KYRO III probably out in Q1 2002. What are its known specs?

[Sunner]

Powervr, I fail to see why you're making such an ass out of yourself?

I mean really, for a while you seemed quite reasonable in your comments, but all the crap you keep spewing here is just gonna result in noone listening to you.

Oh and I live Europe, and I sure as hell dont think 25 FPS is smooth.
Once when I played Quake on a P90 I used to score ~20 FPS avarge, and I thought it was smooth, that was until I upgraded to a P166-MMX and started scoring around 40 FPS, and it was so incredibly much better, then I upgraded again and got my P2-266, and again I was blown away by the difference.

It's all about what you're used to.

 

[BFG10K]

Contradicting yourself again BFG?

Not at all.

If you don't care about features why not turn all your features off.

I turn off most of them. I don't use FSAA, Quincunx, anisotropic filtering, smoothvision or truform. All I'm after is full detail levels (texture & geometry), full 32 bit colour, high resolutions and trilinear filtering. Each time I buy a faster card I can raise the resolution of my existing games.

Anisotropic Filtering, dang you don't need that.

Well it is useful but I prefer to have it off.

32bit textures dang your don't need it.

Err, yes I do. 32 bit textures is not a feature - it's a standard. Nobody in their right mind would buy a card that doesn't support this.

Run it in higher detail levels? But why? That's a feature you don't need.

No, high resolution is a standard as well. And if I can't attain it, I'll buy a faster card in order to make it a standard.

Innoka, that was well said. That is exactly how I look at my video card purchases. I couldn't have put it any better myself.

 

[Daemon_UK]

<< I want more features, more innovation! Wheres the 3DFX tech that was going to be implemented, do I have to wait until NV30? >>





<< I feel quite the opposite; I care little about features, I just want fast performance, espeicially with my existing games. The main reason I got my Ti500 is not for future games but to run my existing games faster and at higher detail levels. >>



Heh, well I am totally the opposite to you! These are the features that I want.

1600x1200x32@60fps, 4x FSAA, and 16 tap anistropy.

Now, is this too much to ask?

I sure know that the Geforce 3 can't do that yet! Until more innovation comes along, it'll be some time yet!

Finally, you mention getting the Ti500 for running existing games, what happens when Duke3d/Unreal 2/Doom3 come out, and they don't run as per your preferences. Are you going to upgrade again?

Thats where you and I are different! Im not an upgrade whore like yourself. When I want to buy a videocard I at-least want it to last a couple of generations!!

 

[RedRooster]

<< Finally, you mention getting the Ti500 for running existing games, what happens when Duke3d/Unreal 2/Doom3 come out, and they don't run as per your preferences. Are you going to upgrade again?

Thats where you and I are different! Im not an upgrade whore like yourself. When I want to buy a videocard I at-least want it to last a couple of generations!! >>



That's the difference between you spend thrify Brits, and the wasteful North Americans. No wonder Kyro caught on so big out there.
I'd upgrade every generation too, if I had the cash. The fastest frame rates in the games I play today are important to some people, including me. I can't quite afford a GF3, but I'm not going to try and justify the purchase of an outdated card(Kyro2) or a card that will be outdated when it's released in a month or two(Kyro3), just to save a few bucks.

 

[Powervr]

I am one of those guys that "try" to be rational, and I allways try to get away from consumism (this is a disease that I don't want to have).

When I am playing all my games without any poblem at resolutions that I play (1024x768, some at 1280x1024) at more than 60 fps (if they are allways above 30 fps I don't bother much...)

our brains are "slow", for our brain any constant changing of static images is motion...
yes many can see if it's at 60 fps or at 30 fps ( I can ), but I have difficulty to see differences between 45 and 60. you don't?

I don't see any reason for me to buy a NEW video card (even kyro 3 ), I am playing all my games with everything in max settings at more than 60 fps at 1024x768,1280x1024 (the sweet spot for my monitor).

If you want more and more frames per second even if you have more than 100 fps and no poblem whatsoever, you want more because you know that if you get a better score in 3dmark you woul get a great felling of superiority or something good, that is irrational, most brands use that to sell (they try to associate power with their's products and unconsciously you get trapped).

to BFG10K:

"but it delivers and at 1280x1024x32 you cannot tell the difference from a geforce 3 ... (side by side with the same monitors etc...) at least in wolfeinstein with everyting on...

<rolleyes>

In that case you won't notice a difference between your card and the Kyro3, right? After all, both the Kyro3 and the GF3 are three times as fast as your Kyro2, right? So why are you getting so excited about the Kyro3? After all, you won't notice any difference when you get it."

I agree with you!!!
I am not excited with kyro 3, I will not buy one, at least without any reasons...
what I was trying to say was that it's a good option, (for those with a tnt, mx 200 or something like that)

to rogue1979:

"The Kyro II is not quite as fast as the Geforce2 GTS, especially in 16-bit color"

1º for games that don't have the option of 32 bit (only 16 bit ), the better quality gainned (because kyro renders everything at 32 bits) is a good trade of.
140 fps against 120 fps I choose the better quality one.
2º at the resolutions tat I play with my cpu or better kyro at 32 bits actually wins against geforce 2 gts even in T&L games, but even if it wins or loose for a lausy 5 or 10 fps then why bother if both are getting the more than 60 fps mark.
3º my problem with my kyro is my hard drive sometimes in the beginning of a game starts and my frames get lower, do you think that a geforce 3 would correct that ..NOP!!!


to Crapgame:
"and the driver set has a very large built in tweaker system to force compatability "

you are right here, kyro has many options to play around (do you ever saw a tool called kyro tools XP), because of the unique kind of architecture some games that don't follow direct3d standards or opengl standards (like mixing 2d functions with 3d), must have some options in kyro disabled, or enabled.
Some of those will take some penalties, like kyro behaving like any traditional card (behaving like any tnt-2 at 175 mhz).
But the driver already came tweaked for better performance individually for each problematic game, I think it's a good thing don't you think?
Of course those games ar far and few between, and are mostly older games that don't need too much fill rate.

"will never play some games correctly like golf games such as Links2002"

I am sure it's not because it's a golf game, it's the way they got it programmed.

"games like FlightSimulator2002 would need a T&L unit even with my 1.4 gig CPU"

what type of processour do you have? My athlon XP 1,46 (1700+) , is doing a great job regarding all T&L job.
If I had a T&L card it might be run faster on some of my games, but who cares if I still play all my games with "quality settings". (and with more than 60 fps)

I agree with you in one thing!
ATI deseveres better support, it delivers better quality, even trading off a little speed, but who cares if it delivers more eye candy

I think all of us deserve to express our views, so less flames against me.

 

[Crapgame]

I mentioned FS2k2 for two reasons......

1. I love it, it's absolutly unbeleavable (if you like the FS series).

2. At max settings it can kick anything short of a GF3/R8500 in the pink parts and leave it gasping for air.


Case in point this screenshot taken at 1600x1200 4X FSAA, every FS2k2 setting at max including ground traffic and sound from a Bell chopper. Note the FPS from a Radeon7500 that scores "best in class" default 3D#2k1.




Screenshot

(shot has been shrunk for modem/monitor impaired)

3D# link ... cause someone will doubt me

If a KyroII will come close to that even with an XP 1700 backing it I need to toss my PC out the window and give up. BTW Im running a 1200 AXIA @ 1400 various FSBs usually 9x155 unless its warm at home then 9.5x147(it doesnt crash I'm just cautious) .

 

[rogue1979]

I have had 4 different Geforce cards lately that play Links 2001 perfectly, including a Voodoo 3, 4 , and 5. I am not an Nvidiot, it is just a priority for me to have 100% compatibility for all my games, new and old. So far only Voodoo and Geforce have been able to do this for me, Radeon couldn't do it, it seems like reading all the posts in this thread Kyro can't either. Since the good ole' V5 isn't fast enough anymore, than there is only one clear choice for me, Geforce 2 or 3. I picked up this current card for $136 shipped, when it isn't fast enough anymore than I will most likely get a Geforce 3 Ti 200. I am not worried yet, I play all my games at 1024 x 768 x 32 with FSAA at 4X and I am playing very smoothly, usually averaging 40-60fps depending on the game. I haven't played one yet that drops me below 25-30fps when the action gets intense on the screen. My second priority is image quality and playable framerates, I don't care if I get 60fps or 150. I hate the jaggies and don't understand why people don't use FSAA for the sake of more framerates. Most modern cards today can handle 4X FSAA without choking. I can also use 1200 x 1600 x 32 bit with FSAA off, but alot of my older games do not support this resolution, and the ones that do are sized wrong because a 1200 x 1600 desktop is too small for me to use even on a 20" monitor.

