GeForce FX Preorder 399 with overnight shipping!

[labgeek]

From the CompUSA page:
Pre-order now and you can upgrade to Penny Next Day Air shipping. Just enter promo code (removed so I wont have a moderator yelling at me) and select Next Day when you choose your shipping method during the checkout process.

Note: Our ship date is approximate and has not been confirmed by the manufacturer.
Penny Shipping offer valid on ground shipments only. Not available to Alaska or Hawaii.




Huh? Next day ground?

 

[Creig]

I'm with mattcham on this one. My last four cards (which I still own and use) have all been based on Nvidia GeForce chips (GF256 x 2, GF2 x 1, GF3 x 1). I simply got tired of waiting for the next version and jumped on the ATI wagon instead. You think maybe Nvidia is partnering with the BitBoys on the GeForce FX project?

 

[TekDemon]

hahaha...*cough*

Seriously guys...memory bandwidth isn't at all controlled by the RAM chips but by the chipset...what's stopping ATI from using faster DDR too?!?!

It's not like ATI couldn't respond by releasing a board with 1Ghz DDR that was part of a 256 bit memory bus...nvidia's memory bandwidth is only comparative as it is and they're using WAY faster RAM...if ATI dropped in 1Ghz RAM it wouldn't even be a competition for memory...

That having been said, the core will probably be faster in other aspects....but the memory pipeline is a serious weakness...which nvidia will probably address soon while constantly saying 128-bit is enough...until they release a 256 bit version sheesh.

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: TekDemon
hahaha...*cough*

Seriously guys...memory bandwidth isn't at all controlled by the RAM chips but by the chipset...what's stopping ATI from using faster DDR too?!?!

It's not like ATI couldn't respond by releasing a board with 1Ghz DDR that was part of a 256 bit memory bus...nvidia's memory bandwidth is only comparative as it is and they're using WAY faster RAM...if ATI dropped in 1Ghz RAM it wouldn't even be a competition for memory...

That having been said, the core will probably be faster in other aspects....but the memory pipeline is a serious weakness...which nvidia will probably address soon while constantly saying 128-bit is enough...until they release a 256 bit version sheesh.

Yeah, they've been caught with their pants down this time. They really need to move to a 256-bit bus, and they know it.

 

[BentValve]

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: TekDemon
hahaha...*cough*

Seriously guys...memory bandwidth isn't at all controlled by the RAM chips but by the chipset...what's stopping ATI from using faster DDR too?!?!

It's not like ATI couldn't respond by releasing a board with 1Ghz DDR that was part of a 256 bit memory bus...nvidia's memory bandwidth is only comparative as it is and they're using WAY faster RAM...if ATI dropped in 1Ghz RAM it wouldn't even be a competition for memory...

That having been said, the core will probably be faster in other aspects....but the memory pipeline is a serious weakness...which nvidia will probably address soon while constantly saying 128-bit is enough...until they release a 256 bit version sheesh.

Yeah, they've been caught with their pants down this time. They really need to move to a 256-bit bus, and they know it.

Pleeeaase, how dumb is that? You guys think Nvidia is stupid? They have know all along what the 9700 specs are, its obvious to me that the reason they did not use a 256bit bus is because its not needed. Surely it is not a cost factor because ATI is builing vanilla 9500s on 256bit 9700 PCBs.
If your gonna go criticizing Nvidias 100+ Scientists and Architects with phnomenal amounts of experience then please list your credentials....otherwise your just spouting your mouth off about something that you have no clue about.

Give me a break.

 

[DPOverLord]

Pleeeaase, how dumb is that? You guys think Nvidia is stupid? They have know all along what the 9700 specs are, its obvious to me that the reason they did not use a 256bit bus is because its not needed. Surely it is not a cost factor because ATI is builing vanilla 9500s on 256bit 9700 PCBs.

Would almost think ya worked for them. LoL. All of ya'll are taking this way to seriously. If you like it buy it if you dont, then dont buy it. Why should we be criticizing people who want to spend the maximum dollar on a card not even released. I mean obviously the only hot deal here is overnight shipping for free. But come on 400$ for a card it better BE FREE!

LoL I still remember jumping on the band wagon for the Hercules ULTRA TNT2 for 250$ now that was a card haha

 

[ZakPC]

If your gonna go criticizing Nvidias 100+ Scientists and Architects with phnomenal amounts of experience then please list your credentials....otherwise your just spouting your mouth off about something that you have no clue about.

Don't forget all the former 3DFx employees

 

[gothaggis]

too bad the release date really isn't until the end of feb/ first week of march.

 

[popeye44]

Back in my apprentice geek years I bought a monster 3d 3dfx 4meg card as an addon to my 2 meg crap card in ye old crapaq computer.
I paid 145.00 shipped.. at the time everyone else was paying 165.00 for this card.. Little did I know I was being sucked into the apprentice hot deals program as well

As for the battle between ati and nvidia.. I'll switch to whoever is faster on the day I have the money in my hand to buy one hehe. I don't believe in loyalty to mfg's as my only loyalty is to performance. coming from a 6 time nvidia purchaser with one time delve into the 64meg radeon1.. ICK.

 

[Kraeji]

 

[mattcham]

Finally, GeForce FX benchmarks are here:

Tom's Hardware

 

[CHAOSMAN]

the 3dmark scores werent that much better. Id still go for 9700 even if ati's drivers arent as good as nvidias. Nvidia new silicon is not worth all that extra cash for some so-so improvements. not to mention blocks a pci slot.

 

[AquariusX]

This card is not worth your time for following reasons:

(1) If you already own a Radeon 9700 Pro, it does not make any sense to get this card for another 400 bucks.

(2) If you don't own one, the GFFX is still not worth it because you can get the ATI card for much less and only slightly lower performance. It's too bad that Nvidia was so late with this card.... if both cards came out at the same time, it might be a different story.

(3) The GFFX dissipates a TON of freaking heat... the only people who could cool this thing efficiently (and by efficiently I mean no case meltdown) are people with water/peltier solutions. Plus, any vid card that competes with a 2.4 Pentium for highest heat dissipation is a big hell no in my mind.

(4) Noise sucks.... GFFX=NOISE.... you do the math...

(5) ATI R350 is already around the corner.... wait for it. I'm sure it will own the GFFX....

 

[DTBH]

boohoo I didn't expect the FX to be just a little faster than the 9700. Kinda disappointed... for a moment I was buying into the hype that it could possible crush the 9700pro... oh well... given a choice I would rather spend less money and buy a ATI card... too much heat in my system already

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: DTBH
boohoo I didn't expect the FX to be just a little faster than the 9700. Kinda disappointed... for a moment I was buying into the hype that it could possible crush the 9700pro... oh well... given a choice I would rather spend less money and buy a ATI card... too much heat in my system already

Am I the only one that thinks that a GF3 Ti500 still has more than enough power to run most games today? I have a GF4 4600 and can run every game I own at 1280x1024 at near 60fps.....games have some catching up to do with hardware.

 

[DTBH]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: DTBH
boohoo I didn't expect the FX to be just a little faster than the 9700. Kinda disappointed... for a moment I was buying into the hype that it could possible crush the 9700pro... oh well... given a choice I would rather spend less money and buy a ATI card... too much heat in my system already

Am I the only one that thinks that a GF3 Ti500 still has more than enough power to run most games today? I have a GF4 4600 and can run every game I own at 1280x1024 at near 60fps.....games have some catching up to do with hardware.

nah u are not the only one. I am still using a gf3 ti 200.

 

[ZakPC]

Originally posted by: DTBH

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: DTBH
boohoo I didn't expect the FX to be just a little faster than the 9700. Kinda disappointed... for a moment I was buying into the hype that it could possible crush the 9700pro... oh well... given a choice I would rather spend less money and buy a ATI card... too much heat in my system already

Am I the only one that thinks that a GF3 Ti500 still has more than enough power to run most games today? I have a GF4 4600 and can run every game I own at 1280x1024 at near 60fps.....games have some catching up to do with hardware.

nah u are not the only one. I am still using a gf3 ti 200.

I'm still using my Elsa Gladiac 920 - this was pre "Ti" GeForce3 and was one of the fastest GF3's even after the TI's came out.
Too bad they don't make consumer cards anymore...
Fast, quality and 5-year warranty.
I would have stuck w/ them.....

 

[VVarwick]

Originally posted by: DTBH
nah u are not the only one. I am still using a gf3 ti 200.

Same here. MSI gf3 ti200 PRO at 220/500. Still plenty fast for the games I play!


Warwick

 

[VVarwick]

Originally posted by: AquariusX
(4) Noise sucks.... GFFX=NOISE.... you do the math...

AMEN!

Good golly! Listen to the mp3s that Tom recorded of this thing in his review compaired to the 9700. This alone would keep me from getting one.



Warwick

 

[Ziptar]

Originally posted by: VVarwick

Originally posted by: AquariusX
(4) Noise sucks.... GFFX=NOISE.... you do the math...

AMEN!

Good golly! Listen to the mp3s that Tom recorded of this thing in his review compaired to the 9700. This alone would keep me from getting one.



Warwick

Got a link to those.. i saw them mentioned on Tom's site but, i can't find them.

 

[VVarwick]

Originally posted by: Ziptar
Got a link to those.. i saw them mentioned on Tom's site but, i can't find them.

Here you go!

About half way down the page...


Warwick

 

[BigJ]

<=== Also quite disappointed in the FX's performance.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: VVarwick

Originally posted by: Ziptar
Got a link to those.. i saw them mentioned on Tom's site but, i can't find them.

<a class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge target=blank href="http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030127/geforce_fx-06.html">Here you go!</A>

About half way down the page...


Warwick

It IS a $400 DustBuster

 

[VVarwick]

Originally posted by: apoppin
It IS a $400 DustBuster

DustBuster! That is where I have heard that noise before! That's exactly what it sounds like!!! I think the throttled down 2D more is just as bad. It has an annoying, grating sound to it...



Warwick<FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>