why are some nv fans so hard on the competing ati products?

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Genx87
So you ask us why we like the GT. Then go onto confront our reasoning.

This is a great flamebait of a post you got going here.

quite the contrary imo. as stated above we've had some very good replies.

statements like:

1. Faster in 90% of the situations
2. Cheaper in 90% of the situations

I wouldnt call it cheerleading for a faster cheaper solution.

do not fall under the "good replies" category as it's simply false, and quite different from saying "i put a lot of weight in d3 results", or "i feel sm3 will have more benefit down the road", or even saying "because the GT wins a few more benchmarks than the PRO".. that is not reasoning, and i've hardly "confronted" anyone about owning either card.

people will certainly put more weight in the reasons which are important to THEM, and that's fine; everyone is entitled to have their own priorities. these types of opinions will certainly be useful factors in making a decision as to which to buy, or to further our understanding of the good/bad points of both products. that's a lot different from a typical fanboy response.

i didn't respond to one of your posts earlier, as my initial reaction would have certainly been negative (seems to me your posts are quite a bit more confrontational than mine), but i'll respond now. you don't need to justify your reasons for what you own. you certainly don't owe me, or anyone else an explanation. but at the same time, i'm not "confronting" you for buying what you have, and am not forcing you to read this thread. all i'm asking is if anyone feels like joining, keep it useful, and if you have some insight you'd like to share, cool! please do so. but there's no need to crap in here, regardless of which product you have.

 

[Genx87]

Sounds to me like you have some e-peen envy and are trying to justify your purchase of an X800 Pro.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Sounds to me like you have some e-peen envy and are trying to justify your purchase of an X800 Pro.

actually, it sounds like exactly the opposite.. you're the one trying to justify what you have, not me. i have both products, why on earth would i need to justfify either? you have a GT? great, you e-peen is huge! much bigger than mine! happy now?

but again, at the risk of sounding repetitive, you're the one who has been making confrontational posts, not me.

in an effort to maintain peace, i bow to your superior e-peen.

have a nice day!

😀

 

[Illissius]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

most likely because the tests you are referring to were done with far cry v1.2, which is still not avail to the public. the 1.1 results on my gt are disappointing when compared to my pro (opts enabled on both cards, since i can't disable them on my pro):

v1.2
1280 4xAA 8xAF

PRO - Average FPS: 55.58, Min FPS: 41.28 at frame 1293, Max FPS: 70.91
GT -- Average FPS: 43.36, Min FPS: 32.66 at frame 1849, Max FPS: 55.61

1600 4xAA 8xAF

PRO - Average FPS: 44.02, Min FPS: 34.97 at frame 561, Max FPS: 52.69
GT -- Average FPS: 33.12, Min FPS: 22.65 at frame 1848, Max FPS: 42.07

ut2k4 shows the gt having a slight advantage (which is consitent with those published on the web):
1600

PRO - botmatch dm-rankin: 172.54 fps, as-convoy: 73.48 fps, br-colossus: 122.50 fps
GT -- botmatch dm-rankin: 182.19 fps, as-convoy: 75.05 fps, br-colossus: 123.86 fps

doom 3 heavily favors the GT, as shown in key's D3 thread.

Hmm. According to AT's benchmarks, the two are very close at SM2.0 without AA/AF, and the GT falls behind somewhat with AA/AF on, but it's not a very huge difference. Maybe you should try different drivers or something, dunno, but it should probably be performing faster than it is.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Illissius

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

most likely because the tests you are referring to were done with far cry v1.2, which is still not avail to the public. the 1.1 results on my gt are disappointing when compared to my pro (opts enabled on both cards, since i can't disable them on my pro):

v1.2
1280 4xAA 8xAF

PRO - Average FPS: 55.58, Min FPS: 41.28 at frame 1293, Max FPS: 70.91
GT -- Average FPS: 43.36, Min FPS: 32.66 at frame 1849, Max FPS: 55.61

1600 4xAA 8xAF

PRO - Average FPS: 44.02, Min FPS: 34.97 at frame 561, Max FPS: 52.69
GT -- Average FPS: 33.12, Min FPS: 22.65 at frame 1848, Max FPS: 42.07

ut2k4 shows the gt having a slight advantage (which is consitent with those published on the web):
1600

PRO - botmatch dm-rankin: 172.54 fps, as-convoy: 73.48 fps, br-colossus: 122.50 fps
GT -- botmatch dm-rankin: 182.19 fps, as-convoy: 75.05 fps, br-colossus: 123.86 fps

doom 3 heavily favors the GT, as shown in key's D3 thread.

Hmm. According to AT's benchmarks, the two are very close at SM2.0 without AA/AF, and the GT falls behind somewhat with AA/AF on, but it's not a very huge difference. Maybe you should try different drivers or something, dunno, but it should probably be performing faster than it is.

one thing you need to keep in mind (and for that matter, what many ppl need to keep in mind) is that when referencing benchmarks on the web, it's often OLD information. for instance, the AT review you've linked uses NVIDIA 61.45 Beta Graphics Drivers & ATI Catalyst 4.6. results don't stay the way they are posted, and benchmark numbers will change over the course of driver and/or game updates.

my results refelect performance based on the latest publically avail drivers: cat 4.9b & forceware 6177.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Kobra
I was happy to see 3DFX go out of business .

:roll:

 

[Illissius]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

one thing you need to keep in mind (and for that matter, what many ppl need to keep in mind) is that when referencing benchmarks on the web, it's often OLD information. for instance, the AT review you've linked uses NVIDIA 61.45 Beta Graphics Drivers & ATI Catalyst 4.6. results don't stay the way they are posted, and benchmark numbers will change over the course of driver and/or game updates.

my results refelect performance based on the latest publically avail drivers: cat 4.9b & forceware 6177.

That's plausible... do newer ATi drivers really improve performance that much (I'd assume nV's didn't get slower)? I mean, that's pretty damn impressive, if they do.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Illissius

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

one thing you need to keep in mind (and for that matter, what many ppl need to keep in mind) is that when referencing benchmarks on the web, it's often OLD information. for instance, the AT review you've linked uses NVIDIA 61.45 Beta Graphics Drivers & ATI Catalyst 4.6. results don't stay the way they are posted, and benchmark numbers will change over the course of driver and/or game updates.

my results refelect performance based on the latest publically avail drivers: cat 4.9b & forceware 6177.

That's plausible... do newer ATi drivers really improve performance that much (I'd assume nV's didn't get slower)? I mean, that's pretty damn impressive, if they do.

it could be that the new nv drivers acutally lower the performance in the sm2 path (which is what is run in v1.1 of far cry) as these drivers have sm3 support enabled. i don't really know... and don't get me wrong, nv40 perf. certainly doesn't "suck" in FC, it's just my first hand exp. shows the PRO is faster, but that's no 'dis' towards nv.

as for ati increasing performance, ati has in several titles, albeit slightly; more in the area if < 10% for the most part - enuff to add some fps to benchmarks, but not enough to make anyone notice while actually gaming...

 

[nRollo]

Anybody else think this "Kobra" is somebody that banned and returns with a new IP to enlighten us with his hatred of ATI?

And if even one of you points out "Rollo, you're the biggest ATI hater of all!" I'm going to use the fact that I've purchased and used way more ATI cards than them like Rick James holding a hot crack pipe on his catch of the day.

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: DefRef
It's amusing to see all the ATI fanchimps who had no problems acting all Jeff K. when the 9700/9800s were outperforming the 5800/5900s, first get silent, then get defensive about ATI doing the same thing they accused Nvidia of doing: Guessing wrong and cheating.

The cheating is their "brilinnear" trick to game benches and the guessing wrong is how they figure zixels compared to the 6800s method - the 6800 is simply better equipped at a transistor level to make D3 run well and to deny that require the fanchimps to back away from their hooting and grunting about how Nvidia was stupid to do FP32 instead of the 'cheaper' FP24. Blah-blah-woof-woof.

The topic alone reads like this: Why don't more people love the ATI with the damp, soggy passion that I do?!? <sniffle> Boo-friggedy-hoo. Like you guys aren't going to sing the praises of ATI when Half-Life 2 comes out with coding specifically bribed to advantage them. If Fatso Newell hadn't been too busy counting the ATI bribe money and ordering the coders to make sure HL2 only runs good his master's cards, maybe he would've been able to get the game out a YEAR AGO and/or noticed that he'd been hacked. I picture him looking at his e-mail being read and the flashing "HAHA11!! LOL I OWN UR FAT AS!1!!1!1!1!11!! OMG" and making some sort of Homer Simpson noise and after scratching the genitals he hasn't seen in years, returning to counting the money.

The only difference between today's ATI fanchimps and the 3dfx zombies of the past is that ATI has much better business acumen. Their partisans are still angry sheep, but what else is new?

Bahahaha...Nice one retard...Bahahaha.... You need a sticky on this...
Wait some essentials
1.FX and FP32? Bahahaha
2.FX opt vs Ati opt? RFLMAO!!!
3.Comparing 9800pro with GT? Priceless!!
The worst kind of fanboyism you chimp is reflected when you look yourself at the mirror.

As for Cainam you are here since 2000 and you don't have a fvckin clue bout him?
Where were you when he was bashin ATI at it's glory? WTF?

PLEASE don't bring up the 3DFX retards.. I was happy to see 3DFX go out of business if nothing than to shut up those retards that worshipped it like some god and religion... Yea, the ATI turds are bordering on 3DFX fanboism, but not quite yet.

I think a ton of people were burned on the 9800 series, with the dimestore heatsink and fan, overheating issues, compatibility troubles, and overall lack of manufacturing quality present in them. I mean the 9800's only had about what, 8 months in the highlight and now they are absolute garbage compared to the 6800GT? It would all be very funny to me, except I lost around $150ish on my piece of crap 9800Pro I had to RMA 3 times, and finally gave away on Ebay for half the price I paid. I'll never buy an ATI product again. Oh ya, and their drivers STILL suck beyond sucky.. Nothing like having to swap drivers every other day depending on the game I was playing.. Losers.

Well don't buy one again and leave us alone fanboy...

ps: These words are coming from an GT owner. IMHO the better value for the buck this round..
And more futureproof... LOL
Reminds you of somethin Cainam? 😀

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Anybody else think this "Kobra" is somebody that banned and returns with a new IP to enlighten us with his hatred of ATI?

And if even one of you points out "Rollo, you're the biggest ATI hater of all!" I'm going to use the fact that I've purchased and used way more ATI cards than them like Rick James holding a hot crack pipe on his catch of the day.

Well comparing him with you I see in your face a fanATIc. 😀

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: jim1976
ps: These words are coming from an GT owner. IMHO the better value for the buck this round..
And more futureproof... LOL
Reminds you of somethin Cainam? 😀

lol.. do you REALLY want to start the 'futureproof' debate again? 😉

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: jim1976
ps: These words are coming from an GT owner. IMHO the better value for the buck this round..
And more futureproof... LOL
Reminds you of somethin Cainam? 😀

lol.. do you REALLY want to start the 'futureproof' debate again? 😉

OMG NO Robin Hood 😉

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Kobra

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: Kobra
I converted 4 of my 9800Pro/XT friends over to Nvidia camp this weekend alone.. They came over, saw the games on the GT, and spent the next 3 days trying to find them for sale at Best Buy.

I think ATI is going to take a hit in business with their x800 series, not to mention the 9800Pro overheating fiasco and poor quality control.

:roll:

even though you're on your third 6800 cause you already destroyed 2 of em? 😉

Uhh, WTF you talking about tard? I destroyed nothing.. I purchased several different 6800's to test them out, and decide which I liked best and which overclocked the smoothest. None were destroyed, did you pull that out of your ass? I returned them, because I was done with them, and found the card I wanted to keep. (BFG6800GT-OC). The only cards i've ever lost were 3 different 9800's and that was because of ATI's horrid quality control, and overheating issues at STOCK TEMPS... Nice try though, back to mom for more cookies.

As for Farcry, not sure where you guys are getting those pathetic benchmarks, running 1.2 i'm pulling in the 60-70FPS range maxed settings. I think people are spreading around false benchmarks.. Also, Farcry is buggy, and has some serious rendering issues and is NOT a good example of a benchmark. Nice try tho. 99% of all games, the GT owns hard, face the facts, we got a winner.

Why don't you slither back under the rock you came out from under?
Cainam is a thoughtful, intelligent poster.
Difference between him and you? If it was just you here, number of views=0. Cainam actually contributes to the community.
When it became known the X800s were forcing brilinear, he told us which games he could see it in and actually helped people?
You call people names and post tripe like "GT owns hard". Bah.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Anybody else think this "Kobra" is somebody that banned and returns with a new IP to enlighten us with his hatred of ATI?

I think it's your 4 year old. What have you been teaching him? 😉

 

[Genx87]

actually, it sounds like exactly the opposite.. you're the one trying to justify what you have, not me. i have both products, why on earth would i need to justfify either? you have a GT? great, you e-peen is huge! much bigger than mine! happy now?

but again, at the risk of sounding repetitive, you're the one who has been making confrontational posts, not me.

in an effort to maintain peace, i bow to your superior e-peen.

have a nice day!

hahaha um ok

 

[CaiNaM]

GeneralGrievous:

Anybody else think this "Kobra" is somebody that banned and returns with a new IP to enlighten us with his hatred of ATI?

I think it's your 4 year old. What have you been teaching him? 😉

LMAO.... but c'mon, don't pick on rollo's boy; not fair as he can't type well enuff to defend himself! 😉

Rollo:

heh.. thx 🙂

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

Anybody else think this "Kobra" is somebody that banned and returns with a new IP to enlighten us with his hatred of ATI?

I think it's your 4 year old. What have you been teaching him? 😉

Nah- he's mostly about Xbox these days, rarely ventures online.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

Anybody else think this "Kobra" is somebody that banned and returns with a new IP to enlighten us with his hatred of ATI?

I think it's your 4 year old. What have you been teaching him? 😉

Nah- he's mostly about Xbox these days, rarely ventures online.

buy he dead or alive beach volleyball so he can play it and not wonder onto the forums again.:wine:

 

[Shamrock]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: Illissius

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

most likely because the tests you are referring to were done with far cry v1.2, which is still not avail to the public. the 1.1 results on my gt are disappointing when compared to my pro (opts enabled on both cards, since i can't disable them on my pro):

v1.2
1280 4xAA 8xAF

PRO - Average FPS: 55.58, Min FPS: 41.28 at frame 1293, Max FPS: 70.91
GT -- Average FPS: 43.36, Min FPS: 32.66 at frame 1849, Max FPS: 55.61

1600 4xAA 8xAF

PRO - Average FPS: 44.02, Min FPS: 34.97 at frame 561, Max FPS: 52.69
GT -- Average FPS: 33.12, Min FPS: 22.65 at frame 1848, Max FPS: 42.07

ut2k4 shows the gt having a slight advantage (which is consitent with those published on the web):
1600

PRO - botmatch dm-rankin: 172.54 fps, as-convoy: 73.48 fps, br-colossus: 122.50 fps
GT -- botmatch dm-rankin: 182.19 fps, as-convoy: 75.05 fps, br-colossus: 123.86 fps

doom 3 heavily favors the GT, as shown in key's D3 thread.

Hmm. According to AT's benchmarks, the two are very close at SM2.0 without AA/AF, and the GT falls behind somewhat with AA/AF on, but it's not a very huge difference. Maybe you should try different drivers or something, dunno, but it should probably be performing faster than it is.

one thing you need to keep in mind (and for that matter, what many ppl need to keep in mind) is that when referencing benchmarks on the web, it's often OLD information. for instance, the AT review you've linked uses NVIDIA 61.45 Beta Graphics Drivers &amp; ATI Catalyst 4.6. results don't stay the way they are posted, and benchmark numbers will change over the course of driver and/or game updates.

my results refelect performance based on the latest publically avail drivers: cat 4.9b &amp; forceware 6177.

Why do you use NVIDIA "official" drivers and ATI beta drivers? Unless ATI has issued the 4.9b drivers in the last few days. To make it "even" Go to dell's website and get the NV 65.62 drivers. Quite a boost in performance. Here are some examples someone got and comapred them

3DMark03

61.77 - 12262
65.62 - 12391

AquaMark³

61.77 - 55942
65.62 - 54991

FarCry (Patch 1.2, 1280x960, Details@High, Water@Ultra)

Regulator

61.77 - 52.90
65.62 - 58.18

Research

61.77 - 75.66
65.62 - 88.36

Training

61.77 - 55.70
65.62 - 60.26

Volcano

61.77 - 74.34
65.62 - 85.65

These were with a 6800GT. You can also get these drivers at Guru3d, but Dell is the originator.

These next ones are with a 6800U

Far Cry SM3.0 tests 1280x1024x32 x16AF max IQ:

regulator

62.20
Play Time: 45.11s, Average FPS: 67.49
Min FPS: 39.64 at frame 2371, Max FPS: 104.93 at frame 1456

65.62
Play Time: 43.14s, Average FPS: 70.55
Min FPS: 39.70 at frame 2360, Max FPS: 111.59 at frame 1672


research:

6220
Play Time: 18.62s, Average FPS: 81.21
Min FPS: 59.67 at frame 98, Max FPS: 102.92 at frame 734

65.62
Play Time: 16.94s, Average FPS: 89.28
Min FPS: 66.13 at frame 119, Max FPS: 109.16 at frame 788


Volcano

6220
Play Time: 64.12s, Average FPS: 85.32
Min FPS: 51.35 at frame 853, Max FPS: 186.56 at frame 1778

65.62
Play Time: 59.91s, Average FPS: 91.32
Min FPS: 55.19 at frame 846, Max FPS: 180.40 at frame 1731

training

62.20
Play Time: 42.08s, Average FPS: 67.65
Min FPS: 38.66 at frame 1979, Max FPS: 132.58 at frame 1365

65.62
Play Time: 40.17s, Average FPS: 70.87
Min FPS: 38.93 at frame 1982, Max FPS: 153.53 at frame 1376

again these are beta, use at your own risk

ftp://ftp.us.dell.com/video/R83074.EXE. But Guru 3d has enabled sm 3 for ya.

 

[1ManArmY]

to each his own crap that is

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: ShamrockWhy do you use NVIDIA "official" drivers and ATI beta drivers? Unless ATI has issued the 4.9b drivers in the last few days.

because those were the latest drivers avail from the respecitve manufacturer's sites...

 

[GeneralGrievous]

shamrock: When i tried installing those it said they were for a quadro card and pci express?!???

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
shamrock: When i tried installing those it said they were for a quadro card and pci express?!???

Check out NVNews.net about those. A lot of people were having problems with those drivers and the 6800 series.

 

[Drayvn]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
And, FarCry really has nothing to do with Doom3. If you want the best Doom3 performance, you get a 6800 or 6800GT. If you want better performance in almost all the rest of the games out there with the exception of FarCry and maybe one or two others, you get a 6800GT. If you want better performance in FarCry, get a X800. It's really very simple to decide right now. I don't understand why you don't understand.

Fair enough. But I think what Cainam is trying to say is that even if 6800GT is "faster" in the rest of the games, the x800pro plays them smoothly enough anyways, so it turns out to be a # game and bragging rights. I think both of you guys make good points on the issue. From the numbers perspective 6800Gt appears to be a better buy. With regard to gaming experience, it is hard for me to tell since I dont own one. Ironically, the X800xt is actually faster than the ultra in most other games besides doom 3, so if only X800Pro could overclock to X800xt fillrate or be "unlockable," then ATI would have had a real winner on its hands. But seriously speaking, X800pro doubles the performance of the 9800Pro, so how can you be unhappy about that?

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

the mid-range cards are a different matter however, as if things stay as announced, nvidia will literally dominate that market - but that's a different subject 😉

I think ATI will introduce R410 to compete with 6600 series cards.

But the way I see things, with the winter refreshes and 6800GT and X800Pros prices falling near the $300 mark as the fastest cards occupy the $499 category dropping the x800xt and 6800ultra to $400 level, more consumers will jump towards the significantly faster mid-high end cards.

6600 GT is rumoured to be 20% faster (on average) than 9800xt, which is pretty good for $199 MSRP.

Is ATi's competing product for the 6600GT and 6600 the X800SE?, as nVidia seem to be bringing out 2 of that series, while ATi have 1?

Or are they using the X600XT and Pro to compete against it?