NV and ATi both have successful launches this week

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

I simply refuted his claim that ATi cant do any higher than 4xAA. Thats not correct, and I corrected him. Simple as that.

You also made it sound like nVidia's 8xAA isn't an option. It is an option and it offers higher image quality than 6xAA does.

I didnt say it wasnt an option. If you read it that way, its not my problem.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Which is where subjectivity comes in.

Right, just like when you claim FP HDR + AA is playable on ATi cards. That's also subjective.

In fact the performance hit of FP HDR + MSAA is probably higher than going from 4xAA to 8xS in regular HDR-less rendering, rendering that the vast majority of games are still employing.

Subjectivity is fine as long as it's consistent.

Having XT's in CF, HDR+AA was playable for me in Oblivion. And many others here with even a single card. "In fact", then "probably"? Your own numbers show that 8xAA over 4xAA takes about a 50% hit.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

The link dropped the 7900GTX, at 1600x1200, 2xTRAA, and just 4xAF. With an average of 54fps

What link? What game(s)?

I run Quake 4 and Doom 3 at 1600x1200 and Half-Life 2 at 1760x1320 and 8xS works fine. In most cases I've found 1600x1200 with 8xS looks better than 1920x1440 with 4xAA, especially in OpenGL games.

As for other games.

My next batch of benchmarks (probably 7900 GTX against G80) will have even more 8xS and 16xS results.

This link, dropped to show that 8xAA usable from Cookie Monster; http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/08/23/ati_radeon_x1950xtx/9.html

As I said before, they have Q4 at 1600x1200, 2xTRAA, 8xAF, and with just 54fps average. Adding 8xAA on that, would drop frames considerable. For me, 54fps is borderline for playable, if you're playing online.

Your numbers prove what I said. I said it would be hard to get playable frames in most any newer game. You showed that Unreal, Quake 2&3, Soldier of Fortune, Star Trek Elite Force 1&2, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Serious Sam 1st&2nd Encounter, Call of Duty, and Jedi Academy are playable to you with 8xAA. Some of these games are close to 10 years old. I would hope they are playable. Older games it to me where 8xAA was only playable. You have the same opinion, not sure why you disagree.

I dont have a current highend NV card. My last was a 7800GTX, and then another for SLI. The 7900 series is much faster, and the GX2 is probably close to 2x as fast. When I had my GTX, 8xAA was not playable at my res, unless it was an older game. Its as simple as that. Which is where I think 8xAA is very usable depending on the game. I dont play old games much, or replay games Ive beaten. Some people do, that is where 8xAA can shine.

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

I guess this ends the argument. Anyhow, almost all GT users have their GTs OCed to GTX speeds so 8xS on most games arent for the faint hearted.

As BFG10K pointed out, 6xAA is only MSAA. SSAA is far superior than MSAA, and the fact NVs SSAA also anti alias the textures as well.

Where is this data from? My guess is, most people dont overclock at all.

And yes, SSAA is much better. I do with ATi would adopt this. As I said before, the more options for the consumers the better. Another reason I went with CF, and dropped SLI. Much more AA options.

Based on users here. We are hardware enthuiasts.

As you said most people dont OC. They dont use HQ because they dont see any IQ differences. They also dont see shimmering like some of us do here.

SLi has plenty of options as well.
2x, 4x, 8xS, 8xSLI AA, 16xS, 16xSLI AA, 32xSLI AA + option to SSAA/MSAA + TRAA.

Compared to ATi's 2x, 4x, 6x, 8xSuper AA, 10x Super AA ,12x SuperAA, 14xSuperAA + AAA (Note that 10xAA and 14xAA for ATi mixes 8xMSAA + 2xSSAA, and 12xMSAA +2xSSAA).

Both side got plenty of AA options. But NV has the superior AA options and IQ because of SSAA can be used on almost all the AA settings.

Again, where is the data that most people overclock? I dont think its nearly as high as you think it is. And yet, most people dont use HQ, most people dont see IQ differences, and most people dont see shimmering. I dont think Ive ever said that they do.

32xAA is quad-SLI. That was not available when I had my GTXs. And SSAA wasnt playable still for me in most games. Remember, 1920x1200 is higher than most use, and 8xAA takes a huge performance hit.

And said Ive said before, NV can have better AA, with SSAA. No arguement there. An area where ATi needs to step it up.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Crusader

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Dont need 6x? Please. 8xAA is far from playable to me, in any sort of high res. There is a HUGE hit on performance. Shimmering cannot be fixed, it can be reduced. At a cost of frames. HQ AF was not enabled, its plainly obvious. You're now claiming that HQ AF is not better than normal AF?

