<< The review is not targeted towards the budget buyer nor towards the extreme enthusiast, but the average buyer who's looking for the maximum performance and features for a moderate price. >>
This being said, they give 3rd place to the Ultra!.. WTF, that card is not a "moderate price" That is just a card for the extreme enthusiast, yet they still recommend it
Hmmm...wonder if Pidge is biased:
<<For a guy doing Photoshop/Web design work all day, a G450 DH/Geforce 2 MX
For a guy doing CAD/3DS MAX type stuff, a Quadro 2 is the given choice.
For a hard core quaker, a GF2 GTS/Pro/Ultra would be the best choice depending on the resolution.
For my mom and my sister who browse the web, look at pretty pictures and chat with people and need an inexpensive all around card, the Radeon is a good choice.>>
Doing photoshop and web design ALL day on a Geforce 2 MX at 1600 would certain be bad. And leave Taz alone, he was just telling people about the article, not inviting Pro-Nvidia people to complain about ATi's drivers while not having first hand experience with them (well, most of you anyway).
<<For a guy doing Photoshop/Web design work all day, a G450 DH/Geforce 2 MX
For a guy doing CAD/3DS MAX type stuff, a Quadro 2 is the given choice.
For a hard core quaker, a GF2 GTS/Pro/Ultra would be the best choice depending on the resolution.
For my mom and my sister who browse the web, look at pretty pictures and chat with people and need an inexpensive all around card, the Radeon is a good choice.>>
Doing photoshop and web design ALL day on a Geforce 2 MX at 1600 would certain be bad. And leave Taz alone, he was just telling people about the article, not inviting Pro-Nvidia people to complain about ATi's drivers while not having first hand experience with them (well, most of you anyway).
Let me explain my first choice. It a dumb reason but when I used to do web pages, i liked watching DVD's in the background. The Matrox G400 didn't support motion compensation so my movie would be very jittery when do work. The Geforce 2 MX didn't have that problem. But I guess most people don't watch DVD movies in the back ground. I never worked at 1600x1200, just 1280x1024 so the Geforce 2MX is good enough for me as far as 2D is concerned. But I guess a serious web designer would be better off with the G450. The last one was just me having some fun since the only Radeon which I own is in my mom's computer. Haha...its the Radeon which you sold me Hawk.
Heh, I am surprised you kept it! But I would figure the Radeon would have better DVD than the MX...?
I have been through so many video cards. I pretty much gave up on DVD with my computer after the Matrox ordeal and just got a set top. So I sold one of the ATI AIW Radeon's (the one I sold was one I got in a trade which I replaced with a Geforce 2 GTS->Geforce 2 Pro). I replaced the MX in my mom's system with the ATI AIW Radeon because I thought my mom might like the TV tuner feature and because she is using a 21" monitor. The MX, I put into my gf's computer cause she was using a crappy Asus mobo with integrated TNT and Via chipset so I replaced the mobo and video card. But yes, it is better for DVD (doesn't use as much CPU resource) but I like PowerDVD better than the ATI DVD player (for quality and functions) which I use on my gf's computer.
Radeon wins, so Geforce guys don't like it. If Geforce wins Radeon Guys don't like it. They are both fine cards, if your happy with your card, that's what metters most. Me? I'm happy with the article and my Radeon.
I don't believe people think either one is a bad card. I just think people here think the article was pretty dumb comparison/review.
It was not the best nor the worst review I've ever seen. Typical web PC hardware semi-journalism. I do find it interesting that all Taz did was post a link to the article, and certain people find the immediate need to jump in and say the article sucks. Why is this article biased? Was it comments like
<< GeForce2 Ultra based cards are unmatchable in performance. The Radeon performed very well in High Quality tests and at high resolutions, but the GeForce2 GTS came up with a more balanced performance chart. >>
or
<< The GeForce2 Ultra cards are the ones to beat >>
or
<< This is the fastest core clock we have ever seen from a graphics chip manufacturer and combined with its four pixel pipelines, gives it a total fill rate of 1 Gigapixel per second! The next closest competitor is 200 Megapixels behind, and to think that it's another nVidia product makes most people shiver >>
I didn't find it biased.
<< Each has their own strengths and weakness. Since this article didn't touch on them, it is a useless article. >>
Pidge, did you even read the article? They spent more time on the GF strengths than anything else.
Just because this guy (whoever he is) wrote an article and picked the Radeon over the GF cards is no reason for you to get your panties all in a bunch. There are plenty of reviews that go the other way also. Chill out everyone. Its just a piece of hardware that goes in a PC.
<< GeForce2 Ultra based cards are unmatchable in performance. The Radeon performed very well in High Quality tests and at high resolutions, but the GeForce2 GTS came up with a more balanced performance chart. >>
or
<< The GeForce2 Ultra cards are the ones to beat >>
or
<< This is the fastest core clock we have ever seen from a graphics chip manufacturer and combined with its four pixel pipelines, gives it a total fill rate of 1 Gigapixel per second! The next closest competitor is 200 Megapixels behind, and to think that it's another nVidia product makes most people shiver >>
I didn't find it biased.
<< Each has their own strengths and weakness. Since this article didn't touch on them, it is a useless article. >>
Pidge, did you even read the article? They spent more time on the GF strengths than anything else.
Just because this guy (whoever he is) wrote an article and picked the Radeon over the GF cards is no reason for you to get your panties all in a bunch. There are plenty of reviews that go the other way also. Chill out everyone. Its just a piece of hardware that goes in a PC.
You didn't read what I said. I said the article didn't focus on the ATI's weakness at all and that it sounded like what . I never said it was biased. I do agree with you in that it is "typical web PC hardware semi-journalism" which equates to nothing to get excited over for me so I wouldn't even bother posting the link, even if they had chosen an NVIDIA or 3dfx product. There are to many problems with their pick. It just seemed like they focused to much on cost even though they stated that they weren't gonna focus on cost.
-Its Windows 2000 drivers are weak compared to NVIDIA
-Linux drivers "suck"
-Didn't mention ATI's record of not offering driver support for older products
-Didn't mention that the Geforce 2 GTS even when the ATI is overclocked is still about 10% slower than
the GTS. If the Geforce 2 GTS was overclocked, then the margain would be much higher.
-Lowest price video cards from Anandtechs video card price guide:
NVIDIA GeForce2 GTS 32MB $111 from Access Micro
ATI RADEON 32MB DDR $118 from Z-Buy
-Didn't mention that ATI is known for providing customer with very bad end user support with no responses by email and long waits on a phone which is not toll free
-The current ATI drivers have poor FSAA and disable it when there is a lot of graphics on screen. And the only FSAA option is 4x which is to much for the Radeon, even though it is the number one card.
-No overclocking tool in ATI's drivers even though the article expects us to overclock it
-Poor 16-bit image quality. Very poor. This may be o.k. now but what about in the near future when games come out that tax a lot on the video card and one is forced to play in lower resolutions because they can't play in 16-bit color.
This card should fall in the budget award category but since the author mentioned he was not focusing on a budget card, then he should have given the award to the Geforce 2 GTS. Its an average article though and not worthy of much discussion over it.
-Its Windows 2000 drivers are weak compared to NVIDIA
-Linux drivers "suck"
-Didn't mention ATI's record of not offering driver support for older products
-Didn't mention that the Geforce 2 GTS even when the ATI is overclocked is still about 10% slower than
the GTS. If the Geforce 2 GTS was overclocked, then the margain would be much higher.
-Lowest price video cards from Anandtechs video card price guide:
NVIDIA GeForce2 GTS 32MB $111 from Access Micro
ATI RADEON 32MB DDR $118 from Z-Buy
-Didn't mention that ATI is known for providing customer with very bad end user support with no responses by email and long waits on a phone which is not toll free
-The current ATI drivers have poor FSAA and disable it when there is a lot of graphics on screen. And the only FSAA option is 4x which is to much for the Radeon, even though it is the number one card.
-No overclocking tool in ATI's drivers even though the article expects us to overclock it
-Poor 16-bit image quality. Very poor. This may be o.k. now but what about in the near future when games come out that tax a lot on the video card and one is forced to play in lower resolutions because they can't play in 16-bit color.
This card should fall in the budget award category but since the author mentioned he was not focusing on a budget card, then he should have given the award to the Geforce 2 GTS. Its an average article though and not worthy of much discussion over it.
Pidge, as usual you love to focus on all the negatives. Were you upset that all of the GF2 weaknesses weren't covered? Where is that list? Taking a soldering iron to a $450 video card to get decent 2D quality?
-Its Windows 2000 drivers are weak compared to NVIDIA
......Not true on new drivers. They are within 5-10% of the Win98 drivers
-Linux drivers "suck"
........Linux 2D drivers are built into XF86 4.02. There are no 3D drivers yet. This is a new chipset. The GF series of cards have been around longer and have had more development time. 3D support in Linux is for a very tiny segment of the gaming market.
-Didn't mention ATI's record of not offering driver support for older products
........True....of older products
-Didn't mention that the Geforce 2 GTS even when the ATI is overclocked is still about 10% slower than
the GTS. If the Geforce 2 GTS was overclocked, then the margain would be much higher.
........I thought they stated very clearly many times how much faster the GF2 is. Did they need to provide THAT level of detail?
-Lowest price video cards from Anandtechs video card price guide:
NVIDIA GeForce2 GTS 32MB $111 from Access Micro
ATI RADEON 32MB DDR $118 from Z-Buy
........Video card as all PC component prices change frequently. Cheapest GF2 DDR on pricewatch is $161. I see no GF2 DDR for that price at Access Micro. The cheapest GF2 32 meg DDR they sell is $212 Cheapest Radeon 32 DDR on Pricewatch is $106. You can get a 64 meg VIVO retail from ATI for $155 with MIR with the trade up program.
-Didn't mention that ATI is known for providing customer with very bad end user support with no responses by email and long waits on a phone which is not toll free
.......I never had to call them, nor nVidia, nor 3dfx, so I can't comment (I've owned cards from all of them). Is nVidia that much better? They may be, but again never needed to call them either
-The current ATI drivers have poor FSAA and disable it when there is a lot of graphics on screen. And the only FSAA option is 4x which is to much for the Radeon, even though it is the number one card.
......True I guess. Honestly I don't use FSAA. I turned it on when I first got the card and didn't see anything special. I play at high res and am not bothered by jaggies being a FPS game type guy. If I were a SIM player, FSAA would be more important. 3dfx was the king there.
-No overclocking tool in ATI's drivers even though the article expects us to overclock it
......True again. You have to use Powerstrip to overclock (I don't) until something better comes along.
-Poor 16-bit image quality. Very poor. This may be o.k. now but what about in the near future when games come out that tax a lot on the video card and one is forced to play in lower resolutions because they can't play in 16-bit color.
.....I don't play that many 16 bit games. I do play Q2 and HL. I see no problem what-so-ever with the 16 bit performance in speed or quality in these games. When a game comes out that my card cant handle (there isn't one yet), I'll upgrade to the next thing. At this time it looks like it may be NV20, as long as I can still get good 2D.
This card should fall in the budget award category but since the author mentioned he was not focusing on a budget card, then he should have given the award to the Geforce 2 GTS. Its an average article though and not worthy of much discussion over it.
.......Its an average article that didn't have the winner you would have liked.
-Its Windows 2000 drivers are weak compared to NVIDIA
......Not true on new drivers. They are within 5-10% of the Win98 drivers
-Linux drivers "suck"
........Linux 2D drivers are built into XF86 4.02. There are no 3D drivers yet. This is a new chipset. The GF series of cards have been around longer and have had more development time. 3D support in Linux is for a very tiny segment of the gaming market.
-Didn't mention ATI's record of not offering driver support for older products
........True....of older products
-Didn't mention that the Geforce 2 GTS even when the ATI is overclocked is still about 10% slower than
the GTS. If the Geforce 2 GTS was overclocked, then the margain would be much higher.
........I thought they stated very clearly many times how much faster the GF2 is. Did they need to provide THAT level of detail?
-Lowest price video cards from Anandtechs video card price guide:
NVIDIA GeForce2 GTS 32MB $111 from Access Micro
ATI RADEON 32MB DDR $118 from Z-Buy
........Video card as all PC component prices change frequently. Cheapest GF2 DDR on pricewatch is $161. I see no GF2 DDR for that price at Access Micro. The cheapest GF2 32 meg DDR they sell is $212 Cheapest Radeon 32 DDR on Pricewatch is $106. You can get a 64 meg VIVO retail from ATI for $155 with MIR with the trade up program.
-Didn't mention that ATI is known for providing customer with very bad end user support with no responses by email and long waits on a phone which is not toll free
.......I never had to call them, nor nVidia, nor 3dfx, so I can't comment (I've owned cards from all of them). Is nVidia that much better? They may be, but again never needed to call them either
-The current ATI drivers have poor FSAA and disable it when there is a lot of graphics on screen. And the only FSAA option is 4x which is to much for the Radeon, even though it is the number one card.
......True I guess. Honestly I don't use FSAA. I turned it on when I first got the card and didn't see anything special. I play at high res and am not bothered by jaggies being a FPS game type guy. If I were a SIM player, FSAA would be more important. 3dfx was the king there.
-No overclocking tool in ATI's drivers even though the article expects us to overclock it
......True again. You have to use Powerstrip to overclock (I don't) until something better comes along.
-Poor 16-bit image quality. Very poor. This may be o.k. now but what about in the near future when games come out that tax a lot on the video card and one is forced to play in lower resolutions because they can't play in 16-bit color.
.....I don't play that many 16 bit games. I do play Q2 and HL. I see no problem what-so-ever with the 16 bit performance in speed or quality in these games. When a game comes out that my card cant handle (there isn't one yet), I'll upgrade to the next thing. At this time it looks like it may be NV20, as long as I can still get good 2D.
This card should fall in the budget award category but since the author mentioned he was not focusing on a budget card, then he should have given the award to the Geforce 2 GTS. Its an average article though and not worthy of much discussion over it.
.......Its an average article that didn't have the winner you would have liked.
<< I do find it interesting that all Taz did was post a link to the article, and certain people find the immediate need to jump in and say the article sucks. Why is this article biased? Was it comments like >>
Yeah, and I find it a bit rediculous that Taz got all upset over what I said. It's a video card article. Whoop de do. But no, he had to take what I said out of context and put his own interpretation on what I said (does he read minds as well?). Simply saying "the article sucks" meant I didn't like it. When I said it was "biased" I meant that they tended to overlook a lot of things in it. It's like they're trying to sell something, thus, being biased toward ATi. Granted, that's my view on it, but I got slammed for speaking my mind. In a way, it's not any different than someone making posts in here screaming: "BUY A RADEON. LOOK, IT BEAT OUT ALL OF THE NVIDIA CARDS IN THIS ARTICLE." If that isn't being biased, I don't know what is. The article would have been better if they would have just left out rating the cards.
If they left out the rating of the cards, I would read that they picked the GF2. They had nothing but praise for them.
The response meter for this article is hovering about 40 at the moment with a lot of traditional and expected mud slinging. Ben's rebuttal was based upon questionalbe second hand references attesting to the quality of one's favourite "ice cream". The "queued frames" comment was actually not ATI or Nvidia flavoured...see below for the driver flavour.
What I find amusing is that it is very similar to saying "Ben(not skywalker
and Jerry's" is the best ice cream without ever having tasted it. While the gap between which "tasters" has narrowed, PC World does not hold a candle to ZD Net/PC Magazine (the authors of Winbench). ZD Net actually have technical staff who are qualified and capable of devising techniques and implementing programs to sort out questionable driver implementations.
The article in question plays a different tune for the masses. Review sites and the industry marketing types are somewhat one dimensional in giving in to the simplistic nod of "fastest" must be best endemic to the PC industry.
It was refreshing to see an article state both side of the facts (supporting and unsupporting ) and then present a conclusion in which the concept of "sufficient framerate" was appropriately weighted in and with relation 2D quality, support, image quality, and price in making a different set of tradeoffs which one reviewer at one review site deemed best. Even on this board, some users have come to this decision independently.
Viva la difference and appreciate that the process of enlightenment is not achieved by sticking to tried and true formulas. If the article made your eyes bulge...put down that keyboard and go for a walk and leave the PC powered down for the weekend. We have enough framerate evangelists in this world as it is.
What I find amusing is that it is very similar to saying "Ben(not skywalker
and Jerry's" is the best ice cream without ever having tasted it. While the gap between which "tasters" has narrowed, PC World does not hold a candle to ZD Net/PC Magazine (the authors of Winbench). ZD Net actually have technical staff who are qualified and capable of devising techniques and implementing programs to sort out questionable driver implementations.The article in question plays a different tune for the masses. Review sites and the industry marketing types are somewhat one dimensional in giving in to the simplistic nod of "fastest" must be best endemic to the PC industry.
It was refreshing to see an article state both side of the facts (supporting and unsupporting ) and then present a conclusion in which the concept of "sufficient framerate" was appropriately weighted in and with relation 2D quality, support, image quality, and price in making a different set of tradeoffs which one reviewer at one review site deemed best. Even on this board, some users have come to this decision independently.
Viva la difference and appreciate that the process of enlightenment is not achieved by sticking to tried and true formulas. If the article made your eyes bulge...put down that keyboard and go for a walk and leave the PC powered down for the weekend. We have enough framerate evangelists in this world as it is.
Well we all make choices, and its human nature to defend our choices, but whats important is in the end were all still friends.
oldfart,
I was not trying to nitpick at ATI. I was just stating some very well known problems that other websites including Anandtech would point out if he were doing a video card roundup or buyers guide. I am discrediting the article, not the video card.
I was not trying to nitpick at ATI. I was just stating some very well known problems that other websites including Anandtech would point out if he were doing a video card roundup or buyers guide. I am discrediting the article, not the video card.
I have been around for a couple months but don't post very much. I have read MANY posts from all the guys arguing in this thread, and I know each of you pretty well. I have decided to break out of my shell today, and share my take on some of the people in this thread.
Compellor - Without question, the biggest moron I have seen at any forum in a long time. I know his type, and I feel sorry for his parents and any other unfortunate people that have to deal with him. A coward and a trash talker. A result of bad parents raising a bad kid. Always sees the negative side of things. Probably spends most of his time alone in his room.
Pidge - Not as bad as Compellor but just as ignorant. Takes cheap shots whenever possible, and backs nothing up. A sort of "Compellor in Training". Probably the same person with a different registered name.
Taz - Seems to love his Radeon a lot, and talk about it a lot. Has a good sense of humor. Gets in arguments with some Nvidia fans but doesn't start them. Only seems to defend the Radeon from certain Nvidia zealots who take cheap shots. No problem with him.
Ben - While he does have some limited information about video cards, he is often incorrect. He also changes his story and facts more often than most people change their underwear. A typical hypocrite. I won't waste my time searching the forums, but I have seen countless examples of his flip-flop statements. Also worth mentioning.... GameBasement is NOT his website. He just joined a few months ago and has written a couple articles. It's also a pretty worthless website to begin with, and offers no real helpful information or reviews. Basically some high school kids who wanted to have a site. Ben himself is probably 16-19 years old, suffers from a chronic illness and can't leave the house or get out very much. This would explain his obvious obsession, as well as his overall limited focus. Possibly suffers from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.
Hawk - Has always seemed like a pretty reasonable guy. Not very controversial. Doesn't seem to get involved in many arguments. No problem with him.
LSD - The name itself gives some insight into the low life mentality of this individual. Seems pretty ignorant. Possibly related to Compellor or Pidge. Maybe little brother.... or boyfriend. Maybe just another name for the same user.
Hope this helps.
Compellor - Without question, the biggest moron I have seen at any forum in a long time. I know his type, and I feel sorry for his parents and any other unfortunate people that have to deal with him. A coward and a trash talker. A result of bad parents raising a bad kid. Always sees the negative side of things. Probably spends most of his time alone in his room.
Pidge - Not as bad as Compellor but just as ignorant. Takes cheap shots whenever possible, and backs nothing up. A sort of "Compellor in Training". Probably the same person with a different registered name.
Taz - Seems to love his Radeon a lot, and talk about it a lot. Has a good sense of humor. Gets in arguments with some Nvidia fans but doesn't start them. Only seems to defend the Radeon from certain Nvidia zealots who take cheap shots. No problem with him.
Ben - While he does have some limited information about video cards, he is often incorrect. He also changes his story and facts more often than most people change their underwear. A typical hypocrite. I won't waste my time searching the forums, but I have seen countless examples of his flip-flop statements. Also worth mentioning.... GameBasement is NOT his website. He just joined a few months ago and has written a couple articles. It's also a pretty worthless website to begin with, and offers no real helpful information or reviews. Basically some high school kids who wanted to have a site. Ben himself is probably 16-19 years old, suffers from a chronic illness and can't leave the house or get out very much. This would explain his obvious obsession, as well as his overall limited focus. Possibly suffers from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.
Hawk - Has always seemed like a pretty reasonable guy. Not very controversial. Doesn't seem to get involved in many arguments. No problem with him.
LSD - The name itself gives some insight into the low life mentality of this individual. Seems pretty ignorant. Possibly related to Compellor or Pidge. Maybe little brother.... or boyfriend. Maybe just another name for the same user.
Hope this helps.
I sure am glad I didn't reply to this thread earlier. Then there would have been something writeen about me, too by ChrisSun.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter