about this gf2 ultra vs. radeon deal...

[PyKoTic]

i hate to break it to you gf2 fans, and future ultra ones, but the ultra is a piece if s@#T, 500 bucks US for a suped up gf2 ? man thats bs. Let me tell you something, i just bought a radeon 64mb ddr vivo retail, and i currently have a crap p2 350 loaded with too much stuff, so its slower then normal. I put this card in after my tnt2 ultra, what a great card that was, i hate giving it up, but its damn worth it.
Tested some games to see how they looked, didnt even worry about speed cause my processor was too slow, funny thing is it was fast as hell in games, q3, listento this, honest to freakin God, i can provide you with a screenshot to prove it, i set the resolution to 1600 x 1200, highest details, 32 bit yada yada....i hit up to 45 - 50 fps unbelievable!, what's that the ultra can do 60 on a p3 800 or something, ya thats pretty sad. This cards features kill the ultra alone, and lets not talk about speed, this card is fast enough, why the hell would you need 170 fps or more in q3 anyways, unless you suck ass and u need as much as you can get, still the radeon has waaaay more then enough, and i had no problems at all installing it, its worth a hell of a lot more then the gf2 ultra, and i was skeptical. Wait till i upgrade to a p3 700, its all over ladies and gentlemen.

 

[EMAN]

IF you actually set your resolution @ 1600x1200 than your fill rate limited to certain FPS. It won't matter if you have pentium 3 1000mhz or p2 350mhz. Try more conservative setting like 1024x768.

 

[Sunner]

You can have a look-see on any site thats reviewed the Radeon, and youll certainly find numbers with higher end CPU's than a P3-700, the Ultra still crushes the Radeon in terms of speed.

Lets face it, nVidia holds the speed crown, theres no doubt about that.

 

[merlocka]

ummmm.... where to begin

 

[Regulator]

Speed isn't everything. I want an all around card and I think the Radeonis it. Excellent image quality, Excellent DVD Playback, Faster than I will need in games.
Sad part is, I can't find a 64MEG ATI-ALL-IN-WONDER Radeon so I'll have to settle for the 64MEG DDR VIVO and use a vcr as a tv tuner!

 

[Deeko]

I would actually get a Radeon over an Ultra, money aside, because of the features. The Radeon is plenty fast, and it has the most features you will find.

 

[BFG10K]

i hit up to 45 - 50 fps unbelievable!, what's that the ultra can do 60 on a p3 800 or something, ya thats pretty sad

This statement tells me you know absolutely nothing about benchmarking. At that high resolution the video card is the bottleneck, not the CPU.

I think you will find the GF based boards shine with even low end CPUs because they are able to offload some calculations. Anyway enough talk, time for some benchmarks from Anandtech:

GF2 Ultra vs Radeon

Q3 Demo1, P3 550, 1600 * 1200:
------------------------------
GF2 Ultra: 82.9 fps (16 bit), 57.7 fps (32 bit)
Radeon 64 MB DRR: 37.6 fps (16 bit), 36.2 fps (32 bit)

You claim your P3 350 is getting 45-50 fps while Anandtech's P3 550, which is 200 Mhz higher, can't even get above 40 fps. What exactly are you "benchmarking"? You do know to use average fps right? Maximum fps mean nothing.

Secondly as you can see, the GF2 Ultra is able to kill the Radeon.

Thirdly the benchmarks at 1600 * 1200 with a 1 GHz Thunderbird are exactly the same as the P3 550, which proves my point of the video card limitation at higher resolutions.

Don't post about things you know nothing about.

 

[Morningstar]

I used to have a Asus 7700 GTS 2 then I got Radeon, and have been much happier, as 2D and DVD playback is superior. I am not going to argue that Radeon is faster than GTS, because I will admit its not, well at least since DET 3. But speed isn;t everything, everyone who is pro Nvidia seems to believe that's the most important if not the only factor to consider. I really think the fps are high enough on both cards to satisfy most people who play FPS's, isn't 50+ fps suffcient. I think the GTS Ultra is similar to a jet engige on wheels, fast but lacks in comfort or luxeries, whereas the Radeon is more a like a luxery car. I guess my point is this, for the money ( around $300-$350 us) the Radeon just seems like a better value to me. And so far Radeon has done a decent job with the drivers. And before anyone says that they haven't, its not official, but there are beta drivers floating around that have solved many people's problem, if nothing, it says that ATI are actually working on driver improvements; this being main reason why so many have stayed away from ATI products in the past.

 

[RoboTECH]

yes, it's humorous that some peeps think the only reason to buy a video card is their 3dMark and Q3 scores.

Everything else bedamned....

of course, the main thing that keeps me from bothering with a Radeon is their "driver support"

 

[bluemax]

I don't know why people are still poo-poohing ATI for driver support. So far the Radeon's had what... three new drivers now? Pretty darned good if you ask me! 3dfx sure doesn't release that many! No, it's not like Detonator drivers that are released seemingly every week, each one more "beta" than the last...
Let's face it, they're both good cards WITH SOLID DRIVERS AND GOOD SUPPORT.
ATI has said from the beginning they'll be supporting the Radeons much more than the Rage128 lineup. With a chip this good, I can see why.
It's so tempting to get one, but with rumours of a MAXX version before Christmastime, I might have to wait it out a little longer...
Then again, this card is $300 now... I don't want a $500US card like the GF Ultra is! I'm sorry- it's just not THAT good!

