Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 16 of 27 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 261

Thread: Nv30




  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Thilo Bayer, hardware editor at PC Games Germany has received a GeForce FX for testing.
    More interestingly he has posted some early findings in the 3DCenter forums.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    1,369

    Default

    Hey, any final specs on what the required power supply wattage will be ? I have an Antec Truepower 330W PSU, and I'm not going to buy a more powerful one, just so that I can spend every last cent I have to get a GeForce FX...
    Will it be enough ? :?: :rolleyes2 Or will I be buying an R350 ?
    SPAM Special Ops

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Every spec I've seen so far recommends a 350w power supply, so you should get away with your Antec PSU.
    The R350 should prove to be slightly faster than the FX, however I don't see it matching the graphics quality
    we can expect from the FX. Check out the detail on Nvidia's elf Dawn, then imagine her rendering in realtime.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    German site tecchannel.de has posted what appears to be the first FX
    benchmarks, whilst the review is in German, the graphs speak for themselves.

    Geforce FX 5800 Ultra review

    Benchmarks

    3DMark2001SE Pro 1024 x 768 x 32
    3DMark2001SE Pro 1280 x 1024 x 32
    Quake 3 Arena 1280 x 1024 x 32 HQ
    Quake 3 Arena 4x FSAA 1280 x 1024 x 32 HQ
    UT2003 Botmatch 1280 x 960 x 32
    UT2002 Botmatch 1600 x 1200 x 32

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    55

    Default

    Man the GF FX is a total let down im no ati lover i get the most for my money and yes the fx won in 3d mark only by 500 points it lost in UT2003 a real game who would pay that much money for a card that is no big inprovment from the 9700pro and runs hotter and is now the noisest card out with the hight core on it it doesent overclock that good just overclock a 9700 you have a better card i was looking forward to getting this card but its not worth it at all and if ati comes out with the r350 soon man this is gona be funny just my op
    A7N8X no delx
    AMD 2400xp@2500mhz 200z12.5
    epox EP-8RDA
    AMD 1700xp@2406mhz 200x12
    ATI 9700pro
    2-256 pc 2700 2.5 sucks need $$ for new ram
    WD 80gb SE hard drive 8cach buffer lol it died running maxto 40gb ata 133 now
    3d mark 2001se 17k
    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5633214

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    These are the first FX reviews/comments that I've seen, I'll add more as they become available.

    3DGPU
    Extremetech
    Onethumb
    Hothardware
    HardOCP
    Hexus
    Anandtech
    Sudhian Media
    Gamespot
    IGN
    Hardware Analysis
    A1 Electronics
    PCpop
    Gamespy

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    55

    Default

    take a look at this rev http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDIx
    and there is another at toms hardware just go reading all the fourms around its like one big flam war online today like over at madeonion alote of people are not happy with the FX after waiting all this time
    A7N8X no delx
    AMD 2400xp@2500mhz 200z12.5
    epox EP-8RDA
    AMD 1700xp@2406mhz 200x12
    ATI 9700pro
    2-256 pc 2700 2.5 sucks need $$ for new ram
    WD 80gb SE hard drive 8cach buffer lol it died running maxto 40gb ata 133 now
    3d mark 2001se 17k
    http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5633214

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Conclusion

    As we’ve seen, the GeForce FX is no slouch in the 3D accelerator world, however it is not the "9700-killer" many have
    expected. It is, at best, mildly faster in most games, and the same or slightly worse in a few. Had it arrived when most
    of us thought it should, there is no doubt it would be much better received.

    However, its best performance was in 3dmark2001, a synthetic benchmark, and its worst in ut2003, an actual game
    compared to the 9700 Pro. This is strangely reminiscent of the Radeon 8500 release, where the Radeon won in 3dmark,
    but lost in games to the GeForce 3. This anomaly, plus the strange texture problems that popped up, all point to
    immature drivers.

    As for Anti-Aliasing, the GeForce FX gained more of a lead in 3Dmark 2001 when it was enabled, exactly the opposite
    of what was expected, due to the limitations on memory bandwidth, however in Unreal Tournament, as the AA level
    was increased and the resolution rose, the GeForce FX dropped behind compared to the 9700 Pro, possibly due to
    bandwidth limitations. When testing Anisotropic Filtering, The GeForce FX was all around faster at AF than the Radeon
    9700 Pro, This being an advantage of the 500Mhz GPU, which gives a fantastic fill rate. The GeForceFX 5800 Ultra
    certainly does have a sweet spot, and that is at 2XAA / 8XAF at 1280 resolution.

    Overall, the GeForce FX seems to be a capable card, and is a step up from the GeForce 4, to which it is the successor.
    Should you buy one? If you have a GeForce 4 class card, and want to stay on top with the latest and greatest, then
    yes. However, if you are currently using a Radeon 9500/9700 level card, then there is no reason to spend another $400
    to get a slight boost and if you use AA all the time, then you may actually decrease your performance depending on the
    game and resolution.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bottom Line: The GeForceFX 5800 Ultra is a very hot and noisy beast that may give you a bit of an edge over the
    current king of the hill, the ATI 9700 Pro in some applications. If you are an NVIDIA fanboy, this of course has your name
    all over it. At the current US$400.00 price point, the GFFX simply does not seem worth it to us. If NVIDIA can work some
    driver magic and pull an extra 20% increase in frame rate out of the bag like we have seen in the past; they had best
    start pulling. Either that or pull out the NV35 chipset, and quick.

    This year will be interesting as both ATI and NVIDIA know it is all about having the best VidCard on the market when DOOM
    hits.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Final Words

    So there you have it, NVIDIA's response to ATI's Radeon 9700 Pro - but does anyone else feel unfulfilled by the
    GeForce FX? A card that is several months late, that is able to outperform the Radeon 9700 Pro by 10% at best
    but in most cases manages to fall behind by a factor much greater than that. Granted the problems that plagued
    the launch of the FX weren't all up to NVIDIA's control, after all the decision to go 0.13-micron was made 1 - 2
    years ago based on data that was available at the time. ATI took a gamble on producing a 0.15-micron part and
    NVIDIA did the same on their 0.13-micron NV30, and it looks like ATI guessed right.

    While we were reviewing the FX, looking at its performance and investigating its image quality, we found ourselves
    reminiscing of ATI's launch of the Radeon 8500. A card that was long overdue, but in the end unable to outshine
    the top performer at the time. Although the current state of the GeForce FX is much better than what we had with
    the first Radeon 8500, the word impressive isn't what we'd use to describe it. The performance is an improvement
    over the Ti 4600, without a doubt, but it does not place NVIDIA back in a position of dominance, which is what
    everyone was expecting from NV30. This isn't the end of NVIDIA, the company is quite healthy and they've got a
    number of products in the pipeline with great potential (GeForce FX included) but it does mean that the road to
    regaining dominance in the market will be an even more difficult one to traverse.

    ATI has not been sitting idle all this time, and progress on the R350 core has been coming along quite well. We
    proved early on that the 0.15-micron R300 core could reach speeds of up to 400MHz, and with the GeForce FX
    NVIDIA has established that shipping cards with 800MHz - 1GHz memory is feasible, if ATI can put together a R350
    with specs close to what we're implying then even a driver-tweaked FX will not stand a chance. NVIDIA has told
    us that the GeForce FX will be in stores next month, and we'd expect R350 in about a month following that. It will
    be a close race, but what ATI has going for them right now is a much more mature driver set than NVIDIA for their
    flagship GPU. The 3+ month advantage ATI had in bringing the R300 into production and to market gave ATI a much
    bigger advantage than just being the king of the hill for a while, it gave them quite a bit of time to fine-tune and
    optimize their drivers for this very occasion; this is a luxury that ATI has not had previously but they have made
    excellent use of it today.

    NVIDIA's focus at this point is NV31 and NV34, after all, that's where the money is. The small percentage of the
    market that will go after the NV30 will not make or break NVIDIA, but should ATI compete like this in other market
    segments then there will be cause for worry. As we mentioned at the start of our GeForce FX Preview - "Kudos to ATI."

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    All of us have been very busy last night and today. Everyone was venturing for a review, and hoped that the work NVIDIA
    has put into this design would produce a killer card...not so. We found quite a few reviews this morning. Some were good,
    some decent, and some taken out the blue. I'd just like to say that Geforce FX (NV30) is not what most us wished for. It's
    more of a prototype for the future (NV35). It's disappointing for a lot of people and nVidiots in particular that this card
    simply doesn't cut it (based on review samples).
    Whether the retail card is going to be much better, I doubt that. It might be by an inch, but it won't matter because most
    of us will not buy a $400 card with huge fan just for those few FPS. I won't mention "free" Anti-aliasing modes and Anisotropic
    performance which were in plans (at least AA). It could be because of the drivers, but in my opinion NVIDIA had plenty of
    time to compile a nice set of Detonators for that occasion. Again, retail cards may (or may not) perform better, but it's hard
    to achive the quality ATI has shown us with their 256 bit bus compared to NVIDIA's 128 bit. Some say "bandwidth is not
    everything". It's not, but we need to realize that switching from .15 micron to .13 micron process is a tough job. I can certainly
    understand that (and I hope you all will).

    Based on the reviews, the card does perform well, but it's not a killer. Without that huge fan aka nDustbuster aka Vacuum-
    Cleaner aka LeafBlower and huge power consumption we would certainly appreciate it more. Let us hope NVIDIA can at least
    work on those drivers.

Page 16 of 27 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •