Well now ive lost all faith for NVidia!

[waylman]

acceptance of your problem is the first step towards recovery.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: waylman
acceptance of your problem is the first step towards recovery.

I've accepted that you're a dumbass. Now you start your recovery.

Edit - Niiiiice blatant babe thread posting in OT. You suck at the Internet.

- M4H

 

[Regs]

Holy hell !

***Takes out his nvidia card and throws it out the window.
***Watchs screen go black


Cheaters rot in hell!

.... O yeah, I forgot to add that I hardly care. Companies lie when they market a product? NOooooOO.

 

[fluxquantum]

:frown:

 

[nRollo]

Cheaters rot in hell!

.... O yeah, I forgot to add that I hardly care. Companies lie when they market a product? NOooooOO.

LOL(really)

I ordered a MSI FX5800 last night, the one that's clocked at 400/400, but does not have the FlowFX on it.
Controversial 5800

Here's why:
1. I'm going NUTS waiting for the 5900, son's 4200 not cutting it for me
2. Saw Doom 3 ETA 11/03/03 on Best Buy website :*-(
3. $500 plus more than I want to spend on a card, I buy new one every 6-7 months
4. $500 plus a lot to spend on a card that doesn't perform a ton higher than $400 9800
5. Saw New Zealand reviews of 2 cards like this that say they OCd to Ultra levels, stock cooling
OCers down under
6. New Det FX fix much that was wrong with 5800s, new fan fixes rest.

Anyway, I had my hand on the "buy" button for the 128 MB Sapphire Atlantis 9800, then I noticed it's the one card of their high end they don't include RTCW with, which angered me. I didn't want to go back to the 9700, because I'd used one for the last 7 months.

 

[Guspaz]

If you have used a Radeon 9700 for the last 7 months, why buy a 5800? It's not any faster, for the most part. That's like upgrading from a PowerColor Radeon 9700 Pro to a Sapphire Radeon 9700 Pro

 

[jjyiz28]

this is a new thread about techtv's screensavers talking smack about ati's "cheatings" and don't even mention nvidia's huge "optimizations".
also insinuating that the image quality of nvidia's card is actually ati's.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=27&threadid=1060793

 

[Rogozhin]

Rollo

that 5800 isn't an ultra is it.

I would be willing to bet $5 that you will be highly disappointed.

I ran some benchies with Jakup over at nvnews and his 5800 ultra was about 1/3 slower in all the games we compared-raven shield, UT2003, battlefield 1942. This was with NO AA and NO AF and his system was better than mine.

Rogo

 

[nRollo]

Rogo:

that 5800 isn't an ultra is it.

I would be willing to bet $5 that you will be highly disappointed.

Well you're on for the $5, but consider I've done things like go from a GF1 to a Rage MAXX, or from a GF3 to a V5, just because I like to play with hardware.
Also, remember that all a card has to do to "satisfy" me is give me perfect animation at 11X8X32 UT2003, with some AF, while I play online.

I did the 9700Pro thing, was bored with it.

There's a lot of cool stuff about the nV30:
A. New drivers improve performance much
B. The New Zealand OCer site OCd two of them from different companies to Ultra levels (1000MHz RAM) with no problem. (and the Ultra has 9700Pro performance with new drivers, sometimes better)
C. It's new tech not many people have seen
D. I don't use AA at all. Even with the 9700Pro it was too slow for me in online gaming, I could really tell the difference in big maps/battles

I thought about buying an 5800Ultra, but there is the noise issue, and they're hard to find.
I thought about buying an 5800Ultra and water cooling it, but that is $600 for a VGA, and they don't last long with me.
I was planning to wait for the 5900, but I'm really getting annoyed gaming on my 3 year olds Ti4200 the last couple weeks. (even my wife was surprised, her first comment was,"I thought you wanted the one coming out next month?")
I promise I'll buy a Radeon or whatever is best if I am "highly disappointed"

 

[nRollo]

Rogo-
Your results with Jakup don't make much sense, you have a 9700np, he has a 5800Ultra:

Anand found the 5800 non Ultra faster than 9700 non Pro at 5/6 benchmarks w/o AA/AF, even with old broken drivers

Tom found the 5800Ultra faster than the 9700Pro at non AA/AF 90% of the time as well

Overclockers.com found the 5800 non Ultra equal to the 9700Pro at Non AA/AF

Same thing at Firing Squad

So if all these reviews, and I could go on, find the 5800/Ultra to beequal or faster than the 9700/Pro, how do you come up with your 9700 non pro being a whopping 30% faster than a 5800Ultra?
Like Johnny Cochran said on South Park, "It doesn't make sense."

 

[Rogozhin]

I know it didn't make sense rollo-remeber though he was using the prefx- drivers at the time.

I'll still be willing to do the $5

I am betting that you will be dissapointed in that it will be slower than your 9700 regardless of resolution and IQ settings-my proposition!

Rogo

 

[Rogozhin]

Rollo

I just looked at those links and since we disregard 3dmark, and other synthetic benchmarks (codecreatures too), I looked only at the games.

Mainly UT2003 since I remeber that you play that a majority of the time.

All sites show the 9700 PRO faster than the 5800-in some cases as much as 30% and others about 1%-20%

None of those sites show enough game benchmarks either.

Here we see the 5800 being slower in every resolution at all settings.

Hards review


Don't get me wrong rollo, I'd love to have an fx to mess around with and compare but as the cash flow is slowing down a bit, I can't justify it at the moment!

Good Luck

rogo

 

[Harabecw]

Rollo, how much money do you make each month?

 

[nRollo]

Rogo:??????

All sites show the 9700 PRO faster than the 5800-in some cases as much as 30% and others about 1%-20%

1st Link/Anand:
10X7 FX5800nu- 198fps R9700np-189fps
12X9 FX5800nu- 160fps R9700np- 138fps
16X12 FX5800nu- R9700np-

 

[nRollo]

Rogo:??????

All sites show the 9700 PRO faster than the 5800-in some cases as much as 30% and others about 1%-20%

1st Link/Anand:
10X7 FX5800nu- 198fps R9700np-189fps
12X9 FX5800nu- 160fps R9700np- 138fps
16X12 FX5800nu- 110fps R9700np- 93fps

FX5800 Non Ultra faster at no AA/AF, just like I said

2nd link/Tom
10X7 5800U 171 9700P 166
12X10 5800U 130 9700P 114
16X12 5800U 93 9700P 80
FX Ultra faster at non AA/AF, just like I said

3rd link/Overclockers:

10X7 FX5800 nu 130 9700p 131
12X10 FX5800 nu 110 9700p 111

I don't understand your post Rogo. Two of my links show 5800 non Ultras being as fast or faster than 9700 or 9700 Pro at non AA/AF, the other two show the same for the 5800 Ultra vs the 9700 Pro.

Did you even got to the links? Anyway, like I said, I mainly game online at fairly low res (11X8X32) and fairly low AF (2 or 4X) so I don't think I'll really notice the difference between the 5800 and the 9700Pro.

If I do, I'll upgrade, and maybe my 3 year old will have the worlds most infamous VGA.

 

[nRollo]

Rollo, how much money do you make each month?

Less than you probably think, but my wife and I are both degreed working professional people, so I'm lucky enough to be able to buy video cards. I usually get about half back what I paid for them too, so it's not like I eat the whole cost. (e.g. I bought my R9700P for $395 in 10/02, sold it for $225, am now paying $340 for 5800, which I hope to replace with nV40 at year end)

 

[Harabecw]

ooh man, send me a PM when you're ready to sell the NV40 for cheap
I myself am lucky enough not to have too many expenses so I can slowly upgrade, but nowhere near what you do.

 

[Rogozhin]

Rollo

I am looking at the 5800 non ultra.

rogo

 

[Rogozhin]

ROllo

I didn't know you meant the 9700 non pro-I had thought you owned a 9700Pro.

Rogo

 

[nRollo]

Rogo-
I did have a 9700 Pro, ATI from Best Buy. I guess what I was trying to show by those two links is that the non AA/AF performance of the 5800 non Ultra is right around the 9700 and 9700Pro.
As the new drivers offer higher performance, and better AF IQ that's on par with the R9700s, I don't think I'll be cursing my fate when I slap the 5800 in.
I'm actually pretty excited to test it. I haven't seen any American reviews of the new design of the 5800, that don't have the flowfx.

If I would've bought the 9800 it would've just been more of the same, 10% faster. (and mainly at AA/AF) The 5800 is totally new tech I've never played with.

You have a 9700np, do you think the performance is bad? Do you think I would have noticed if we had traded cards?

People point at the average fps of the 9700/9800 pro a lot and proclaim:
"I run 6X AA, 16XAF on EVERY game!"

I'm here to tell you that on UT2003, those settings, I don't care if average is 90fps. The FEEL of the game is WAY different, and you die WAY more, just to iron out some jaggies you never get a chance to see if you're a good player in a good game anyway.
Online fps is not about IQ, it's about staying alive. I'll run 6XAA when there is a card out the can do it fast enough to play.

 

[Rogozhin]

Rollo

I never ran my 9700 non pro at non pro speeds.

I am never content with the performance of my video cards (I always want them to run a little faster)

I flashed it to a pro bios and it runs 325/310 no problem-so I don't think either one of us could tell the difference

I can't play UT2003, with all details maxed anywhere above 2xAA 8x performance AF @1024x768, with good fps.

It will be at least the next gen and more than likely the 2nd gen of cards that can run the game full details AND 6xAA 16xAF.

Rogo

Let us know when you get the card!

 

[nRollo]

I can't play UT2003, with all details maxed anywhere above 2xAA 8x performance AF @1024x768, with good fps.

But...but..why not 6X/16X all sliders maxed like the other guy said?!?!?!?

LOL good honest reply Rogo. AA has it's place in RPGs and SIMs, but for me it's unwelcome in first person shooters. I think the guys saying otherwise either die a lot or don't play a lot.

 

[Rogozhin]

Rollo

Another factor is cpu limitation (i'm running a 1.9ghz Athlon xp 2100+) and I know i would get much better frames with a 3.06ghz p4 BUT I still don't believe that the game would be playable at 6xAA and 16xquality AF.

Rogo

 

[SSXeon5]

Originally posted by: RobsTV
SSXeon5,
based on your sig, your post has a slightly different twist than if the post was from
someone that actually "Had Faith in NVidia". Your post has nothing to do with your
faith in NVidia. You are ATi and Intel all the way.

To lose something means you must have had it first.

Why the big stink about NVidia and no one mentions the big performance difference between Intel and AMD in 3dm03?

Take a look at ATi's 9800 scores in 3dm03 with an Intel/AMD CPU range of 2900 to 3100 MHz.
AMD is beating Intel by huge amounts. (about 1000 points, and that holds fairly well at lower CPU speeds too).
The difference in CPU's used (AMD or Intel) is more than any difference in video cards used.
Yes, I guess if you had both an ATi card and an Intel CPU, you would try to find reasons to justify the deficiency.

Acually ive HAVE a geforce GTS 2 32MB and had a Geforce 4 Ti4400 128MB so i still liked them till i heard this FX bull.

Take a look at ATi's 9800 scores in 3dm03 with an Intel/AMD CPU range of 2900 to 3100 MHz.
AMD is beating Intel by huge amounts. (about 1000 points, and that holds fairly well at lower CPU speeds too).
The difference in CPU's used (AMD or Intel) is more than any difference in video cards used.
Yes, I guess if you had both an ATi card and an Intel CPU, you would try to find reasons to justify the deficiency.

I havent seen the 3200+ beat the 3.0CGHz CPU yet so whats your point? I dunno why u are starting flames i voiced my opinion and didnt think anyone else did this post cuz ive been out worken on my camaro and chillen with my friends alot more then usual. Im sorry and i wanted this tread to die.

Originally posted by: SSXeon5
christ i have been out of the forum loop for a wile and didnt see any posts latley ..... EXSQUESE MEEEE!!!! Just think that was really lame

DTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTDTTDTDTDTDTD

SSXeon

 

[Schadenfroh]

this thread should have been locked a long long time ago