 

[TuffGuy]

funny...no response from PyKoTic yet...

Video Card Shootout

5th - 3dfx Voodoo5-5500 64MB
4th - ATi Radeon 64MB VIVO DDR
3rd - ELSA GLADIAC GeForce2 GTS 64MB
2nd - Hercules 3D Prophet II MX 32MB
1st - Hercules 3D Prophet II GTS 64MB

but like people have said, it all depends on what you're looking for. but if you're gonna argue about image "quality" you can't forget about the Matrox G400 Max...

 

[BFG10K]

funny...no response from PyKoTic yet...

He has responded, but not in a normal way. He decided that instead of posting his response in this thread like any normal person would do, he would start a completely new one, having a title which has nothing to do with the topic.

He also decided to start the new thread with a personal attack against me. Is it just me or is this guy abnormal?

His new thread is here.

 

[TuffGuy]

yeah, the guy's an idiot.

 

[RoboTECH]

<<
Video Card Shootout

5th - 3dfx Voodoo5-5500 64MB
4th - ATi Radeon 64MB VIVO DDR
3rd - ELSA GLADIAC GeForce2 GTS 64MB
2nd - Hercules 3D Prophet II MX 32MB
1st - Hercules 3D Prophet II GTS 64MB
>>



Just out of curiosity, since when has PlanetHardware become a bastion of hardware reviewage?

Anyone read their reviews? They're weak as hell.

 

[TuffGuy]

RoboTECH - it was the most recent link from anandtech. but regardless of the jounalistic quality, find me a review that says otherwise...

 

[tkopp]

Guys, it all depends on what you want your card for. If you want high FPS and the knowledge that, next gen, you'll still have playable framerates, then you'll probably go for the GTS. If you want good framerates now and eyecandy (and possibly low framerates later) you'll probably go for the Radeon. Speed-wise, now, there isn't a noticable difference. Later, there will be (unless ATi's driver team is really on the ball). What made me chose the radeon was that I realised that I spend around twice as much time on the net and doing homework as I do playing games, so the 2d quality mattered to me. It's all a matter of taste, and to say that there's any right answer is a little foolish. Just let it lie.

 

[Do'Urden]

I've decited to do it diffrently. I'm opting for the Radeon All-In-Wonder, but only as a secondary card (primary in the begining). It's gona be the PCI version, then later on, when I want some performance, I'll get an AGP one, but still retain all the features of the Radeon.

The goods of both worlds!

 

[BFG10K]

Guys, it all depends on what you want your card for. If you want high FPS and the knowledge that, next gen, you'll still have playable framerates, then you'll probably go for the GTS.

My point exactly. Anybody after raw frame rates would be crazy to ignore the GF based boards.

 

[TuffGuy]

tkopp - very well put. you bring up valid points. read PyKoTic's original post about the radeon &quot;working&quot; the gf2 in fps. the guy's an idiot.

 

[RoboTECH]

tuffguy:

it's pretty obvious that pykotic is a dunce. No arguments there.

anyway, here's a few decent reviews that I've seen of the 5500. They're thorough, meaning they offer more than just 3dMark and Quake3 scores. They offer some explanations:

http://www.voodooextreme.com/reverend/Main.html
http://www.3dspotlight.net/

ironically, here is another good review:
www.riva3d.com/v5 - check out the results when 3dMark2000 is run *without* HW T&amp;L - which simulates today's games in a *realistic manner*

and, along with the reverend's review, here is one of the most thorough reviews I've seen:

http://www.beyond3d.com/reviews/hardware/v5_5500/

unfortunately, those guys had problems with their P3 system and they didn't have the 1.1 drivers (With lodbias slider). It was a very thorough review, nonetheless, and highlighted some of the things that many of the other webistes failed to mention. Also, follow the in-review links for some pretty good stuff. beyond3d is one of the best hardware sites out there.

Now, if you want to see some pretty pro-3dfx reviews, check out www.simhq.com or www.nfshq.com. Those guys are flight and racing sim'ers, and that is where the 5500 pretty much opens up the can o'whoopass on the GTS (mainly because of FSAA quality.

Anyway, as a pretty loyal nvidia user, if I had a website, I'd write up a very good review of the 5500, despite the fact that I kept the GTS (for reasons unrelated to performance tho, hehe....)

 

[TuffGuy]

yeah, i've read those reviews before. i would personally choose the matrox g400 max if i were to buy a video card right now.

Nvidia's testing &quot;suggestion&quot;...

 

[RoboTECH]

tuffguy:

I can't wait until Matrox can finally hit the nail on the head with some 3d support. I have a freind who has a G400, and gawd it looks good!

too damn slow in games tho. B-/