"Bad Buy" 6800NU HardOCPs value choice for Doom3

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Zebo
No no rollo you missed the best to really get those pro/xtrer's goat.. the "no good" 5900 cards spank em'

No they don't; not in the HardOCP benchmarks I read anyway. The 9800XT scored around 47FPS at 1024x768 and the 5950U also scored 47FPS at the same settings. I'll go look for a link.

EDIT: Here's the link. It's actually a 5900U vs. a 9800PRO. They both score 47FPS at 1024x768 w/ 8XAF. Unless you care about 0.6FPS, they both perform the same.

I care about the minimum frame rate 22 vs 7.. unless you dont carea bout 15 FPS.

;/

EDITED: Because at first after I changed 20 to 22 after double checking I still said 13 fps when in actuality linear math would disagree with that conclusion.

You guys are grasping at straws. From the sounds of it, those of you that are nitpicking over this issue are nVidia fanboys. Both cards get the same average FPS, and the minimum FPS was different for a split-second and could have been a glitch for all we know. Face it, the 9800PRO and 5900U are EQUAL when it comes to Doom3 based on the benchmarks we have seen.

I find all of the 9800/5900 discussions very silly to be totally honest. The 5900's are only superior in OpenGL and are really only superior to the 9800 cards in professional GL applications. In just about every other situation the 9800 cards are noticeably faster. The fact that it can keep pace with NV3X cards in Doom3 is remarkable IMO, especially if you look at how the X800 cards compare to the 6800 cards in the same benchmarks. If the 9800PRO can keep pace with the 5900U with ATi's lousy OpenGL drivers, it shows that the 9800PRO is a superior piece of hardware IMO.

Seems like it matters an awful lot to you. You opinion is noted.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Seems like it matters an awful lot to you. You opinion is noted.

It just irritates me that when two cards get the *same* average FPS in a benchmark, you get people who say that one card "spanked" the other one. Then you have people saying that one card is better than the other because of a dip in the minimum FPS for a millisecond during a cutscene that doesn't even impact gameplay. We're supposed to be having an intelligent discussion here, not a pissing contest based on personal bias.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Seems like it matters an awful lot to you. You opinion is noted.

It just irritates me that when two cards get the *same* average FPS in a benchmark, you get people who say that one card "spanked" the other one. Then you have people saying that one card is better than the other because of a dip in the minimum FPS for a millisecond during a cutscene that doesn't even impact gameplay. We're supposed to be having an intelligent discussion here, not a pissing contest based on personal bias.

When there is an artificial 60fps cap, the minimum framerate is a very serious concern. Although in this case it looks like a cutscene was to blame, which would make it irrelevant.

theres a big diff between 5-47-60 and 27-47-60 (numbers pulled from the sky, dont look for them in the article)

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Seems like it matters an awful lot to you. You opinion is noted.

It just irritates me that when two cards get the *same* average FPS in a benchmark, you get people who say that one card "spanked" the other one. Then you have people saying that one card is better than the other because of a dip in the minimum FPS for a millisecond during a cutscene that doesn't even impact gameplay. We're supposed to be having an intelligent discussion here, not a pissing contest based on personal bias.

When there is an artificial 60fps cap, the minimum framerate is a very serious concern. Although in this case it looks like a cutscene was to blame, which would make it irrelevant.

theres a big diff between 5-47-60 and 27-47-60 (numbers pulled from the sky, dont look for them in the article)

IMO you need to look at the graph as a whole; if it's only hitting 5FPS for a split second, it's not really that big a deal. I agree that it's a problem if it happens more frequently though, especially during actual gameplay.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Seems like it matters an awful lot to you. You opinion is noted.

It just irritates me that when two cards get the *same* average FPS in a benchmark, you get people who say that one card "spanked" the other one. Then you have people saying that one card is better than the other because of a dip in the minimum FPS for a millisecond during a cutscene that doesn't even impact gameplay. We're supposed to be having an intelligent discussion here, not a pissing contest based on personal bias.

Don't confuse my trying to warn about the 7fps dip on the 9800pro with me pissing on anybody's territory. That concerned me more that the 22fps dip on the 5900U. No pissing contest from me. Just stating what I noticed. Whether it was a cut scene or not, it still hit 7fps for a reason.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Seems like it matters an awful lot to you. You opinion is noted.

It just irritates me that when two cards get the *same* average FPS in a benchmark, you get people who say that one card "spanked" the other one. Then you have people saying that one card is better than the other because of a dip in the minimum FPS for a millisecond during a cutscene that doesn't even impact gameplay. We're supposed to be having an intelligent discussion here, not a pissing contest based on personal bias.

Don't confuse my trying to warn about the 7fps dip on the 9800pro with me pissing on anybody's territory. That concerned me more that the 22fps dip on the 5900U. No pissing contest from me. Just stating what I noticed. Whether it was a cut scene or not, it still hit 7fps for a reason.

The reason was probably a Windows XP service suddenly starting up, or some background process. If you look at the graph, the dip down to 7FPS was very sudden and only lasted a millisecond. If you disregard that glitch, the minimum FPS for the 9800PRO was 22FPS or so, the same as the 5900U.

Another thing to note about this comparison is that the 5900U has 256mb of ram whereas the 9800PRO only has 128. That is another potential cause to the dip in FPS.

EDIT: I just looked at the 9800XT results, and it has a minimum FPS of 23, so that points to the 128mb of memory as being the most likely culprit here.

BTW, I wasn't accusing you of anything with my comments, keys. I was more talking about the comment that the 5900U "spanked" the 9800PRO.

 

[Corporate Thug]

hopefully the release of the x800 pro GT will drive down the price of the X800 pro to the $299 range, which will make it the best buy IMO

 

[GeneralGrievous]

That would be a great buy. The x800 Pro outdoes the 6800 by a sizable margin.

I find all of the 9800/5900 discussions very silly to be totally honest. The 5900's are only superior in OpenGL and are really only superior to the 9800 cards in professional GL applications. In just about every other situation the 9800 cards are noticeably faster. The fact that it can keep pace with NV3X cards in Doom3 is remarkable IMO, especially if you look at how the X800 cards compare to the 6800 cards in the same benchmarks. If the 9800PRO can keep pace with the 5900U with ATi's lousy OpenGL drivers, it shows that the 9800PRO is a superior piece of hardware IMO.

Don't forget shader hacks, IQ "optimizations", mixed mode directx 8.1 code pathing, and dustbuster cooling solutions.

 

[Marsumane]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Seems like it matters an awful lot to you. You opinion is noted.

It just irritates me that when two cards get the *same* average FPS in a benchmark, you get people who say that one card "spanked" the other one. Then you have people saying that one card is better than the other because of a dip in the minimum FPS for a millisecond during a cutscene that doesn't even impact gameplay. We're supposed to be having an intelligent discussion here, not a pissing contest based on personal bias.

Don't confuse my trying to warn about the 7fps dip on the 9800pro with me pissing on anybody's territory. That concerned me more that the 22fps dip on the 5900U. No pissing contest from me. Just stating what I noticed. Whether it was a cut scene or not, it still hit 7fps for a reason.

The reason was probably a Windows XP service suddenly starting up, or some background process. If you look at the graph, the dip down to 7FPS was very sudden and only lasted a millisecond. If you disregard that glitch, the minimum FPS for the 9800PRO was 22FPS or so, the same as the 5900U.

Another thing to note about this comparison is that the 5900U has 256mb of ram whereas the 9800PRO only has 128. That is another potential cause to the dip in FPS.

EDIT: I just looked at the 9800XT results, and it has a minimum FPS of 23, so that points to the 128mb of memory as being the most likely culprit here.

BTW, I wasn't accusing you of anything with my comments, keys. I was more talking about the comment that the 5900U "spanked" the 9800PRO.

This is exactly what i was arguing in another thread. Cutscenes are irrelevant. Especially due to this perticular instance being so small

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
That would be a great buy. The x800 Pro outdoes the 6800 by a sizable margin.

It actually loses to it in Doom3. The 6800NU gets 57FPS at 1280x1024, but the X800PRO only gets 51FPS.

Generally the X800PRO does indeed outperform the 6800NU. Right now it's Doom3 that matters most though.

 

[Keysplayr]

Gotcha.
Yeah, 128 is the culprit no doubt.

 

[nitromullet]

If the 9800PRO can keep pace with the 5900U with ATi's lousy OpenGL drivers, it shows that the 9800PRO is a superior piece of hardware IMO.

nice spin...

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Suxorz. When you have $500+ you'll spend on a vid card, no one will take your money. (I looked high/low for non-price gouged GTs Ultras) :-(

That's the freaking sad part of this situation. There's a freaking line of people willing to plop down more than it costs for an entire low end Dell system to buy a 6800GT/Ultra and we can't find people willing to sell them to us! :Q

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

If the 9800PRO can keep pace with the 5900U with ATi's lousy OpenGL drivers, it shows that the 9800PRO is a superior piece of hardware IMO.

nice spin...

If the 5900U keeps pace with the 9800PRO in HL2 I will say the same thing about it.