• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

ATI R300 rumours

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
did you hear the one about the guy who overclocked his ati 8500 to 704 mhz stable 708 iffy.

actually read it earlier today course they did some hardware tweaks too but nothin that they hadnt done to gforce 3 but can't remember the site now?
 
I really dunno if I could ever buy an ATi card. nVidia just seems to be supirior is so many ways. I mean at every price range, I'd take nVidia over ATi. I really think that ATi must improve the driver situation or they will never "beat" a nVidia card. Further more, I really think that all these new generation video cards, I could never see spending money on them. I mean, really there is only one feature that can actually be used in every game that these high end cards have that the lower end GF2's don't. And that's much better performance in FSAA. Really, that would be the only reason that I would suggest to someone to get a GF3. And even then, I would never suggest to them to buy anything other than a GF3 Ti200. I am glad that ATi is in the market, it is forcing nVidia to keep on fighting, but I really, don't think that ATi anytime soon will produce a product that would win hands down (except for the AIW Radeon 8500DV). That's my take
 
I'm anxious to see the R300, but not too anxious. I just hope ATi can release some better stock drivers this time. They don't have trouble making competitive hardware. It's the software side that holds them back. I hate to see so much untapped performance go to waste.
 


<< nVidia just seems to be supirior is so many ways. >>


Except image quality. 😉
Most people would agree that ATI had been constantly providing richer colours, better colour definition, and sharper 2D as a rule.
Now that's not saying the Geforce3 is bad, the Radeon just produces a better-coloured image.
 
Seems to me that a lot of people bitch and moan about ATI drivers... and my observation being that most of them aren't even ATI card owners. Funny. I read rumors here and there about buggy drivers but never had any problems with drivers for my Radeon 64MB VIVO. Some dude was saying that ATI releases drivers every 2 weeks because of this?... I think he means NVidia does. Had the Geforce2 GTS and had more problems with drivers than with my Radeon. Plus, as one user has already said... ATI video quality is superior to other graphics cards.

If want to complain about screwed up graphics in games then why don't you blaim the company that developed the game? Doesn't make any damn sense that they developed a game for a state of the art graphics card like the 8500 and never tested to see if their game actually works with it. All theory and no application.
 
Zenfoe you may be a newbie like me but im definitely feeling ya.....the only way to truly design a game for consumers is to test it with a variety of rigs using a variety of hardware
 
I sometimes wonder if NVidia's GeForce-family isn't parralleling or matching the ATI problems. Most of the GeForce users out there go through initial growing pains, especially the motherboard issues of setting up 4X mode in a majority of motherboards out there.

NVidia is more likely to be run on BETA drivers because of some improvement or another, meaning that they are no different than using BETA ATI drivers. (The drivers releases for NVidia cards come three to four times more frequently, though.)

The DVD playback is anything but smooth on any GeForce family card using PC's below 1 GHz. I've seen P2-400's run smooth playback with a $60 Radeon VE!

NVidia doesn't demand quality 2D (RAMDACs) out of their generic business partners, meaning you have a good chance of poor image quality. NVidia cards in general tend to have a seriously dark picture, requiring a major shift in the gamma settings in every game. ATI cards tend to be bright in their games, requiring a shift to the darker side of the gamma settings.

NVidia cards often do not support 3V AGP boards, causing severe damage to both card and motherboard in those situations. I know, the same is true with 3DfX cards and 1.5V AGP boards...

NVidia cards run with compressed textures by default, causing the famous torn sky in Quake!!!. ATI cards have momentary whitescreens due to some driver problem. The NVidia problem persisted for several generations of driver releases until they finally found a physical problem in the NVidia chipset, right? 😉

NVidia has awesome framerate in their games, especially in the lower resolutions and 16-bit color. The lower the resolution the way better the performance; low end NVidia cards can run awesome framerates with 640x480 settings. ATI Radeons 7000/7200 (64-bit DDR, SDR models) in the low end tend to run optimal at 800x600 regardless if 16-bit or 32-bit color is used.

As far as the R300 goes, it'll probably be far short of expectations. ATI and NVidia always trump up the numbers and then release a disappointment.
 
the 8500 is an excellent card. there isnt' a single gf3 that supports dual monitors that I know of. I'm glad at least someone in the industry is innovative in non-3d aspects of vid cards. To think that ATI will never outdo Nvidia is so short-sighted it's hilarious, especially with nvidia dethroning 3dfx. It could easily happen. Don't forget about Bit Boys 😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top