nVidia G92 cards to be renamed

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: taltamir
back YEARS AGO when it was actually a decent card.

Shens, fx5200 was never a decent card

I remember when I bought it in 2004 for my mom's PC for games like the ones from GameHouse which runs great even on Intel Graphics, it was from XFX and lasted 1 year and it stopped working, them my mom when to the store and bought another one for 120 bucks and I was so pissed off telling her "Why you didn't call me before, it was a rip off!!"

It couldn't even play Need for Speed Underground 1 without lowering details, it couldn't never pass the 30fps mark no matter what, at 1024x768. And for the worse, that card died 6 months later and then I sent her a 6800XT and it has been working just fine, she can even run Call of Duty 4 with most details on low and medium with no AA and runs just fine, after all she has only a P4 2.4BGHz, no Hyper Threading, talking about CPU bottleneck here. The FX architecture just sucks overall, funny thing that ATi has been doing fine with the same VLIW SuperScalar concept that made the GeForce FX a flop, Anandtech's GeForce FX Moratorium, what went wrong article is quite informative...

 

[AaronGA]

I try to buy another GFX card every 2-3 years, due to the increase in cost of everything else, and vs performance. ATM I have an 9800gt, but now I am in need of a CPU Upgrade, due to still running an old AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Windsor 3.2GHz OC@ 3.8ghz Air Cooled.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: nRollo
Are you saying people buy their video cards based on the name of the card on the box and nothing else?

If so, I don't have much sympathy for them.

The world doesn't owe anyone protection from themselves, and there is no truth in advertising law that applies here.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Well, there really isn't anything preventing consumers from doing a little research before purchasing any goods or services.
My wife and I recently purchased a new vehicle. But not before I researched it. Without even realizing it, we purchased one of JD Powers highest rated vehicles. Then we needed a new vacuum. Quick search for reviews on the web. We knew what to buy and what not to buy for the best price. Oh, and a LCDTV. We waited 6 months for the particular TV we wanted (or I wanted. My wife leaves the electronics purchases up to me) and for the price to come down or for a sale. I researched LCDTV's to exhaustion. And we got the most beautiful picture I have ever seen on any TV. It pays for any consumer to research their potential purchases. This day and age, where there isn't anybody without access to the internet, even if they have to go to a internet cafe, it is so easy to research. Those who do not, and walk in to a store and buy an item they have no clue about, will either get lucky, or be very unsatisfied with it.

You'll never hear me say that people shouldn't research their purchases, but that doesn't excuse or make right NVIDIA's intent to confuse consumers. This move could very well have someone who is diligent in doing their research comparing an 8800GT, a 9800GT, and a GTS 240 when there is no difference, although NVIDIA clearly makes a distinction between the 200 Series, 9 Series, and 8 Series on their site http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_family.html

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: taltamir
back YEARS AGO when it was actually a decent card.

Shens, fx5200 was never a decent card

it might very well be as you say, I really don't remember anything about the fx5200. it WAS years ago after all.

 

[qliveur]

Not again. Has Nvidia merged with Lucasfilm?

 

[Qbah]

I'd say nVidia should get an award for the FX5200. They fooled so many people it's not funny... This card was beyond bad. It was like changing from a '95 Jaguar to a '99 Fiat, cause it's 4 years younger Not to mention they renamed it to the FX5500 later on and people thought it was better and were still buying it...
I remember a friend of mine buying it and yapping what a great card he bought, that it's the FX ! Then I brought my laptop with a Mobility 9700 in it... ran his beloved CS:S on it... I could see him crying inside

With this renaming at least you get great performing cards... And as long as they stick to the scheme and don't mess it up, it's fine with me... But I highly doubt it

 

[Cookie Monster]

FX5200.. I think millions of those were sold to the unsuspecting customers.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
Wow Nvidia are really milking the G92 for all it's worth!

Well, they are very good cards. No doubt. Everyone will get used to the naming soon enough.

Does anyone remember some of the name changes from the past:-

Nvidia

Geforce FX 5500 = Geforce FX 5200
Geforce4 MX 4?0 = Geforce2
Geforce MX 4000 = Geforce2

Let's not forget about ATI:-

Radeon x1550 = Radeon x1300 Pro
Radeon x1300 XT = Radeon x1600 Pro
Radeon x1650 Pro = Radeon x1600 XT
Radeon 9200 = Radeon 9000

These are all of the ones I can remember but there must be more examples!

 

[Qbah]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
Does anyone remember some of the name changes from the past:-

Nvidia

Geforce FX 5500 = Geforce FX 5200
Geforce4 MX 4?0 = Geforce2
Geforce MX 4000 = Geforce2

Let's not forget about ATI:-

Radeon x1550 = Radeon x1300 Pro
Radeon x1300 XT = Radeon x1600 Pro
Radeon x1650 Pro = Radeon x1600 XT
Radeon 9200 = Radeon 9000

These are all of the ones I can remember but there must be more examples!

There's also the 9600 becoming the X600 and X300. Which implied they were the same gen as the X800 series which wasn't the case. The X800 was 4 times as fast as the X600 (if not more...). The proper midrange, X700, arrived very late and was pretty much overshadowed by the 6600GT. I remember ATi PR saying something that the X means the card is PCI Express That was some nasty BS too

However, the X1600Pro becoming the X1300XT... how is that misleading? A midrange product becoming a low-end in the same generation by changing it's name - sounds good to me.

The X1650Pro being the old X1600XT was fine too imo, since a X1650XT showed up being a cut down version of the X1800 cards, not the castrated abomination the "old" X1600-series was.

You also had the nasty 9000 being slower than 8500... Also 9200 slower than 9000 and 9250 slower than 9200... Not to mention one generation was actually 2... 9000/9500/9700, where the 9000 was only DX8.1. No biggie I guess, who would use a low end card for DX9? It's like buying a 9500GT and wanting to play DX10 stuff

nVidia has been pretty clean in the 5-, 6- and 7-series, at least in naming (blast you FX5200! ).

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: Qbah
since a X1650XT showed up being a cut down version of the X1800 cards, not the castrated abomination the "old" X1600-series was.

Actually the X1650XT was a castrated X1950PRO/GT which used the RV570 die, it had 8 pixel pipelines but 24 pixel shader processors (Same 3:1 ratio)

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: Qbah
nVidia has been pretty clean in the 5-, 6- and 7-series, at least in naming (blast you FX5200! ).

They made up for it with the 8- 9- and now GT200 series.

:roll:

 

[Qbah]

Originally posted by: Denithor

Originally posted by: Qbah
nVidia has been pretty clean in the 5-, 6- and 7-series, at least in naming (blast you FX5200! ).

They made up for it with the 8- 9- and now GT200 series.

:roll:

I never said otherwise

Frankly, the whole 8-, 9- and G- series situation is one nasty BS being pushed down our throats. Develop a card, give it a name and stick to it - that would be my advise.

Ohh and each time the team sits down to think up a new name for a card, do check if they're not high, mentally handicapped or drunk. Or all 3