ATI just got handed their ass.
Tags:
-
Graphics Cards
- ATI
- Games
- Nvidia
-
Graphics
- Product
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Smilin
February 7, 2002 11:56:26 AM
Yep. C'mon it needed said. In this little game of technology leapfrog everyone was on ATI's jock about how their new card was competing with nVidia's souped up version of a 6 month old card (Ti500). Where's all the lil ATI wonderboys now? They're all like, "But, but, but soon ATI will release a something something and blah blah". Woulda coulda shoulda oughta. ATI just got handed their ass.
Now come up with all the arguments you can...
Oh, and I'll preemptively say it: I'm trolling so STFU.
Now come up with all the arguments you can...
Oh, and I'll preemptively say it: I'm trolling so STFU.
More about : ati handed ass
FatBurger
February 7, 2002 2:44:20 PM
Smilin
February 7, 2002 2:53:18 PM
Related resources
- Just got broadband and can't get ATI RADEON X300 to recognise wireless connection is there a switch or slider? Thanks - Forum
- I need advice, just got screwed over by XFX/ATI - Forum
- Just got my hands on 26 bookshelf speakers. Any ideas? - Forum
- I just got an ATI 9800 pro!! - Forum
- One of the reasons why AMD got it's hands on ATI - Forum
pr497
February 7, 2002 3:07:02 PM
3 words....la dee da...
<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2649487" target="_new">P4 NW + DDR</A> = <font color=blue>Not Bad</font color=blue>
<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2649487" target="_new">P4 NW + DDR</A> = <font color=blue>Not Bad</font color=blue>
Anonymous
a
b
U
Graphics card
February 7, 2002 5:12:27 PM
No matter where I look in the Geforce 4 specs I still cant find anything resembling Truform so ATI is still te only manufacturer to offer truely better visual quality that I can see and enjoy.
And further, untill these reviews stop just talking about max fps and mention fps under load they're all pointless.
I've used both the Geforce 3 Ti200 (set at 240/500) and the Radeon 8500 now under games such as UT / RTCW / Q3a / Myth 3 and the one thing that really stands out is that when the there's lots of action on the screen the Geforce is the card thats fps takes the biggest nosedive.
I'd prefer a card that gives me 45 - 100 fps than a card that offers me 20 - 200fps any day!
And further, untill these reviews stop just talking about max fps and mention fps under load they're all pointless.
I've used both the Geforce 3 Ti200 (set at 240/500) and the Radeon 8500 now under games such as UT / RTCW / Q3a / Myth 3 and the one thing that really stands out is that when the there's lots of action on the screen the Geforce is the card thats fps takes the biggest nosedive.
I'd prefer a card that gives me 45 - 100 fps than a card that offers me 20 - 200fps any day!
Smilin
February 7, 2002 5:41:08 PM
FatBurger
February 7, 2002 5:42:43 PM
Smilin
February 7, 2002 5:49:58 PM
Is that it? When the 8500 came out everyone was nVidia vs ATI this and that. Now where's all the loudmouths?
It's all quiet now. Watcho gonna say? Wait for ATI to release some new drivers? LOL. But the 8500 has PuffyForm you say? GTF outta here.
Don't forget boys and girls...when fall rolls around the GF4 will get souped up too. Should be some faster drivers by then too (yes that's right nVidia WILL release faster drivers...can you HONESTLY say ATI will?)
It's all quiet now. Watcho gonna say? Wait for ATI to release some new drivers? LOL. But the 8500 has PuffyForm you say? GTF outta here.
Don't forget boys and girls...when fall rolls around the GF4 will get souped up too. Should be some faster drivers by then too (yes that's right nVidia WILL release faster drivers...can you HONESTLY say ATI will?)
varlo
February 7, 2002 5:55:33 PM
There is always one manifacture that comes out first and a second one to go out afther them whit equal or better product and most of all whit better pricing.
ATI place them on second place for a reason,to be second is not always bad,both Nvidia and ATI could come out tomorow whit a ...let say... 600Mhz GPU 975Mhz memory 4 pixel shader and so on,you get my point?
The reason they do nt do ot is simple,they would shoot themself in the foot.
Now if ATI fallow Nvidia,that is because that study that market,launch a product to compete at lower cost and force the other to come out whit something better.
When Nvidia will get tired of that game (and they will)or decide to stop it there, ATI will launch to top-of-the-line card like they use to when the voddo vs rage war was on and Nvidia(3dfx) will be 2nd back again.
This is called marketing strategies.
Sorry for my spelling I'm french...hey I ain't perfect!
ATI place them on second place for a reason,to be second is not always bad,both Nvidia and ATI could come out tomorow whit a ...let say... 600Mhz GPU 975Mhz memory 4 pixel shader and so on,you get my point?
The reason they do nt do ot is simple,they would shoot themself in the foot.
Now if ATI fallow Nvidia,that is because that study that market,launch a product to compete at lower cost and force the other to come out whit something better.
When Nvidia will get tired of that game (and they will)or decide to stop it there, ATI will launch to top-of-the-line card like they use to when the voddo vs rage war was on and Nvidia(3dfx) will be 2nd back again.
This is called marketing strategies.
Sorry for my spelling I'm french...hey I ain't perfect!
Smilin
February 7, 2002 6:00:50 PM
I'm insulting him because he's insulting my intelligence.
You and I and everyone with a brain knows its the MINIMUM framerate that counts.
Now tell me a GF3 (any flavor) has a problem with the minimum framerate in Q3. Q3!!!???!!!???
In case you hadn't noticed Fatburger I'm trolling pretty heavy here (not a normal thing for me...I'm usually the helpful one). So if I step on some toes and get someone roused...all the more fun!
As a side topic...how does the 8500 run with an 8-bit stencil buffer and shadowmode 2 in q3? Seriously..I'm curious...It kills any video card I've seen (even a Quadro II on a P3 Xeon)
You and I and everyone with a brain knows its the MINIMUM framerate that counts.
Now tell me a GF3 (any flavor) has a problem with the minimum framerate in Q3. Q3!!!???!!!???
In case you hadn't noticed Fatburger I'm trolling pretty heavy here (not a normal thing for me...I'm usually the helpful one). So if I step on some toes and get someone roused...all the more fun!
As a side topic...how does the 8500 run with an 8-bit stencil buffer and shadowmode 2 in q3? Seriously..I'm curious...It kills any video card I've seen (even a Quadro II on a P3 Xeon)
Smilin
February 7, 2002 6:05:01 PM
varlo
February 7, 2002 6:17:30 PM
You read my review for the GF4 2 weeks before the official launch,info that i had in my hands for quite some time now but i was under NDA...if so you probably aware that i know some stuff in the biseness....trust me ATI has a card up their sleeves.
Sorry for my spelling I'm french...hey I ain't perfect!
Sorry for my spelling I'm french...hey I ain't perfect!
bront
February 7, 2002 6:17:42 PM
Q3 was not the only game he mentioned. As for insulting your intellegence, you're doing a good enough job on your own.
The GF4 TI cards seem to be little more than revisions of the GF3 cards. GF3 Rev 3 if you would (the GF3 TI's would be Rev 2). They have plenty of performance, but how well do they bear a load, and can Nvidia squeee any more out of them?
Also, I question why they didn't either incorperate the DX8 features into the new GF4MX, or name it the GF3MX. It's fast and a decient deal, but it's fighting with the GF3 for market share now with price and a lack of DX8. That move baffles me.
RAM Disk is not an instalation step.
The GF4 TI cards seem to be little more than revisions of the GF3 cards. GF3 Rev 3 if you would (the GF3 TI's would be Rev 2). They have plenty of performance, but how well do they bear a load, and can Nvidia squeee any more out of them?
Also, I question why they didn't either incorperate the DX8 features into the new GF4MX, or name it the GF3MX. It's fast and a decient deal, but it's fighting with the GF3 for market share now with price and a lack of DX8. That move baffles me.
RAM Disk is not an instalation step.
pr497
February 7, 2002 6:18:19 PM
are you bored or something?
it seems to me that you have nothing better to do than to start another one of these ati vs. nvidia crap.
this is an unusual act on your part cause i usually see you helping people instead of being an a$$...
<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2649487" target="_new">P4 NW + DDR</A> = <font color=blue>Not Bad</font color=blue>
it seems to me that you have nothing better to do than to start another one of these ati vs. nvidia crap.
this is an unusual act on your part cause i usually see you helping people instead of being an a$$...
<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2649487" target="_new">P4 NW + DDR</A> = <font color=blue>Not Bad</font color=blue>
Smilin
February 7, 2002 7:03:28 PM
Ladies and Gentlemen we have a winner.
pr497 has called me out.
The truth is I got sooooooo sick of those ATI vs nVidia threads. I would have thought that when nVidia released such a dominating card everyone would STFU...people get so personal and defensive about their cards it cracks me up. It seemed like the ATI guys finally had a chance to take a shot at nVidia during the whole 8500 vs Ti500 debate and they took full advantage of it (they went on and on..god). I'm just enjoying how loud the silence is now. No one can seem to come up with an argument that outweighs the awesome benchmark results the GF4 is producing.
Here's a hint folks: Trueform, price, OVERpowered.
Being a Ti500 owner myself I'm well aware of how much $$$ the top end nVidia cards cost. I also think Trueform is pretty nifty even if it does look all puffy. And hell, my Ti500 runs at my "sweet spot" resolution on my 19" monitor just fine...for today, the GF4 is overpowered.
All that aside...man ATI just got their butt kicked. They did that tiny little leap over (or next to) the Ti500 then nvidia came in a bit later and left em in the dust.
Now if we could just get AMD and Intel to do this.
pr497 has called me out.
The truth is I got sooooooo sick of those ATI vs nVidia threads. I would have thought that when nVidia released such a dominating card everyone would STFU...people get so personal and defensive about their cards it cracks me up. It seemed like the ATI guys finally had a chance to take a shot at nVidia during the whole 8500 vs Ti500 debate and they took full advantage of it (they went on and on..god). I'm just enjoying how loud the silence is now. No one can seem to come up with an argument that outweighs the awesome benchmark results the GF4 is producing.
Here's a hint folks: Trueform, price, OVERpowered.
Being a Ti500 owner myself I'm well aware of how much $$$ the top end nVidia cards cost. I also think Trueform is pretty nifty even if it does look all puffy. And hell, my Ti500 runs at my "sweet spot" resolution on my 19" monitor just fine...for today, the GF4 is overpowered.
All that aside...man ATI just got their butt kicked. They did that tiny little leap over (or next to) the Ti500 then nvidia came in a bit later and left em in the dust.
Now if we could just get AMD and Intel to do this.
Smilin
February 7, 2002 7:25:20 PM
AMD_Man
February 7, 2002 7:57:44 PM
Man, who cares. Stop this endless bashing. The only reason that I chose the R8500 over the GF3Ti500 was not price but support. ATI's support in Canada is next to none here in Toronto. Hehe, living 5 min away from their main headquarters helps. Anyway, if my R8500 breaks 1 or 2 or even 5 years from now, I can rest assured that I can get a replacement from ATI within 2 days, no questions asked.
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
bront
February 7, 2002 8:23:00 PM
Quote:
one thing that really stands out is that when the there's lots of action on the screen the Geforce is the card thats fps takes the biggest nosedive.Quote:
Your GF3 takes a nosedive below 60fps when using Q3A?He did not say that the GF3 sunk to unacceptable levels in Q3, he said that framerates fell faster for the GF cards that the Radeon cards when under a heavy load. Falling from 180 to 90 (not real numbers, just an example) is still plumeting.
On a raw performance scale, yes the GF4 currently holds the crown, and it holds a big lead. However, it is quite expensive, and the card that is ment to compete with the 8500 will not be out for 8 weeks. And the 8500 towers over the GF4 MX series due to it's extra features.
Ultimately, I want to see what happens next month, when the cards actualy hit the market, before it's official. What good is a kick ass card if you can't get your hands on one?
RAM Disk is not an instalation step.
Amair_sc
February 7, 2002 9:28:04 PM
AMD_Man
February 7, 2002 9:37:24 PM
Anonymous
a
b
U
Graphics card
February 7, 2002 11:34:12 PM
Maybe I was being to general so here were the tests I used.
I used a map for UT called DM-Crashtime - this is an evil map as its a real fps killer.
With the Radeon 8500 the fps never dropped lower than 45 whereas the Geforce 3 card could only just manage to stay above 30. (With normal UT maps like Deck16 fps is typically around 130).
(UT 1024 x 768 32bit OpenGL)
The same applies to RTCW - using Trenchtoast map standing out in the open the 8500 would sit about 44fps whereas the Geforce was about 38fps. Whenever there was an aerial bombardment where the screen shakes and there are huge explosion the 8500 would just flinch a bit dropping to 38/40 whereas the Geforce would hit the 15/16 mark for those few seconds.
Oh and Truform was on with the 8500 too.
As for being an ATI geek, as you're implying, hardly, the only ATI card I've ever had was the original Fury 32. Since then its been Geforce 1, 2 and 3. Before the Fury it was the Voodoo 1 and 2. I'm only buying the 8500 because it offers the highest visuals. If nvidia had incorporated the 3DFX technology out of the Rampage I would have been quite happy to buy the 4600
I used a map for UT called DM-Crashtime - this is an evil map as its a real fps killer.
With the Radeon 8500 the fps never dropped lower than 45 whereas the Geforce 3 card could only just manage to stay above 30. (With normal UT maps like Deck16 fps is typically around 130).
(UT 1024 x 768 32bit OpenGL)
The same applies to RTCW - using Trenchtoast map standing out in the open the 8500 would sit about 44fps whereas the Geforce was about 38fps. Whenever there was an aerial bombardment where the screen shakes and there are huge explosion the 8500 would just flinch a bit dropping to 38/40 whereas the Geforce would hit the 15/16 mark for those few seconds.
Oh and Truform was on with the 8500 too.
As for being an ATI geek, as you're implying, hardly, the only ATI card I've ever had was the original Fury 32. Since then its been Geforce 1, 2 and 3. Before the Fury it was the Voodoo 1 and 2. I'm only buying the 8500 because it offers the highest visuals. If nvidia had incorporated the 3DFX technology out of the Rampage I would have been quite happy to buy the 4600
AMD_Man
February 7, 2002 11:38:19 PM
flamethrower205
February 8, 2002 12:06:57 AM
(I'm not necessarily replying to AMD man, just that u were the first person I clicked on). I find that my vid card (Quadro DCC, which is an OpenGL specific Gf3) doesn't take a nose dive in games, so I do not belive that argument is valid, and I have played all sorts of games.
Only if you let me see the Umpa Lumpa- Homer Simpson.
Only if you let me see the Umpa Lumpa- Homer Simpson.
nexus_alpha
February 8, 2002 1:53:18 AM
Let me be the first to say you need to get with reality the geforce4 is faster that was expected and frankly I was expecting something better from nVIDIA I knew it was going to beat the present ATI cards but the gap was unimpressive. Why do I say that because the GF4 is going to be nVIDIA flagship for 6 months at least seeing how they just came out and the top-line isn't even avaliable for purchase. Mark my words wait till you see the rv250. It is clocked at 350/350 compare to the present 275/275 even if driver performance remains the same which it will not (because the card is released with yet unseen drivers) it will provide competition for at least the gf 4 ti 4400 dollar for dollar it may ( I am a bit pessimistic ) beat the ti 4600. Don't give me the bad ATI drivers crap look at the latest drivers the are very stable and provide nice performance. The rv250 is not vapourware it is already in MASS production and set to be announced and maybe even released in March.Not to mention ATI's reply to the gf5 don't believe the drivel some websites tell you that the r300 is ATI's only chance to compete with the ti 4600 that is crap plus the r300 is dx 9 complient Microsoft made sure of that (Microsoft and ATI are very cozy right now). Dx9 beta testers abound since 1 month ago.
P.S. the high poly bug is fixed in the latest drivers that will be released soon.
P.S. the high poly bug is fixed in the latest drivers that will be released soon.
juin
February 8, 2002 3:33:15 AM
clocked at 350/350 compare to the
Rumor say 350 mghz for the core nothing for the memory frenquency.
http://service.madonion.com/servlet/Index?pageid=/orb/p...
Rumor say 350 mghz for the core nothing for the memory frenquency.
http://service.madonion.com/servlet/Index?pageid=/orb/p...
pr497
February 8, 2002 2:30:37 PM
can you write your post again...im not sure if i can follow it...
<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2649487" target="_new">P4 NW + DDR</A> = <font color=blue>Not Bad</font color=blue>
<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2649487" target="_new">P4 NW + DDR</A> = <font color=blue>Not Bad</font color=blue>
Smilin
February 8, 2002 2:37:24 PM
Smilin
February 8, 2002 2:45:44 PM
nexus_alpha
February 8, 2002 3:43:16 PM
Ok maybe I got carried away but I hate it when people trash talk a company like ATI who is clearly trying their best. And if you want to talk about-- "Well just wait till XYZ comes out and you'll see!" argument.- let me ask you a question when CAN I BUY A Geforce TI 4200 or TI4400 or TI 4600. Great the websites have reveiws that helps me how. It would be a different story if the card was available right now then ATI has it ass whooped (monetarily). ATI could play the same game and give the websites rv250, but they did not unlike -----. Actually I will not be surprised if the rv250 and the top of the line geforce 4's are available for purchase around the same time.
nVIDIA has a fast card but please lets stop bad talking the various companies it serves no purpose but rather something like how insanely insanely fast the new graphics cards become outdated (disn't the ti500 and r8500 brand new cards!?1/?!)
nVIDIA has a fast card but please lets stop bad talking the various companies it serves no purpose but rather something like how insanely insanely fast the new graphics cards become outdated (disn't the ti500 and r8500 brand new cards!?1/?!)
Amair_sc
February 8, 2002 7:25:34 PM
*sigh*
When you compare the newest technology to the one it just replaced of course you expect a performance increase, its what it was designed for. If you want a clear comparisons between the technological level of two rival companies you should at least try to compare two products that where built to compete against each other.
So fundamental yet so hard to grasp for you.
AMD + Intel = lower prices for me
When you compare the newest technology to the one it just replaced of course you expect a performance increase, its what it was designed for. If you want a clear comparisons between the technological level of two rival companies you should at least try to compare two products that where built to compete against each other.
So fundamental yet so hard to grasp for you.
AMD + Intel = lower prices for me
nexus_alpha
February 9, 2002 12:11:24 AM
Anonymous
a
b
U
Graphics card
February 9, 2002 12:26:24 AM
flamethrower205
February 9, 2002 12:53:16 AM
Black_Cat
February 9, 2002 12:59:25 AM
ATI should be applauded for at least staying in the game. Everyone else was squashed. If Nvidia had no competition we would all be bitching and moaning. However, I have a Radeon 8500 and an overclocked Ti200. Yes the Radeon gets better scores on 3dmark 2001. And yes I notice a difference with regard to frame rates when there's a lot of action on the screen. But dammit, my goat porn looks terrible! Seriously though, mpegs and other multimedia don't look as clean with the Ti200. Also in UT weird things seem to happen like walls changing colors. For the price I paid for both cards, which were about the same, I would have to recommend the Ti200. Also, this is my 3rd Radeon 8500. 2 were DOA.
What?
What?
AMD_Man
February 9, 2002 1:04:37 AM
flamethrower205
February 9, 2002 1:23:49 AM
Black_Cat
February 9, 2002 2:24:36 AM
Black_Cat
February 9, 2002 2:29:41 AM
flamethrower205
February 9, 2002 1:27:54 PM
Black_Cat
February 9, 2002 6:34:23 PM
kinney
February 9, 2002 6:38:08 PM
This post is stupid.
as far as 'getting your ass handed to you', 3dfx is the only company who got their ass handed to them from nv.
ati actually has been spitting in the market leaders face (and kicked them in the nuts) for some now, I'm impressed!
also, i dont see any reason to buy a gf4 and barely any reason to buy a gf3, they are overpriced when i can buy a oem 8500 for $155 and clock it to stock retail speed, have a card as fast as a ti500 and vastly superior in feature set (dvd playback/truform/dx8.1).
I use a gf2 gts and just dont understand peoples reasoning unless they are nerds who think theres some kind of geek honor in running a crappy game like q3a at 200fps instead of 100.
you try to make this look like some inner city thugged out street battle like "where you at now punks??!!", LOL.
its a computer video card and now we "REPRESENT".
and btw 3dfxs cards were better than nv's to, there werent many people spouting nv crap to loudly when the v1 or v2 were popular so i just dont see the point. and v1 and v2 versus the crappy nv cards at the time were in no respect equal to the radeon versus geforce battle of today.
the v1 and v2 were so above and beyond crappy nv products it wasnt even funny, while radeon vs. geforce nowadays is almost a matter of preference of features or speed.
"dude your getting a dell", is that kid trying to say he wants to stick his 'dell' in you?
as far as 'getting your ass handed to you', 3dfx is the only company who got their ass handed to them from nv.
ati actually has been spitting in the market leaders face (and kicked them in the nuts) for some now, I'm impressed!
also, i dont see any reason to buy a gf4 and barely any reason to buy a gf3, they are overpriced when i can buy a oem 8500 for $155 and clock it to stock retail speed, have a card as fast as a ti500 and vastly superior in feature set (dvd playback/truform/dx8.1).
I use a gf2 gts and just dont understand peoples reasoning unless they are nerds who think theres some kind of geek honor in running a crappy game like q3a at 200fps instead of 100.
you try to make this look like some inner city thugged out street battle like "where you at now punks??!!", LOL.
its a computer video card and now we "REPRESENT".
and btw 3dfxs cards were better than nv's to, there werent many people spouting nv crap to loudly when the v1 or v2 were popular so i just dont see the point. and v1 and v2 versus the crappy nv cards at the time were in no respect equal to the radeon versus geforce battle of today.
the v1 and v2 were so above and beyond crappy nv products it wasnt even funny, while radeon vs. geforce nowadays is almost a matter of preference of features or speed.
"dude your getting a dell", is that kid trying to say he wants to stick his 'dell' in you?
kinney
February 9, 2002 8:32:51 PM
Matisaro
February 10, 2002 10:57:24 PM
Quote:
also, i dont see any reason to buy a gf4 and barely any reason to buy a gf3, they are overpriced when i can buy a oem 8500 for $155 and clock it to stock retail speed, have a card as fast as a ti500 and vastly superior in feature set (dvd playback/truform/dx8.1).Point a: radeons dont overclock for [-peep-].
Point b: I can spend the same amount of cash on a ti 200 and overclock it to ti500 speeds with a MUCH greater success rate than the oem radeon.
Your point is nullified....have a nice day.
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
AMD_Man
February 10, 2002 11:06:07 PM
Quote:
Point a: radeons dont overclock for [-peep-].
Point b: I can spend the same amount of cash on a ti 200 and overclock it to ti500 speeds with a MUCH greater success rate than the oem radeon.
PointA: They do! 300/300, at least, is practically guaranteed on a retail Radeon 8500. :smile:
PointB: A little voltage mod and you'll get to 275/275 or more easily. The OEM is merely a retail Radeon 8500 with lower voltage in most cases. Up the voltage, flash the BIOS and you should have the equivalent of a retail Radeon 8500.
Note: I'm referring to the 250/250 Radeon 8500s with 3.6ns RAM.
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Matisaro
February 11, 2002 12:08:28 AM
I was speaking about oem radeons to retail radeon speed, which has a low succ4ess rate, however MOST ti 200's will do 240 core and at least 500 mem, which is a HUGE overclock, were talking 60mhz core/100MHZ dram, and it happens ALL the time.
So I still believe the gf3 overclocks better than the radeon8500.
Also you dont have to flsh bios's or do ANYTHING which would detectably void your warrantee.
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
So I still believe the gf3 overclocks better than the radeon8500.
Also you dont have to flsh bios's or do ANYTHING which would detectably void your warrantee.
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
AMD_Man
February 11, 2002 12:24:51 AM
noko
February 11, 2002 12:27:53 AM
My GF3 Ti200 overclocks to 245/540 without problems, anisotropic filtering brings the performance way down. Dissappointed in FSAA of the GF3 especially with anisotropic filtering turned on. DVD playback is second rate compared to ATI, video out is a joke. Oh well, it should get me through until the next major rounds of video cards come out. I am more inclined to buy from ATI next time around.
AMD_Man
February 11, 2002 12:35:27 AM
kinney
February 11, 2002 7:21:16 AM
Matisaro
February 11, 2002 8:05:30 AM
- 1 / 2
- 2
- Newest
Related resources
- SolvedI just got oem windows 8.1 pro Forum
- SolvedMy computer has become worse. thinking it was just the graphics card i got a better one and the problem is still there Forum
- SolvedI just got a Nexus Android and would love advice on what apps to get to make is work best with FB and also Windows Office. An Forum
- SolvedI just got a Maximus VI Impact Mobo which is a z87 and a I5 4690k Asus site says install new bios before build (Just Mobo , PS Forum
- Solvedjust got 572 and the dvd doesnt want to open cds any suggestions Forum
- SolvedGot a build ready just wanna know if i can make any improvements when it comes to GPU Forum
- SolvedJust got a new SSD, trying to make it my primary disk... Forum
- SolvedJust got 2 Blue Screens?? Help. Forum
- SolvedJust got a new graphics card but im not sure if my psu could handle it Forum
- SolvedJust got a new monitor running 1920x1080, some games only run at 50fps Forum
- SolvedJust got a Nexus 5 need a case any suggestions? Forum
- Solvedhey just got bf4 on disc but there 3 and i got this pc from my friend with bf4 already on it so can i just put in code to orig Forum
- SolvedHello, just bought a used r9 290, got a question Forum
- SolvedComputer completely freezes - Just got a new Motherboard and Processor Forum
- SolvedJust got a Gigabyte 970A-DS3P AMD Motherboard need help Forum
- More resources
Read discussions in other Graphics & Displays categories
!
.