• 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.

FX5950, still better than 9800XT...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
i can see reever your not as smart (tech) as i may have thought...


i again, own both and find these reviews to be true. do you own both?
or you just playing expert knowing not much at all...

I have build over 10,000 systems including many review systems that have taken editors choice etc...

what have you done? read a few favorite review sites claim expert status?

if a review is not to your liking, you pretend its not there and try to skew the results as many do.
 
again, own both and find these reviews to be true. do you own both? or you just playing expert knowing not much at all...
Click to expand...

Yes I own both, a softmodded 9500 and a 5900 non-ultra i traded from my friend

if a review is not to your liking, you pretend its not there and try to skew the results as many do.
Click to expand...

Thats not the problem here. You are taking one reviews word over eveyrbody elses. And if they disagree you yell shenanigans and conspiracy. You need to take your blinders off

what have you done? read a few favorite review sites claim expert status?
Click to expand...

Just because you say i own bla-bla and i build bla-bla gives you expert status? If you were such an expert and owned everything and built everything you wouldn't need to read reviews or confide with them
 
Wow, some people are very zealous about brand names. Unfortunately most of us cant afford to buy top of the line cards from all major manufacturers and test them to see which is best. We have to rely on reviews and word of mouth for that. Ill buy whatever the reviews say is the best for my purposes, along with some people who seem knowledgeable on certain message boards. Maybe when we all have our own review websites and get sent $500 dollar video cards every month to play with then we can go all quasi-fanatical... until then 🙁
 
Gee, so if it takes 3.3 sec to open photoshop with my ati I should dump it for nvidia 'cause it opens in 3.09 secs. Well, I'll keep ati's better colour accuracy over nvidia.... no wait a minute, I use matrox for my photoshopping machines, blows em both away in 2d. Caveat is, speed isn't everything, colour accuracy is and nvidia has always played number 3 which is why you won't see a nvidia card in any ad agency/magazine/graphic house around.
 
i stay in touch as much as possible with everyone's reviews, due to many consumers follow the direction of the reviews givin.

i have both the 9800xt and 5950, not yelling foul, as i agree with some reviewers findings (they tell it as it is about both, including ati issues or whatever you would to call them)...

i find listening to consumers allows us to make better choices about how to market our product(s), example: we have a few cases having the ati issue so many say isn't so or happening (monitor blacks out etc.. w/cat 3.8 drivers), among other issues etc... when this is a issue as big as or bigger than future dx9...

speaking of dx9, look at the tom's review, the 9800xt is very little ahead (aqua bench) of 5950 yet the 9800xt is NOT display picture correctly, thats a dx9 issue for ati and shows good nvidia performance as well... i don't see what some others do, i see what firing s. and toms seen (plus a few other reviews) and thats not saying ati is stealing the show, it shows there are issues.

Lets demand the same of all compaines... if that makes no sense please feel free to correct me.
 
speaking of dx9, look at the tom's review, the 9800xt is very little ahead (aqua bench) of 5950 yet the 9800xt is NOT display picture correctly, thats a dx9 issue for ati and shows good nvidia performance as well... i don't see what some others do, i see what firing s. and toms seen (plus a few other reviews) and thats not saying ati is stealing the show, it shows there are issues.
Click to expand...

Aquamark contains 4 dx9 shaders, and 300 dx8 shaders. That is as little dx9 as you can put into something. Ati not displaying the picture correctly is not a dx9 issue, it is a driver issue that is apparent with all drivers after 3.2, most of which predate aquamark by 6 months. You don't see what other see because you are looking at aquamark and gunmetal as dx9 titles, when they are essentially meet the bare minimum to be called "dx9" and are not truly representative of real dx9 games that will be coming out in the future. True dx9 games contains more than 4 shaders, like HL2, and tomb raider, and show greatly different performance than aquamar. and as more and more games use more and more shaders, the performance delta will be even bigger.
 
your right, ati has a issue (unknown yet for sure what), when fixed, what makes you think ati can hold its speed when displaying more of the picture or display correct? also what's to say nvidia won't improve there drivers etc...


its worth noting neither are perfect, yet many forget this.
 
According to Anandtech and there videocard round up's part 1 and 2 ?. ATI cards crash in Homeworld2 .... that?s unacceptable ATI cards are not as stable and don?t perform as fast as Nvidia Cards in Homeworld2 ?.there for they are useless junk too me because its my favorite game.

I Frankly dont care about what card is faster and what card is overall the better card or company i just want the GAMES i play not Benchmarks ( i dont play Benchmarks there crap games ) too run there best and get the best gameplay out of them with the best Hardware for that specific game and checking all the homeworld2 benchmarks on the net the FX5900 is the card too have for that game. It also plays all the other games ive run on it without any problems.

: ) when the next ATI cards come out and if they run the next homeworld better I?ll be getting ATI ? because I buy hardware too run my games on ?. Not games too run on my hardware!!!
 
cm123 - I don't agree with 95% of what you have to say. However, I will defend to the death your right to say it 😉 .

Originally posted by: videoclone
According to Anandtech and there videocard round up's part 1 and 2 ?. ATI cards crash in Homeworld2 .... that?s unacceptable ATI cards are not as stable and don?t perform as fast as Nvidia Cards in Homeworld2 ?.there for they are useless junk too me because its my favorite game.

I Frankly dont care about what card is faster and what card is overall the better card or company i just want the GAMES i play not Benchmarks ( i dont play Benchmarks there crap games ) too run there best and get the best gameplay out of them with the best Hardware for that specific game and checking all the homeworld2 benchmarks on the net the FX5900 is the card too have for that game. It also plays all the other games ive run on it without any problems.

: ) when the next ATI cards come out and if they run the next homeworld better I?ll be getting ATI ? because I buy hardware too run my games on ?. Not games too run on my hardware!!!
Click to expand...

^ If I played Homeworld 2 I'd probably shy away from ATI hardware as well. However, I don't, and with every single game I play right now I don't experience any issues with my ATI card. In fact, it is just as stable as my Nvidia GF4. If you check out Anand's review, ATI is faster in the majority of games, not just benchmarks.

Also, videoclone , I don't think you've brought up this Homeworld 2 issue enough. Perhaps creating a third thread about this topic is in order for you to get the message across??
 
Originally posted by: cm123

speaking of dx9, look at the tom's review, the 9800xt is very little ahead (aqua bench) of 5950 yet the 9800xt is NOT display picture correctly, thats a dx9 issue for ati and shows good nvidia performance as well... i don't see what some others do, i see what firing s. and toms seen (plus a few other reviews) and thats not saying ati is stealing the show, it shows there are issues.
Click to expand...


Your using TomsHardWare as a source? Explain to me how it display's the image WRONG when infact we have no reference image. I'd like to see those other reviews and if I could see some references on the so called 10,000 computers you've built and your awards on them.
 
Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
cm123 - I don't agree with 95% of what you have to say. However, I will defend to the death your right to say it 😉 .

Originally posted by: videoclone

Also, videoclone , I don't think you've brought up this Homeworld 2 issue enough. Perhaps creating a third thread about this topic is in order for you to get the message across??
Click to expand...

lol hahaha just trying to justify buying this sheettty GeforceFX card i got lol anyways
hows things jiffylube 🙂 ... you played any BF1942 Desert Combat yet ? its awsome
Click to expand...
 
tabb... "we have no reference image"

do you even know what your talking about?

...see the toms review, here's a bit.

The "Massive Overdraw" test in AquaMark 3 aims to test the limits of a graphics card's fillrate. In the explosion pictured below, numerous layers of textures are added onto one another (Particle Effect) and then slowly faded out. It seems that ATi's driver doesn't continue to fade out the textures until the blending ends, instead simply cutting out certain textures when a certain degree of fade-out is reached. This obviously saves memory bandwidth, leading to a higher framerate. In the direct comparison with the image rendered by NVIDIA's FX 5950 Ultra, the result is a darker and less detailed explosion (Frame 5100).
and
The density of the smoke or refuse that is shown spewing from the pipe in this picture is much lower on the Radeon 9800 XT than on the FX 5950 Ultra. The vehicle at the left-hand edge of the screen proves that this is not the result of some difference in lighting or gamma settings.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031023/nvidia-nv38-nv36-20.html


see anand videocard round up's part 1 and 2 for homeworld 2 crashes

see link above for firing s. slow 2d...

i think the point has gotten lost, ati cards have there fair share of issues right now, some much more of a issue than nvidia's. however many people are focused on how bad nvidia is at dx9, when its just doesn't look that bad when you look at ati's issues, even on the dx9 aqua at tom's, ok, you don't like him, so therefore he is posting pictures and print falsely, i don't think so, nor firing s. at least they point out issues from all chips unlike some who don't (not to say of course these sites always do or don't).

if ati ran all textures, would it still be slighty faster? i thought this was a nvidia issue? whoops, guess that's a ati problem for now after all.
 
cm123, you still have yet to answer the fundamental question:

In what possible situation are either of these cards' 2D capabilities going to be tested in real life applications?
 
look at firing s. review ... everyday use including many favorite(s) games of past also.

web surfing, photoshop, office and ...

