree 120%
90% of the "futureshop/best buy" computers out there still have MX400s in them. There are more FX5200 sold then then entire 9800 series. There are more FX 5600 sold then 9600pros there are way more Ti4200 sold then 9200s.

People here are blinded, they can't accept the fact that nVidia pulled some magic, they just think the little Radeon in the machine is la best because they bought one.

RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
FX5700Ultra, the next Ti4200? seems so
December 6, 2003 6:04:59 AM

I dont care if they take my recommendations, such as the 5900NU as the recommended for the $150-$200 range... but to disqualify the entire line would make a first time visitor, or even a old timer like myself think "wow, what a bunch of fanboy morons".

Esp since the whole debate was originally brought up because of the lackluster DX9 performance (which doesnt even really matter as theres no good DX9 games to even PROVE this!!!! I dont think synthetic benchmarks count and we've already gone over why the Doom 3 AND HL2 benchmarks are already out of date and invalid)

Its just funny how we say things like "dont buy a card for future games until those games are released little timmy!"... to anyone who arrives to our forum doorstep.
Then when it comes to our buyers guide we are like "THESE GODFORBIDDEN CARDS DONT PERFORM WELL IN DX9!!! DONT BUY THEM"
LOL, see the logic (or lack thereof?)

And everyones like "ok ok, wait until they release the new drivers and then we'll decide"
Then the 52.16s come out, NV works their magic (as usual). Yet ppl wont get rid of the FX stigma because they are the type that gets stuck in a rut, and change is something they dont do easily. Not good for someone living in the technical age.

I would suggest moving control of the buyers guide to Cleeve, he has demonstrated the most unbiased, objective video card views on the forum.
edit- and besides that, a very bad job was done of removing the FX stuff anyway! I quote
Quote:
Other good cards in this price category: Radeon 9500 Pro, Radeon 9600 Pro, GeForce FX5600 Ultra rev2.0


and
Quote:
Don't think about buying 256 MB version GeForceFX 5600 cards. They aren't fast enough to utilize 256 MB VRAM.


----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by kinney on 12/06/03 02:11 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b U Graphics card
December 6, 2003 8:07:06 PM

Quote:
(which doesnt even really matter as theres no good DX9 games to even PROVE this!!!!

What?

Wrong. Either you're now subjectively selecting what is a 'good' DX9 game (ironic for someone so stuck on defending CS), or you aren't aware of the multitude of DX9 enhaced games that there are out there, and the holes in the FXs'' performance.

Here's a few examples:

<A HREF="http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=gw5700u&..." target="_new">Here we see in Freedom Fighters that the R9600XT once again outperforming the FX5900</A>

<A HREF="http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/nv38-36.html/n..." target="_new">In Digit-Life's review of the FX series the R9600XT beats the FX5900U in one of the TombRaider benchies and is close enough in the other two to show weakness(and that's an Ultra).</A>

Unfortunately I can't find equivalent TRON 2.0 demos (most people are reviewing by category again, and using lower res. for the FX5700s than the FX5900s). But based on the gaps in those demos between the FX5700s and R9600s and the R9800s and FX5900s, I'm pretty confident that the FX5900's performance in TRON 2.0 would be another DX9 game it does poorly in.


<A HREF="http://www.techtv.com/freshgear/products/jump/0,23009,3..." target="_new">TechTV's one of the few to put an R9600XT against an FX5900U/NU and even the FX5950 in MaxPayne 2.0 (which is DX8.1 title, does the hole extended to PS1.4 as well?) and it performs worse w/ no AA/AF, (ok tie in second res of FX5950). And these figures aren't an anomoly, they match seperate reviews of each hardware (9600v5700 + 9800v5900) by Driverheaven and others</A>

More mainly DX8 'holes'.

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1890&p=6=" target="_new">What's up with C&C? The FX5950 and FX5900Ultra loses by a WIDE margin to the R9600PRO! You'll notice this is the LAST time Aanand review the FX59XX series against an R9600 card (I guess nV won't give you the first crack at hardware if you make it look bad)</A>

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1890&p=14" target="_new">Same thing with SimCity (oh no all those SIM players whatever will they do?)</A> :wink:

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1890&p=18" target="_new">Warcraft II showing similar results</A>

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1890&p=12" target="_new">FS 2004 has never been a 'showcase' title for the FXs</A>

And you can't complain about this only being the case on Anand's tests, it's replicated all over the place. And Anand would easily be classified as a pro-nV reviewer, esdpecially in light of his being given the right/chance to add nV hardware that still hadn't cleared NDAs everywhere else.

All in all that doesn't show the FX5900 in a very good light.

Modern games = struggle for FX series. That's not to say it's an impossible strubble. Some games will get the run-time compiler tweak, but only if anyone benchmarks and publishes them, otherwise you're likely to get the same gulf in performance between the FX5900 and the Radeons without it ever being addressed by nV.

The FX5900 is an ok card, but for the same price you can get an R9800 which will spank it in almost every game, and for significantly less you can get and R9600 card. So the FX5900 is still a long way off from being the most recommendable card in it's class. Sure it belongs in the buyer's guide like I said before, but it also requires the caveats I mention the last timewe talked about this.

The FX5900 doesn't suck like the FX5800, but it definitely isn't as attractive as many alternatives.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
December 6, 2003 9:17:34 PM

Quote:
Remember, a 5200 is around GF3 speed, which isnt entirely much slower than a 4200. And the GF3 was as fast as the GF2 Ultra (and later faster).

Prove it. I've seen GeForce FX5200 (non-Ultra, 128 bit memory) getting beaten by MX440. eForce FX5200/5600 series have no consistent performance level.

Quote:
Current games are completely playable on a Geforce2 GTS card.. if not even an MX with more settings turned down.

Fine! So why people upgrades from GeForce2 GTS?

My R9000 (non-PRO) heavily slows down in extreme gunfights in Mafia (not much such gunfights in that game) at 1024 x 768 x 32bit @ max details /no AA. This card is faster than GeForce2 Ultra. Though I can get through the fight, but I definately feel the need for a better card in such cases.

AA is not very useful in games like Serious Sam/UT. But in games like GTA-VC/Mafia, you would certainly want to turn AA on. Do this with GeForce2 GTS

Quote:
Its just funny how we say things like "dont buy a card for future games until those games are released little timmy!"... to anyone who arrives to our forum doorstep.
Then when it comes to our buyers guide we are like "THESE GODFORBIDDEN CARDS DONT PERFORM WELL IN DX9!!! DONT BUY THEM"
LOL, see the logic (or lack thereof?)

You say something better within 2 lines.

Quote:
I would suggest moving control of the buyers guide to Cleeve, he has demonstrated the most unbiased, objective video card views on the forum

Do you think Cleeve will recommend FX5900 over R9800?

Nobody will be able to satisfy nV fanboys

Quote:
edit- and besides that, a very bad job was done of removing the FX stuff anyway! I quote

Thanks for the correcion. I will be more careful about editing from the next time

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Spitfire_x86 on 12/06/03 06:25 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
December 6, 2003 9:19:30 PM

Quote:
There are more FX5200 sold then then entire 9800 series. There are more FX 5600 sold then 9600pros there are way more Ti4200 sold then 9200s.

Tell people to buy Celeron (P4 based) over AXP, becuase there are way more Celerons sold than AXP.

BTW, I don't think anybody in this forum ever recommended R9200 over Ti4200

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Spitfire_x86 on 12/06/03 06:26 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
December 6, 2003 9:54:06 PM

Your missing the point. I dont care whether you think the 5200 line is crap or not. You can argue back and forth all day about what card is faster ect. BUT

Quote:
edit- and besides all that... everyone said that we should wait until the big NV driver release (52.16) before we pulled the FXs out... and the driver release was a huge success for Nvidia, and we're still pulling them out???!!!?? Then why did we even wait?

and edit #2- plus, some of us have problems with ATI driver support, and some even problems with the quality of their actual product! I dont think ATI is anywhere NEAR a "one size fits all" gfx provider!


Thats the point we are trying to make.
Nice try to divert the issue though.

----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b>
December 6, 2003 9:55:46 PM

what do mean what does he think, it's freaking buyer's guide, not "I'm a freaking fanATic so here's a ATi cards guide"

Put the FXs back, say good things about them, or u might as well delete the freaking guide cause it's biase, false and run by a bunch ATi monkeys.

RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
FX5700Ultra, the next Ti4200? seems so
December 6, 2003 9:59:32 PM

these people here are just not seeing things straight.

1. nVidia pulled magic and they very well can pull another one and have the FXs killing Radeon

2. The FX lose to the Radeon by like 20 fps at most? and people are going around yelling FXs ARE SHIIT!!!!!!!
3. The whole freaking forum is pro ATi
4. nVidia driver are freaking better than ATi PERIOD!
5. nVidia cards are more popular PERIOD!


RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
FX5700Ultra, the next Ti4200? seems so
December 6, 2003 10:02:27 PM

Like I told spitfire.. Im not going to argue with you guys over what card is better ect. I can pull up all kinds of specific examples of a 5900 beating a 9600 in this or that.. or I could how crappy ATI driver support still is. Does it even matter? Because thats not the point.
I think your efforts are futile when it comes down to it on arguing like a fanboy.

The point is all FXs are removed (and they dont deserve to be, my arguement for the 5200 was just to show how they are not crap), if you read my reply to spitfire you'll understand what we're getting at.

Drop some of the fanboyism for christs sake.
While I'm having FUN playing CS or whatever game I choose to play you can sit around and lament that fact.
Its obvious why you play games, not to have fun but look at the graphics.

If I play CS- soo f*cking what?

----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b>
a b U Graphics card
December 6, 2003 10:29:21 PM

I've always been a sucker for more info (look at my Catalyst review it's growing like a weed, and it already had alot of stuff/links in there.

I would prefer specifically addressing each FX line, maintaining a/the big discalimer at the beginning.

I do like the FX5700U it is a different design and the 3Vertex engines do help in some areas. And that's coming from someone who really likes his R9600P. Ask GW the FX5700U is a worthy competitor; and the pride of the FX line IMO. The FX5950 is ok, but yes, it doesn't match the perfromance of it's rivals, nor does the FX5900.

The FX5200 can be added, but also with a caveat like: " this really isn't a gaming card of any quality to recommend for this category, your money would be better spent on a GF4ti or even an R9100 in most cases. The Ultra is too expensive for it's mediocre performance". Should things change and the price of the FX5200U come down, then maybe that could be edited.

I think currently the lack of metion of the FXs (even if we were to only mention them for the sake of crticizing them), despite the banner at the top, just makes people dismiss or call into question the buyers guide on first blush. That's even if with more research they later come to understand it's virtues. At first they are likely to be looking there for a specific reason why the card they were leaning towards is not included.

I'd also like to see mention of the Parhelia, even if to say it's only benifits are Great Image Quality (at the price of FPS) and Surround Gaming support (something I hope to see on offer from nV and ATI later.

I would've also prefered the division of cards to be $0-100 (winner GF4ti), $100-200 (winner R9600 series [special mention to FX5700]), $200-300 (winner R9800non-pro), 300+ (recommended R9800XT), and maybe $2000+ for the Matrox HR256 :evil:  . I think that there is a true difference between the low-class/entry level and that of the R9600/FX5700, which right now get overshadowed by cheap R9800non-pros.

I like as much info as possible, but I do realize it's quite an involved task to keep updating this thing of ours, but I'm generally satisfied for the most part.

That's just my view of things from the cheap seats.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
a b U Graphics card
December 6, 2003 10:39:52 PM

Watch who you call a Fanatatic, especially an ATI <b>monkey</b>.

If that is in anyway directed at me, the one who was being asked, it's completely unwarranted.

I've added my thoughts if you can show how in any way it's clouded by FanATIcism I'd love to here it.

Buyer's guides are all about opinion, there is very little 'fact' because anything more than $/mhz involves some interpretation of the 'facts'.

I've said my peace, and I'll leave it at that.



EDIT (didn't want to waste another post [not looking to increase my ranking]: With regards to your other post, I just want to address this one issue;

<font color=purple>5. nVidia cards are more popular PERIOD!</font color=purple>

WOW! PERIOD! Exclamation Point!
And
nV is lossing it's popularity.
nV's figures aren't across the board.
INTEL still has the MOST popular graphics chips in the world!

The rest of those points I'll simply say, In your opinion. #4 is simply no longer true IMO, but that's MY opinion, which I forgot is irrelevant.

- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by TheGreatGrapeApe on 12/06/03 05:49 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
December 6, 2003 10:46:17 PM

Thats because they dont want to see things straight.

Its apparant with the removal of the entire line of FXs.

The FX line is more than qualified as an ALTERNATIVE if not better in some cases. What... we dont have alternative recommendations at LEAST anymore?
And watch, they'll put them back in with huge disclaimers making them sound worse than they really are..

I would buy a 5700 or 5900, especially when the 9800NP line drys up like the 9700NP line pretty much has. And I think that would be worth noting.

BTW CoolS, isnt the buyers guide yours anyway? Cant you change it?
You did create the thing.

If anyone reading this doesnt understand what the real issue is, read my last reply to Spitfire.

Edit- I'll just repost it here because no one is directly answering either of these points. And these are our main grievences.

1. Everyone said that we should wait until the big NV driver release (52.16) before we pulled the FXs out... and the driver release was a huge success for Nvidia, and we're still pulling them out???!!!?? <i>Then why did we even wait?</i>

2. Some of us have problems with ATI driver support, and some even problems with the quality of their actual product! <b>I dont think ATI is anywhere NEAR a "one size fits all" gfx provider!</b>
Hence the need for alternatives, at the very least. But if your just going to put huge disclaimers about how 'dangerous' the purchase might be, then forget it.. and like CoolSq said, just erase the whole thing.

----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b>
December 6, 2003 11:04:59 PM

Take a look at HardOCPs <A HREF="http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?s=73b80384c07381556..." target="_new">buyers guide</A>

AND LOOK WHERE THEY PUT THE 5200S.
:smile: It doesnt really matter though, I just wanted to point out that on a site that is WAY BIASED against Nvidia their forum is much more balanced and fair than ours.
Ours looks like a bunch of fanboy noobs run it.

----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b>
December 6, 2003 11:10:12 PM

IMO, the guide should have them in, with a list of pros and cons. It looks more professional to have everything in there, even if a particular item is not recommended for purchase. If someone ignores your advice and purchases what you feel is an inferior card, why worry about it? You did the best you could and it's not like its your money anyway.
December 6, 2003 11:20:23 PM

Its simple, Ati have a slight edge in performance in the top price bracket but in the middle and lower end really have nothing to offer as nvidia price/performance is much better. Even Atis middle 9600 range have outpriced themselves as the 5600fx are much more appealing to 95% of the population who are not obsessed with benchmarks etc and can save big dollars with nvidia.

If he doesn't die, he'll get help!!!
a b U Graphics card
December 6, 2003 11:20:59 PM

Quote:
I can pull up all kinds of specific examples of a 5900 beating a 9600 in this or that..

I'm sure you can but how would that make the FX5900s look any better. A $200+ card should not be beaten by a much cheaper card. It doesn't do well against it's competition, but losing to the R9600 in modern games is ridiculous.

Anything you could show me about ATI's drivers I could show you equal issues with nV's drivers. nV's driver are at best only SLIGHTLY better tha ATI's and that's one thing that could change tomorrow. The architectural issues with the FXs will be their for the life of the card, and that is an issue. To rely on driver workarounds for all future games means forvever you are going to be dependant on nV giving driver support to THAT line to make them work on par with the Radeons in DX9 titles. Consdiering the massive number of titles released every year, the Forceware team will be overwhelmed by all the special instructions required for the run-time compiler (also imagine the size the drivers will bloat to). It's a lsoign battle that only looks good as long as the benchmarks are the same ones every time, which nV can predict.

I read your post and do understand your view, read my response to Spitfire above and see where I stand on it.

Quote:
Drop some of the fanboyism for christs sake.

Seriosuly you should look in the mirror, 'Hello Kettle, this is pot, you're Black!'. You can call me a FanATIc all you want it seems to be your way of discussing the issue. But it'll simply show your inability to address the very REAL and serious shortcomings of nV's current architecture. I'm not the one who gave a Mfr an A+/A+, only a Fanboi would IMO.

I have always been willing to grant you and others some ATI shortcoming in the driver area (not to the degree you now try and ascribe to them) but you ignore all of the faults with nV, so now I'll simply relegate your posts to the same region of postdom hell that rramjet occupies along with mulletkid. You're more of a fanboi than that randallflag guy, which is ironic considering you like to label everyone else with that moniker (plus calling people 'console candidates').

Quote:
While I'm having FUN playing CS or whatever game I choose to play you can sit around and lament that fact.