More links that say 4xAA quality is virtually the same;

With 4X anti-aliasing enabled, the "jaggies" in the scene are cleaned up considerably, but it's extremely difficult to perceive any real differences in the images, even while zoomed, although the cables on the crane seem slightly more defined on the Radeon. We've also included a sample using ATI's 6X AA mode, which was the best overall. (NVIDIA doesn't support this mode.)

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx

Wrong.
First of all your link is talking about zooming in on screenshots, which is not how you play games and is a pointless comparison to even make.

Do you zoom in on a static screenshot in games much?

The man was right, ATIs 6x mode is unneeded.

Above 4X AA is unnoticable, 8xS is though.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/video/3dvideoforpc-05q2.html

But I'd like to note that the quality difference in modes higher than MSAA 4x goes down to zero, especially in dynamic games. While 8xS mode in GeForce cards still makes some sense (texture antialiasing and "side-effect" anisotropic filtering), you will have to use a magnifying glass to find differences between 6x and 4x modes in ATI cards. That's why it's hard to say whether all these crazy modes (like ATI CF 14x or NV SLI 16x) make any sense...

Not sure how you are going to attempt to spin this one.
But after reading this thread, I'm sure more than ever and if you dont have connections with ATI in some way I'll eat a hat, a sombrero even.. holy crap.

Wrong what?

I know it talks about zooming in. I didnt say zooming in matters. Why not make the same post to gastanfor? His link focused on zooming in to see a difference. Be level all the way across, not just when it fits your agenda. In a previous post, I bolded the part of a link that says ingame they look the same. Which further proves my case, that at 4xAA, the quality is nearly identical. Ive provided three links that say this.

Speaking of games, the link you dropped doesnt even use a game to show the difference in AA quality.

I dont have any connection with ATi. Please dont make unbased claims like this.

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: Ackmed
8xAA is far from playable to me, in any sort of high res.

8xAA not playable on two 7800gtx's in BF2 at what resolution?

1280*1024 with 8x AA is playable with my 7600gt in bf2. SLI'd 7800gtx's = ~4x the power of one 7600gt.

As I said several times, 1920x1200. And no, it wasnt playable. I dont like stuttering frames in a action game such as that.

 

[Ackmed]

For the last time, drop it. You do not know what you think you do. Im sorry your pal got banned, he got himself banned. Perhaps he will learn a lesson.

As for your other attempts, you're not even close.

Originally posted by: josh6079
It is interesting to note one of your quotes:

...And someone who was in the program, did just that. Started troll topics, spread misinformation, and just always praised NV, and put down ATI.

If you switch things around we have your basic definition:

...spread misinformation, and just always praised ATI, and put down NV.

Your statements thus far have implied that Nvidia's 8xAA is useless while many more credible sources than yourself have stated otherwise.

Is this a troll topic? Nope. When did I spread misinformation? Nope. Ive praised NV and ATi in this thread.

Again, where is the misinformation? And others have said its not playable too. Its my opinion, and I made that very clear. Its subjective.

As for 8xAA not being playable, NV not needing 6xAA, and 6xAA looking better than 4xAA, here is a link from a X1950XTX eval.

Once again we see the ATI Radeon X1950 XTX providing noticeably faster performance over the ATI Radeon X1900 XTX. This performance allowed us to enable Quality 6X Adaptive AA at 1600x1200 for image quality that is out of this world. All trees, grass, foliage, fences, edges on polygons looked absolutely incredible with no signs of aliasing. Once again we see the BFGTech GeForce 7950 GX2 would benefit if it had a 6X AA option by default because the performance is there for it. We tried 8xS AA but this was way to much of a burden for this video card at 1600x1200 in this game.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTE0NCw4LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

As you see, I am not alone.

For what is the 100th time it feels, I like 8xAA very much. It looks better than any AA ATi has to offer. Its just too slow for me to use in any sort of newer game.

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: Ackmed
You're now claiming that HQ AF is not better than normal AF?

ATI HQ AF vs Regular NV AF

not much better than regular AF

Its pretty easy to see the difference. Why not comment on the link I dropped?

Is that not easily noticable?

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
For the last time, drop it. You do not know what you think you do. Im sorry your pal got banned, he got himself banned. Perhaps he will learn a lesson.

As for your other attempts, you're not even close.

Originally posted by: josh6079
It is interesting to note one of your quotes:

...And someone who was in the program, did just that. Started troll topics, spread misinformation, and just always praised NV, and put down ATI.

If you switch things around we have your basic definition:

...spread misinformation, and just always praised ATI, and put down NV.