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/building_gaming_opteron_2003_Part1/page6.asp (see clip below)


"When I moved to the Radeon 9800 Pro (with clean VGA drivers), I immediately noticed something was off. My system seemed slower ? like it was a little bit laggy. I felt as if my hard drive was slightly fragmented or that my Internet connection was just a hair congested. Quick checks showed that it wasn?t so.

it?s easy to discount these numbers and say that the differences are small but again, I wasn?t thinking about measuring 2D performance when I came up with this article. As I mentioned earlier, the difference in 2D speed comes across as a system that feels more responsive. Webpages appear to load just slightly faster (when in fact it?s just that the time between parsing of the HTML and rendering it to the screen that has been reduced) and windows draw faster. Even though this differences are only a split second, you should ask yourself how much time you spend browsing the ?net, how many Windows you?ve clicked/dragged, how many miles of text and images you?ve scrolled through? It?s not trivial when you add it all up"
 
"The "Massive Overdraw" test in AquaMark 3 aims to test the limits of a graphics card's fillrate. In the explosion pictured below, numerous layers of textures are added onto one another (Particle Effect) and then slowly faded out. It seems that ATi's driver doesn't continue to fade out the textures until the blending ends, instead simply cutting out certain textures when a certain degree of fade-out is reached. This obviously saves memory bandwidth, leading to a higher framerate. In the direct comparison with the image rendered by NVIDIA's FX 5950 Ultra, the result is a darker and less detailed explosion (Frame 5100).
and
The density of the smoke or refuse that is shown spewing from the pipe in this picture is much lower on the Radeon 9800 XT than on the FX 5950 Ultra. The vehicle at the left-hand edge of the screen proves that this is not the result of some difference in lighting or gamma settings.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031023/nvidia-nv38-nv36-20.html"

This is a load of horse crap-Hanners has put up an in-depth article about it and has posted it at nvnews.net and beyond3d

If you really are an engineer then you would know better than to trust TOM for valid TECH info.

You also used fallacious logic to invalidate what Reever was propounding-another tactic no Engineer would use (because logic is the cornerstone of mathmatics and Physics).

My perception of your initial post is that of a FLAME BAIT attribute.

I am currently running a 9800PRO and have built 25,000 systems with the FX 5950 and using all means possible I've come to the conclusion that:

1.The 5950 U doesn't compare in 2d, 3d, or empiracally to a 9800PRO-let alone an xt.

I suppose Ginfest will come riding out of the darkness of nvidiot land to shoot the bluffer.

rogo

 
Originally posted by: cm123
tabb... "we have no reference image"

do you even know what your talking about?

...see the toms review, here's a bit.

The "Massive Overdraw" test in AquaMark 3 aims to test the limits of a graphics card's fillrate. In the explosion pictured below, numerous layers of textures are added onto one another (Particle Effect) and then slowly faded out. It seems that ATi's driver doesn't continue to fade out the textures until the blending ends, instead simply cutting out certain textures when a certain degree of fade-out is reached. This obviously saves memory bandwidth, leading to a higher framerate. In the direct comparison with the image rendered by NVIDIA's FX 5950 Ultra, the result is a darker and less detailed explosion (Frame 5100).
and
The density of the smoke or refuse that is shown spewing from the pipe in this picture is much lower on the Radeon 9800 XT than on the FX 5950 Ultra. The vehicle at the left-hand edge of the screen proves that this is not the result of some difference in lighting or gamma settings.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031023/nvidia-nv38-nv36-20.html
Click to expand...

Yea, your using the 5950 as a reference image? My god your dumb.
 
tabb... Yea, your using the 5950 as a reference image? My god your dumb.

this is not about a refernce image if you had any ideal what your talking about you would know that, images are missing in a rather simple term maybe even you and a few others may understand....

are you anything? know anything? have any certs? any awards? own a 9800XT or 5950?

i have been in computers since 1986 as a tech., MCSE (never failed a test in computers - passed first time, everytime, many MCSE can not say this), +I, +SQL, +Exchange, +IIS, +TCP/IP, A+, SCSI+, Red Hat Linux RH300, digital PBX engineer, Quantum MVP, MOS - senior product engineer while designing and approved of 2 editor choice systems including the first and fastest (at the time) AMD athlon (CRN) including set there record in #D performance using ATI card, first engineer at a whitebox company to confirm/find major hdd error (wd), guest speaker at crn xchange event, CIO for over 12 Years, etc...

...it may not be a lot, but its a start... that's a little about me... how about you (since you asked a few times)? have you done anything right or know anything (as you put it)?



 
I suppose that a response to my critiques is beyond a person with so many unbelievable certifications.

ARe we supposed to quiver in our litterhosen ????

Many people on this board hold higher degrees and are published but don't go tooting their horns at every opportunity.

Rogo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top