• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Most influential Graphic cards in history

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
The 6 series brought about SM3.0, HDR, Purevideo and modern SLI.
The 8 series brought a unified architecture and stream processors giving us CUDA and Physics (among many other things).
Since they bought 3DFX they basically own 9 of the top 10.

 

AVP

Senior member
Jan 19, 2005
885
0
0
This is weird, i was just thinking about this....6600gt and 8800gt on the nvidia side were big leaps in performance that were offered at mainstream prices. I own both but that doesn't make me biased right? :p

Though, I did go from an ATI rage 128 to a 6600gt to an 8800gt over the span of what? maybe close to 10 years I think and neither time was I really pushed to an upgrade to play something specific, these cards became available and they were perfect purchases.

Anywho, check out the Valve Hardware Survey it can kind of attest to the popularity of later generation cards which is slightly relevant.

 

Extelleron

Diamond Member
Dec 26, 2005
3,127
0
71
Originally posted by: Wreckage
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd


The 4870 was slower than?
The GTX280 which had been out for awhile. Very much so.

When the 8800 series came out it absolutely demolished any other card on the market regardless of price point.

The 4870 was between second and third place. Hardly "influential" or even mildly impressive.

Had it passed the GTX280 by 30% or more maybe, but it fell behind. In a 2 horse race 2nd place is last place.
Absolute BS.

The HD 4870 and the GTX 280 came out at the same time and compete for different markets, with the HD 4870 X2 competing with the GTX 280. The HD 4870 beats/beat the GTX 260 and at $299 was not that far away from a $649 GTX 280. The HD 4870 X2 completes the series with a card that is much faster than the GTX 280 on average.

Not considering the HD 4870 influential or "mildly impressive" is just plain silly and shows a serious lack of knowledge about the market. If it weren't for RV770 we would be spending $600 for a GTX 280 and $400 for a GTX 260, meanwhile you can now get a GTX 280 for <$400 and a GTX 260 for not much more than $200. nVidia is competitive in a number of areas but there is no doubt that AMD is in control of the market and it is AMD that sets the bar for now.

 

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
Originally posted by: Modular
4850 = for the price champion of all time.
I assume that you must be relatively new to the video card industry then.

Compare the HD4850 to some of the price/performance cards of all time. Those are X1950pro, Geforce Ti 4200, 6600GT, 8800GT etc etc. I could probably even go back further but imho the 6600GT was the price champion of all time.

Why? i never seen a card sell like the 6600GT. Almost every gamer I knew back then had this card. It was affordable, didn't break the bank and provided decent performance (~9700pro), easily overwhelming its competition across the board. It brought huge performance increases at mainstream level.

But technologically, theres quite a few cards that could be deemed the most influential. We could go all the way back to NV3 (RIVA 128), 3dFX voodoo and even renditions v1000. However id say the 8800GTX aka G80 was one of the most influential in recent times. Not only it doubled the performance of past flag ship cards, but was the first DX10 card. (Not to mention having a whole slew of features). It performed faster at DX10 apps compared to the competition. Simply put, it was like the 9700pro reincarnated.
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
1
0
Having owned the 6600GT and the 4850 the 4850 seems far closer to the top dogs than the 6600GT was at the time.

I'm sure someone could compare % differences quite easily if they were really interested...


 

poohbear

Platinum Member
Mar 11, 2003
2,286
4
81
Originally posted by: postmortemIA
three that matter are GeForce 256 (first TnL card), GeForce 3 (first card with shaders) and Radeon 9700 Pro (first powerhouse)
QFT

i would also add the 8800gt & 4200 ti200 cause they brought performance to the masses, which in itself is quite revolutionary and allows pc graphics to progress much faster. I've been gaming for 12 years and those 5 are the most significant imho
 

legoman666

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2003
3,629
1
0
Originally posted by: AVP
This is weird, i was just thinking about this....6600gt and 8800gt on the nvidia side were big leaps in performance that were offered at mainstream prices. I own both but that doesn't make me biased right? :p

Though, I did go from an ATI rage 128 to a 6600gt to an 8800gt over the span of what? maybe close to 10 years I think and neither time was I really pushed to an upgrade to play something specific, these cards became available and they were perfect purchases.

Anywho, check out the Valve Hardware Survey it can kind of attest to the popularity of later generation cards which is slightly relevant.
something on that list is broken. The list of most popular video cards doesn't even have the 48XX or the 38XX series cards.
 

imported_D3v

Junior Member
Aug 28, 2008
16
0
0
riva128/voodoo/voodoo3/gf256/4200ti/9700pro/6600GT/1900xt512/8800GT

Thats the story of my life at least. I've owned and disowned tons of 6800s, 1900xtx, 1950s, 8800 ultraX2 and a 320, and more, but them's the cards I stuck with and love(d).

Edit: Too many vid cards are made, seriously.
 

Rage187

Lifer
Dec 30, 2000
14,276
4
81
wow, I actually agree with most of what they said.

V2
4200
6800
8800GT

were all monumental
 

413xram

Member
May 5, 2004
197
0
0
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Leaving out the GeForce 256 is stupid regardless of what it cost.

Also stupid is no mention of the Voodoo3,4,5 cards which had some impressive FSAA features that changed how we play games. No more jaggies! (the V5 6000 doesn't particularly count because it wasn't released)
Totally agree:)
My favorite though was my voodoo2 12Mb Black Magic in sli:))))))))))))))))) When you teamed that in sli playing the game Unreal with a Pentium II it took 3d graphics to another level for me! WOW!!!
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
This list is a joke.

The NV1 had no impact as a graphics card- it was an absolute abject failure.

The exclusion of the GeForce256 OTOH simply shows the authors profound ignorance. Not only was the GeForce256 the first rasterizer to support hardware T&L on one chip, it also was the first consumer part to offer full trilinear piped pixel pipelines(which the GF2 lacked), anisotropic filtering(albeit- much lower degrees then what we have now) and most importantly it was the first part to offer programmability. Outside of the Voodoo1, no other part in history is close to the impact that the original GeForce had on the market. They use the 'high' price as an excuse to not have it on the list? The most expensive GeforceDDR was the Hercules model that retailed for $319.99 at a B&M- V2 SLI which they cover on the list was $600.

They included the Radeon8500? While it wasn't the sickening failure that the NV1 was, it wasn't anything resembling a tollerable card(dreams of some die hard ATi enthusiasts put it in the good category, but it really, really wasn't). Likewise, the 6800 has absolutely no business on this list at all, at best it was a mediocre part- not in the vague realm of being one the best ever. The 8800GT also has no place on this list. It was introduced at ~$220 and 'with ridiculous performance and immensely satisfying technical specs for a price that left people scratching their heads even as they reached for their wallet'- the GeForce256 launched for the same price and was hands down the fastest part on the planet- a part that was excluded at least partly because of its' incredibly high price.......?

Those talking about the 4850- why would it be remotely in the league of a 'best ever' list? It was a decent low-mid range part that was competitive with its' counterparts offering. New technology? Nope. New performance? Nope. Middling performance with middling price? Yep. 'Best ever' isn't talking about a 15% performance edge for 10% more money- that is simply the nature of the market. It made the 9800GTX+ drop in price- I'll let you in on a little secret- any new technology that doesn't force a price adjustment from its' competition is an automatic failure. It is simply a given that any new technology should drive down the price of that which it replaces and competes with, if it doesn't, then we aren't progressing.

BTW- Obsidian x24 V2 SLI on one board was the best 3Dfx SLI solution ever, still have one of those kicking around here somewhere.

V4/V5 were utterly profound failures- they belong on a list of the poorest parts in the history of graphics cards, not the best. They included some novelty features that were not supported or exposed by any API which itself wouldn't have been a huge issue but they lacked almost all of the new core features of DX7 that everyone was pushing(MS, developers and every other graphics card company). Them ripping off SGI's accumulation buffer tricks and trying to pass that off as 'new technology' was an absolutely horrendous choice on their part. Every feature 3dfx offered on those parts had been available for years on workstation class hardware- noone put them on consumer parts because they didn't make sense(most of it still doesn't- even their version of FSAA which was easily replicated by everyone else died a very quick death due to how fillrate and bandwidth intensive it was- it would be utterly catastropic for performance with shader based games).
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,171
13
81
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
This list is a joke.


Those talking about the 4850- why would it be remotely in the league of a 'best ever' list? It was a decent low-mid range part that was competitive with its' counterparts offering. New technology? Nope. New performance? Nope. Middling performance with middling price? Yep. 'Best ever' isn't talking about a 15% performance edge for 10% more money- that is simply the nature of the market. It made the 9800GTX+ drop in price- I'll let you in on a little secret- any new technology that doesn't force a price adjustment from its' competition is an automatic failure. It is simply a given that any new technology should drive down the price of that which it replaces and competes with, if it doesn't, then we aren't progressing.

I disagree. The reason the 4850 belongs on that list is not because it unveiled any groundbreaking new features, but because of what it brought to both consumers and developers.