Crapgame, nice looking screenshot, but why do you need 4X FSAA at 1600 x 1200?

 

[Powervr]

there is no game that kyro can't handle (not yet)
what there are is some that don't like TBR aproach so we have to disable it (so might run slower with kyro)

when I have problems (my only problem was with a demo that I tried "dune something" I do not remember the name ), I turn on z-buffer emulation and all went well (although exageratelly slow with that demo)

I willl try that fs2002....
but I saw that screenshoot, and I don't see why any good athlon can't handle that...

 

[Daemon_UK]

Got this from Pottsey

4 pipelines
Hardware T&L
Programmable Pixel & Vertex Shaders
Free AA
64 bit colour

In other words the Kyro III is going to be faster then GeForce 3 in theory.

 

[EMAN]

I don't see any reason for me to buy a NEW video card (even kyro 3 ), I am playing all my games with everything in max settings at more than 60 fps at 1024x768,1280x1024 (the sweet spot for my monitor).

I have to agree. When all your games play good with reasonable resolution than why upgrade?



BFG, you have a 17 inch monitor and Geforce 3 ti500. Why not use Anisotropic Filtering? AA is only good for racing games anyway. Doesn't your monitor max at 1280x1024 60htz? I think you have enough juice to max out your resolution and max out your Anisotropic Filtering.

 

[Crapgame]

<< I am playing all my games with everything in max settings at more than 60 fps >>



I see the problem here, nobody gets those framerates with the games I play. I really have no intrest in the Unreal/Quake type game so most of the games you all talk about I'm clueless and I have no working comparison. EDIT: In fact in most games if there isnt a hotkey or a show FPS in the UI I dont bother to check and I could really care less as long as it looks good while playing smooth.

Anyways my 7500 is pumping an average of 10-15 FPS more than the KyroII did in all my games and the KyroII is enjoying a wondefull retirement in a Photoshop PC, if it ever sees 3D again with it's new owner I'll be shocked.

 

[jlee]

I've had a 64mb GTS system and a Kyro II system side by side (PIII 700/GTS, Duron 750/Kyro II), and they ran about the same, except the GTS was faster in Delta Force, of all things...lol

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1435&p=10 - QIII

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1435&p=14 - Serious Sam, beating even the Geforce2 Ultra.

I think the Kyro II does quite well for the price range - it is, after all, a budget card..not a high-end competitor for a Geforce3. Was it not designed to compete with the MX series?

Anyways..let's try to get back on topic

 

[BFG10K]

Heh, well I am totally the opposite to you! These are the features that I want.
1600x1200x32@60fps, 4x FSAA, and 16 tap anistropy.
Now, is this too much to ask?

Not at all but in fact you're essentially after raw speed which is exactly what I'm after. However I go a step further and disable FSAA and anisotropic filtering so I can go to even higher resolutions.

I sure know that the Geforce 3 can't do that yet!

Agreed. In fact, there are some games on my Ti500 that I wouldn't run above 1152 x 846 x 32.

Finally, you mention getting the Ti500 for running existing games, what happens when Duke3d/Unreal 2/Doom3 come out, and they don't run as per your preferences. Are you going to upgrade again?

I certainly am, but keep in mind that I buy the fastest card I can afford at the time so I'm not really losing anything when it comes to the performance of the next generation of games. The only difference with me is that I justify my purchase on the grounds of having immediate performance and image quality gains in my existing games rather than buying a card based on the speculation of how well it will run the next generation of games. If those games run fast then it's all the better. If not, I'll upgrade.

Im not an upgrade whore like yourself. When I want to buy a videocard I at-least want it to last a couple of generations!!

If you think like that you'll only get burned, especially since there will always be newer and more detailed games on the horizon. You'll never get a card that runs the next generation of games fast.

The best thing to do is to buy a card that allows you to enjoy your current games more and worry about upgrading only when you have problems with the next generation of games.

yes many can see if it's at 60 fps or at 30 fps ( I can ), but I have difficulty to see differences between 45 and 60. you don't?

I can see the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS. Does that count?

I am playing all my games with everything in max settings at more than 60 fps at 1024x768,1280x1024 (the sweet spot for my monitor).

You just told us that RTCW runs at 25 FPS at 1280 x 1024 for you.

If you want more and more frames per second even if you have more than 100 fps and no poblem whatsoever, you want more because you know that if you get a better score in 3dmark you woul get a great felling of superiority or something good,

No, I don't care about 3DMark at all. I see you just don't get it. I didn't buy a Ti500 to brag, I bought it because I need the extra speed so I can run my existing games at higher detail levels.

My Ti500 is faster in most games at 1152 x 864 x 32 than my GTS was at 800 x 600 x 32. With my new card the bar of image quality has been raised significantly because I can run all of my games at higher resolutions and faster speeds. And my next card will again raise the bar of image quality. And the next card after that will do the same. And so on.

I agree with you!!!I am not excited with kyro 3, I will not buy one, at least without any reasons..

Here's a good reason: you're only getting 25 FPS in RTCW with your current setup. I'll let you on a little secret: if I had a Kyro2 I would probably not run RTCW above 640 x 480 x 32 in order to make it run fast enough for me. And even then it'd probably be too slow for me.

what I was trying to say was that it's a good option, (for those with a tnt, mx 200 or something like that)

Just like a 8500 and a Ti500 is a good option for people with slower cards.

When all your games play good with reasonable resolution than why upgrade?

So you can run at even higher resolutions.

BFG, you have a 17 inch monitor and Geforce 3 ti500. Why not use Anisotropic Filtering?

So I can raise the resolution as high as possible. I don't want anisotropic filtering eating my FPS because IMO it's not worth it.

AA is only good for racing games anyway.

I don't use FSAA in any form.

Doesn't your monitor max at 1280x1024 60htz? I think you have enough juice to max out your resolution and max out your Anisotropic Filtering.

For one thing, I am getting a 19" monitor so I can go above 1152 x 864 (75 Hz) in certain games which I have more than enough horsepower to do so. However for some games (Undying, RTCW and maybe Quake3) I will not raise the resolution higher than 1152 x 846 in order to keep the framerates high in all situations. However as always my next card (GF4 possibly) will allow me to run those games at higher resolutions.

 

[EMAN]

I certainly am, but keep in mind that I buy the fastest card I can afford at the time so I'm not really losing anything when it comes to the performance of the next generation of games. The only difference with me is that I justify my purchase on the grounds of having immediate performance and image quality gains in my existing games rather than buying a card based on the speculation of how well it will run the next generation of games. If those games run fast then it's all the better. If not, I'll upgrade.

That is why you always want to stay a 1 generation back in the videocard department. Even than all your games run fast with an older video card. Since there's competition the latest generation is cheap right now. There will always be next generation of video cards that will be faster for your next generation of games. It's not like geforce 3 or Radeon 8500 improves game play. It barely makes a noticeable difference if any. Sure you can run higher resolutions and maybe use FSAA but I don't that is worth extra $150+.


If you think like that you'll only get burned, especially since there will always be newer and more detailed games on the horizon. You'll never get a card that runs the next generation of games fast.

You should buy the card when the next generation of games are out or when you can't play with your current setup. And I don't call having over 60fps not playable and I'm sure everyone agrees with me on this. Sure if I have $ 250 and I love gaming I would buy it but not every 6months.


So I can raise the resolution as high as possible. I don't want anisotropic filtering eating my FPS because IMO it's not worth it.

Than you should of gotten yourself a Radeon 8500. It barely eats FPS at all. Yeah I know Nvidia or die.


For one thing, I am getting a 19" monitor so I can go above 1152 x 864 (75 Hz) in certain games which I have more than enough horsepower to do so. However for some games (Undying, RTCW and maybe Quake3) I will not raise the resolution higher than 1152 x 846 in order to keep the framerates high in all situations. However as always my next card (GF4 possibly) will allow me to run those games at higher resolutions.

Okay how many FPS do you need? You don't use Aniso. filter and play at that 1152x864. Damn you should be getting like 150fps. That my friend is overkill.

 

[RobsTV]

If you are a little handy, and do your homework, you can have the lastest and
greatest without paying extra for it. Some of you sound as if spending $150 on
a video card is the end. It's only the beginning. Your an idiot if you stop there.

First, do your research. See what performance users are getting in the video forum.
Regularly upgrade your video card, so your alwaya have the latest.
Then, check out the Hot Deals forum, and jump on those 12 hour deals.
Last of all, sell your almost the latest video card for what you pay for the new one.
Include installation to justify the cost.
Again, upgrade regularly. Old cards like Voodoo3 don't have much resale value anymore.
Stick with cards that everyone is familiar with and likes, not bad experiments.

This formula works fairly well.

Just sold my old 32meg GF2 GTS for $100 installed.
Jumped on the BestBuys online 2 day deal for GF3 Ti200 priced at $99 after rebate.
Card clocks in at Gf3 Ti500 stock levels or higher.

You can also apply this to CPU's and motherboards.

Last off, why upgrade?
As shown, it can be free, or nearly free.
Newer games use new features last years cards don't have or support well.
Todays cards still can't keep up with old games.
For example, using 1.4GHz T-Bird and GF3 Ti500, Gran Prix 3 drops into the teens
at 1024x768x32 using 2xAA and all options cranked up. Nascar 4 stays at around
low 30's with same settings.

Never buy a video card for what you think you will need tomarrow,
and only get a card that will run what is out today. Some of you are
too young to know this, but wait a few years and you'll understand.

 

[Stiganator]

This is refering to BFGs last comment about TV and movie FPS having no connection with 3d gaming. It kinda does, unless you have some holographic projector. You are not playing in 3 dimensions, but an illusion of 3 dimensions. So your "3d" game is nothing more than a jazzed up film.

I own a Voodoo3, so I can't even play the games you are refering to. I believe a game can be played at 20-25 fps, as long as it stays at 20-25 fps. I don't think a human is capable of recognizing more than 65-70 fps, so why would you need 120. I would agree that 25 is a bit slow, i look for around BFGs absolute minimum of 60. Each of you have valid points, but remember this post was for specs not flaming.

 

[Powervr]

this is what we can expect from imagination regular drivers updates...

they are updated at the same pace as nvidia does their's detonators (without the betas)


so, for those that might get kyro 3, you will get good drivers support...

New Kyro drivers soon
taken from www.paraknowya.com

"ImgTech was hoping to get the drivers ready for X-mess but due to the holidays coming up, work has been slow and the WHQL certified process has taken a lot longer them expected. Still early next year we should see some new drivers which contain a lot of fixes. The next set will be moving up a to a high version number. One source told me the new drivers could reach build 1.00.14.0000, this is a bigger jump then we have seen before. The current drivers are only 1.00.09.0031. Some of the fixes will be AVP2 and Diablo 2 will work correctly. "


the problem is that some programmer might neglect kyro cards, so we have to wait for a driver to fix that ...
but kyro is now well known and this are things of the past...(at least with known software houses )

kyro drivers are not worst than nvidia, nvidia cards are allways tested, unlike ati and the rest of the others...
Nowadays no one would launch a game with problems with nvidia cards, I remember this happening when 3dfx was alive, it was a real problem for nvidia, (diablo 2 )

 

[Powervr]

BFG:
"Here's a good reason: you're only getting 25 FPS in RTCW with your current setup. I'll let you on a little secret: if I had a Kyro2 I would probably not run RTCW above 640 x 480 x 32 in order to make it run fast enough for me. And even then it'd probably be too slow for me.

nop I said that I don't see dropping bellow that (no slide show, at least for me ) (I am not able to test it... I tried anandtech demos but I got an error, don't know why), and that at 1600x1200x32 with everything on.

and I play mostly at 1024x768x32 with everything on so I bet my kyro is doing more than 60 fps


you are able to distinguish bettween 120 and 60 fps ?
uau!

 

[BFG10K]

That is why you always want to stay a 1 generation back in the videocard department. Even than all your games run fast with an older video card.

But they will not run as fast as they will with a top of the line card. Also while I don't care too much about future games the fact remains that a faster card today will run tomorrow's games faster.

It's not like geforce 3 or Radeon 8500 improves game play. It barely makes a noticeable difference if any.

You're wrong - it makes a large difference. I would not be able to run my heaviest games at 1152 x 864 x 32 if I had anything slower than a Ti500.

Sure you can run higher resolutions and maybe use FSAA but I don't that is worth extra $150+.

So don't buy it then. I'm not forcing you to but to me it is worth it so that's how I choose to spend my money. Just because you can't justify it, it doesn't mean that there's not a valid reason to do it.

You should buy the card when the next generation of games are out or when you can't play with your current setup.

Or if you want to run your existing games faster.

Than you should of gotten yourself a Radeon 8500. It barely eats FPS at all. Yeah I know Nvidia or die.

That's a totally different issue and I'm afraid that this discussion will proceed on a totally different tangent if I address it. Let's stick to the subject at hand for now.

Okay how many FPS do you need? You don't use Aniso. filter and play at that 1152x864. Damn you should be getting like 150fps. That my friend is overkill

No it isn't. Do you think (for example) that there's a difference betwen 135 FPS and 120 FPS in Quake3? Well there is. Try playing the Dredwerktz map and go to the outside area with all of the bots set to nightmare difficulty and all firing a wide range of guns. That outside area will either slow down to framerates in the high 30s or the low 50s depending on whether you get 135 FPS or 120 FPS in the timedemo of demo four.

Now go to the other side of the area and try to rail someone standing on the ledge. Without ultra high framerates it's impossible to do this so your ability to play the game is severely crippled. All because somebody made the blanket statement that there's no difference between 120 FPS and 135 FPS.

There is no magic number which is the pinnacle of performance so any such blanket statements you make are false. Don't under-estimate the defintion of playable and don't over-estimate your system's abilities.

This is refering to BFGs last comment about TV and movie FPS having no connection with 3d gaming. It kinda does,

No, it doesn't. For one thing, if it's the same why do people see a 60 Hz refresh rate flicker? Also movies have no interactivity whatsoever, they use motion blur and they don't fluctuate with speed. Regardless, there are still some who claim to see flickering and jerkiness in movies even with the aforementioned trickery. And until you see movies running at 120 FPS you can't say that 24 FPS is all you need.

and I play mostly at 1024x768x32 with everything on so I bet my kyro is doing more than 60 fps

I don't that very much. You can easily check by using cg_drawFPS 1. Even my Ti500 drops below 60 FPS in some places at 1152 x 864 x 32.

you are able to distinguish bettween 120 and 60 fps ?

Easily. 60 FPS average is a total slideshow compared to 120 FPS average.

 

[vedin]

BFG, face it, you are too picky. You will NEVER EVER need 1,000fps. The human eye, I guarantee and would put money on it, can't tell the dif in 200 and 300, but you would make the arguement that if you had 300, 200 is a total slideshow. If you can tell what's going on, and your aim is not affected, and you aren't getting controller lag, it's smooth enough. What is playable is just that, playable. How fast does it have to run in order for you to keep from loosing due to frame rate lag. For me, so long as it doesn't get lower than 30, I'm good. I can kick just as much butt when playing at 60fps as I can at 120fps. As a matter of fact, it seems to me that beyond 80, your mouse is causing more micro-skipping than anything. Mice only have a refresh rate of so much, and I notice that a whole lot more than I do any tiny little amount of frame skipping you get when seeing a 3d scene that is above 60fps. But then, hey, I'm cheap. I got a two year old vid board, and a ten dollar mouse. I'm gonna get the next great budget card, and maybe have money left over to actually buy a game.

 

[Powervr]

to BFG:
"Now go to the other side of the area and try to rail someone standing on the ledge. Without ultra high framerates it's impossible to do this so your ability to play the game is severely crippled. All because somebody made the blanket statement that there's no difference between 120 FPS and 135 FPS."

that is why TBR aproach is allways better (FPS will not fluctuate so much, like nvidia cards, if and only if there is enough cpu power for T&L)

kyro 3 will have T&L and maybe also vertex shaders (don't know), so even less fluctuations...


"No, it doesn't. For one thing, if it's the same why do people see a 60 Hz refresh rate flicker? Also movies have no interactivity whatsoever, they use motion blur and they don't fluctuate with speed. Regardless, there are still some who claim to see flickering and jerkiness in movies even with the aforementioned trickery. And until you see movies running at 120 FPS you can't say that 24 FPS is all you need."

BFG people see 60 hz flickering because of the way CRT tubes work...
IN CRT (cathode ray tube, normal tv's and monitors) the tube "lights" phosphor elements one by one, from top to bottom, and at 60 hz, when the tube is lighting bottom elements the light of some of the top elements might be diminishing.
that is why some people see it flickering .
some elements might be at full "light" only 30-45 times a second,the rest of the time they are obscured.