I really don't care if you play CS with your underwear pulled over your head or not. The only issue I ever had with it was specific to our driver discussion. The fact that you're so sensitive to it is hilarious. It's a freakin' game. Did you code it yourself? Is it that your clan ostracized you?

Quote:
Its obvious why you play games, not to have fun but look at the graphics.

No, I play games to have fun, but I BUY GRAPHICS CARDS TO ENJOY THE GRAPHICS, Duh! Sorry I forgot that this was the Graphics Card section and not the Games forum you seem to think it is. CS plays just as well on a $200 cheapo surplus rig, so why do I care about it working with a $300+ graphics card. It's one game, it's old, it's ugly, and full of cheaters and a$$holes, and I don't care if it ever plays well on my cards at all, but I will care if my card sucks in all other games because the mfrs decided to focus on it, at the expense of all else.

Play CS, enjoy it, just stop bitching about it's F'in shortcomings which are directly related to the fact that it's creators have abandoned it. Go bitch at them and tell them to make their game work better. CS issues plague Matrox cards, ATI cards, and the new 1.6 thing from Valve F's up even nV cards from what I've seen.

Sure call me the anti-fanboi of CS, whatever. I just hope nV focuses more attention on their next gen cards about playing D]|[ and HL2 than making CS run.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
a b U Graphics card
December 6, 2003 11:26:24 PM

Don't worry about ASAP, it's not like THGC will implode. :wink:

Good Luck, I'm sure somebody will find something to bitch about. I'll of course just criticize the fact that the FAQ can't help me figure out where I put my car keys! Damn FAQ! :eek: 


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
December 6, 2003 11:36:28 PM

Quote:
3. The whole freaking forum is pro ATi

The who freaking forum is pro "The Best"

Quote:
4. nVidia driver are freaking better than ATi PERIOD!

Except Detonator 52.xx nVidia released 0 good drivers since GF-FX launch. OTOH, ATi had only one bad driver (cat 3.8) since R9700 PRO launch.

Quote:
5. nVidia cards are more popular PERIOD!

Intel graphics chips are most popular.

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
December 6, 2003 11:51:47 PM

oh no, spitfire PM fredi and ask for a sticky and remove the lame joke so it's all his now, i have no control over this because he's a @#$%^& that doesn't respect the orginal creater of the entire freaking thing. He change the entire freaking concept and now it's his

RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
FX5700Ultra, the next Ti4200? seems so
December 7, 2003 12:22:31 AM

OMFG
Hey moron
Quote:
I'm not the one who gave a Mfr an A+/A+, only a Fanboi would IMO.

I didnt give NV an A+/A+, why do you lie? Seriously.

Quote:
at best only SLIGHTLY better tha ATI's and that's one thing that could change tomorrow.

Right, they've been saying that forever. ATIs driver and software is lacking compared to NV, face it and admit it.

Quote:
moniker (plus calling people 'console candidates').

I said that??? I think your guilty concious is starting to leak through.

Quote:
The fact that you're so sensitive to it is hilarious. It's a freakin' game. Did you code it yourself? Is it that your clan ostracized you?

Becasue you dont let it go, and act as if ATIs in the clear and all good because in your mind, CS doesnt matter at all. But your wrong and thousands of gamers will disagree with your small minded opinions.

Quote:
No, I play games to have fun, but I BUY GRAPHICS CARDS TO ENJOY THE GRAPHICS, Duh! Sorry I forgot that this was the Graphics Card section and not the Games forum you seem to think it is. CS plays just as well on a $200 cheapo surplus rig, so why do I care about it working with a $300+ graphics card. It's one game, it's old, it's ugly, and full of cheaters and a$$holes, and I don't care if it ever plays well on my cards at all, but I will care if my card sucks in all other games because the mfrs decided to focus on it, at the expense of all else.


And how do you get those graphics? From a game? Or the games that are essentially tech demos and synthetic benchmarks you seem to adore?
Have fun playing Aquanox buddy!

I think you must have a history of getting owned in CS, you seem to have a little suppressed hatred coming out.

Its ok, we'll support you.. not everyone is a "a$$hole and cheater" in CS.. calm down and take your pills.
Deep breaths.

----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b>
December 7, 2003 12:56:45 AM

Im just trying to help the guy out.

----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b>
December 7, 2003 1:23:03 AM

I mean no disrespect when I say this.. but I dont care if I win the popularity contest.
I come here for good information not this spin he puts on to put a better light on the ATIs.

I guess my point was that he went into the whole GF vs Radeon debatacle when I was merely pointing out 2 very good reasons why the FXs should be in the guide.
I tried multiple times as you can tell if you reread the thread, that I wasnt here to argue about ATI/NV.. he even agreed with that point but continued to ramble on about how the Radeons are equal or better than the competition, CS.. whatever else he sees as a "weak point" in my arguement.
Even though I wasnt arguing about that stuff at all! Yet he keeps it coming, like an ape.

I suppose he felt since I won the whole issue on whether the FXs should be included or not he had to get me somewhere.

Oh well. I dont even care, my point was made and I got what I posted here to achieve.
Though I think CoolS and Spitfire should find a FAQ they BOTH agree on.
Otherwise turn it over to someone who isnt going to make these kinds of mistakes.

I'll be the bigger man in this argument and apologize to Ape for name calling, its unnecessary.

But popularity doesnt matter. I dont care if I'm in the THGC clic, I've been here longer than Ape has.. check the registration dates. And I'll be here when most are gone.
The quality of information does matter though, in that regard.. Ape needs to be a little more fair and open minded.
I guess if ppl prefer his spin over my honest to God opinions/experiences.. whateva.

edit- ppl liked spud too.

----
I just tell it like it is and some can't handle it. If your experience is different, well congratu-fukulation.
<b>I’M NOT A ATI FANBOY, I’M NOT A NV FANBOY, I’M A STABILITY FANBOY</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by kinney on 12/06/03 09:24 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
December 7, 2003 1:29:01 AM

everyone loved spuddy, it was all DH's fault :@

RIP Block Heater....HELLO P4~~~~~
120% nVidia Fanboy
FX5700Ultra, the next Ti4200? seems so
December 7, 2003 1:31:52 AM

Wow, I guess I hadn't gone through enough messages to see you guys get like this. :)  Not like I haven't been there myself...

I have one thing I'd like to offer, as respectfully as possible. I came to this forum before I purchased my current system and everyone was very helpful. However, the buyers guide as it is, would not have answered my question. That is, what card can I buy for 64 bit linux that will give me good 'doze performance.

Obviously we Linux users are in a great minority, there is no doubting or arguing that. However, with the introduction of the "consumer" level AMD64 chips, I think we'll be seeing more people coming here looking for that very answer. Maybe not, just my opinion but it seems to make a degree of sense.

I guess what I'm suggesting, is maybe it's worth mentioning that if you're running 64bit Linux, ATI is unfortunately useless. I say unfortunately because after researching it, I would have seriously purchased an ATI. I'm sorry, but after seeing this demo I saw in a computer shop on a high end ATI card next to what they said was a comparable NVIDIA card running the same demo, the ATIs capabilities for image quality alone make it a better choice. As it is, I went for the best card for the money that could provide good 'doze performance as well as 64bit linux. That's why I bought an FX5900 non ultra.

I know Linux is a very small segment of the desktop market, but given the nature of this website, I submit to you that you are much more likely going to have Linux guys asking questions here, than on a more consumer oriented board. For that reason, I think it might be worth a small note. One that doesn't insult the FX5900, because really, in that scenario, it really is a good card. Tron 2.0 looks absolutely stunning on it and the Linux performance is great.

If you don't want to, that's fine. I'm not here to argue. But I will say I think it's great the way you guys help people out. I found this forum extremely helpful and I thank all of you who replied to that message a while back.

<i>SCO is to Linux what a flea is to a dog.</i>
December 7, 2003 1:45:55 AM

I saw a bumper sticker the other day that said...
"<b>Geek by nature...Linux by choice.</b>."
I really liked that :smile:
Nice post raretech, I understand where your coming from...

<b>I help because you suck.</b>
a b U Graphics card
December 7, 2003 9:11:54 AM

Quote:
I didnt give NV an A+/A+, why do you lie? Seriously.

*Cough* <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam..." target="_new">LIAR!</A> *Cough*

Just to be sure someone didn't post in your name, or perhaps you were drunk at the time, maybe dual personality (Ahhh now I get it, you hate ATI, but the OTHER you loves them, finally makes sense), lemme quote you back to yourself for everyone else's benifit;

<font color=blue>
I'd give NV an A+ hands down and ATI a B-. Also on the card ratings, I'd personally give the NV cards an A+.. it depends on what your looking at. As far as technical prowess and flexibility the NV are superior (massive bandwidth and advanced pixel shaders). Being stuck at 24FP isnt the best situation in the future, but I know what your saying.</font color=blue>


Quote:
Right, they've been saying that forever. ATIs driver and software is lacking compared to NV, face it and admit it.

I have, I do, if you look at that post above I think I acknowledged a slight advanatage favouring nV. You just won't admit any issues with nV's drivers, and thus you DID give them an A+.

Quote:
I said that???

I didn't use "" I used '' meaning that's the gist., but here's the exact phrase for your recollection.

"<font color=blue>You sound like you'd like to be the proud owner of a console system.</font color=blue>"

Wow having to do alot of requoting of your own work back to you. Must be that dual personality that does things while you're all unawarez.

Quote:
But your wrong and thousands of gamers will disagree with your small minded opinions.

Oh I think you underestimate me/them. I'm sure it's millions who disagree with me, and even more if you include those who think that the SIMS are Cool!. But they are also of little consequence to the new platforms. Their sticking to an old game doesn't promote the development of new ones and new hardware to promote those new ones.

Quote:
And how do you get those graphics? From a game? Or the games that are essentially tech demos and synthetic benchmarks you seem to adore?

Hmm, let's see this week I bought The Game Of The Year pack for Morrowind (It cost as much as the Bloodmoon expansion pack alone, so I'm giving the old CDs to a frined), I was just looking at DeusEx2 (still thinking about it) and Prince of Persia (not impressed) earlier today, waiting for the verdict on DeusEx2 from those in here who were waiting for it for so long (Eden), and I'm buying HALO next (patch to fix things like a few exploits comes out monday folks). As you already know, I've played the COD demo, and with all the Shader Effects on too, not too impressed, but it's 'good', wish they demoed the multi-player too. I just finished the BREED demo yesterday, not impressed there either.. sux, other than the water it looks like something I could've played over a year ago, and the audio was just terrible.
I looked at the Final Fantasy XI box today and said, nah, not my thing. Looks nice, but too Anime for me. Sure you may HAVE to play everything, and then brag about it like it's some accomplishment, me it's about having fun in the down time. I guess some of us just have more time to waste than others. You're parents must be VERY proud I'm sure... 'our son's played all the new games, and he.. what did he call it dear? Ah yes, he p'zones all the others.'

Quote:
Have fun playing Aquanox buddy!

Aquanox IS the game (and it sucks compared to the original, IMO) Aquamark is the Demo. At least get it straight when you're trying to zing someone.

Quote:
I think you must have a history of getting owned in CS

Nope, not that it would matter though either. Another E-penis thing I guess. CS is simply no longer of interest, once you break the bond and move on your realize there is alot more to gaming out there. I hope there's a CS2 mod for Halo, but the leak of the source code brings up the spectre of cheaters all over again before they've eaven launched.

My problem isn't so mcuh with CS itself as it is with mfrs wasting time optimizing for it. I want my newer games to run better; improve Halo performance on ALL systems, don't worry about CS. That's why I buy new things, even if they don't meet your approval for phalic fortitude.

<b>EDIT</b>; And just regarding your post to GW, this little section;

Quote:
I suppose he felt since I won the whole issue on whether the FXs should be included or not he had to get me somewhere.


You won what? Spitfire asked me what I thought and through the collective 'will' of the forum he's adding them. If you think it was about YOU then you're more self-involved than I expected. Seriously re-read my reply to him about this (both of them). I'm just glad Spitfire cares enough to ask for input, (some input more than others, poor CoolS). But thanks for thinking I'm that petty.

I'll leve it at that, like I've said in the other post, I've said my peace, and made my peace.

- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
a b U Graphics card
December 7, 2003 9:47:21 AM

Quote:
I found this forum extremely helpful and I thank all of you who replied to that message a while back.

Hey, I remember you! You're THAT guy! :lol: 

Everything's working good? Cool!

Yeah, I agree, a linux note is an excellent idea. Like I said above, the more info the better, but that's up to Spitfire depnding on time/resources.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
December 8, 2003 12:11:35 PM

> I've always been a sucker for more [snip]
> [snip] That's just my view of things from the cheap seats.

I think thats the most sensible post on the matter I've seen period! :) 


Shadus
!