GeForce FX: Just what nvidia needs

[Deeko]

This is all my personal opinion here. nvidia has been getting WAY to cocky here. Not saying they will compete, or saying they are confident, saying definitively that they ARE the best and their new products always ARE the best thing to happen to 3D graphics. I think they need a good, swift kick in the ass. I hope R300/R350 totally mops up the GeForce FX, because maybe it will teach them NOT to follow 3dfx' route, not to claim they are the best and then get lazy. You can't win them all, its about time they learned that.

 

[b4u]

Here we go again ...

Personally, I'm waiting for one month so see what this market will turn into ... I'm seriously thinking of an upgrade, which will include on graphical card ... maybe not the top of tech, but this lattest moves will undoubtelly define my option ...


Cya

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: Deeko
This is all my personal opinion here. nvidia has been getting WAY to cocky here. Not saying they will compete, or saying they are confident, saying definitively that they ARE the best and their new products always ARE the best thing to happen to 3D graphics. I think they need a good, swift kick in the ass. I hope R300/R350 totally mops up the GeForce FX, because maybe it will teach them NOT to follow 3dfx' route, not to claim they are the best and then get lazy. You can't win them all, its about time they learned that.

The GeforceFX's performance with 3dmark 2003 will be what will save it, not!

 

[ScrewFace]

nVidia needs to be brought down to size. It'd be a shame if they went out of business because of thier arrogance. If they would have used a 256-bit memory interface and had 2 texture units per pipeline then nVidia'd be on top again. Alas, though, they didn't. Maybe next time (if thier is a next time).:disgust:

 

[SFang]

Originally posted by: Deeko
This is all my personal opinion here. nvidia has been getting WAY to cocky here. Not saying they will compete, or saying they are confident, saying definitively that they ARE the best and their new products always ARE the best thing to happen to 3D graphics. I think they need a good, swift kick in the ass. I hope R300/R350 totally mops up the GeForce FX, because maybe it will teach them NOT to follow 3dfx' route, not to claim they are the best and then get lazy. You can't win them all, its about time they learned that.

Agreed.

 

[dfloyd]

What does 3dmark 2003 scores actually mean?

I get 909 Marks with my 1.4 AMD + GF3 card.

But I run Unreal II on the same machine at 1024 x 768 with hardly any slowdowns.

So should I upgrade because all actual games I play work like a champ or because 3dmark 03 is a poor excuse for a benchmark? If I had games that did not play on my card I would upgrade, but not because 3dmark03 says my card will not run games. Heck I got up to 30fps on the Doom III Tech Demo after I tweaked it a bit, at 800 x 600.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

3DMark03 tests your system's "readiness" for DX9. Obviously a GF3 will not cut it. UT2k3 and Doom III are DX8 games, not DX9... If you notice the scores, you are practically required to have a DX9 board (Radeon 9500 or better) in order to get some decent scores. 3DMark03 will determine how well your system will do in the future, obviously a 1600+ and GF3 offers very little hope for a game like Doom IV should such a thing ever exist...other than that the benchmark is very valid and practically required to better reveal the strengths of current gaming systems as 3DMark2k1 scores were getting a little out of hand @ 15000+. When before a Ti 4600 could compete with a 9500 Pro, a non Pro 9500 destroys a heavily overclocked Ti 4600. Its the future of our gaming systems, the R300 Radeon 9700/9500 series and the NV30 GeForce FX are the first to give us a sneak peak at what the future of games has in store for us. Futuremark had to make 3DMark03 very very very taxing on systems today, because chances are by the time the NV35/R400 are available, hardware will be destroying the benchmark and rap!ng it without mercy.

3DMark03 does have a chance of saving the GeForce FX, as there is a possability that the NV30 could destroy the R300 in the benchmark, especially at the default resolution/settings where its lower memory bandwidth wouldn't strangle its performance...

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: dfloyd
What does 3dmark 2003 scores actually mean? I get 909 Marks with my 1.4 AMD + GF3 card. But I run Unreal II on the same machine at 1024 x 768 with hardly any slowdowns. So should I upgrade because all actual games I play work like a champ or because 3dmark 03 is a poor excuse for a benchmark? If I had games that did not play on my card I would upgrade, but not because 3dmark03 says my card will not run games. Heck I got up to 30fps on the Doom III Tech Demo after I tweaked it a bit, at 800 x 600.

My Ti4200 with OC can't run GTA3 the way I like it (4xS AA and 16x Aniso - enabled through GeForce tweaker) at 1024x1280 (I have a Flat Panel that is natively 1024x1280), I hope a Radeon 9700pro can.