Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 78

Thread: Gfx Card Test

  1. #21
    That Damn Good
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,602
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Not too bad of a program.



    Desktop: i5 3570k @ 4.5ghz, 12gb DDR 3 memory, 2x EVGA GTX670 4gb

    Laptop: Intel i7 3610QM, 12GB DDR3 memory, GTX 670m 3gb

  2. #22
    Emutalk Member sheik124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    $WinDir$
    Posts
    718
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Reznor, ATI always has the floor in DX9, its like a law of thumb now All I am saying is that HomeWorld benchmark is rather intruiging, imagine if they used shadow-mapping for the faster cards? And the reason anand said NV30 would p3wn R300 is because most people at the time thought that NV30's dual vertex shaders or whatever the heck they're called would perform great, but nVidia failed to properly utilize them

  3. #23
    Moderator Clements's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,510
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Wouldn't even bother comparing r420 and NV40 without properly optimised drivers and knowing the prices. They are so equal it's not like there is a clear favourite this time. They perform within 5% of each other most of the time, each beating the other card by a small amount. The NV40 is a new architecture so the drivers are in their infancy stages compared to ATi's relatively mature drivers since the core is modified from the 9800 core.

    On one hand you have ATi whose main goal seems to be having the fastest card in terms of speed of DX9 and AA/AF filtering for right now but at the cost of using lower precision for Pixel Shaders than NV40 and no SM3.0 compliancy.

    On the other you have the massive nVidia card that has more raw power (no AA/AF) with more transistors but slower filtering and DX9, but has much better performance in OpenGL right now and has support for SM3.0 and uses 32-Bit precison for Pixel Shaders. Lots of people don't like the idea of having two molexes or using two slots for it, but then the GT version does not and has 16 pipes vs X800 Pro's 12. The NV40 also has that video encoder thing(?) which lots of people are interested in. I can't see a *clear* winner here. It's arguable whether SM3.0 will be actually useful, but no one really knows other than the handful of games annonced that will support it.

    You could argue either way which of these strengths are more important, but it would be pointless since people all don't play the same games or want the same thing from a video card. Blindly favouring one over the other without taking into account all the facts from both parties = fanboy.

  4. #24
    Emutalk Member sheik124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    $WinDir$
    Posts
    718
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    i can't wait for the 6800 GT, i always hate buying the biggest baddest hardware, and the GT fits my needs

  5. #25
    EmuTalk Member Reznor007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Norman, OK, USA
    Posts
    666
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    X800 series also has hardware video encoding, and tests show it uses less CPU power than 6800 currently. While 6800 supports FP32, the benchmarks don't show it. Basically every shader using program detects nvidia hardware and uses partial precision shaders, which go down to FP16 or as low as FX12, while Radeon cards are strictly limited to FP24(that's all it can do). I seriously doubt anyone could notice the difference in FP24/FP32 since the numbers are per component(96bit VS 128bit precision). The only time you could really see a difference is if the shader is extremely long, so much that both cards would crawl trying to run it.

    And Clements, Geforce 6800 is actually derived from NV30. It's more of an upgrade than R360->R420, but it is still a derivitive design.

    The biggest difference between the 2 is that people already own X800 Pro cards(Best Buy has already had them), whereas I don't think 6800 cards will be available until late May or June at the earliest. And no, I'm not a fanboy...my 9600 was the first ATI card I've bought...and that was mainly because it was a very fast card for the price($75 new at Best Buy).
    Last edited by Reznor007; May 8th, 2004 at 03:16. Reason: Stupid spelling mistake :)
    Nothing can stop me now.

  6. #26
    Emutalk Member sheik124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    $WinDir$
    Posts
    718
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    best buy has x800 pros? **** 6800 i want a card now

  7. #27
    Moderator Clements's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,510
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    From my personal perspective, I'd go for nVidia for my own reasons. I have no DX9 games at all, other than DX9 plugins (Direct64, Pete's OpenGL2, Dolphin) and stuff, which aren't exactly that GPU intensive compared to say, FarCry (games which I don't really play). I have a few DX8 games that work well enough on NV hardware, but I play more games in OpenGL whenever there is an option to, and I have a *lot* of OpenGL games since I prefer the API over Direct X at the moment, although I don't use Linux. I'm really into id games such as Doom and Quake that I missed the first time around, I play both via Doomsday/glQuake/Tenebrae which are in OpenGL. SM3.0 would be irrelevant unless an N64 plugin utilised them, then it'd be useful to me.

    I'm into classic console emulation, particularly N64, so MSAA would not be as good as some super sampling modes to alias those alpha textures, particularly with Jabo's plugin. I don't video encode so that is also a moot point. ATi cards can have issues with PJ64 with the current drivers (not sure how many ATi owners this affects, but there's a fair few) so they can't work in 32-Bit mode.

    So, from this I believe that from what I like to do on my computer, an nVidia card would provide the best solution rather than an ATi card. It may not be even worth me upgrading for this generation since the card I have serves all my retrogaming purposes and more, so I'm happy. These 6xxx are likely to be too expensive for me to afford, so I'd even be happy with something like a 5900XT if it is cheap. Me getting an ATi would be simply idiotic since it's OpenGL is inferior to nVidia at the moment, less compatible with the emulators I enjoy playing, and has DX9 performance I'll barely even use with not one proper DX9 game on my PC. So I've weighed up the options and made a decision.

  8. #28
    Plugin coder / Betatester Falcon4ever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,249
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Thumbs up

    my ati 9600 pro...
    nice app doom

  9. #29
    EmuTalk Member Reznor007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Norman, OK, USA
    Posts
    666
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Clements
    From my personal perspective, I'd go for nVidia for my own reasons. I have no DX9 games at all, other than DX9 plugins (Direct64, Pete's OpenGL2, Dolphin) and stuff, which aren't exactly that GPU intensive compared to say, FarCry (games which I don't really play). I have a few DX8 games that work well enough on NV hardware, but I play more games in OpenGL whenever there is an option to, and I have a *lot* of OpenGL games since I prefer the API over Direct X at the moment, although I don't use Linux. I'm really into id games such as Doom and Quake that I missed the first time around, I play both via Doomsday/glQuake/Tenebrae which are in OpenGL. SM3.0 would be irrelevant unless an N64 plugin utilised them, then it'd be useful to me.

    I'm into classic console emulation, particularly N64, so MSAA would not be as good as some super sampling modes to alias those alpha textures, particularly with Jabo's plugin. I don't video encode so that is also a moot point. ATi cards can have issues with PJ64 with the current drivers (not sure how many ATi owners this affects, but there's a fair few) so they can't work in 32-Bit mode.

    So, from this I believe that from what I like to do on my computer, an nVidia card would provide the best solution rather than an ATi card. It may not be even worth me upgrading for this generation since the card I have serves all my retrogaming purposes and more, so I'm happy. These 6xxx are likely to be too expensive for me to afford, so I'd even be happy with something like a 5900XT if it is cheap. Me getting an ATi would be simply idiotic since it's OpenGL is inferior to nVidia at the moment, less compatible with the emulators I enjoy playing, and has DX9 performance I'll barely even use with not one proper DX9 game on my PC. So I've weighed up the options and made a decision.

    I know that nvidia's older OpenGL compliance is good, but have you seen their tests on the GLSL compiler test? It fails about 50% even on the newest drivers. You can download the program here http://www.3dlabs.com/support/develo...lparsetest.exe

    Radeons score around 93-94%. This is relevent because Doom3 is going to use GLSL.

    As for PJ64 with Jabo's plugin(and Rice's, and Orkin's)...works great here :shrug: Never had a problem with it. I also play Tenebrae(and other Quake builds...I've kind of started to like Darkplaces more than Tenebrae). nVidia's better OpenGL really only comes into play in professional programs though...for the most part ATI works just as good in games(and at the speeds both cards run GL games it doesn't even matter).
    Nothing can stop me now.

  10. #30
    Moderator Clements's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,510
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Yeah, OpenGL2 is still in it's early stages in the nVidia drivers so I'm not supprised it crashes. Pete's OpenGL2 plugin is the only thing on my computer that uses OpenGL2 (I don't like PSX, but I have the emulator) and by the time Doom 3 is released OpenGL2 support will probably be improved to ATi's current implementation. Older OpenGL "works good" on ATi but that's it. I might as well get nVidia card for the same money and get faster frame rates in my OpenGL games, and that's what I did, and I'm happy. ATi doesn't 'own' nVidia in everything.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. I'm updating my GFX card, please help me.
    By jessman1988 in forum TechTalk
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: December 19th, 2003, 15:11
  2. What gfx card?
    By Doomulation in forum TechTalk
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: June 17th, 2003, 18:17
  3. GFX Card Recomendations please?
    By imafreewoman in forum Project64
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: June 15th, 2003, 05:56
  4. Formatting on [QUOTE] or [CODE] needs adjustment
    By AlphaWolf in forum Suggestions?
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: February 1st, 2003, 02:31
  5. Gfx Card Suggestions
    By GrafX in forum TechTalk
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: March 14th, 2002, 05:09

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •