A Positive GFFX Thread

[vash]

And I "agree" the NV30 has real "potential" . . . there isn't much positive I like about it in its present "form".

The present form of NV30 isn't desireable, but plenty of people are going to buy it, definitely.

If you don't believe that I'm the only one with problems with the Radeon 8500 and Counter-Strke, load up the rage3d.com forums and search for counter-strike. You'll find quite a few posts with other people, using the Radeon 8500 and getting uber slowdowns. I don't see that many posts or questions on any Nvidia fansite when it comes to Counter-Strike.

vash

 

[paralazarguer]

I beileve that the GeForce FX is just like the Willamette P4. It was rushed to market. It's a great design but incomplete and doesn't have all of the supporting technology that it needs to rock. I'm optomistic that the next major itteration will be as large an improvement as the northy was over the willamette.

 

[tbates757]

This thread feels like a consoling party for the losing team, I'm sure fans of this thread would get along jolly with the Raiders. LOL! Sorry I just couldn't resist, anyway, even if, if, nVidia is able to optimize the drivers for the 5800 Ultra for a nice 10-15% performance gain, what kind of driver is going to get rid of the god-awful seventy-some-odd dBA sound level that the horrid cooler on it makes? No DetonatorXP 74.31239 will rid the card of that horrible sound, and that is ultimately why it is/will be a failure. I have a Ti4200 so it's not like I am an ATi zealot, better luck next time?

 

[paralazarguer]

This thread feels like a consoling party for the losing team

I remember someone saying something very similar about some people getting together and saying that the P4 definitely had some potential when it only had socket 423 wilamettes with PC800. I bet that no one in this thread has ever even seen one of these cards. Those people were right, the P4 did have a lot of potential. I believe that the GF-FX does aswell. As they improve their .13u manufacturing process, the chip will get cooler. The benchmarks show that memory bandwidth is really holding the card back and that the GPU has a LOT of kick to it even with beta drivers. Memory bandwidth is easy to adopt. Easier than doubling the L2 cache on a willamette and changing the manufacturing process with a new socket and new memory support anyway...

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Slogun

Point me to the "silver" bullet of the fix and I'll gladly try it like the others I have used so far (disabling AA, AF npatch, subdivisions, etc). I'm not saying HL and its associated mods don't work, I'm just saying there are times when the FPS drops to half of my refresh rate far more often than the TI500 ever did. Other games do not exhibit this problem, only Half-Life.vash

Just let it be known that Vash is no CS/HL noob. He is an authority on this game as well as on running CS/HL game servers.
If he says that his ATI 8500 has problems with HL/CS, you can bet that he has tried more troubleshooting strategies than many people here have experience with.

Lol behing an authority on CS/HL has absolutly NOTHING to do with knowing how to properly configure and use a video card. I've been playing CS for over 3 years now. Big deal.

""I've built plenty of boxes, configured them plenty, installed, uninstalled and reinstalled drivers, patches and Windows versions -- nothing has fixed it. The only fix comes in the form of removing the ATI part and putting in the Nvidia part.""

Problem 1. You are almost ALWAYS going to see problems with "uninstalling, installing, reinstalling" drivers. Be it nVidia, ATI, S3, whoever. Stacking drivers upon drivers is never a good idea. The only way to get a fool proof situation to know if its a driver problem is a fresh install and nothing but the VC drivers.

Problem 2. Throwing in an nVidia card after the ATI or vice versa is another problem. It's never a good idead to install VC drivers from two different card manufactures.

You aren't doing proper testing to know what the real problem is. Do a fresh install of windows with nothing but the drivers. Then install CS and see if you have the same problem. In the event you Do run into a problem, it could be a conflict between your hardware/drivers and the game. If not, install different software 1 by 1 and see what you install when the problem starts again. It's the only sure fire way of knowing what is causing your problem.

There is a possiblity that there is a coding problem done by Valve in CS that conflics with the Radeon 8500. This could be another possibility. But every Radeon 8500 I've seen runs flawlessly. I run Net_graph 3 all the time and only see it dip if 4-5+ smokes are thrown in one area.

 

[vash]

Problem 1. You are almost ALWAYS going to see problems with "uninstalling, installing, reinstalling" drivers. Be it nVidia, ATI, S3, whoever. Stacking drivers upon drivers is never a good idea. The only way to get a fool proof situation to know if its a driver problem is a fresh install and nothing but the VC drivers.

Been there done that. Went from clean installs of Win2k Pro, WinXP. I reinstall my machine on a monthly basis, especially when changing piece of hardware.

Problem 2. Throwing in an nVidia card after the ATI or vice versa is another problem. It's never a good idead to install VC drivers from two different card manufactures.

I've never done that, I know the pitfalls. I've always done clean installs of my box when it comes to troubleshooting games.

You aren't doing proper testing to know what the real problem is. Do a fresh install of windows with nothing but the drivers. Then install CS and see if you have the same problem. In the event you Do run into a problem, it could be a conflict between your hardware/drivers and the game. If not, install different software 1 by 1 and see what you install when the problem starts again. It's the only sure fire way of knowing what is causing your problem.

I've done a clean install of WinXP, used the built in WinXP drivers for the Radeon. Left those, then upgraded to the "WinXP" WHQL versions -- both of those didn't fix the problem. Fine, clean the box (again), and use Cat 2.5's -- same thing. Clean it once more, then Cat 3.0a's, again the FPS dropping. My profession is to test, I know how to configure Win32 for virtually any need.

There is a possiblity that there is a coding problem done by Valve in CS that conflics with the Radeon 8500. This could be another possibility. But every Radeon 8500 I've seen runs flawlessly. I run Net_graph 3 all the time and only see it dip if 4-5+ smokes are thrown in one area.

Not everyone has this problem, I have no idea why there is an issue for me. However, visit the Rage3d.com forums, do a search for counter-strike and tell me how many threads you find when it relates to slow performance. Everyone there has done the same things I have: clean install of the box, clean install of the drivers, use a resolution like 1024x768, disable AF filters, turn off AA, turn off ati_npatch, turn off ati_subdivisions, turn off vsync, etc. None of these helped me, none of these helped many of the other people on the forum. The only thing I did to "fix" my problems was to switch my gaming PC to use the Ti500.

Please, try again to find a solution to this, ATI is no help and none of the rage3d.com forums have "the" answer.

vash

 

[LikeLinus]

Could it be a hardware problem with your AGP slot and the Radeon? IF it only does it under "intensive" bandwidth and games, it could be a resource problem with the AGP slot or something. Maybe the throughput to the card isn't enough. Have you tried things like changing your AGP options in the Bios?

I did go read the threads over at Rage, and most of them could fix the problem with some of the solutions you provided. Have you tried other games such as UT2003 and others to see if they drop off performance during high poly moments during the game? I'm just wondering if it's game specific or maybe you just havent realized it's across the board for all games and a hardware issue.

Just some thoughts.

 

[vash]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Could it be a hardware problem with your AGP slot and the Radeon? IF it only does it under "intensive" bandwidth and games, it could be a resource problem with the AGP slot or something. Maybe the throughput to the card isn't enough. Have you tried things like changing your AGP options in the Bios?

I did go read the threads over at Rage, and most of them could fix the problem with some of the solutions you provided. Have you tried other games such as UT2003 and others to see if they drop off performance during high poly moments during the game? I'm just wondering if it's game specific or maybe you just havent realized it's across the board for all games and a hardware issue.

Just some thoughts.

The AGP slot is the same one I used for the Ti500 that was happy with. I've changed AGP from 4x, 2x, 1x, disabled fast writes, sidebanding, etc. Verified that AGP is running at 66mhz, has plenty of ram for it, etc.

The performance of other OpenGL based games, such as Quake3, MoH:AA, SoF2 to Direct3D games like UT2K3 are all "normal" to what I've seen. I play plenty of those games regularly and I would notice a performance hit if there was an unusual one.

Many of the posts on the rage3d.com forums still list people who have problems with their Radeon 8500 and CS. Some people have their problem fixed with Truform off, but that doesn't fix a good handful of the rest. Look in the gaming forums, even the Technical support for the 8500s -- numerous posts about problems with CS when it comes to performace. People are coming from GF4MX cards and are complaining with the Radeons, that is an easy indication that there is something wrong with the ATi's part.

Now visit the Nvidia fanboy forums, far less people asking CS questions when it comes to speed.

vash

 

[specktre]

goddamn you idiots....stop, flaming PPL for owning a certain type of video card, if you like nvidia great, if u like ATI that is awsome. but seriously STFU about ATI, or NVIDIA being crappy companies.

You all sound like thos lovely human-ass white trash ppl that hate ford or hate chevy or hate dodge "pick-up trucks" when it comes down to it all of the companies out have good and bad things about them, but when you say one company is just way better and say you would never buy another brand, that is just ignorant and stupid.

hell if i had 399$ i wouldn't spend it on a MFing video card anyways. and who the hell buys an electronic or computer part when they first are released i sure as hell don't.

so calm down all you ATI and NVIDIA freaks...BTW i own a GF4ti4200 and i love it, but wish i would have gotten a SIS xabre....not

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: specktre
goddamn you idiots....stop, flaming PPL for owning a certain type of video card, if you like nvidia great, if u like ATI that is awsome. but seriously STFU about ATI, or NVIDIA being crappy companies.

