If I were to buy....

KRUNNCH

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2003
30
0
18,530
Okay ignore all of the recent "benchmarks" regarding HL2 with the 5900 and 5900 Ultra Series card by Nvidia. What would be the best brand of card with the most overclockability? I'm leaning towards the Asus, Gainward, or MSI brand but can't really decide. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Money isn't too much of an option until it reaches past $500.

Thanks,
KRUNNCH
 

coolsquirtle

Distinguished
Jan 4, 2003
2,717
0
20,780
5900Ultra SUX ><
get a GeForce 5 SX 1 lolz

anyways if ur really f***ed up in the head and want to get a FX, wait for NV38 AKA 5950Ultra, cause if that card doesn't kick ass, nVidia's screwed all over

Proud Owner the Block Heater
120% nVidia Fanboy
PROUD OWNER OF THE GEFORCE FX 5900ULTRA <-- I wish this was me
I'd get a nVidia GeForce FX 5900Ultra... if THEY WOULD CHANGE THAT #()#@ HSF
 

sargeduck

Distinguished
Aug 27, 2002
407
0
18,780
Unfortunately, I imagine that card will still blow. If I'm correct in what I've read, isn't it only a 5900 Ultra that is clocked higher? Kinda like the 9800xt, same core, higher clock. It'll be faster at dx8 games, but still suck the big one in dx9.

As each day goes by, I hug my 9600Pro just a little tighter.
 

coolsquirtle

Distinguished
Jan 4, 2003
2,717
0
20,780
THAT's NOT TRUE

I'M NOT LISTENING

LALALALLALALALALLALALLALALALALLALALALALLALALA

Proud Owner the Block Heater
120% nVidia Fanboy
PROUD OWNER OF THE GEFORCE FX 5900ULTRA <-- I wish this was me
I'd get a nVidia GeForce FX 5900Ultra... if THEY WOULD CHANGE THAT #()#@ HSF
 

RRAMJET

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2003
414
0
18,790
Why are there so many 12 year olds with Ati cards on these forums. You jerks havn't even played a DX9 game, all you've done is read some bench mark on some unfinished game that you really know nothing about. I really don't care what card is better, simply because we are only seeing the first few DX9 games that probably don't even use DX9 to its full capacity. Like, get a grip you petulent little fanboys, as if you pricks are gunna notice the difference through those half inch thick glasses anyway. Anyhow i'm not sure if your talking [-peep-] about ATI being better or if you really believe it. How many benchmarks have you seen been proved wrong or misleading in the past anyway. I'd just like to say i recon i know why all these ati fanboys are so opinionated, because they went out and spent all that cash on a 9600 or 9800 just to realise that the only difference these expensive cards have is that they run at a higher resolution and have some features that can't even be noticed. Now they are pissed cause they got sucked in by some good marketing so they come on here and make out how much better their cards are when in actual fact they probably dont even have a monitor that will use the slightly increase performance. What a bunch of nerdy loosers you guys must be, with your crappy ass bit of computer hardware that no one really cares about.

If he doesn't die, he'll get help!!!
 

ufo_warviper

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2001
3,033
0
20,780
rramjet, I own 3 Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4200 cards that I'm happy with that I just purchased. However, I am behind ATi's R3xx line 100%. But I beleive that John Carmack and Gabe Newell are credible sources. If John Carmack and both Gabe Newell claim there are issues with nvidia's FX hardware, then that's pretty much the definative truth, like Eden said. I realize the news about nVidia seems to shocking to be true. But we must face the reality of the situation: ample evidence supports the inevitable conclusion that ATi's <i>current</i> hardware is vastly superior to the FX line

In fact, tell me everyone, If next year ATi pulled the same stunts that nVidia pulled this year, but nVidia plays sound business tactics, who would y'all use next year? I would use nVidia or someone else.

None of the people you suspect wearing double-paned glasses are pricks or geeks. They are hardware enthusiasts that will generally praise the products that offer what they demand as a user. Few of us are Brand-loyal fanboys. We are performance fanboys. Many of us are price/performance value fanboys as well. We are fanboys of individual products That's right, when a new product enters the market like the next Gen of ATi or Nvidia, or even the XGI Volari, most of us will give each vendor's offering a fair evaluation after examining benchmarks and reading up on the features, and stability that each individual product has to offer. None of us are pricks dude, we just accept the truth for what it is. Indeed it is a difficult truth. It's a truth that I do not want to be a reality. If I want to live in reality I must accept the truth for what it is, regardless of whether the truth does not live up to my expectations. So what will it be? The red pill or the blue pill?

I am hurt that nVidia has cheated their customers this year. Apparantly, they are doing it on purpose, because every moment they go behind the scenes to cover their arses. My fury towards nVidia is based beyond the fact that they have an inferior chip. It forgivable to have an inferior chip if it is marketed and sold as such. Nvidia knew their cards were going to suffer in POS 2.0 calculations, so they cruised down the DX8 benchies with their hand relased behind their heads because they made sure their chips were very fast at DirectX 8 to intentionally give the false impression that their hardware was the most superior. Now that Driver "Cheaptimizations" have been discovered & several DX9 benchmarks exist currently, nVidia is receiving the backlash that they rightfully deserve. Customers deserve to get the performance and image qualtity that they pay for. Nvidia only cares about saving their own face rather than meeting customer expectations. It's sad, really sad. I used to have so much trust and faith in Nvidia as a trustworthy, and reliable company. With each passing day, more and more examples of Nviida's coverups appear across the net, and I'm not impressed with this. Right now, I feel so betrayed by nVidia that temporarily I am experiencing thoughts like "I won't reccomend or buy nVidia ever again." But that won't neccessarily be the case. I hope things change for the better, because the situation is really grim for nVidia.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!
 

RRAMJET

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2003
414
0
18,790
I'm not saying nvidia havn't stuffed up, all i'm saying is i'm going to wait until the full game is released and nvidia have optimised their drivers a bit more before i make a final judgement. Don't worry if nothing changes in the benchmarks i'll be the first to say nvidia are crap. I just find these people who are jumping to all sorts of conclusion before we have benchmarked the final broduct a bit painful to say the least. Its like argueing the Athlon 64 is gunna be the best before it has beed released or any software that optimises it has been released.


If he doesn't die, he'll get help!!!
 

coolsquirtle

Distinguished
Jan 4, 2003
2,717
0
20,780
i love you rramjet



Proud Owner the Block Heater
120% nVidia Fanboy
PROUD OWNER OF THE GEFORCE FX 5900ULTRA <-- I wish this was me
I'd get a nVidia GeForce FX 5900Ultra... if THEY WOULD CHANGE THAT #()#@ HSF
 

darko21

Distinguished
Sep 15, 2003
1,098
0
19,280
people who are jumping to all sorts of conclusion before we have benchmarked the final broduct

rramjet I hate to break it to you but future mark was bang on with 3d03 and their interpetation of the fx chip.. It is painfully obvious that nvidia has cheated and lied!! how many more benchmarks do you need? enough is enough. let it go Nvidia is second fiddle now... thats how the ball bounces. Hopfuly Nvidia will regain the crown soon but I would not count on it..
 

RRAMJET

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2003
414
0
18,790
Yea but see i play games not benchmarks, i let my eye do the benchmarking. AS most benchmarks don't mean shite in real world terms.

If he doesn't die, he'll get help!!!
 

lhgpoobaa

Illustrious
Dec 31, 2007
14,462
1
40,780
I dunno... it has a certain amount of validity... say for example we were talking about 3dmark as a benchmark for games *snorts*

But looses some strength with direct gaming benchmarks that cant be modified or hacked in anyway.

Who knows what the original poster wants...
Maybe just the thrill of having the highest overclock ever, or insane 20K+ 3dmark scores.


<b>I am not a AMD fanboy.
I am not a Via fanboy.
I am not a ATI fanboy.
I AM a performance fanboy.
And a low price fanboy. :smile:
Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.</b>
 

darko21

Distinguished
Sep 15, 2003
1,098
0
19,280
RE: I dunno... it has a certain amount of validity... say for example we were talking about 3dmark as a benchmark for games *snorts*

Come on the guy wants the best card ($500) Who cares if one or the other is 2% faster with dx8!! the future is with dx9 and I belive anybody reading these posts with an IQ over 70 knows knows Nvidia suffers alot under dx9.. WHY? because fx cards are not dx9 compliant... ITS THAT SIMPLE.
 

rain_king_uk

Distinguished
Nov 5, 2002
229
0
18,680
I think considering 3dmark03 was the first application to suggest the GFFX is weak at PS2.0 functions, it isn't as invalid a benchmark as NVidia wanted people to believe. Now it's becoming clear why NVidia sought to invalidate 3dmark03 - they wanted to shift more units before their little secret was discovered.


Edit: In fact if 3dmark03 got anything wrong it didn't put enough emphasis on the PS2.0 part of it's test.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by RAIN_KING_UK on 09/18/03 03:16 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
RRAMJET STFU!!

PLEASE!!


your SO full of crap! yes, i agree that jumping to conclusions is bad. but were not jumping anymore, the proof has been released, and many infulential people have confirmed what were saying!!

teh GFFX line is NOT worthy of our money! im not going to promote something thats been proven over and over and over again to be performing sub par compared to competetors! wtf dont you get about this!

-------

<A HREF="http://www.teenirc.net/chat/tomshardware.html" target="_new"> come to THGC chat~ NOW. dont make me get up ffs @#@$</A>
 

mulletkid

Distinguished
Dec 21, 2001
106
0
18,680
I agree with rramjet wholeheartedly. (Is there supposed to be a hyphen in wholeheartedly somewhere?) The gaming experience of REAL games and stability are my #1 concern. I just hope Nvidia doesn't actually come out with those new detonator drivers as they are right now. I just don't think the performance gain is worth the sacrifice in image quality / brightness. Unlike all the other times Nvidia came out with new drivers and all of the Ati fanboys whined about, "Well they sacrificed image quality Waaaaaaaaaa." There was never a noticable difference between one set of drivers and the next. At least to the naked eye while in motion. These new detonator 50s or whatever look rather awful. Oh and I also agree on the nerd isuue. I'm pretty sure Iv'e mentioned something to that effect on one of my posts somewhere. Several times in fact.... In one post....
 

darko21

Distinguished
Sep 15, 2003
1,098
0
19,280
The only fanboy hear is you!! ignoring the facts!!! and playing games... When I said nobody here with an IQ under 70 could ignor the facts about Nvidia and the fx performance.. I did not expect you would respond so soon.
 

rain_king_uk

Distinguished
Nov 5, 2002
229
0
18,680
I remember having a LAN party when the 9700 Pro first came out, someone with a 4600ti was trying to convince everyone that the games we were playing looked WAY better on his card than the 9700 Pro that another guy there had. We did some benchmarks to prove him wrong, but he wouldn't accept it - saying such things as "it looks smoother on my machine".

This reminds me of that :D

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by RAIN_KING_UK on 09/18/03 03:41 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

GeneticWeapon

Splendid
Jan 13, 2003
5,795
0
25,780
So....how did a few benchmarks tell you that games didnt look better on his card?
How a game looks is quite a bit different then what a benchmark can tell you. I've owned a 9500Pro, an 8500LE, and a couple of different Geforce 4's(not including tnt's & VooDoo's) and know in my heart that some games look better on one piece of hardware over the other. I know that a 9700Pro is wayy better then a Ti4600, but I know that some games look better on Nvidia's crap.

I help because you suck.
 

rain_king_uk

Distinguished
Nov 5, 2002
229
0
18,680
He was arguing the game ran smoother - FPS are a good indication of how smooth a game is really running.

In most benchmarks the cards were running such high FPS that the human eye probably couldn't even detect a difference in how smooth the animation was, even though the 9700 Pro was alot faster. Also in some others the 4600Ti had to have some bells and whistles turned down or resolution lower to match the 9700 pro. This suggests the 9700 Pro is going to look better since it is using more effects/a higher resolution.

Also he was claiming his card was faster, something which just wasn't true for sure. Thing is he refused to accept the benchmarks at all because he said he could tell by looking better than any benchmark.
 

Ion

Distinguished
Feb 18, 2003
379
0
18,780
Hmm... i would tell him to look at the "smoothness" when 6xAA and 16X AF are turned on and play the game. :tongue: