I don't see how you can say if it's a flop or not. It hasen't even been released to the public! Time will tell, personally I wish AnAndTech did some AMD-System Benchmarks, but it hasent been done. Right now the driver's according to many of the review sites, aren't up to snuff. nVidia will fix, these problems soon enough. Does the card take a sh1tload of power? Yes. Does it sound like a hoover? Yes. What did you expect? It has DDR-II! This card is for the computer enthusiast, not the run of the mill user. Companies make the most of thier money selling products targeting big companies like Dell and Gateway. I am sure VisionTek, BFG Tech or MSI will come up with a quieter cooling solution. Right now, I am completely netural in the case. I am going to sit tight and wait and see what happens.
I agree whole heartedly. However, you can tell that Nvidia is going to want alot of money for this chip. And if you compare it to the 9700, heh it's just not worth more money. Not with the current benchmarks anyway. If you're right and Nvidia fixes some of the flaws, then perhaps people will pay.. I just don't see that happening. Only chips that will sell are the ones companies put in computers such as dell and gateway etc. People like us know not to waste money on something that's a tiny bit better than 2nd place.
Ruckas-
Ruckas-
GF Dustbuster is not a very attractive solution at all...
Firstly, its performance isn't particularly good.....
Its way too noisy, Nvidia must have been under the delusion that every one who brought their card moded there case with 10 + fans...
Its way too big..
its kinda late
Firstly, its performance isn't particularly good.....
Its way too noisy, Nvidia must have been under the delusion that every one who brought their card moded there case with 10 + fans...
Its way too big..
its kinda late
apoppin
Lifer
Have you LISTENED to the clips? . . . the one at Tom's sounds just like a DustBuster.
Nevermind the ear to the case; just being in the SAME room is gonna get annoying.
In terms of its performance per clock (compared to the 9700 pro), its way below expectations. A 500mhz GPU (and memory) BARELY beating a 325mhz one (and getting beat by it in some benchies as well as in 3D image quality) while being obnoxiously loud isn't going to win it many fans. So what happens when ATI ramps up the 9700 to similar clock speeds?
I don't think I'll be buying any of these chips. It sounds as if these cards are going to be overheating and trashing peoples computers left and right. 9700 and GFFX alike. I wonder what the life expectency for a chip that runs that hot is.. Jesus. 145o F? That's just retarted. If ATI fully decks out the 9700, my god... I can't even believe it. I have old crappy voodoo2/3 chips still running in my p2 computers. Got 50 bucks says niether of these cards will be running 5-6 years from now.
Czar - Smirk, your name was familure. But heh, hi anyway....
Ruckas-
Czar - Smirk, your name was familure. But heh, hi anyway....
Ruckas-
You are starting to sound a lot like imtim83's evil (not that he isn't) twin brother.
The first generation of a significantly different product is frequently slammed.
When the P4 came out everybody hated it. I said wait & see what happens, it's going to be fast.
Revive this thread in a couple months & see how you feel.
If I had $400 to spend on a video card right now, the GFFX would be my choice. It's as fast (or faster) than the 9700 Pro in pre-release form (read: Beta drivers), & will only get better from here.
Some of you are truly pathetic.
Viper GTS
I thought about this a bit more and I do not think that the 5800 Ultra will be a flop. It is meant for high end power users who squeeze every thing they can out of their computers (not saying people with the ATI Pro don't). It's noisy - but that doesn't matter to the power user who wants to see that extra 5 FPS or ~200 pts in 3DMark 2001.
The review we haven't seen that I think will be interesting is the reviews of the card just below this one, the 5800 (non-ultra). It will probably have a cooling solution similar to ATI's. It will be interesting how much core clock helps the GFFX Ultra compete with the Radeon 9700 Pro. All Anand would have to do is lower the core clock down to 400 MHz core/mem, which I think the non-ultra version will be released at.
I thought about getting an ATI card instead of the NVidia card in another thread later in June, but ATI's Linux drivers are constant source of problems to gamers (transgaming). I think I would rather have the GFFX non-ultra to save on noise, heat, cost, and driver headaches.
I will see in June how ATI's Linux drivers are and then make a decision.
The review we haven't seen that I think will be interesting is the reviews of the card just below this one, the 5800 (non-ultra). It will probably have a cooling solution similar to ATI's. It will be interesting how much core clock helps the GFFX Ultra compete with the Radeon 9700 Pro. All Anand would have to do is lower the core clock down to 400 MHz core/mem, which I think the non-ultra version will be released at.
I thought about getting an ATI card instead of the NVidia card in another thread later in June, but ATI's Linux drivers are constant source of problems to gamers (transgaming). I think I would rather have the GFFX non-ultra to save on noise, heat, cost, and driver headaches.
I will see in June how ATI's Linux drivers are and then make a decision.
Markfw
Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
- May 16, 2002
- 27,335
- 16,165
- 136
Viper, performance aside, how will you cope with the noise and heat of that card ? At ~70 watts of heat below your CPU, you are going to need to go to a new level of case fans. What is your plan ? I know they said the retail release would be quieter, but the heat is still there.
And the "pathetic" comment was uncalled for.
And the "pathetic" comment was uncalled for.
I want to see a retail and also want to see if anyone can oc it with a different cooling scheme.
I've called imtim a POS troll as well, so I'm an equal opportunity fanboy hater.
The noise is the only thing that would bother me, but the way my office is set up now it wouldn't matter. I have four PC's running 24/7 + an old rackmount switch that is a noisy biatch - There's a continuous hum anyway. It likely wouldn't make that big of a difference.
The heat + power draw doesn't bother me a bit, I have plenty of power supply capacity (TruePower 550) & my CPU isn't pushed very far so the heat won't make a difference.
Viper GTS
apoppin
Lifer
Some of us just might feel the same way about you . . . your weak attempts to defend the Dustbuster seem to rise out of deep disappointment of a true Nvidia supporter.
Have you actually played the sound clips from Tom's and Anand's site?
You would really order the FX despite ATI's "FX-killer" just around the corner?
If so, I salute your determination to support "your" company despite all the negativity surrounding its flagship launch.
EDIT: Why revive this thread? In a couple of months, the GF-FX will still be a noisy, power-hungry beast - and it will clearly be beaten by the new incarnation of the Radeon. Would you like me to revive the threads where I already predicted this Nvidia debacle?
True, but 2 years later, the original 1.5GHz P4 still stinks. The GeforceFX isn't magically going to transform itself into a 3.06GHz HT CPU just because it's been out for 6 months. What you buy now is what you will have months from now.
I see this comment posted over and over again. This card was supposed to be released months ago, and if the reports that the only thing to delay it was the inability to ramp up production of the .13u process then the engineering team has had near final silcon for months giving them plenty of time to work on the drivers. If NVidia comes up with a magic driver 6 months down the line as they have before, so what, by that point the competition will have pushed past the FX and at a lower price point than the FX is at now.
If I had $400 to spend on a video card now, keeping in mind the FX still isn't available and an actual "you can buy date" is still a mystery, I would wait to see what ATi has coming up as their next release is reportedly quite close. If I absolutely needed something, I would spend $200 on a 9500Pro then wait for the next big thing. If I'm going to spend state of the art money it better be for state of the art performance which the FX does not deliver vs the 9700Pro. That would not sit well with me knowing I spent $400 for a gamers card that barely beats and often doesn't vs the competition's 6 month old tech.
I dunno, the test results on anandtech and the the test results on Tom's Hardware Guide are totally opposite... whats the deal... who to believe??? Tom's always been trusted in the past.. He makes the GFFX look like a good card and andantech makes it look like crap....
I bet that new drivers help out this card by about 15-25%. Also I feel its probably the same as P4...its slower per clock when it came out but when new bandwidth is added it will scream.
I like both Nvidia and ATI by the way. Nvidia's drivers are better still though.
All the HUGE Cooling and power requirements the card has = NVidia had to over-clock their own card to match up to the 9700Pro.
If they ran it at a modest clock speed using "NORMAL" cooling... the 9700Pro would spank it.
NVidia is just behind... face it, you can['t be king forever.
If they ran it at a modest clock speed using "NORMAL" cooling... the 9700Pro would spank it.
NVidia is just behind... face it, you can['t be king forever.
MichaelD
Lifer
- Jan 16, 2001
- 31,528
- 3
- 76
My opinion is a bit simplier than most:
1. Who cares about it taking up the first PCI slot? Nobody uses that first slot anyway these days, we're moving towards integrated boards, ala NForce2 and many people (like me) have no PCI cards at all.
2. It's late. Very late. Super very late. Big deal. BUT, ATI has gained the top-tier enthusiasts dollars with the 9700 Pro already.
3. The thing is way too noisy. <---the biggest downfall. What's the rage lately? That's right; quiet systems. Rheobusses/Stealth Fans etc are more poplular now than ever. Like many, I've spent some money and a LOT of time getting my main rig quiet. No way I'm putting the equivalent of a Delta Black Label in there.
1. Who cares about it taking up the first PCI slot? Nobody uses that first slot anyway these days, we're moving towards integrated boards, ala NForce2 and many people (like me) have no PCI cards at all.
2. It's late. Very late. Super very late. Big deal. BUT, ATI has gained the top-tier enthusiasts dollars with the 9700 Pro already.
3. The thing is way too noisy. <---the biggest downfall. What's the rage lately? That's right; quiet systems. Rheobusses/Stealth Fans etc are more poplular now than ever. Like many, I've spent some money and a LOT of time getting my main rig quiet. No way I'm putting the equivalent of a Delta Black Label in there.
Personally, I don't see where the "no faster" comments come from. The FX beats the 9700 in almost EVERY proper benchmark by 20% or so. Benchmarks
Ignore the "perf aniso" results from the 9700 because those are not a fair comparison to the FX's "bal aniso". It's comparing the low quality anisotropic filtering from the 9700 to the high quality from the FX. Yes, in the image quality tests this made some sense, but nVidia's HQ still beat the 9700's LQ slightly, and the FX LQ problems seem to me to be just a driver issue, and knowing nVidia this will be fixed promptly.
So comparing apples to apples, HQ to HQ, the highest playable (60+ min fps) UT2003 benchmark is 108.6 fps (59.4 min) for the FX vs 90.4 fps (49.9 min) for the 9700. 20% faster. Speed advantage disappears as you increase resolution beyond 1024x768, but so does playability.
The noise and drivers are what I feel need to be addressed with this card. Speed is fine, driver optimizations and a fix for the LQ aniso issues will change the "same speed" comments due to improper use of benchmarks to "20% faster" like the FX really is. So the problem *isn't* lack of speed, and to call the benchmarks disappointing is to read them incorrectly. The problem *is*, is 20% performance worth a >70dB fan? Tough call.
I may end up getting a Ti4600 and waiting for the NV35 or NV40. I'm extremely disappointed with the sound issues with this card, since the performance is exactly what I was expecting, but I thought the fact the card takes an extra slot would allow for a QUIETER fan for cooling. If nVidia could improve yields/manufacturing in some way to reduce heat and allow for 5800 Ultra clocks WITHOUT the noise, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
Just to clarify why my only listed options are nVidia, ATi is, to me, not an option due to driver incompatibility issues. (Don't tell me about how they've "fixed them over the past few months". That's not true in my experience. I LAN game with several people with 9700 Pro's who have to install different drivers for each game we play due to problems. I vastly prefer the nVidia "install the latest and you're set" driver paradigm.)
Ignore the "perf aniso" results from the 9700 because those are not a fair comparison to the FX's "bal aniso". It's comparing the low quality anisotropic filtering from the 9700 to the high quality from the FX. Yes, in the image quality tests this made some sense, but nVidia's HQ still beat the 9700's LQ slightly, and the FX LQ problems seem to me to be just a driver issue, and knowing nVidia this will be fixed promptly.
So comparing apples to apples, HQ to HQ, the highest playable (60+ min fps) UT2003 benchmark is 108.6 fps (59.4 min) for the FX vs 90.4 fps (49.9 min) for the 9700. 20% faster. Speed advantage disappears as you increase resolution beyond 1024x768, but so does playability.
The noise and drivers are what I feel need to be addressed with this card. Speed is fine, driver optimizations and a fix for the LQ aniso issues will change the "same speed" comments due to improper use of benchmarks to "20% faster" like the FX really is. So the problem *isn't* lack of speed, and to call the benchmarks disappointing is to read them incorrectly. The problem *is*, is 20% performance worth a >70dB fan? Tough call.
I may end up getting a Ti4600 and waiting for the NV35 or NV40. I'm extremely disappointed with the sound issues with this card, since the performance is exactly what I was expecting, but I thought the fact the card takes an extra slot would allow for a QUIETER fan for cooling. If nVidia could improve yields/manufacturing in some way to reduce heat and allow for 5800 Ultra clocks WITHOUT the noise, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
Just to clarify why my only listed options are nVidia, ATi is, to me, not an option due to driver incompatibility issues. (Don't tell me about how they've "fixed them over the past few months". That's not true in my experience. I LAN game with several people with 9700 Pro's who have to install different drivers for each game we play due to problems. I vastly prefer the nVidia "install the latest and you're set" driver paradigm.)
That's just BS and you know it.
What your friends are doing is upgrading their drivers because ATi puts out new releases so frequently.
Spicedaddy
Platinum Member
- Apr 18, 2002
- 2,305
- 77
- 91
DOA
I'm so glad I got a 9700 Pro in September... I hesitated a lot before buying it, because I thought it was crazy to spend all that $ if it was gonna get spanked by NV30 in 2 or 3 months. Well, it turned out to be 6 months, and it's not getting spanked at all.
If it looks the same, who cares what they call it? I don't think it's a driver issue... Is Quincunx AA a driver issue also? (it's fast, but looks like crap)
I'm so glad I got a 9700 Pro in September... I hesitated a lot before buying it, because I thought it was crazy to spend all that $ if it was gonna get spanked by NV30 in 2 or 3 months. Well, it turned out to be 6 months, and it's not getting spanked at all.
If it looks the same, who cares what they call it? I don't think it's a driver issue... Is Quincunx AA a driver issue also? (it's fast, but looks like crap)
Originally posted by: gregor7777
That's just BS and you know it.
What your friends are doing is upgrading their drivers because ATi puts out new releases so frequently.
Uh, no, it's upgrading for this game then downgrading for another game then back up to some midrange driver version for a third. If they don't, their system freezes within an hour or so, or they get visual artifacts, or some other issue. It's not like nVidia drivers, you can't just install 3.0a catalysts and walk away. You need v2 catalysts for this and v3 for that and v1 for another and pre-Catalysts for yet another. It's rather annoying because it adds like 30 minutes setup time between each game we play for the ATi graphics card users to get their systems working. Gives the rest of us time to eat some chips and salsa or something I guess.
This is as close to personal experience as it gets for me since I won't put an ATi card in my own system. I'm afraid I trust my personal friends, and my own eyes, at LAN parties more than ATi fanbois on forums.
Sorry for being harsh, but you flamethrow at me, I fire back. BS, indeed, Troll.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter