geForce3 Benchmarks

[Modeps]

Firing Squad has benchmarks from the gf3 and i must say, im not impressed... its good that it performs nicely with 4xfsaa @ 1024x768, but i thought this was supposed to be the best card ever... hell, it performs worse than the gf2 ultra in many cases!

 

[iam4u2nv]

Are there any sites that look at image quality instead of just frames per second? I was not impressed with the geforce 2 image quality versus my Radeon. I am always puzzled why people are so hung up on frames per second when I really can not see much difference between 40 or 70 with my eye. It is the image quality that matters to me.

 

[Modeps]

actually there is a quite noticable differance between 40 and 70 fps... its when you hit higher than that that its not noticable... optimum is 60fps.

 

[RedRooster]

NVidia's "thing" right now is that they're saying for now the GF3 isn't much better than the GF2, but once games take advantage of directx8 then it's gonna blow everything away!
But by then the next card will be out, so it's just a vicious circle. hehe

 

[Jumpem]

Look at the high res on high quality benchmarks, or the ones with FSAA. The Geforce3 spanks the Ultra hard! In the above mentioned benchmarks the GF3 sometimes has a 20 or 30 fps difference. It does not perform worse(maybe a few frames slower in low res). I'll be getting one the very first day they're available locally.

 

[kami]

You have to take a few things into account...

1. Pre-mature drivers
2. CPU limitations
3. Nothing fully takes advantage of GF3's capabilities.

It's really pointless to buy one, but at least nVidia is taking the initiative to start something new. The second generation of cards like this (in about 6 months) will be the cards to have. This is just another step in the right direction.

My GTS will hold me over til the end of this year at which point I'll buy one of the next gen nVidia's or an ATI if they get their act together with drivers and also release something competitive.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Image quality wise, the G450 rocks worlds. Esp. if the game does EMBM (yes, they are out there, and I do play one). As long as you don't do really 3d intensive games (I don't) the cards are wonderful.

 

[iam4u2nv]

Yea I have like 40 frames per second on my Radeon DDR and I love it. The image quality blows me away. I had a Geforce 2 DDR before and I had problems with missing parts of the screen and what not. I love the Radeon.
I got the All-In-Wonder version and I love the card.

 

[DefRef]

Typical Nvidia hater rhetoric.

All OBJECTIVE reviews have said that where the GF3 will shine is in NEXT generation, DX8-based games that will REQUIRE DX8-compliant hardware and that for current games, all it does is FSAA at a minimal speed hit.

Smart money is to wait until the Fall refresh (GF3Ultra?) brings faster cards, lower prices and game that NEED the cards to rule. That's what I'm doing cuz my P3-927/GF2 combo is rocking the heeowws just fine.

 

[Oyeve]

Im with iam4u2nv. Who care how many FPS it gets when a voodoo3 can still LOOK better. I for one am sick of geforceX. The colors always look washed out and dingy. My radeon provides me with a nice balance of vibrant color and speed. So what quake 3 get 150 fps and the radeon only gets 100 (these are not real stats, just a comparison) the radeon just looks better and being in my mid 30s I probably cant see anything better than 30-40 fps anyway.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

DefRef: I don't hate Nvidia, I had both a TNT and a TNT2 card. They are excellent when framerate is concerned. I just don't do what they were designed for. On the otherhand I DO do what Matrox designed thier cards for. The TNT* cards while vastly outperforming the Permedia2 that I had before that couldn't match the visual quality (in either 2d or 3d). For most of the people out there any later 3dfx, Nvidia, Matrox, Kryo, or ATI card would work well. For framerate monsters Nvidia seems to have bolted the crown on thier head. However Matrox and ATI seem to have the edge in visual quality and Kryo has the bang for the buck.

One annoying limitation (that doesn't affect 95+% of computer users) of the TNT* cards is the inability to scale a TV tuner window at resolutions over 1024x768. The G450 can do that, and does it well. That's why I'm using Matrox. Not because I hate Nvidia.