- Jul 3, 2005
I suppose the difference would be that the 2900 series came into the market way way way too late with terrible performance. Then along came the 3800 series which was an improved version of the 2900 series still didn't quite offer the performance that could have been but overall fixed most of the 2900 series short-falls. Now the 4800 series came along and did what no one expected, offered great performance for the money and toppled most nvidia offerings in it's price range; it still however isn't perfect (eg. needs fan fix, and powerplay issues.) At this trend one can only assume that ATI/AMD's next gen cards are just going to fix those issues while offering even more performance. Sure, they have been putting out more 4 series card's but it's to fill price gaps mostly; the only real exception being the 4850X2 which is unnecessary imo still none of this compares to nvidia's re-hash spree and bad naming sprees.Originally posted by: apoppin
What is the difference with AMD ?Originally posted by: Quiksilver
I'm starting to see what INQ hates nvidia so much....
Seems all nvidia does anymore is...
Cut prices of current gen cards and then a few months later put out a revised current gen card with higher clocks and a few extra shaders under the same name. Then a few months later bring in a new set of re-hashed cards with a die-shrink, higher clocks, better cooling, nd more or equal shader count's as next gen cards. Rinse and Repeat.
I would rather them just cut their losses and focus on a true next gen cards.
4870 is a rehashed 2900 series
.. letsee 2900xt .. 3870 .. 4870 .. the 4870 is not even 2x faster than 2900xt
I would rather them just cut their crap also and focus on a true next gen card.
My issues with nvidia cards:
8800GT (Should of never been a 8 series card)
8800GTS+ (The ones that had the extra shaders)
8800GTS 512 (Should of never been a 8 series card)
9600GSO (Essentially just a crippled 8800GT)
9800GT (Just a die-shrink of 8800GT; should have been the 8800GT)
9800GTX (Should of just been the 8800GTS 512)
9800GTX+ (Just an OC'd 9800GTX)
9800GX2 (Was unnecessary and overlapped performance for GT200 cards)
GTX 260+ (Just an OC'd 260 with a few extra shaders)
Now if I were to guess the INQ to be right about these cards they shouldn't exist either(seems the 270 is just a higher clocked 260+ and the 290 is just gonna be an OC'd 280; the dual-card I can't even gauge the power requirements for that thing.)
As I said before nvidia needs to focus on a true next-gen card instead of all these re-hashed cards to save their current gen cards.