First off, the sheer price/performance of the 4850 forced Nvidia to drastically slash their price-gouging MSRPs to the point that the average consumer could now afford them. Previous to the 48X0 series debut, the GTX280 and GTX260 were reserved for either the hardcore gamer or those with disposable income. Now, even budget conscious gamers could afford a card with substantial performance (4850 or GTX260).

Secondly, now that both ATI and Nvidia are producing powerful cards that even the casual gamer can afford, developers are free to increase the minimum specs for their games since so many people now own video cards that would have been considered high-end less than a year ago.

So not only did the 4850 affect gaming in the present, but we will see its effect in the future as developers are now free to increase their games' base graphics levels.
 

nRollo

Banned
Jan 11, 2002
10,460
0
0
Creig-
I'd nominate your sig for one of the 10 best on this site.

The "most influential video cards" list to me is illustrative of how very strange the world of video cards is.
 

nRollo

Banned
Jan 11, 2002
10,460
0
0
Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
STB Powergraph 64.
Heh- I had one of those, followed by their Lightspeed. Bitmap prowess FTW!

Man was I excited to get the PowerGraph, these days people don't even know what gaming was like in those days.

Net reviews and shopping were largely in the future, and every year the CGW Video Card Review issue was the most anticipated event of the year. I'd re-read that thing to tatters and usually end up buying at least one example of the many chipsets that would be launched that year just so I could try them. (LOL- I bought a S3 Savage when I new the TL didn't work and it had texture cracking issues)

Every issue of Computer Shopper magazine was scanned and re-scanned, looking for the vendor who had the current hot card for $10 less.

 

JPB

Diamond Member
Jul 4, 2005
4,007
67
91
Here is all the graphics cards I have owned. Most recent first.
Going to step-up to a GTX260 Core 216 / GTX280

EVGA 9800GTX
BFG 7900GTX OC
EVGA 8800GTS 640MB
HIS X1900GT
Connect3D X1800XL
ATI X800 Pro
ATI 9800 Pro x 2
Geforce4 MX440
3DFX Voodoo 3 3000 AGP
Riva TNT2


 

Rage187

Lifer
Dec 30, 2000
14,276
4
81
8800gt
7900gt
6800gt
5900
ti4600
something Nvidia with 64mb
Voodoo 5500
Voodoo 4500
Voodoo 3000
Voodoo 2x2 SLi with a S3 Virge for 2d

I changed at least once a year, sometimes twice. Now I've switched to consoles as my main rig.
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
I disagree. The reason the 4850 belongs on that list is not because it unveiled any groundbreaking new features, but because of what it brought to both consumers and developers.
Really now? Well let's just break it all down :)

First off, the sheer price/performance of the 4850 forced Nvidia to drastically slash their price-gouging MSRPs to the point that the average consumer could now afford them.
What about setups like the 8800GT or particularly the 9600GT in SLI? The 4850 cost ~30% more then the 8800GT when it launched and more often then not failed to match that performance advantage(it did exceed it under some circumstances). The 9600GT in SLI simply smacked the 4850 around for the same price point. What did it bring to consumers exactly? It was a very competitive single GPU part at its price point, nothing at all more.

Previous to the 48X0 series debut, the GTX280 and GTX260 were reserved for either the hardcore gamer or those with disposable income. Now, even budget conscious gamers could afford a card with substantial performance (4850 or GTX260).
Is this serious? I pay attention to cost v performance mainly as I have always found it better to upgrade more often at a given price point then spend twice as much up front- but in anything approaching reality how in the world did the 4850 come close to changing the landscape for the consumer? You tell me- what game did the 4850 make playable that wasn't on say the 9600GT for half the price? Please, if you are in the position of pinching pennies where you have to really sweat the ~$30 extra for what nV was charging for their closest competitive part- you must be able to justify why you would spend double on a board that didn't make any new game playable at all. Try to keep a realistic hold on what it actually offered, it will help out a lot.

Secondly, now that both ATI and Nvidia are producing powerful cards that even the casual gamer can afford, developers are free to increase the minimum specs for their games since so many people now own video cards that would have been considered high-end less than a year ago.
OK, let's get into the reality check for what these new parts have really brought to the table. Well, so much for the 4850 pushing developers. That is the 4850CF solution in 6th place- behind 8800GT SLI and 9800GX2 in the most demanding game out. At the upper end of the boards limits, it fell down. Sure, in old tech games it ran much faster in relative terms- but you brought up future development where it would, as demonstrated by the charts, fail to match older and cheaper technology.

The 8800GT was a far bigger impact part at what you are stating the 4850 did, but again, it was very, very far removed from being one of the best graphics cards ever.

So not only did the 4850 affect gaming in the present, but we will see its effect in the future as developers are now free to increase their games' base graphics levels.
Base graphics are designed around sub $100 parts, go ahead and look at your games library and see for yourself. The 4850 still hasn't gotten into that bracket yet, nor will it any time too soon(possible excetption being some BF sale type event). To say the 4850 had pretty much no long term impact on the market would range from fairly accurate to overstating what the card brought to the table.
 

Arcanedeath

Platinum Member
Jan 29, 2000
2,822
1
76
Personaly for my top most influncial cards of all time I'd go with the Matrox G200 (ultmate 2d card back in the day :)), the Vodoo 1 & 2 (SLI, Glide, and hi-res 3d FTW), the Nvidia TNT (Crazy price performance & good 2d/3d) , Nvidia Geforce DDR (amazing for its time and not priced out of this world), the ATI 9700Pro (doesn't really need explanation), Nvidia 8800GTX, I actualy owned all of those cards save the 8800GTX I cheaped out and got a GTS which my brother is still using to this day :)
 

SolMiester

Diamond Member
Dec 19, 2004
5,331
17
76
Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Originally posted by: Concillian
Originally posted by: MarcVenice
If the 8800gt fits in, then so do the HD4850/4870.
How so?

When the Ti 4200 came out it soundly beat everything available in the market for close to half the price... except the 4600 which was not worth it.

This is a pretty direct comparison to the 8800GT, which was similar performance to a GTX at half the price.

Kinda the same story with the GF2 / GF256 debate. The GF256 brought the technology to the market (at a price). The GF2 brought it to the masses.

IMO the real winners are not the cards that bring technology that nobody can afford. Evolutionary bigger / pricier --> faster is nothing special. The real gems are the ones that smash the existing price / performance paradigms.

Everyone expects next generations top tier to beat the previous generation's top tier. This is evolutionary performance gains. The real winners are the ones where the next generations midrange price point beats the previous generations top tier.

That happened with the 8800GT, that didn't really happen with the HD4850 / 4870.
I think the HD4850 did roughly the same. It was available for $150, whilst it's DIRECT competitor, the 9800gtx, was selling for 250$ and had to drop faster in price then a mobster with concrete around it's feet, to be able to compete.

So if the 8800gt is mentioned, so should the HD4850. If the 8800gt belongs in there at all, is another discussion. In all honestly, I didn't buy hardware back in the Ti 4200 days. I do remember graphics cards, but my dad bought them, not me...
OMG, stop being so precious because your damn 4xxx series isnt mentioned....the 4xxx wasn't ground breaking and didn't introduce anything but some long awaiting competition against NV...
 

SolMiester

Diamond Member
Dec 19, 2004
5,331
17
76
Originally posted by: Creig
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
This list is a joke.


Those talking about the 4850- why would it be remotely in the league of a 'best ever' list? It was a decent low-mid range part that was competitive with its' counterparts offering. New technology? Nope. New performance? Nope. Middling performance with middling price? Yep. 'Best ever' isn't talking about a 15% performance edge for 10% more money- that is simply the nature of the market. It made the 9800GTX+ drop in price- I'll let you in on a little secret- any new technology that doesn't force a price adjustment from its' competition is an automatic failure. It is simply a given that any new technology should drive down the price of that which it replaces and competes with, if it doesn't, then we aren't progressing.

I disagree. The reason the 4850 belongs on that list is not because it unveiled any groundbreaking new features, but because of what it brought to both consumers and developers.

First off, the sheer price/performance of the 4850 forced Nvidia to drastically slash their price-gouging MSRPs to the point that the average consumer could now afford them. Previous to the 48X0 series debut, the GTX280 and GTX260 were reserved for either the hardcore gamer or those with disposable income. Now, even budget conscious gamers could afford a card with substantial performance (4850 or GTX260).

Secondly, now that both ATI and Nvidia are producing powerful cards that even the casual gamer can afford, developers are free to increase the minimum specs for their games since so many people now own video cards that would have been considered high-end less than a year ago.

So not only did the 4850 affect gaming in the present, but we will see its effect in the future as developers are now free to increase their games' base graphics levels.
While I'm sure, everyone now has access to cheap game performance, I believe it has been there for ages....66GT was cheap performance for the games of the times....48xx has done nothing that hasnt been done already....



 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS