SneakyStuff
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2004
- 4,294
- 0
- 76
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,003
- 126
So Rollo, when can we expect your next batch of Doom3 benchmarks as evidence of the 5800's superiority?
Rollo likes to inflate the 5800U at any opportunity and deflate ATi, often using exactly the same reasons to do both at the same time. His completely illogical and irrational behaviour is as predictable as the rising sun that comes up each morning.
dguy:
Very loud- not really. It's no louder than my 4 year old's case with a fan on the side over it's big OCer hsf, or a cdrom drive.
More expensive- who cares? You don't buy cards like this if you're counting pennies.
6 months late: Who cares? I got mine last month, a year after it came out.
Couldn't live up to it's hype: Errrr, yeah. Too legit to guit. Uh huh, you go, MC Video Card.
I'm not feeling charitable tonite. Your post "called me out", I'm cranky and on my way to drunk, so you get my opinion, albeit watered down to not violate the board's terms of service. If I posted some long manifesto about how your card sucks out of nowhere, you'd be defensive too.
It's nice you think so, but since you're using a crippled, low power 9600, I'll take it with a grain of salt. Good choice there- believe the Shady Days hype, did we?
Really? Did you ever think the cost of the 12 layer PCBs, low yield chips that run at 500MHz, 1.8ns DDR2, and big dual heatpipe copper hsf fan might have something to do with it? Kind of like when ATI quit making a good, but costly card- the 9500Pro- and started making a cheap, at best "OK" card- the 9600Pro.
Let's see:
Very loud- not really. It's no louder than my 4 year old's case with a fan on the side over it's big OCer hsf, or a cdrom drive.
More expensive- who cares? You don't buy cards like this if you're counting pennies.
6 months late: Who cares? I got mine last month, a year after it came out.
Couldn't live up to it's hype: Errrr, yeah. Too legit to guit. Uh huh, you go, MC Video Card.
Ever hear of advertising?
I see. And resurrecting a dieing thread to slam my video card is "mature"?
Well, it is kind of like the guy driving a beat up Hyundai saying"I've heard those Mercedes rust in 20,000 miles!" or the guy whose girlfriend looks like JarJar Binks saying, "They all look the same in the dark anyway".
When their opinions are wrong, and they have no basis in fact, I'll say it. It's a public forum, debate is expected. I won't shut up just because you don't like what I have to say.
Since you said it, and it's not true, why don't you post some quotes to back it up? I've never said the 5800 Ultra is anything but an interesting and rare piece of hardware I wanted to try on a whim. I've always said it's approximately as good as a 9700Pro, but not as good as a 9800/5900. If you want to tell lies about me, be prepared to back them.
LOL as the owner of a 9600Pro, you don't even know what speed like the 5800 Ultra has feels like. Yet, here you are, calling it "slow" while you hobble along with your crippled card.
I'm not feeling charitable tonite. Your post "called me out", I'm cranky and on my way to drunk, so you get my opinion, albeit watered down to not violate the board's terms of service. If I posted some long manifesto about how your card sucks out of nowhere, you'd be defensive too.
As soon as the game is released. If it's in the box with a 6800, that will be very soon. Of course, as I don't think the 5800U is superior to anything with 9700/9800/5900 in it's name, I'll probably just post "5800U runs Doom3 pretty good!"
Rollo likes to inflate the 5800U at any opportunity and deflate ATi, often using exactly the same reasons to do both at the same time. His completely illogical and irrational behaviour is as predictable as the rising sun that comes up each morning.[/quote]
Well, it's nice you think so, but there are more than a couple people who think your whole "It only suxorz half as much, so it's superior!" argument is a little nuts too.
(see tortoise vs cow analogy above)
Rollo, just because im USING a radeon 9600 pro, does NOT mean i have never used a faster card. FYI, a couple of my buds have faster cards, including the 5800U.
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But NOT because of how fast it is. If a card's worth was solely depended on how fast a card is, then nvidia would still make them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? Did you ever think the cost of the 12 layer PCBs, low yield chips that run at 500MHz, 1.8ns DDR2, and big dual heatpipe copper hsf fan might have something to do with it? Kind of like when ATI quit making a good, but costly card- the 9500Pro- and started making a cheap, at best "OK" card- the 9600Pro.
The key word here is "SOLELY" I will say it again/ If a card's worth was based SOLELY on speed, the 5800U would still be made.
The way the 5800U was disapointing may not matter to you, or me for that matter( i wouldnt mind having one) but the vast majority of the people believe it is too loud and too hot and too pricey and whatnot.
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But NOT because of how fast it is. If a card's worth was solely depended on how fast a card is, then nvidia would still make them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? Did you ever think the cost of the 12 layer PCBs, low yield chips that run at 500MHz, 1.8ns DDR2, and big dual heatpipe copper hsf fan might have something to do with it? Kind of like when ATI quit making a good, but costly card- the 9500Pro- and started making a cheap, at best "OK" card- the 9600Pro.
The key word here is "SOLELY" I will say it again/ If a card's worth was based SOLELY on speed, the 5800U would still be made.
The way the 5800U was disapointing may not matter to you, or me for that matter( i wouldnt mind having one) but the vast majority of the people believe it is too loud and too hot and too pricey and whatnot.
SneakyStuff
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2004
- 4,294
- 0
- 76
Well, it's funny how we have drifted so far off course, thanks to Rollo. Back to the ORIGINAL TOPIC what are your thoughts on the r420? What's all this i hear about a second revision 2 months after its' release?
You know, for some people without a large disposable income, counting pennies is exactly how one can afford the nice toys one has. As the saying goes "watch the pennies and the pounds mind themselves". I'm not sure, but I think the same principle applies even with american currency.
SneakyStuff
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2004
- 4,294
- 0
- 76
lol, that's a real knee slapper, you brought it up genius, you could have just ignored my saying that the 5800u was a dud, and posted something on-topic you know. FYI, you're arguing with a 15 year old, if that brings to terms the word "childish"
Let's just move onMost of the posters on this board should be saying it is the most important feature this generation based on their prior stance. Look at the BS we listened to for the last 19 months about PS 2.0 and we now are up to a whopping three games that support PS 2.0, two of them worth owning(and one of them already supports 3.0 ).
BS? As far as I can see, the DX9 Radeons clearly outperform DX9 GeForces with DX9 games. They may not play them fast enough to allow for 12x10+AA+AF, but they're playable. Most ppl bought 9700 Pros because it allowed them to play all their games with HRAA at 60+fps, a new feat. The fact that early benches indicated that the 9700P would significantly outperform the 5800U with next-gen effects was icing on the cake, but not totally irrelevant. If you're upgrading once every two years, surely it's a smarter move to buy the card with the most longevity, as best can be determined at the time?
SM3.0 will be important for NV40 if it runs well. If not, then it's just a marketing bullet point, like NV30's PS&VS2.0"+".
).BS? As far as I can see, the DX9 Radeons clearly outperform DX9 GeForces with DX9 games. They may not play them fast enough to allow for 12x10+AA+AF, but they're playable. Most ppl bought 9700 Pros because it allowed them to play all their games with HRAA at 60+fps, a new feat. The fact that early benches indicated that the 9700P would significantly outperform the 5800U with next-gen effects was icing on the cake, but not totally irrelevant. If you're upgrading once every two years, surely it's a smarter move to buy the card with the most longevity, as best can be determined at the time?
SM3.0 will be important for NV40 if it runs well. If not, then it's just a marketing bullet point, like NV30's PS&VS2.0"+".
My thoughts on the R420:
1. I like ATI 2d, and always have. In the absence of a determining factor like Doom 3 game in the box, or great difference in performance, I may well buy a R420 or it's successor in May
2. If the R420 is $100 less than the nV40, and offers 90% of it it's performance (like runs UT2004 at 100fps at 12X10 4X8X) I would buy it, because I switch cards a fair amount and always take a huge loss when I sell
3. If the 6800 ships with Doom3 in the box, and offers similar performance to the R420, I'm on that immediately.
As far as the successor ATI part goes, I think the consumer always wins when companies pump new tech out, so I'm all for it. I hope it competes well with nVidia's best so both companies prosper and compete for our dollar.
the only gripe i have about the 5800U is that it is about the same speed as the 9700 pro but it came out a year latter
i dont care about computer noise, just performance
i dont care about computer noise, just performance
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,219
- 54
- 91
Well, Anand's article seems to hint that ATI's seemingly hasty release of the "X800XT" only 1 month after the introduction of the "X800" is most likely due to ATI crapping its collective shorts after sneeking a peek at NV40's performance. They probably called every ATI technician at 3 in the morning on their red ATI BatPhones and shot the "ATI" logo into the cloudy sky for an emergency acceleration of the X800XT's debue. I can almost here the "Enterprise Red Alert Sound" echoing through all the ATI facilities. LMAO......
Those last few words were my own of course, but it probably reflects well what Anand was trying to say.
SneakyStuff
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2004
- 4,294
- 0
- 76
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
Isnt R420 going to ship with Half-Life 2? I am not sure, but I think i did hear that somewhere. If that is the case the whole point about having doom 3 with NV40 is not as important because we know which game is gonna have more depth and not just pretty graphics and dark corridors. Of course I am not confident in r420 shipping with half-life 2 but just wanted to make a point. And is there a rumour that X800Pro will have 12 pipes and on May 31st, X800 XT will come out with 16 thus equalling NVidia's? And who says anything about nVidia being faster without any proof but a pathetic 3dmark03 score.....no one said anything about 16 true pipelines either, knowing nvidia. Finally, even if R420 is based on the R300, we already know R300 was better than anything nvidia had to offer. Thus, ATI always did have a superior GPU. So how can ppl make an assumption that because NV40 has a completely new core it will smoke ATI when ATI always had better technology? Could it be that Nvidia might just might equal to or slightly beat AtI this time? I highly doubt the difference will be more than 10% in performance. Of course considering ATI has better image quality and less performance drop while having those features implemented...faster vertex and pixel shaders...hmm....but Nvidia has more stable drivers....this isn't getting anywhere until we see a review. Maybe the reason they have a new core is because NV35 did not beat ATI as they had hoped, and since ATI already has good technology on their hands they did not feel like they had to make drastic changes until R500 to be competitive. NO one said they wanted to be the best....because remaining competitive and draining the compeittiors resources on spending far more money developing a new core can be beneficial when R500 strikes and makes Nvidia cry....by then they won't have as many resources since they spent a lot more on NV40 than AtI did on R420....this is all just speculation and maybe even nonsense on my part, but just my 2 cents. cheers
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,219
- 54
- 91
OMG, your not gonna cry when the reviews come out if nvidia comes out ahead are you? I almost feel bad for ya. Almost.
And as for your very entertaining comment about how ATI has always had better technology? What planet are you from?
Nvidia ALWAYS owned ATI from RIVA128 on up until after the Ti4xxx series. ATI's first REAL competitor was the 9700 and it blew everyone away. Good for them. I bought one. Loved the performance, hated the compatability problems and drivers. Although they have improved. So, I will light a candle for ya on the 31st of May.
Oh, and ask AMD users if Nvidia's resources will ever be depleted.
I did get a laugh out of that. A possibility, maybe he had never used a computer prior to the introduction of the Radeon 9700?
I remember after I got my GF3Ti200 and saw benches that at the time showed it about equal to slightly less performance with the R8500, and the R8500 cost $250 Canadian more. Though, I was jealous of Truform. It's a shame they stopped putting that into the hardware, it was a nifty concept.
Such comments are always ridiculous, companies with as much capital and liquifiable assets as NVidia has do not simply disappear after one bad product launch. It took 3dfx a while to go under after a series of rather large mistakes (in hindsight anyway), and an outstanding product release by their biggest competitor (The GeForce DDR). NVidia and ATI are in an even better place than 3dfx was, since the bulk of their income comes from integrated chipset sales to major OEMs, and are not relying on the comparatively small gaming market to support their business.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
When I said always had a better GPU and a superior one that was in comparison between the current era as in over the last 2 years always had a better technology so then why change it when you are already on top? I should have specified but dont think i am that ignorant. All I am saying is let the competitor waste time and effort to catch up so you can beat them later when they least expect it.
NO I am not gonna cry if Nvidia wins I dont care who wins, as long as I get a good card and a one that is worth it based on price, features, performance and stability among other things. I am not trying to be on either side here. I'm just saying if you are dismissing ATI as a competitor this round you are making a huge mistake based on no facts that you can confirm either. If you think NV40 will be better good for you, but you have no grounds to prove that. That is an assumption. So don't talk like it is a fact until the reviews come out.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And chsh1ca:
....Oh yeah and about resources I never said they will run out of resources I said they will use up more of them (as in draining their resources, not depleting them -- read what the words say not what you want them to say). Listen the reason sprite, C-plus and any other variation of Coke products exist is only to take Pepsi's attention away from the main product being Coca Cola. That is a way for coke to make pepsi focus on these small product lines and make them waste more resources where it doesnt even count. Similarly, if ATI has a chip that is able to compete with Nvidias' let Nviida spend R&D now and ATI will save theirs for the next round since they have less cash. It only makes sense to improve the technology when you are forced to for these companies. If there was no competition you'd still have your Geforce 1. So if ATI does not see it integral to introduce a completely new core because a slight redesign keeps them competitive why waste the money?
Fuad said X800 might come with CS2. I think Valve may want to concentrate on getting HL2 out the door before promising CS2.
Note the date on this article reviewing the R9700Pro: August 19th, 2002. ATI has had a long run at the top, but don't fool yourself into thinking that they are going to get complacent and not bother until their competitor does come out with a killer card. If things are as they are shaping up to be, NV40 could take the performance crown by a decent margin (which explains why Anand mentioned the hasty release of the X800XT), and if it does, that has more business ramifications than simply losing a few dozen card sales to end users. ATI will have had far from two year reign at the top. Even the previous two years from now, ATI largely only spent three quarters of it (in terms of 3/4ths of 2 years, not three literal quarters) at the top. April through August, 2002 was still owned by the GF4 Ti4600.
Actually, it's to appeal to a wider base of consumers. Not everyone likes coke, many people like orange flavoured soft drinks, grape flavoured soft drinks, etc., etc.. It's to sell more, not to tie up Pepsi's R&D efforts. If you honestly believe that, I have to laugh.
Not likely, the vast majority of the money either of these companies make comes from integrated chipset sales -- read what the words say not what you want them to say.
Except they know they will have competition, and you need to stay ahead of the curve. These people are working on cores we won't see in use for another year or two right now, it's not as if they are sitting around bored waiting to see the benchmarks.
No. Would the cards be as powerful as they are today? Not likely. Would they be far more powerful than the GF1? Damn sure they would. Game development houses would not allow graphics technology to stall, and it was too lucrative a market for any of the major graphics players to stay out of it.
A wait-and-see strategy has rarely worked in the computer industry simply because things move pretty fast. I'd say of all the major technological parts to the industry, the graphics industry is one of the fastest paced of the bunch. ATI and NVidia both stated in the past they were going to an 18 month product cycle. For ATI, that means this next release should be an entirely new product. They are rumoured to have scrapped the original R400 core, and opted to 'slightly' redesign the R300 core. NVidia as well should be releasing a new product around now, and it just so happens that they are. Apparently, neither vendor has adhered to their 18 month new product cycle -- NVidia released the FX series way late -- basically what would have been the 6-month mark from their original product cycle -- and ATI appears set to rebadge a redesigned version of R300 as R400. Right now, while ATI and NVidia are preparing to release this coming line of products, they are also both simultaneously working on the upcoming successor to both these products (likely the GF6900, and the RX900), as well both companies will have another team working on the next core revision on (R500/NV50). There is no resting on your laurels in the graphics acceleration business.
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Well, Anand's article seems to hint that ATI's seemingly hasty release of the "X800XT" only 1 month after the introduction of the "X800" is most likely due to ATI crapping its collective shorts after sneeking a peek at NV40's performance. They probably called every ATI technician at 3 in the morning on their red ATI BatPhones and shot the "ATI" logo into the cloudy sky for an emergency acceleration of the X800XT's debue. I can almost here the "Enterprise Red Alert Sound" echoing through all the ATI facilities. LMAO......
Those last few words were my own of course, but it probably reflects well what Anand was trying to say.
thats possible, but keep in mind that the 9500 pro was relased only 2 months after the 9700 pro. the 9700 pro is in many ways what the X800 XT is and the X800 is the 9500 pro, since there will no longer be "pros" (XT now being and pros and the pros being X800)
therefore, it can be possible the quick release is due to:
a. the performance difference between R420 and NV40
b. ATi simply changed their marketing strategy
c. a combination of the two
i believe c to be most viable explanation
Originally posted by: ZimZum
Originally posted by: Pete
Um, ATi's new CEO is ex-ArtX. I think that's a small clue that ArtX is now in ATi's blood.
Artx ( ATI's West team) are the ones who designed the r300 and the original r400 which is now the r500. One of the smartest moves ATI has made was aquiring Artx.
Dave Orton (ArtX CEO) has been pretty much running ATi since ArtX acquisition with KY Ho (ATi Chairman & CEO, now ex) concentrates on OEM relations in Taiwan! atleast thats the story so i doubt recent promotion of Orton to CEO from COO is all that significant.
And ur right, ArtX acquisition has paid dividend for ATi in spades in operational sense anyways!
Akaz
LTC8K6
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2004
- 28,520
- 1,576
- 126
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: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter