Nvidia GeForce 3 vs ???

[astroller]

Hi.

First of all, I must say I'm a novice at graphic cards! With all the hype of the new GeForce 3, I'm just waiting for the price cuts on the GeForce 2 family.

Tom's hardware wrote a very long article on the GeForce 3. One hell of a powerful beast it is! Tom mentioned that NVidia has again rule the hi-end graphics card arena with the GeForce 3. 57 million transistors! Are there no competitions against this card? What about 3D Labs oxygen and wildcats? Those are around $1000 cards! Silicon Graphics machines are powered by those right? I'm not anti-nvidia. Rather, I'm curious at this whole new breed of VGA cards! Any comments anyone?

What would be the estimated price of the GeForce3 when it's launched? And how much the GeForce2s will fall?

 

[DeathKnightMaF]

There are no competitors to the GeForce3 right now. 3D Labs Oxygen card, the last time I checked, only rendered around what the GeForce2 Ultra could do. Somewhere in the vicinity of 30 million triangles/sec (correct me if I'm wrong though). GeForce 3 peaks around 100 million/sec sustained. I'm sure there will be competitors for this card in the future, but Nvidia will probably already have something faster out by then. The estimated price, the last time I heard, would be around $499 for the GeForce3. The Hercules 3D Prophet 3 will be retailing at $550.

 

[UKtaxman]

Is it just me or is the GF3 a little underwhelming? From what I've seen and read so far it appears to have the same speed as GF2Ultra but with all the bells and whistles that come with a Radeon! I know the drivers haven't been optimised and that the features won't be used until 2005, but it is a bit lacklustre! From all the hype and the fact that it costs £500, I was expecting a real beast of a card. So it's got the speed of an ultra, the features of a Radeon and the FSAA of a Voodoo. So nothing amazingly new there then.
BTW is this the same Nvidia that was rubbishing 3DFX about FSAA not too long ago? hmmmmmm
and is this the same Nvidia that was rubbishing the Radeon feature set not too long ago? hmmmmm
Maybe I'm the only one, but I really get the impression that this will be a stop gap card, before they release their REAL next big thing. I hope so, cos on the strength of what I've seen and read it looks like ATI might come in at a lower price point with a comparable card and take back all of it's market share! But then maybe Nvidia could do with the kick up the arse to get themselves back on track.

 

[Deeko]

UKtaxman, it doesn't have that much improved performance in todays games, but once games start using all of these DX8 features, it's speed will be much higher than that of the GF2u. Just be patient.



<< Maybe I'm the only one, but I really get the impression that this will be a stop gap card, before they release their REAL next big thing >>


This is the real next big thing. The GF2u was the stop gap card that you are speaking of.



<< FSAA of a Voodoo >>


Maybe the same quality of a V5's FSAA, but it is supposed to do it twice as fast.

astroller, the next card from ATI should compete very well with the GF3. It just might not be around until the fall. And by then there may be NV25 to worry about. The oxygen card you mentioned is a pro card, they are more designed for pro apps than games. So they aren't really in the same class.

 

[Mykex]

 

[UKtaxman]

Thanks Deeko, but the problem I can forsee is what is there at the moment to make you want this card if the current performance isn't as great as we may have expected. By current I mean todays games, played today. Why would you buy it ahead of what will be a cheaper GF2u when they have comparable or better performance for the foreseeable future? By the time the games are out supporting it, surely we will be 1 or 2 generations along the Nvidia line?
Sorry to seem like a prat, but I'm just really dissapointed with what they've released. For that sort of money I was expecting it to do my washing, ironing, walk the dog and shag the missus!

 

[Deeko]

I agree with you that now is not a good time to get the card. By the time there are games that use this, it may be close to/already past the release of the NV25. So getting it now would kinda be a waste...I totally agree. Once there are games that utilize it, you will probably be able to get one for much cheaper. Or maybe even a faster card.

 

[Mem]

UKtaxman,Welcome to Anandtech forums,anyway your point is valid the good thing about the GF3 is the older Geforce cards will drop in price.

Being the Geforce3 has some new hardware features it will take awhile for games to use these of course,also when later cards are released by ATI,Nvidia etc with the same sort of features, by then hopefully we will see games using them so in a way the GF3 is laying the foundation for the future,pricewise I would wait since there is no advantage right now in having one.

 

[Finality]

<< What about 3D Labs oxygen and wildcats? >>

3D rendering cards are not good at one thing 'gaming' cards do well and thats textures.

Its probably the strongest point of all the 3d gaming cards out there and even though the Oxygen cards are very powerful for scene rendering its not fast enough for 3D gaming.

 

[UKtaxman]

Thank you for the welcome MEM. Am I right in thinking that this is a similar method as employed by Creative on their SBlive line of cards? I seam to recall them blabbing on something about it being reprogramable etc...Also will other chip manufacturers be able to use this method ala compatability without getting their arses sued?

 

[Deeko]

The features are DirectX 8 standards, so anyone can use them.

 

[Mem]

I would say there is some improvement over the Geforce2 more hardware features rather then pure speed right now as for reprogramable feature well we will have to wait &amp; see if this becomes really useful.As for patents on new hardware well Nvidia have been known to sue if they see other companies trying to use or steal their features,I also think they have it priced too high even when you take the high cost of memory chips they use.By the time DOOM3 comes out you will be able to pick them up at super cheap prices.

 

[DeathKnightMaF]

What I don't understand is why people are dissapointed with the performance of the GeForce3. You should not, not even the slightest bit. What you should be dissapointed about is the lack of games that take advantage of what it has to offer. The performance of the GF3 is roughly 3 times faster than that of the Ultra, with fill rates peaking at 150/100 million sustained triangles/sec. This is with T&amp;L and everything enabled. What I don't see people doing is taking games right now that are fully optimised for the GeForce2 line of cards, especially the Ultra, and using a GeForce3 on it. People have gotten too attached to 3DMark and also Quake3 as benchmark testers. Sure, they are really good, but Q3 is not FULLY optimised for the GF2 line of cards. Of course the GF2 Ultra and the GF3 will be about the same performance on all previous games, that is expected. Release some newer games and also use games that are out right now that fully support T&amp;L and all the other goodies. That's when you will see the GeForce3 shine. Take Midtown Madness 2 or Collin MacRae Rally 2 for example, both support hardware T&amp;L. Put the GF2 Ultra up to the GF3 in both of those games and you WILL see the difference. Fill rates are much higher and your fps will be a lot higher also on the GF3.

Overall, don't ever be dissapointed about the performance of the GF3. I agree, though, that the price is quite high. Like I said before, the thing to be dissapointed and pissed about is the lack of games that fully support the GF3 and DX8.

 

[UKtaxman]

Sorry, deathknightmaf, but I find it hard to agree with anything you've just written. I think your somewhat missing the point. What I'm saying is that it's dissapointing that the performance in todays games is so lacklustre considering what was initially promised, and if you honestly believe that it is 3 times as powerful as the GF2 then you need your head examined ala all those 3dfx zealots. I recall every chip manufacturer saying the same thing on release of their latest and greatest, and I'm sure in a biased theoretical situation it may well perform as quoted. But we all know that stats and benchmarks mean diddlysquat as they can be manipulated to show whatever you may wish. Hence a bench such as 3dmark shows the GF to outperform a Voodoo5 by 3 to 1, we all know in real life that this is not the case, but how many people have fallen for said benchmarks?
I have to admit that it does appear to be a top card, but considering what we have been promised it just doesn't deliver. Maybe as previously stated when the fully optimised games begin to appear it may all change, but I think we'll be playing on GF5 by then!hohum
Sorry if it sounds like I'm having a rant, but I was expecting huge things from GF3, and they just don't seem to have been delivered ESPECIALLY at that price point.

 

[DeathKnightMaF]

What you fail to realize is that what is promised is under the best conditions, ie. fully optimised games for GF3, full DX8 support in those games, and really good drivers. None of which are out yet. So I don't know why you are dissapointed. You obviously didn't know too much about it in the first place or you wouldn't have gotten your hopes so high. Sorry if I come off as sounding like a jerk or anything, but what I am saying is the truth. Believe me, they HAVE delivered, but what isn't delivered is the games and other programs (except for the tech demos, which show off the true capability of the card; GF2 can't do that stuff and not nearly as fast) that take full advantage of it. Yes, games that are out right now aren't going to show off what the GF3 can really do. Have you even taken a look at any videos of demos and other things that show off the GF3? If you haven't, you should. I do agree with the lack of performance with previous games, but like I said that is to be expected. Now that I think of it, though, with the power of the GF3 you can run at resolutions of 1024x768 and a little higher in games like Q3 and others with Quincunx HRAA enabled and get a completely jaggy-free scene with the fps of a GF2 Ultra at that res w/o FSAA enabled. Now that my friend is a performance advantage in games. You just failed to take that into account. I'm not dissapointed at all with the GeForce3, but I don't like the current price of it. That is the one of the ONLY things going against it right now, along with the lack of games.

 

[UKtaxman]

But anyone can write ea tech demo to make a card look great! Look at vllagemark to see what I mean. It was written for the Kyro and the Kyro still absolutely slaughters the GF3 at it. Admittedly the GF3 does do 3 times as well as the GF2, but it still lags the Kyro by a huge margin. This is because of the 10x overdraw used in that benchmark, but how often do you find a game with 10x overdraw? Looking at the real life games and comparing them to tech demo's makes little if any sense. How often do you see cards perform amazing in those demo's when their real life performance is lacking? Look also at the 3dfx t-buffer demo's, they looked absolutely awesome and far better than any GF, but how do they compare in true life?
I think what I'm trying to say is not to get intoxicated by stats and demo's as they are as you imply done in ideal circumstances. The real proof is in the pudding(as my gran used to say) How it performs in games today, and that is I'm afraid, very dissapointing.

 

[jaydee116]

Last weeks article on it said it would be $600. WTF??? Why bother. I am disapointed in it because of that fact alone. I just baught a new Radeon 32DDr ($88) and it is great. UT plays smooth with everything on, high details, 1024x768,32bit. 70fps with my Duron600@600. I like it. If it can handle UT like this to hell with the $600 card until games come out that can use it.

$600 is crazy. At least maybe it will drop the GForce 2 GTS and Ultra down in price and keep game developers coming out with new stuff.

 

[DeathKnightMaF]

Let me point this out again:

<<Now that I think of it, though, with the power of the GF3 you can run at resolutions of 1024x768 and a little higher in games like Q3 and others with Quincunx HRAA enabled and get a completely jaggy-free scene with the fps of a GF2 Ultra at that res w/o FSAA enabled. Now that my friend is a performance advantage in games.>>

I still don't see why you are dissapointed with it performance wise. With it's HRAA (high resolution anti-aliasing) and LightSpeed memory architecture it can out-perform any card out right now. And yes, even the GF2. Using it in todays games is anything but dissapointing. The only thing keeping the GF3 from rendering at top speed in todays games is the lack of T&amp;L and full optimization and also your monitor's refresh rate is a limiting factor. Your monitor can only go so fast. Even if you have an fps of like 300 or something, your monitor is not really running at 300fps and you are not actually seeing 300fps. That is what the card is doing, but not what you are seeing. I just can't see how you are dissapointed man. Bet you anything if you had one right now you wouldn't be complaining and you would also be groveling at its feet. That is your opinion though, and I respect that. Just seems a little crazy to me. I haven't seen anyone else complain about its performance except you

 

[Deeko]

DeathKnightMaf, it is NOT that much faster in most current games....I don't know about the new, t&amp;l taxing games like Giants, but your regular game isn't that much faster. The core is running at the same speed as the GF2u, and so is the memory. It has some little things, like the memory architecture and the HyperZ equivalent, and FSAA will be much faster, but in current games you won't see a huge performance gain. I'm not disappointed with its performance. It is designed to be ultra-fast in tomorrows games. It really isn't worth it's price NOW. Later, when there are games that take advantage of it, maybe it will be, but by then it should be cheaper anyway.

EDIT: Umm...what are you talking about 300fps for, it's not going that fast buddy...and if you turn off vsync, your fps is not limited by your refresh rate AFAIK.

 

[astroller]

<< 3D rendering cards are not good at one thing 'gaming' cards do well and thats textures. >>




<< Its probably the strongest point of all the 3d gaming cards out there and even though the Oxygen cards are very powerful for scene rendering its not fast enough for 3D gaming. >>



So that is the difference between GeForce and Quadro too? Why are these rendering cards a ton more expensive than 3D gaming cards? Are 3D gaming cards good at rendering scenes (say on LightWave or Maya)? Are there all-in-one cards, good rendering and gaming power?

 

[Dark4ng3l]

<< , with fill rates peaking at 150/100 million sustained triangles/sec >>



Hmmm fillrate is calculated in pixels not polygons. The GF3 has a lower raw fillrate than the ultra because it's clocked slower and has the same amount of pipelines.

 

[DeathKnightMaF]

Let me leave this thread with a general statement that EVERYONE should follow: There is absolutely no reason for anyone to hail or bash the GeForce3, be dissapointed with performance, or anything of that matter, PERIOD. It is a card for the future and you should not, in anyway, compare it to the previous lineup. You will NOT see this card shine until new games come out that fully support it and fully support DX 8. It is pointless to compare this card to the GeForce2 Ultra, because the Ultra is nowhere close to the GF3. No, I'm not kissing this card's feet right now, and I won't until I can see it with an actual game that was made for it. From this point on in the post I am throwing out general statements and I should not be accused of being an Nvidiot or zealot. Why do you think Nvidia made the chip with 57 million transistors? Sit there and look pretty? Don't count on it, they would lose more money than anything, and that is exactly the opposite of what Nvidia does. They put over twice as many transistors in it than the GF2 (which has 25 million). They are going to put them all to work with 5% used for cache and the other 95% used for computations. What kind of power do you think comes out of that??!! A whole butt-load of power! So don't whine about it not &quot;performing&quot; or it being too &quot;slow&quot; with today's games. It is a card of the future and should be treated as so. Stick with your GF2's and whatnot and you will be fine! When more games are released and the GF3's price comes down, then you can criticize it until your heart's content

 

[XGamer]

Is it just me, or is this &quot;which video card is the best issue&quot; just a little redundant.

 

[DeathKnightMaF]

Seems that way doesn't it? heh
I just had to clear some stuff up.

 

[UKtaxman]

Does anyone actually believe that this card will fall that much in price in the near future? I don't recall any other card being released at above £200, and before becoming obsolete being priced below £100. In fact the price to performance ratio with these new cards(not just nv20) is very poor compared to any prior card. I'm not criticising the card wholey for it's performance, more for the fact that they charge that much money for it! What other non Nvidia gaming card as debuted at over £200, never mind £400!!!!