GeForce FX like a Dodge Viper.

Medellon

Senior member
Feb 13, 2000
812
2
81
I liken the new GeForce FX to a Dodge Viper. To get the horsepower that it does, the Viper has a big V-10 block with 2 valves per cylinder that is relatively unsophisticated. The GeForce FX seems less efficient than the ATI Radeon 9700 with it's massive size and huge heatsink and fan. Compare the Viper to a Porsche 911 Turbo whose engine produces almost as much horsepower but with half the cylinders. It also get's better gas mileage to boot. The ATI Radeon 9700 is like the Porsche, technologically advanced and highly refined. The GeForce FX is like the Viper, big, loud, and massive to achieve comparable results. Any thoughts?:)
 

jiffylube1024

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
7,430
0
71
Originally posted by: Medellon
I liken the new GeForce FX to a Dodge Viper. To get the horsepower that it does, the Viper has a big V-10 block with 2 valves per cylinder that is relatively unsophisticated. The GeForce FX seems less efficient than the ATI Radeon 9700 with it's massive size and huge heatsink and fan. Compare the Viper to a Porsche 911 Turbo whose engine produces almost as much horsepower but with half the cylinders. It also get's better gas mileage to boot. The ATI Radeon 9700 is like the Porsche, technologically advanced and highly refined. The GeForce FX is like the Viper, big, loud, and massive to achieve comparable results. Any thoughts?:)

The FX is brute force vs. the ATI which is more finesse, but the comparaison doesn't hold all the way. The Porsche is much more expensive (the 400hp model which can accelerate at similar speeds), whereas the FX is the more expensive card. Also, the FX has the most "sophistocated" core with a greatly superior DX9 engine; it's just that the IPC apparently aren't as good as the Radeon.

 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
nVidia made a very, VERY, big mistake when they chose 128bit. The technology is great (cg should produce some awesome looking games), but they just weren't thinking.

BTW Chevy SB 350 bored over to 383 would crush anything we have today. Got a friend who runs em up to 1300-1500 horsepower. The setup I designed got around 950 HP with 1033 torque lb/ft. 0-100 2 secs 0-60 1.4secs. CRatio = 12:1, so if you were wondering whether it would explode at the end of the drag strip it wouldn't. Nothing beats american muscle :) Too bad those babies cannot be driven on the street (slicks, emmisions, etc.) The setup was not for dragging, though. I did not have dual dominators or something, I used fuel injection, but I do not remember what model. That was more designed for performance racing (I think I had 3.73 gears on it, so it was not even designed for acceleration and got those times :).

Just mumbling
 

Mingon

Diamond Member
Apr 2, 2000
3,012
0
0
The FX is brute force vs. the ATI which is more finesse

How do you work that out? the FX with less bandwidth comes close and occasionaly beats the ATI. Nvdia cards have since the geforce 3 been better performers clock for clock.

Nothing beats american muscle

Is that why the NASCAR's engines are UK built :p
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,992
1,612
126
Originally posted by: CurtCold
I'd rather have the Viper than the FX anyday... :p
Of course, I'd take the Porsche over the Viper. :p
 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
Hmmm, I do not remember saying anything about NASCAR. They are not the best built engines. However, I do not mean who builds them, I mean what is in them.
I should have clarified.
Nothing beats classic American muscle.
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
Originally posted by: Mingon
The FX is brute force vs. the ATI which is more finesse

How do you work that out? the FX with less bandwidth comes close and occasionaly beats the ATI. Nvdia cards have since the geforce 3 been better performers clock for clock.

It helps when the games are designed around nVidia chips... The ATI doesn't have a whole lot more bandwidth roughtly 19-20GB/sec compared to 16GB/sec, and it is probably safe to say that the 128 bit memory architecture is more effecient than the 256 bit architecture used by the 9700, that would explain the 9500 Pro's impressive performance in memory bandwidth intensive tests, you'd think it wouldn't do so hot with half the bandwidth. Seems interesting that the 275 MHz core 270 MHz ram 9500 Pro would be able to compete against nVidia's Ti 4600 @ 300 MHz core and 325 MHz memory. Not only is the Ti 4600 core faster, it has more memory bandwidth to draw from. But then you could argue the superior design of the 9500 Pro's core...which is perfectly resonable. Brute force is 500 MHz FX vs. 325 MHz 9700 Pro. Finesse would be the Radeon's ability to keep up with the FX without that sheer power. The 9700 Pro has been taken up to insane "brute force" speeds, that's how all the top 3D Mark scores are obtianed, with heavily overclocked 9700 Pros, 400MHz + cores. I believe some are hovering close to 500 MHz... It would be nice to see how an overclocked 9700 Pro would do against a GF FX. Hell, with the colling system the FX Ultra requires, seems almost like cheating as the 9700 Pro can be taken quite high with such extreme measures.
 

KillaBong

Senior member
Nov 26, 2002
426
0
0
I think ATI is more like the viper. It is almost all old technology with a bigger die, ddr instead of ddr2, and what not.
NVIDIA should pull ahead soon, because they already have the technology, and they have plenty of room for improvment.

I'm also over american cars, because I realized there absolutely terrible. I would rather be driving a 4 banger golf, than a v8 mustang or camaro.
Quarter miles are useless too. Who cares about straight when it cant even make a turn at nearly the speed of a good foreign car.

American muscle cars are loud, cant handle, get terrible mpg, and dont even have nice interiors.
 

jiffylube1024

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
7,430
0
71
Originally posted by: Mingon
The FX is brute force vs. the ATI which is more finesse

How do you work that out? the FX with less bandwidth comes close and occasionaly beats the ATI. Nvdia cards have since the geforce 3 been better performers clock for clock.
Very easy answer: clock speed. ATI runs at only 325 MHz and requires only moderate cooling; nVidia is competitive because they run the core at 500 MHz and require exotic cooling, to say the least.

Your statement is correct up until the GeForce FX. Check the reviews, it runs at 500 MHz; the ATI runs at 325MHz and they're neck and neck in actual performance.
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,213
12
81
Originally posted by: Mingon
The FX is brute force vs. the ATI which is more finesse

How do you work that out? the FX with less bandwidth comes close and occasionaly beats the ATI. Nvdia cards have since the geforce 3 been better performers clock for clock.
clock for clock? I dunno about that, nvidia cards have always been at higher clocks, but not clock for clock. And don't try to bring that into this one, because clock for clock they are getting their ass whooped hardcore.

 

blade2

Member
Jun 28, 2002
191
0
0
Originally posted by: KingofFah
Hmmm, I do not remember saying anything about NASCAR. They are not the best built engines. However, I do not mean who builds them, I mean what is in them.
I should have clarified.
Nothing beats classic American muscle.

Japanese techno-wizardry?? Italian style?? German effiency (eugh) British..something or other?!

I'd take a TVR over a Porshe anyway...
 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
Is their a best CPU for overclocking? Too bad there isn't.
If you have driven stock or slightly modded versions of chevy sports cars then you do not know what I am talking about, KillaBong.
If I still had my data sheets for the setup I was working on, I would post it all here. Nothing in the car was stock. They were, however built off of the Chevy SB, that is what I am reffering to. You cannot build off the other blocks and get as much power out of them (I actually heard of some 460 olds hitting 1300 HP). I think the most powerful non-GM car there is would be the Supra with the Twin Turbos at 1200 HP? (I hate imports and know little about them, so some supra fan will have to fill me in on that).
Unless you know a lot about the classic hotrod era which I would say is 1955-1970, but that is a matter of opinion, you do not know about the parts I was using. In fact, I do not even remember. Today, my friend who builds diggers and races them in the NDRA, will not build of import setups unless he wants to lose. This is simply my opinion, and unless you show my an import setup that can beat what I have seen for myself, then why would I change my opinion?
The chevy sb is a monster for drag racing. Yes, they are loud. I like the car to 'flex' its muscles and make everyone know it is doing it (the whole neighborhood). If it was legal I would keep the muffler off all the time to make it louder. What is the fastest accel time now? The new lam? 3.8secs 0-60? How sad is that in comparison to the 0-100 time of 2 seconds on the setup I had, and I was never that good at building setups (always had a problem keeping the compression ratio safe.)
As I was only referring to the engine setups, I do not see how the setup would handle terrible, since I could mod a 'better' chassis to get my setup in it, and handle like a dream. In my opinion, I like the heavy rear american chassis. I know I could take a porsche and do a 150mph turn without losing too much traction. In the american chassis, I would start sliding, but I know how to control and use it. I think that all the new cars are disgusting looking. I also love powersliding. Try powersliding in a porsche and then in a 63vette. If you know what you are doing, the vette will be able to make turns that the porsche cannot. The porsche's handling is awesome. Great traction. Horrible for powersliding. As I am typing this, I am trying to remember my experience trying to powerslide perfectly and exactly what happens when you do it (someone know?). If you were not allowed to use the handbrake for whatever reason, then you could say the imports and newer american cars handle better. Cars, obviously, use piston engine still. The most powerful one you are going to be able to have will always have to be built on a Chevy block. This was me just mumbling my opinion, so do not take it so seriously. You obviously have your own. There has got to be a guy in here that will back me. This generation of cars needs to be brought back to its full glory; we need to get rid of emissions laws. Oh, one more point. Those times were with the setup in a 63 stingray splitglass chassis. That chassis is fairly heavy in comparison to a porshe body :) I could put it in a 69 chevelle(if i remember correctly, its 1/2 a ton more than the vette) and still crush those times by today's cars.

SKIP DOWN TO HERE IF YOU WANT RELEVANCE TO THIS THREAD

I believe the FX would be the high technology and the radeon would be the brute force. Combine the FX with 256bit memory, then see some awesome power. I still believe that this card will mature (driver updates, games using cg, games designed for the FX's advanced architecture)
 

HappyGamer2

Banned
Jun 12, 2000
1,441
0
0
small block chevy gets over 1000 hp, yep with twin turbos or supercharger and burning nitro not gas.
lifespan about 500 street miles or about (5) 1/4 mile blasts.
cost? 10 grand or more
fuel used about 1 gallon per mile
driveablity, poor will idle at about 2000 rpm if your lucky
low rpm torque is zero
 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
LOL, well I am sorry if that is all you have been able to get out of them. True 1300-1500, using nitros, but not a charger at the same time. Reason: too expensive to repair what the blower does to the engine setup. I used the charge in the 933, hence the reason why I could not get that high. As far as the driveability. When I was at my max gear, T-10 6 gear tranny, I did hit my max RPM of 12500 on an oval track. I think my optimal torque was in the 5000's, but it has been too many years. Tires = 315Z something, cannot remember the exact model number. 180MPH traction. You cannot just say blah blah blah, and expect me to say yeah your right. To be fair, you never drove it.
 

ctk1981

Golden Member
Aug 17, 2001
1,464
1
81
Id like to see the dyno sheet numbers of that 383. Ive heard of high numbers before out of a small block, but nothing that high. Btw, you do not simply bore over a 350 to get to 383. Its .030 over bore and a increase in the stroke to get it to 383.

And almost all guys running monster HP are doing it with Big blocks. Not counting the SB guys with twin turbo setups. And I believe the guy above said NITRO, as in NITRO METHANE not NOS.

And now we've added 12,500 RPM's too. Funny, because all 383's I seen had a hard time turning high rpms, let alone the insane amount your claiming. So we must have a very very expensive bottom end in that thing to hold. Heck, the nascar guys dont even turn that many rpms. So we must have an expensive Billet crankshaft, titanium alloy rods, super lightweight pistons, run on 118 octane gas, etc.

Anyone else thats into cars will have a hard time swallowing the crap you just spewed.
 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
Actually, I had a 454 setup. When I first met my friend from the NDRA, he showed my that using the correct stuff, you can get a sb higher. It is simply certain parts you cannot get for the 454 that you can for the sb, obviously, and those parts, when combined properly will get you the power I am talking about. I have absolutely no proof remaining. Talking to disbelievers like yourself really makes me want to scrounge together some cash and start working with my friend again on cars and get you your dynos. I am speaking my opinion that I believe is fact from experience. It is completely valid for you to be in disbelief, since I have provided you with no evidence proving I ever have worked on cars in those HP ranges. I never hit 1300-1500 range, he did, I just did some work on them and test drove them. It was beyond me how he was able to do it. I believe because I have seen it, and I do not need to prove to anyone whether it is fact or not. Believe what you will, I was just telling you my personal experience. Classic human view: seeing is believing, and I cannot fault you for that. I have seen and I believe it. What I have done myself was around a 950HP setup with 1033 torque (for some reason the torque is burnt in my head), with 0-100 in 2 seconds. Now those numbers are not so outrageous, you must admit, for an sb. Things that I remember for sure: T-10 6 gear tran, I had a blower in it (200HP do not remember the model, if you list me some from awhile ago I will definitely be able to pick it out), fuel injection (do not remember model), do not remember the intake or exhaust manifolds, mufflers, etc. This was a long time ago. You have just made be want to get back in touch with my friend and start getting the car together. Might take time (years most likely to get funds together and find all the exact parts again or something that could replace what I used before and not affect performance; not to mention the fact that I need to find all my notes to find out what I used before, since I do not have to the money to go through all the testing I did before.), but this car will definitely come to life again.
 

Ketchup

Elite Member
Sep 1, 2002
14,558
248
106
As interesting as your storries are, KingofFah, I am inclined to go with Ctkelly on this one. 1300 HP out of a 383? Cmon, wadya take us for, a bunch of computer geeks?

Seriously though, one of the best build-ups I have seen was an LT1 bored .30 over with a 400 crank putting out about 700 Horsepower. Without nitrous and a big blower, I doubt you are going to go much over that without some serious cubic inches.
 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
Just read the last line you posted. I consider what you said to be worthless. Only fuel for a desire to bring this car back to life to prove you wrong. I try to avoid these wars, because there is usually no winner. Who was the winner of Vietnam? Why engage in something that will only waste time. You will never make me believe contrary to what I know to be true. I could not care less about your opinion and what you are telling me is true. I tried just about every part there was; steel, billet, aluminum alloy. I do not think I ever saw a titanium, at least not where I was looking. This thread has become completely worthless to me now. I am wasting my time here, and I will not view this thread again. I love watching NASCAR, but they are not the best built, fastest, most powerful piston engine cars I have seen.
The earth is flat; the earth was and is a spherical shape. Do you believe everything that science tells you? I am the kind of person that asks "How do I know that if you pick that up and let it go, it will drop?" I need to see it. Once I have seen it, I believe it. Not only did I see that power, I DROVE IT. To think that you could change what I KNOW as fact is absurd. Hypothetical situation: I build the car, it fulfills what I said it would. You drive it. You get the dynos. I prove myself right. You come back and tell people what you have seen and come to believe as true. Someone like yourself contradicts what you say. I am gone; the dyno sheets are gone. You have no proof, yet you know that it is possible. Now do you understand where I am coming from? These are not meant to be answered, since I will not be viewing or replying to this post again. I wanted to attempt to give you some understanding to stop thinking that what you have been told is true. If everyone did that, we, as the human race, would not have progressed at all. I would ask you to try it yourself, but the money required today to do all the testing I did before is insane. What I ask of you is to simply think about what I have said. Have you ever heard of being close-minded; it is not a good trait to have.
 

Pacfanweb

Lifer
Jan 2, 2000
13,155
59
91
KingofFah,

I'm not going to read every single word you wrote, but I do have a question:

You're saying you built a 383 SBC, (which is a 350 bored .030 or.060" over with a 400 crank) that had 900+ hp. Fine. You say your friend built one that had around 1500, right? Am I reading this right?

Here is your quote
"Things that I remember for sure: T-10 6 gear tran, I had a blower in it (200HP do not remember the model, if you list me some from awhile ago I will definitely be able to pick it out), fuel injection (do not remember model), do not remember the intake or exhaust manifolds, mufflers, etc. This was a long time ago. "

My questions:
WTF is a 200 hp blower?
T10 6 gear trans? A T10 is a 4 speed.
Fuel injection. Ok, fine. A "long time ago"??? Nobody was using FI "a long time ago", at least not with any regularity.....unless a long time ago to you is 1997 or so. Not to mention that it's only been in the last 8-10 years that ANYONE has been able to build small blocks with that kind of power.

I am calling BS. You don't seem to know what you are talking about, nor do you appear to have the knowledge to be able to build an engine of that caliber.
And there is absolutely no way you can get 1500 hp from a 383 w/out nitrous or forced induction. Supercharger, maybe, but it wouldn't last very long.
0-100 in 2 seconds with a stick? Yeah, right.
Oh, and how is it that you were able to build a 383 with 900+ hp and now can't remember a single damn detail about what was in it??

Yes, I am calling BS. I know people who have and can build small blocks with that kind of power, but I don't think you are one of them. That isn't just a "read how to do it in Hot Rod mag and build it in your garage" type of engine.

Edit:
One more thing: What kind of car was this engine supposedly in?
 

lumen

Senior member
Dec 15, 2002
200
0
0
Man, some of you took this post waaay too seriously, tongue in cheek guys, c'mon.
 

Ketchup

Elite Member
Sep 1, 2002
14,558
248
106
Yeah, why do I get the feeling KingofFah is sitting at home laughing his butt off at everyone who thinks he is actually being serious!?!
 

nRollo

Banned
Jan 11, 2002
10,460
0
0
" I liken the new GeForce FX to a Dodge Viper. "

I liken it more to a 1972 Chevy Nova 350 a kid inherited from his Grandpa, slapped a big Holley and some mag wheels on.