You all sound like thos lovely human-ass white trash ppl that hate ford or hate chevy or hate dodge "pick-up trucks" when it comes down to it all of the companies out have good and bad things about them, but when you say one company is just way better and say you would never buy another brand, that is just ignorant and stupid.

hell if i had 399$ i wouldn't spend it on a MFing video card anyways. and who the hell buys an electronic or computer part when they first are released i sure as hell don't.

so calm down all you ATI and NVIDIA freaks...BTW i own a GF4ti4200 and i love it, but wish i would have gotten a SIS xabre....not

Let it all out brother


Vash - Funny, I have the exact opposite problem you do. The ATI cards I've owned (Radeon LE and a Radeon before that) worked fine with games... When I moved to my current GF3 I ran into all sorts of problems. CS just refuses to load without crashing to desktop... Sim City 4 crashes, etc, etc. I know this isn't common with Detantors, but it happens to everyone. I would still buy an Nvidia or ATI card, depending on who had the better price / performance ratio.

As for the GFFX, I agree that it has potential, but it was a dissapointment. I understand the point that Nvidia has now switched to .13 processing, but I would tend to believe that ATI is working on the exact same thing right now.

The graphics card war has really heated up.

 

[BFG10K]

Of course the FX has a lot of positive features, ranging from competitive performance despite inferior memory bandwidth compared to the 9700 Pro, the successful design of a 0.13 um card, and OEM vendors producing more realistic cooling solutions.

The card might be a little disappointing but it's certainly not DOA.

 

[bluemax]

The graphics card war has really heated up.

How big of a fan should we add to counteract that? [DRUM FILL]

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
Of course the FX has a lot of positive features, ranging from competitive performance despite inferior memory bandwidth compared to the 9700 Pro, the successful design of a 0.13 um card, and OEM vendors producing more realistic cooling solutions.

The card might be a little disappointing but it's certainly not DOA.

Very true. It *IS* performing well on a 128-bit bus. The die shrink allowed them to clock it to the moon! Lower-clocked versions should be close to the 9700 in speed and hopefully cheap like the TI4200 was!

 

[Leon]

Re: noise

According to HardOCP, Nvidia redesigned FX cooling system so it will be virtually silent in 2D mode (web browsing etc), and and a bit less (5db) loud in 3D.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Leon
Re: noise

According to HardOCP, Nvidia redesigned FX cooling system so it will be virtually silent in 2D mode (web browsing etc), and and a bit less (5db) loud in 3D.

Not quite:

This new GFFX cooling system does not run in 2D operation, making it quieter than any other 3D cards in this current generation while not being used in a gaming capacity. When the GFFX Ultra is utilized in a 3D application, the fan system spins up and is still about as loud as it was before. NVIDIA reports it to be around 5dBa quieter than the models we saw Web reviews based on last week.

 

[Vegito]

Originally posted by: vash
The GFFX was made to grow a long ways. By the time the .13 micron is showing its age, Nvidia will be moving onto .09 and have some more of these kinds of growing pains. ATI's cards are good and are using an older technology to deliver stellar performance, but look at the GFFX -- 128 memory bus vs. a 256-bit memory bus on the ATI. The Nvidia and ATI part bench quite close to each other, even though the Nvidia part is half of the ATI part. When push to comes to shove and a newer GFFX is born, with a 256bit memory bus, the ATI will definitely be left in the dust.

For my home needs, I will no longer purchase an ATI card. I have a Radeon 8500, with 128 megs of ram and have had one continuing gaming experience that I cannot fix, no matter what. While playing CS, I get noticeable FPS drops to the 50s-60s, even without smoke. On the same system, with a TI500, the same FPS drop does not happen at all. I've tried to take out npatch, using older and latest drivers -- none of these change the performance drop in CS. Sure, CS is old, but its what I play, so if I see a FPS drop, it bugs me and I want it fixed. This card can certainly run the game at a high framerate, but when I see 50s and 60fps drop (down from 99 on the Nvidia cards), I am not pleased.

vash

I had the cs problem with my 8500 also and Im using a 7000 dual also and it suffers from the smoke problem (on a p4 2.2ghz) But I also have the problem on my dual xeon with ti4600.. my solution, disable smoke on my cs server . But the older ati product gets slaughter on smokes..