Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!

Poll: Which Video card will you buy

Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 74

Thread: FX vs. 9700




  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    251

    Default

    :no: One should always be concerned about performance.


    :p

  2. #42

    Default

    I just saw this link
    Not a bad read
    http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/fin...20030129210315
    AMD Athlon 2400+ @ 2.26Ghz @1.9Core Cooled With Thermalright AX-7 | EPoX 8K5A2+ | 768Mb PC-2700DDR Corsair XMS | Leadtek GForce4 Ti4400 | Hercules Fortissimo II | 80Gb Seagate HDD | Liteon 12x DVD | Aopen 40x12x48 | Samsung SyncMaster 957p 1600X1200@75Hz | Modded Aopen HX-08 with 300W Aopen PSU | Windows XP Pro SP1

    ICQ :159735580 | MSN : nutty_33@hotmail.com | Email : nutty_33@iinet.com.au

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    251

    Default

    Sa-Wee-ah-t!!!

    :shoot2:

    :thumb:

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    251

    Default

    http://www.hardocp.com/
    HardOCP has this up on their 6th Edition for Wednesday about their review here, http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDIx.

    The key parts of this are:

    1. FPS were correct
    2. IQ above 2xAA and QCAA where correct, just these two AA forms couldn’t be captured correctly.
    3. After rechecking they still feel that the 9700 has better IQ at all levels.
    4. They are still pissed off and not satisfied with the FX

    The post from HardOCP:

    GeForceFX Follow-up:
    Well, yesterday was certainly interesting as we were questioning our own IQ screenshots in our GFFX 5800 Ultra preview. We are still working on getting all the facts together, but we do have some initial thoughts on this issue.

    First off and most important to many of you, is that our performance numbers are dead on, and show to be correct for every AA and AF setting shown utilized in our benchmarks (whew).

    Second, it seems that our High Quality Image Quality comparison is correct as well as our IQ comparisons done at and above the 4XAA level.

    Where we are sure they are wrong is solely on our 2XAA/QCAA screenshots and comparisons. Being that this will be a level that almost anyone purchasing the card would be using it is very important.

    Going back yesterday and last night and doing in-game comparisons with the ATI 9700 Pro, it looks to us that NVIDIA's AA is still not up to par with the 9700 Pro's level of quality across the board, but certainly not as lacking as we pointed out at lower levels of AA.

    Overall, we are still standing by our conclusions we drew from our initial results. The GeForceFX 5800 Ultra is loud, hot, expensive, and does not deliver the in-game image quality that the ATI 9700 Pro does. There is no doubt about the validity of that statement in my mind. This is not to say that GFFX is a bad product as it is marginally faster in many applications than the ATI flagship, but we all know that it all stopped being only about frames per second some time ago.

    So to put it succinctly, NVIDIA gets a bit of credit for doing much better 2XAA than at first thought, but it surely does not change our opinion of the product. Now if we can just get NVIDIA to tell us exactly what is going on with their AA and why some forms of it seem to be done differently than others.

    We are currently working on getting proper 2XAA images placed into our GFFX preview along with a reworking of the evaluation of those images.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Well, as I mentioned in the Quadro vs FX, we have never had much luck speedwise with any other card other than nVidia. Since I don't play many games at home, and just do VR/CG research and "toying" with ideas for work, chances are I will get a GeforceFX or low end NV35 at home. At work I just placed my pre-order for the GeforceFX. So far no one has done more than cough at the QuadroFX prices. ;) I've talked a number of people into getting excited over the changes in the CG language for a variety of projects.... We do occasionally get ATI's in for other projects so I may see if I can "try" one to see if we still have the same problems with non-nVidia cards, but so far, through the 9500, all our machines run 25%-50% than any other cards (that includes the Wildcat III). My vote is for the FX, if only because I somehow seem to abuse any other card. Noise is not a problem in my environment... I think my rack-mount case-fans (6 of them) make more noise than the FX can.... but you never know. :) I will know in a few weeks.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Isle of man
    Posts
    1,332

    Default

    Many people have slagged off both ati and nvidia in this forum so all i can say is nyer i have an nvidia ge force 4 and i am gettin a 9500 pro soon so nyer:D
    I'm thinkin of haveing both of them in my rig at the same time ooooh sounds sweet to me.
    And i'm also gonna turn the 9500 into a 9700 with the software hack brill
    What the fcuk happened to my sig?

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,016

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rugbydude
    Many people have slagged off both ati and nvidia in this forum so all i can say is nyer i have an nvidia ge force 4 and i am gettin a 9500 pro soon so nyer:D
    I'm thinkin of haveing both of them in my rig at the same time ooooh sounds sweet to me.
    And i'm also gonna turn the 9500 into a 9700 with the software hack brill
    9500pro can't be hacked into a 9700 - it doesn't have a 256bit memory bus

    only a 9500 non-pro 128mb produced on a 9700 PCB can be hacked - I know both Sapphires and Powercolor will work - the 256bit memory bus must already be present

    a 9500 non-pro 64MB can be hacked into a 9500Pro 64MB

    the hack is only to open the 4 disabled pipelines in the 9500 chip - there's nothing you can do about the memory bus


    in addition - I would estimate approx. 25-33% of people trying the hack experience a checkerboards pattern video corruption afterward - most likely due to the fact that the 4 pipelines that were originaly disabled either were never qualified or were known to be defective if the chip is a failed/bined 9500pro/9700 chip


    in the worst case if the hack doesn't work for you - you are still left with the card you paid for - If you want a guaranteed 9700 card, the only way to be sure is to pay for one

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    251

    Default

    Further more, you have to make sure the 9500 has it's memory in an L shape like the 9700. 9500's that have memory in a straight line will NOT work.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,016

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by negomike
    Further more, you have to make sure the 9500 has it's memory in an L shape like the 9700. 9500's that have memory in a straight line will NOT work.
    ...that's what I said, It must be a 128MB 9500 non pro produced on a 9700 PCB

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    251

    Default

    oopsy, my bad. Sorry.

    PCD styles can be a bit much to remember, I just know to get the 9500 that has ram in an L shape. So if ATI suddenly released a 9500Pro and moved the RAM so it makes an L shape, I'll be SOL.:D

    Remeber, for some of us (me) you have to think, :?:stupid:confused:

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •