ATI's Boundless Gaming is bounded
- Thread starter LittleNemoNES
- Start date
I hated the idea of 3 graphics cards anyway... As well as using a graphics card for something other than graphics.
The card used for physics processing could have been any graphics card. An X300 if you wanted. I thought it was still the best idea to date if anything.
I hope they take the inq. suggestion and produce their own motherboard. It is retarded that the motherboards all embraced SLI with open arms and then when ATI brings forth a good idea they say 'nope sorry we don't want to produce new tech ....well unless NV brings up the idea.' Smells fishy to me.
Yeah that must be it, or everyone got burned on their horrible south bridge, and Nvidia outsold ATIs most recent chipset by an order of magnitude.
ATi has the fastest single card right now, their mobos need a LOT of work.
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
Actually the 7950GX2 is the fastest card right now.
Then this thread need not concern you. I would rather use SLI or a second video card for physics than buy a card that is only good in a handful of games. At least another video card could be used for dual display or SLI could be used in all games.
The day I buy 3 video cards to run in one computer is the day I check myself into the mental institution.
The 7950 is the fastest because Nvidia managed to slap two 7*** series cards together into one PCI-E lane all while not giving it anything outwardly different than a 6800 series (it still does nothing different in terms of features-minus HDCP). ATI looks better and still performs great. I see competition between Nvidia and ATI as useless right now since Nvidia is too dated to logically compare.
I do wish though that ATI would get off their arse and stop relying on their flagship group to make every really good card from them. Nvidia is great with how many options you can do with thier products. Even their drivers are begining to look like they were made by "Cliff Notes". nHancer and Tray Tools still is the way to go. Still, balls to the walls, ATI is just better (right now).
I wasn't so sure about that 3rd PCI-E lane devoted soley for physics though. When Nvidia's Quad SLI gets more effecient, ATI is going to get creamed if physics is all they are thinking about. Then again, I wish they would do something of their own rather than just wait for Nvidia to think of something.
Nvidia=Sega
ATI=Nintendo
(back in the early 90's of course, I'm not implying Nvidia is going to have to sell out)
I do wish though that ATI would get off their arse and stop relying on their flagship group to make every really good card from them. Nvidia is great with how many options you can do with thier products. Even their drivers are begining to look like they were made by "Cliff Notes". nHancer and Tray Tools still is the way to go. Still, balls to the walls, ATI is just better (right now).
I wasn't so sure about that 3rd PCI-E lane devoted soley for physics though. When Nvidia's Quad SLI gets more effecient, ATI is going to get creamed if physics is all they are thinking about. Then again, I wish they would do something of their own rather than just wait for Nvidia to think of something.
Nvidia=Sega
ATI=Nintendo
(back in the early 90's of course, I'm not implying Nvidia is going to have to sell out)
Lol, youve gotta be rollo, i cant possibly believe that anyone would think that this is a good idea.
If youre using the card for physics, obviously its not going to be driving displays... If it is, itll be 2d only, in which case you might as well be using integrated graphics or piece of crap low end cards to be doing this.
And you know what i meant wreckage, stop trolling.
Its the fastest single GPU card... Just because Nv crammed SLI onto a single card doesnt mean suddenly its in the same playing field as the other cards priced far far below it.
will there be any pci slots left after a person uses a x1900 xt crossfire config and a x1600 xt for physics.
On the intel 975x there 3 pci-e slots,but with what ati have suggested there won't be any room left for sound cards or tv tuners.
And can older series of cards like my x700 pro be used for calculating physics.
On the intel 975x there 3 pci-e slots,but with what ati have suggested there won't be any room left for sound cards or tv tuners.
And can older series of cards like my x700 pro be used for calculating physics.
3 video cards is just stupid....and some people will buy 3 X1900's i can see it
they suggest a X1600 as the lowest card to use, and even thats not exactly old is it. ATis implementation is just for effects only, i dont think its actually proper physics like the AGEIA can do
they suggest a X1600 as the lowest card to use, and even thats not exactly old is it. ATis implementation is just for effects only, i dont think its actually proper physics like the AGEIA can do
DeathReborn
Platinum Member
- Oct 11, 2005
- 2,786
- 789
- 136
Maybe ATI will come out with a board similar to the Gigabyte GA-8N-SLI Quad Royal for this "Triple Play" but please god I hope they use EATX for it as i'd like to have 3 available PCI slots.
The x1k series would make an adequate physics processor cos of the ring bus -- kinda like programmable shaders...
That would be great but, any linkage on that? I don't think either Nvidia or ATI are calling this possible yet.
omg I cant wait. Dual GPUs for QUAD CROSSFIRE, DUAL GPUS AS PPUS FOR QUAD CROSSFIRE PHYSICSXXXX
****** that
****** that
You already listed HDCP (soon to be a big deal to to the HTPC crowd) but apparently forgot transparency anti-aliasing and completely redesigned shaders.
Angle independent AF isn't nearly as big a deal as guys like you make it out to be. IQ is comparable in most games. HDR+AA may look nicer, but only 3 games support it, and one of them (Oblivion) with known render errors?
I agree, but would reverse that:
ATIs flagship product's massive heat/power/noise, less advanced multicard options, lack of HDCP, and GX2 level performance are likely the reason they mainly lose money while nVidia stock split yet again.
Last but not least, you can bet ATI would put out a similar card if they could, but the size and heat of X1900XTs would likely get the card so hot it would melt your PCIE slots. Imagine the dustbuster THAT card would require- they'd have to call Black and Decker for some industrial fans!
Coming from someone who doesn't play with a card that supports it, that is rather interesting. It doesn't change the fact that Nvidia can't even do it, regardless whether or not you think it is worth it.
False. It does look nicer, no matter how you try and avoid it.
HL2E1
Oblivion
SS2
FC
TRL
DoD
Um, thats twice as many as you said support it and 4 of those ones Nvidia can't do both HDR + AA on.
Like Nvidia never has render errors? Seriously Crusader, what render errors are you talking about? I don't see any when playing Oblivion.
I agree, but would reverse that:
ATIs flagship product's massive heat/power/noise, less advanced multicard options, lack of HDCP, and GX2 level performance are likely the reason they mainly lose money while nVidia stock split yet again.[/quote]
I wasn't talking about the companies standpoints, why do you all of the sudden bring this up? Got investments?
Also, we've heard that the first generation of DX10 cards on both sides are going to be power hungry, will you refuse to buy a G80 if it requires an OCZ 5.25" bay power supply to run it?
Lack of HDCP, like that was somthing useful for the 7950:roll:
You need a monitor, a OS, a card, and a drive for all of that to work. By the time all of those components are available, G80's and R600's will be out, with a lot of other more important features.
The GX2 does not have a good multicard option either. Quad gets beat by Crossfire, and even its own SLI.
Likewise. Nvidia would put out a card like the X1900 if they could. In fact, they will be...the G80. Power hungry, supporting HDR + AA which will probably make it just as hot...
Fact is, Nvidia couldn't produce a card that can make a game look as good as an X1900 so they solely concentrated on beating it in performance. They did. They got about a constant 15 frame jump with another whole GPU. So the X1900 does about 3/4's the amount of performance that two GPU's can do from Nvidia. That's actually a compliment to ATI.
I know you and I see things differently when it comes to games. You go for okay looks, great performance and I go for okay performance and great looks. We are different, and I'll respect your aspect if you will do so to mine. I don't think the GX2 is worthless. In fact, its a great concept especially when dreaming about its possiblities with a G80 core. Yet you seem to discredit the X1900 every time you post. Not only that, but saying it is better just because it meets YOUR expectations. I was dissapointed with Nvidia this time. Not much has changed from the initial 7800's over a year ago. That doesn't mean though that everyone is dissatisfied about it. Some prefer it the look of the 7 series with the best performance possible, some don't. I just wish you would quit bashing the company that is doing things even your beloved Nvidia isn't doing.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter