How dumb would you have to be to preorder GF-FX now???

[HendrixFan]

chizow, the R9700s complied perfectly with AGP specs, the problem was that early motherboard manufacturers put out 8X AGP boards before Intel finalized the 8X specs, leaving those boards with broken AGP ports. Those were the only boards that the 9700s wouldnt work in. ATI did do a revision of the card so that it would work properly with broken 8X AGP boards. The fault in that matter lies entirely with the motherboard manufacturers that tried to jump the gun.

 

[The Sauce]

Ahhh. You resort to class warfare. You being the poor downtrodden hard working frugal type and me being the multi-millionaire doesn't work for a living type and then you wish me ill. You are either what peeps here call a fanboi or its just that you about as sharp as a bagfull of wet mice.

You see, now you're not making any sense at all...not that you were in the first place. And you are trying to change the subject. You are not even addressing the issues being discussed. Paying too much for something without even knowing what it really is your spending it on is retarded - regardless of your degree of wealth. The only way I can see it not making a difference to someone is if you don't care about money. Most of us do. Most of us would consider that to be stupid. Do with your money what you want - roll it up and insert it rectally for all I care. This argument is fruitless, as you are clearly capable of rationalizing anything. Hope the FX works out for you. If it turns out to be a good deal, I'll be there buying one the same day - as I had originally planned - but probably $50 cheaper.

PS - I may be sharp as a bag full of wet mice, but you are dumber than a bag full of hammers - as they say.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: HendrixFan
chizow, the R9700s complied perfectly with AGP specs, the problem was that early motherboard manufacturers put out 8X AGP boards before Intel finalized the 8X specs, leaving those boards with broken AGP ports. Those were the only boards that the 9700s wouldnt work in. ATI did do a revision of the card so that it would work properly with broken 8X AGP boards. The fault in that matter lies entirely with the motherboard manufacturers that tried to jump the gun.

Well, now we're getting into a "did the chicken come before the egg" scenario. 8X AGP (KT400, Nforce2, GB) wasn't introduced on motherboards until AFTER the 9700pro was released, so I'm not sure who jumped the gun. I'm also confused as to how the 9700pro could be perfectly compliant to a spec that you said yourself was not finalized. This tells me that either board makers didn't ensure their parts were compatible with ATI products (which can be attributed to most any hardware/software conflict), or ATI didn't do their job in making sure their product was compatible with other hardware. Also interesting how the 8X AGP Nvidia parts don't have the same issues.

Chiz

 

[HendrixFan]

Well, it wasnt until October that Nvidia released their 8X AGP boards, after ATI already had working revisions with the non-compliant boards. First to market equaled teething pains I guess.

 

[UlricT]

ok.... hopefully you guys have seen the german benchmarking article being discussed here

gives new meaning to this discussion eh?

 

[Bovinicus]

Those benchmarks from that German site don't make the FX look too good. However, I usually like to look at two or more reviews before I really decide what stance to have on a piece of hardware. NVIDIA could release some special drivers which boost performance 20% all around though. You know how they are with drivers...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: krackato
First off, the only serious console that was ever introduced at even $400 let alone $500 was the Sega Saturn. A serious console hasn't been released for greater than $299 for a long time, and I doubt that trend is going to stop, so I don't know where you're getting this $500 figure.

Secondly, the idea that you could possibly try to argue that it is less expensive to be a pc gamer than a console gamer is ridiculous. You think that new $400 NV40 in 2005 is going to be running at full speed with a 'measly' 3ghz computer from way back in 2003? You think you're not going to have to upgrade the ram? Hell, you'll probably need a new motherboard and a brand new powersupply since the NV40 is going to require nothing less than 350watt psu (which I think the Geforce FX already does).

And thirdly, if you're a gamer, then it's all about the games. And there's just a ton of stuff out there that you can only get for the console. I didn't even cover Nintendo's offerings, like the new 3d Metroid which is garnering huge amounts of praise everywhere, the new Zelda, which is being reported as being a masterpiece that made the previous Zelda on the Nintendo 64 look like a warm up (amazing when you consider that many people considered Zelda 64 the greatest game ever when it was released), and the constant amazing work that Shigeru Miyomoto constantly is spitting out. You just can't get Final Fantasy, Chrono Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Squaresoft, Namco, Sega, and other amazing producers of games except in the console world. (You can't really get Warcraft, Doom, Unreal 2, Half Life, Master of Orion, Diablo, BF1942, and other great "pc type" games on console, so there is definetly a benefit to having both for today's hardcore gamer.)

Hey, you've probably just got a lot more money than I do. If so, more power to you. But the fact is there's alot of great value in the console sector. And when you compare it to the costs of being a PC Gamer, it's a bloody steal.

p.s. Yes, I know that Final Fantasy was eventually released for the PC, and that the Xbox is going to have a version of Doom3 released, and that Diablo was released for the Playstation, but give me a break. I'm not really sure why the hell I'm even arguing this stupid topic with a bunch of phantom's on the internet.

I'm not so sure either, Mr Phantom (it goes both ways).

Perhaps we should start another thread since this is so OT to this one.

Anyway, you are nitpicking and missing the point of my discussion (read: opinion.

Even if the next gen of consoles are still only $300, the console games are generally more expensive than PC games. AND you use your computer for MORE than games (I hope - so the "values" of console vs. PC gfaming cannot be directly compared.

However - my POINT was that if you continue to play games on your console - the graphics will (soon) be seriously outdated and the PC WILL have much better (and inexpensive) graphics than the current consoles UNTIL the next gen is released (in 2005, or so).

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: apoppin

However - my POINT was that if you continue to play games on your console - the graphics will (soon) be seriously outdated and the PC WILL have much better (and inexpensive) graphics than the current consoles UNTIL the next gen is released (in 2005, or so).

I dunno, I think my XBox games look better and are more polished than any PC game to date (no Doom3 alpha doesn't count). PC gaming performance has always lagged terribly from any hardware advancements, and the basis for superior graphics on the PC is based on the assumption that game developers actually put a product out that takes advantage of superior hardware (which never happens). Up until I purchased a 1900FP that runs at 1280 native, I would have agreed with you in staying off the "bleeding-edge" in technology. But running at 1280 with max details, AF and AA requires a more powerful GPU. I never really found AA and AF necessary until after I owned an XBox; now I find those features a necessity just to keep pace with the image quality.

Chiz

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: apoppin

However - my POINT was that if you continue to play games on your console - the graphics will (soon) be seriously outdated and the PC WILL have much better (and inexpensive) graphics than the current consoles UNTIL the next gen is released (in 2005, or so).

I dunno, I think my XBox games look better and are more polished than any PC game to date (no Doom3 alpha doesn't count). PC gaming performance has always lagged terribly from any hardware advancements, and the basis for superior graphics on the PC is based on the assumption that game developers actually put a product out that takes advantage of superior hardware (which never happens). Up until I purchased a 1900FP that runs at 1280 native, I would have agreed with you in staying off the "bleeding-edge" in technology. But running at 1280 with max details, AF and AA requires a more powerful GPU. I never really found AA and AF necessary until after I owned an XBox; now I find those features a necessity just to keep pace with the image quality.

Chiz

just trying to keep your pc up to date to play the latest games means u spend more money then if you just spent it on games

and has far has I can tell, new titles to new title prices of games on either platform is about the same.

 

[The Sauce]

How did this turn into an XBox vs. PC thread?

 

[MichaelD]

Um, I just want something faster than a 4200. Anybody want to sell a 4600 that IS NOT fried from overclocking? Sorry....

 

[magomago]

"The then incredible) NV40 and RV400 will be dropping in price (as the then NEXT gen computer parts are out) in 2005 and you will then have another option - to spend $500 on a PS3/GC2 or XboxII and their overpriced games - or simply upgrade your videocard"


500 dollars! What are you smoking. The ps2/Xbox was 299 upon release and the gfamecbue was 199....so was the dreamcast


Maybe 500 dollars when there were scalping bastards...but that doesn't last forever. I got my ps2 for 199 in June


Does someone have console envy?

 

[sandorski]

If I may comment on Consoles vs PC:

Outdated graphics = Crappy graphics

I remember being gaga over the PS(original) when it first came out, looked at a PS lately? It's craptacular. As graphics technology progresses, what we think is fantastic today will become crappy tomorrow. This is an advantage of the PC for gaming, it is easily upgradeable.

We can argue the wisdom of paying $Var for PC upgrades vs $Const Console, but as stated by others, if you got the money and want the latest what business is that of anyone else? Likewise, if you got the money, but don't want to spend it on a PC, go ahead, it's your money.

 

[BentValve]

You might think I am crazy but I think PC games look a 100 times better than any console game does.

 

[rbV5]

rbv5, you post like you NEF, so please don't talk about factual information. You're fvckin ignorant if you don't think the 9700pro doesn't have problems with video overlay and directdraw, or controlling the PCI/AGP bus.

Yea, who cares about facts? they just get in the way of a good whine! The absolute VAST MAJORITY of virtually every review/preview I've seen, and experience of "MOST" users I've read, my own personal experience of actually using the card for some time now is that you're just plain wrong. The 9700 has had an impressive run so far, only minor issues in my view and I'm certainly not alone.

 

[apoppin]

How dumb would you have to be to preorder GF-FX now???

This question takes on new meaning as Nvidia's Paraphernalia-like Dusbuster cost well over $100 more than the 9700Pro?

Any takers?

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: apoppin

How dumb would you have to be to preorder GF-FX now???

This question takes on new meaning as Nvidia's Paraphernalia-like Dusbuster cost well over $100 more than the 9700Pro?

Any takers?

meh. They cancelled mine for me overnite so I don't have to make up my mind. The little boy in me still wants an FX to monkey around with in the shop though. For some reason it just looks to be a fun toy to experiment with.

I need a card right now though so I will have to read up and see what 9700pro is the one to buy.

 

[spaceman]

it amazes me that some people are lashing out at others over the turd that is the Geforce FX.
:Q


LOL!~

 

[BeauJangles]

I wish everyone would give ATi some credit and respect. Their latest driver releases have been great, absolutely fantastic. Yes, there have been compatibility issues, BUT THERE ALWAYS ARE! Whether you are Nvidia or ATi, sometimes drivers f*ck up certain people's computers. Seriously, neither Nvidia nor ATi is infallible when it comes to drivers.

So quit the quibbling over who has better drivers. Since ATi has released the Catalyst drivers, they have been as solid as Nvidia's dets. On the Radeon 9700 having compatibility issues with certain mobos... is that really a problem? I mean, ATi fixed it pretty damn fast, and, if I had been a customer in that situation I would feel it had been resolved well.