TFT or LCD might be ok with 60 hz...
these are not the suitable for games because pixels tend to not change state at that rate 60 hz, more like 20 hz, 20 times a second...
this produces a motion blur effect, like some cameras (in some movies) some do not change state quick enough when there is too much action (there are cameras that can deliver 1000 frames per second, these don't make the blur effect)

kyro 3 will have free FSAA (no penalties here), no fluctuations (TBR and T&L), 64 bits color (less errors when doing 8 layers multitexturing )
so I guess even if kyro 3 doesn't beat geforce 3 , it will be better, (minimum fps will be better and more option on all the time)

that stament of the more is allways better does also aplly to TBR aproach, the problem is that even with similar score with the average fps, kyro might be 3x or even 4x (depending on overdraw) better at minimum fps...

 

[Powervr]

hey.. there is something going on here:

overclocker forum

 

[BFG10K]

BFG, face it, you are too picky. You will NEVER EVER need 1,000fps.

Where did I say I did?

The human eye, I guarantee and would put money on it, can't tell the dif in 200 and 300, but you would make the arguement that if you had 300, 200 is a total slideshow.

<sigh>

You guys still don't get it. It's much more complex than just picking a number and saying "yep, that's the pinnacle of performance".

that is why TBR aproach is allways better (FPS will not fluctuate so much, like nvidia cards, if and only if there is enough cpu power for T&L)

TBR will still fluctuate in certain situations. Also I'd much rather have a card that went from 120 FPS to 60 FPS rather than a card that went from 75 FPS to 50 FPS. The Kyro2 starts out slower and while the % drop might not be as high as IMRs, at the end of the day your raw framerate is still a slideshow.

BFG people see 60 hz flickering because of the way CRT tubes work...

And CRT tubes work exactly the same way as FPS. 60 Hz = 60 screen updates per second = 60 FPS. Regardless, I can easily see the difference betwen 120 FPS and 60 FPS. Also again you're trying to pull out a magic number and castrate everyone with a blanket statement about what the human eye can and can't see. For one thing you're wrong. Secondly, it's not as simple as that because things are much more complicated.

hey.. there is something going on here:

I doubt very much that Unreal2 will be released in March this year. Also we see more doom and gloom from a Kyro fanboy while he forgets that his marvellous technology (Kyro2) is completely obsolete because it's beaten by the GF2 Pro and the Radeon 64 MB DDR.

 

[Powervr]

"and CRT tubes work exactly the same way as FPS. 60 Hz = 60 screen updates per second = 60 FPS. Regardless, I can easily see the difference betwen 120 FPS and 60 FPS. Also again you're trying to pull out a magic number and castrate everyone with a blanket statement about what the human eye can and can't see. For one thing you're wrong. Secondly, it's not as simple as that because things are much more complicated."

ha...
what I did say was that because of CRT half the time the pixel is obscured (with 60 hz),
so it's 30 hz for obscured and 30 hz for light...
(there are differents grades betteween them)
might be something like 15 hz for each distinct (to the human eye) grades


"I doubt very much that Unreal2 will be released in March this year. Also we see more doom and gloom from a Kyro fanboy while he forgets that his marvellous technology (Kyro2) is completely obsolete because it's beaten by the GF2 Pro and the Radeon 64 MB DDR. "

complete obsolete that is why It still beats geforce 2 and that radeon at unreal and in most of other games...

with any atlhon xp its performance jumps into geforce 2 pro levels and even better ... (anisotropic must be disabled for this to happen)

 

[Powervr]

TO BFG10k:

"TBR will still fluctuate in certain situations. Also I'd much rather have a card that went from 120 FPS to 60 FPS rather than a card that went from 75 FPS to 50 FPS. The Kyro2 starts out slower and while the % drop might not be as high as IMRs, at the end of the day your raw framerate is still a slideshow"

it might fluctuate when there is not enough bandwidth (not usual with TBR) and not enough cpu power for T&L (not a problem for good cpu's, or kyro 3...)

ho by the way...
I prefer a card that achieves only 70 fps max with a minimum of 60 fps that any card that can achieve 300 fps and drop to 50 fps in some areas...