Your statements thus far have implied that Nvidia's 8xAA is useless while many more credible sources than yourself have stated otherwise.

Is this a troll topic? Nope. When did I spread misinformation? Nope. Ive praised NV and ATi in this thread.

Again, where is the misinformation? And others have said its not playable too. Its my opinion, and I made that very clear. Its subjective.

As for 8xAA not being playable, NV not needing 6xAA, and 6xAA looking better than 4xAA, here is a link from a X1950XTX eval.

Once again we see the ATI Radeon X1950 XTX providing noticeably faster performance over the ATI Radeon X1900 XTX. This performance allowed us to enable Quality 6X Adaptive AA at 1600x1200 for image quality that is out of this world. All trees, grass, foliage, fences, edges on polygons looked absolutely incredible with no signs of aliasing. Once again we see the BFGTech GeForce 7950 GX2 would benefit if it had a 6X AA option by default because the performance is there for it. We tried 8xS AA but this was way to much of a burden for this video card at 1600x1200 in this game.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTE0NCw4LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

As you see, I am not alone.

For what is the 100th time it feels, I like 8xAA very much. It looks better than any AA ATi has to offer. Its just too slow for me to use in any sort of newer game.

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: Ackmed
You're now claiming that HQ AF is not better than normal AF?

ATI HQ AF vs Regular NV AF

not much better than regular AF

Its pretty easy to see the difference. Why not comment on the link I dropped?

Is that not easily noticable?

Could you have found a more deceptive screenshot if you had tried Ackmed?

Image1 Image2

The savegames, so people can duplicate the results for themselves...
savegame1
savegame2

 

[Ackmed]

How is that deceptive? Its the shot, and the only shot that HardOCP supplied. You says HardOCP is being deceptive? HQ AF doesnt make any difference on a flat surface, only on an angle. Which is what they used, to show the difference.

I dont have Oblivion anymore, I cant match those shots. You've already said you wouldnt trust me, so I dont see why I would even bother. Perhaps someone else will match the shot for you.

 

[Gstanfor]

Well if you can't see the angles in my pics you are blind...

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Is this a troll topic? Nope. When did I spread misinformation? Nope. Ive praised NV and ATi in this thread.

It's more of a "beating a dead horse" topic.

You are still trying to convince people that a paper launch is a good thing.

Many people think paper launching sucks.....get over it.

 

[Gstanfor]

Some extra images with some very hard to miss angles in them.

Image3
Image4
Image5
Image6

For the curious, FW 92.91 was used for all images posted by me in this thread, and I haven't even gotten round to installing the 92.91 Extreme-G tweakerizer for the driver yet.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Well if you can't see the angles in my pics you are blind...

Yes, yours has angles too. HardOCP focused on angles, as thats where HQ AF comes into play. I still dont understand how you can call me posting that pic deceptive. It an ingame pic, from a few week old evaluation, in a very popular game.

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Is this a troll topic? Nope. When did I spread misinformation? Nope. Ive praised NV and ATi in this thread.

It's more of a "beating a dead horse" topic.

You are still trying to convince people that a paper launch is a good thing.

Many people think paper launching sucks.....get over it.

I didnt try to convice anyone about anything. And I dont call it a didnt paper launch, the hardware was out when they said. A few days earlier in fact. Call it what you want, the got the cards out when they said. Thats the botton line. The facts I laid out were that both NV and ATi had cards out when they said, and they were not price gouged. I said both did a good job.

Yes many people like reviews, and hardware out on the same day. Per the poll on this forum, most people like reviews out a few weeks, before the hardware launches.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Some extra images with some very hard to miss angles in them.

Image3
Image4
Image5
Image6

For the curious, FW 92.91 was used for all images posted by me in this thread, and I haven't even gotten round to installing the 92.91 Extreme-G tweakerizer for the driver yet.

Again, I dont have Oblivion anymore. And you didnt post the save spots for someone else to compare.

I dont know why you just cant accept HQ AF being better. The HardOCP pics clearly show it. In a slower paced game like Oblivion, thats a rather large IQ difference. In a racing game or something else fast paced, it wouldnt matter as much. I full expect (just my opinion) that NV will have a check box feature like ATi, that upgrades AF quality. And have HDR+AA like ATi does. In a few months, this will likely all be a moot point. As of now, ATi's HQ AF clearly is better than NVs AF.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Is this a troll topic? Nope. When did I spread misinformation? Nope. Ive praised NV and ATi in this thread.

It's more of a "beating a dead horse" topic.

You are still trying to convince people that a paper launch is a good thing.

Many people think paper launching sucks.....get over it.

And even MORE people think paper launching is better... get over it

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
For the last time, drop it. You do not know what you think you do. Im sorry your pal got banned, he got himself banned. Perhaps he will learn a lesson.
As for your other attempts, you're not even close.

Once again, you're incorrect. Instead of proving something with facts, which you seem so keen to do with the 8xAA issue and whereas you normally drop links to support your words, you dodge this issue with your lies and say, "you're not even close" when in fact I have the very picture that proves you wrong.

When did I spread misinformation? Nope.

You misinformed and lied to people when you stated "redbox also PM'd me with more insults...". He never did and everyone can see it here:http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/2402/2003435050490277128_rs.jpg

You lied about the actions about another character, why should anyone believe you when you speak of any of your own actions?

Again, where is the misinformation?

This is comical. Again, here: http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/2402/2003435050490277128_rs.jpg after stating that someone insulted you through PMs when they didn't. I'll show you as many times as it takes for you to confront the issue instead of "fade to black".

Honestly, I don't know how you're still stumped after I've dropped the very screenshot of redbox's PM's with you and none hold the insults you say they did.

 

[ronnn]

Well if I can go off topic from the endless IQ wars... I am very impressed with a fanless solution for a card as good as the 7950gt!! Also am impressed with the x1900xt, 256mb - for the budget gamer is darn fast. :thumbsup: Lots of good reasons for buying either card. Both also seem to be in good supply.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

The X1900XT 256MB is cheaper, faster, and has better IQ.

Speaking of IQ, I came across an interesting comparison of R520 (x1800) vs G70 (7800) in ackmeds favorite game BF2. IQ remains the same between R520 & R580 as well as G70 & G71, so its still a perfectly valid comparison.

The IQ comparison was done by Tertsi - the same guy responsible for 3mood (a doom3 IQ enhancer for nvidia cards). It's in the form of a mouseover.

Link

There are also some nice AOE3 images I could post.

those screens look teriible.
i mean when i play BF2 on my x800gt it look ways better than either of those.
could be cuz i play at 1280x1028 and 4xaa 16xAF.

 

[Gstanfor]

I dont know why you just cant accept HQ AF being better. The HardOCP pics clearly show it. In a slower paced game like Oblivion, thats a rather large IQ difference. In a racing game or something else fast paced, it wouldnt matter as much. I full expect (just my opinion) that NV will have a check box feature like ATi, that upgrades AF quality. And have HDR+AA like ATi does. In a few months, this will likely all be a moot point. As of now, ATi's HQ AF clearly is better than NVs AF.

And my pictures clearly show that hardocp's comparison image is extremely exaggerated. (if anyone can give me a savegame of the location they used, i'll replicate their image on my machine). I've played with oblivion's built in HDR - it's craptacular, as is the bloom. I much prefer a user mod that provides HDR for any screenmode (not on in my shots) if I want to use HDR at all (frankly I don't think the game needs it).

 

[Sonikku]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
X1900XTX $331.99 @ newegg = kicks the 7950GT

X1900XT 512MB $299 @ newegg + $29 3rd party cooler = Kick the 7950GT but in every possible way

X1900XT 256MB $239 @ newegg also kicks 7950GT but :!

So why would someone pay $320 for a 7950gt i say :~

Because it's Nividia.

And we all know Nividia is always better then ATI. Just like how we know for a fact that computers with black cases are faster then ones with white cases.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: Ackmed
For the last time, drop it. You do not know what you think you do. Im sorry your pal got banned, he got himself banned. Perhaps he will learn a lesson.
As for your other attempts, you're not even close.

Once again, you're incorrect. Instead of proving something with facts, which you seem so keen to do with the 8xAA issue and dropping links to support your words, you dodge this issue with your lies and say, "you're not even close" when in fact I have the very picture that proves you wrong.

When did I spread misinformation? Nope.

You misinformed and lied to people when you stated "redbox also PM'd me with more insults...". He never did and everyone can see it here:http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/2402/2003435050490277128_rs.jpg

You lied about the actions about another character, why should anyone believe you when you speak of any of your own actions?

Again, where is the misinformation?

This is comical. Again, here: http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/2402/2003435050490277128_rs.jpg after stating that someone insulted you through PMs when they didn't. I'll show you as many times as it takes for you to confront the issue instead of "fade to black".

Honestly, I don't know how you're still stumped after I've dropped the very screenshot of redbox's PM's with you and none hold the insults you say they did.

Stop using facts against Ackmed....it's just not fair.

 

[5150Joker]

These forums are comical, the same 5-6 guys arguing about meaningless crap nobody else cares about. Do any of you actually play games or just sit here slinging dirt back and forth at each other all day? Even Rollo got tired of this and moved on.

 

[450R]

Come on, Joker. They're on a crusade to save the world from ATI's lowly 6xAA and nVidia's lack of HDR+AA. We should be thanking them for wasting their lives away!

Salute!

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
These forums are comical, the same 5-6 guys arguing about meaningless crap nobody else cares about. Do any of you actually play games or just sit here slinging dirt back and forth at each other all day? Even Rollo got tired of this and moved on.

Funny how certain people only moan about long debates when ATi and their supporters are on the recieving end, never a peep to be heard when nvidia gets criticized.... As ackmed would say - hmmmm...

 

[BFG10K]

I didnt say it wasnt an option.

Yeah you did, when you were telling everyone it's too slow to be used.

Having XT's in CF, HDR+AA was playable for me in Oblivion.

So did you try 8xS with SLI?

And many others here with even a single card.

Many others find 8xS playable with a single card. Or is that subjective again while HDR + AA is fact?

You can't have it both ways Ackmed.

As I said several times, 1920x1200.

For me, 54fps is borderline for playable, if you're playing online.

54 FPS is borderline for playable?

So I guess a X1950XT Crossfire with HDR + AA in Oblivion is unplayable since it only scores 51.6 FPS at your chosen resolution.

That means your X1900XT Crossfire rig is also unplayable, much less single card configurations, the fastest of which is only getting 31.1 FPS.

Also are you going to tell us 6xAA isn't usable like 8xAA since those scores already show 4xAA being unplayable?

Older games it to me where 8xAA was only playable. You have the same opinion, not sure why you disagree.

Like I pointed out my next batch will have more 8xS benchmarks since I hadn't fully tested the 7900 GTX at the time I ran those.

Quake 4 and Doom 3 is playable at 1600x1200 and Half-Life 2 is playable at 1760x1320. Also other games like Vampire Bloodlines that I don't benchmark are playable at 1600x1200.

Nobody's denying 8xS takes a big performance hit; the point is that it's far more usable than you would lead us to believe.

Also 6xAA can take quite a hefty performance hit over 4xAA in some cases, though obviously not as much as 8xS over 4x.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Is this a troll topic? Nope. When did I spread misinformation? Nope. Ive praised NV and ATi in this thread.

It's more of a "beating a dead horse" topic.

You are still trying to convince people that a paper launch is a good thing.

Many people think paper launching sucks.....get over it.

And even MORE people think paper launching is better... get over it

nobody thinks paper launching is better.
the ppl who voted for the option were prolly confused by the way the poll was worded.

 

[Gstanfor]

nobody thinks paper launching is better.
the ppl who voted for the option were prolly confused by the way the poll was worded.

no, fanatics apparently love it. Of course they kinda have to - it's all they've had from ati for a couple of years now...

 

[josh6079]

More companies than just ATI have had them Gstanfor, Nvidia included.

Originally posted by: Ackmed
...NV cant do it, and it sure cant do 8xAA in any sort of playable frames.

As others have stated, yes it can.

I tried it with a 7800GTX, and it wasnt even close to playable. It still wasnt in SLI.

I find this impossible to believe due to my two 7800GT's being able to perform quite well with 8xAA, especially in BF2. 8xAA would be well within the capability of two 7800GTX's. You either didn't do something right or are lying yet again.

I didnt say it wasnt an option. If you read it that way, its not my problem.

This is contradicting. You certainly claimed it wasn't an option when you said, "...NV cant do it, and is sure cant do 8xAA in any sort of playable frames."

I dont have any connection with ATi. Please dont make unbased claims like this.

It's not "unbased". They are making those acusations because of they way you post. Wouldn't the constant suspicion be a clue as to maybe alter a certain posting style?

Ive praised NV and ATi in this thread.

By saying that 8xAA looks good but is useless?

I didnt try to convice anyone about anything.

Maybe not "convince" but you certainly implied that the 8xAA option was unusable when several other members more credible than yourself came forth stating the opposite.

 

[Pantalaimon]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

nobody thinks paper launching is better.
the ppl who voted for the option were prolly confused by the way the poll was worded.

no, fanatics apparently love it. Of course they kinda have to - it's all they've had from ati for a couple of years now...

X1900XT and XTX were paper launched?

 

[Gstanfor]

More companies than just ATI have had them Gstanfor, Nvidia included.

Not to anywhere near the same extent. nvidia realises that if you want success financially and mindshare amongst consumers you product has to be readily available.