• Pardon our dust as we work on some regularly scheduled forum maintenance. You may notice some missing features during this time. Thank you for your patience!

Kyro 2 the killer of nvidia ???

Page 17 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

HolyGrenade

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2001
3,359
0
20,780
0
I am not a fan of any manufacturer, but technology. As I have said many times before, the Tile based renderring is a good technology. But by it self it cannot sell a card. I think the Kyro 2 is what the Kyro 1 was supposed to be when that was released. It has been delayed far too much. Now you have to wait another month (according to the anandtech people).My point in the previous point was that this card does not compare to the GF2 Ultra or the GF3 as powervr2 was trying to promote it. It does provide good competition in the low end of the market, such as against the likes of the GF mx and the GF gts and the low end radeons.

From a technology point of view, the kyro tries to deny the graphics in games from evolving. Personally I don't think its sale figures will not be very different from the original kyro. A lot of the low end cards get sold as part of oem deals. The bigger oem companies have deals with Ati and nVidia. Some of the smaller oems even have exclusive deals with the manufacturers. Some of the oem's selling computers equiped with nVidia are advertising their computers as having "Graphics to the n'th degree." The people that don't know much about computers don't know what it is bu they want it. Its almost like intels catch phrase "Intel inside". People didn't know what it was but they wanted it. Besides, nVidia and Ati have established brand names that also helps the oems' sell their computers.

Performance buyers will not be buying the Kyro because of the future prospects with the lack of T&L and whatnot. The good people at anandtech say:

<i>"If, however, you must upgrade now and won’t upgrade again for quite a while (read: over 9 – 12 months), then the GeForce3 may be an investment worth looking at."</i>

9 - 12 months... 'quite a while'? In my book that is a short period to have a graphics card. I've had my GeForce DDR since its launch. Now that is 'quite a while'.

Since they are big fans of the Kyro 2, I would tend to interprete that phrase as saying, only buy a Kyro 2 as long as you can afford to upgrade again in 9 - 12 months time. You know, people like powervr2, who have a Kyro 1, but are upgrading to a Kyro2, and are likely to upgrade again when the next incarnation of the card is released and so on.

I still retain my original views of this card as being overrated and released far too late. I my self will be waiting to see the different flavours of the GF3 or GF4, different flavours of the next generation Radeon or power vr, providing they have T&L, Pixel and vertex shaders and a few other key features. After that I probably won't be upgrading again until cards with onboard Voxel shaders/Accelerators/renderrers are available. This is probably a couple of years away.


<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red>
 
G

Guest

Guest
I thought the Kyro II was supposed to do multitexturing and FSAA without any performance penalty. I C it was all bullshit.

Another great review of the Kyro in fast graphics! lol! it was in the bottom half of the cards the whole time! Even in the scaling. I thought it was supposed to be more scalable than the GeForce Cards! Ha!



<font color=blue><b>Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?</b></font color=blue>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Yeah I think you hit the nail on the head. The Kyro 2 has some very compelling technology when looked at by itself, but when you include the whole picture, there are too many strikes against it. None of the strikes against it seem huge--with the possible exception of no T&L--but when taken as a group they really drag it down. It was pointed out much earlier in this thread that perhaps the Kyro II is sort of an interim card--a way to get the bugs worked out, make some money, prove a concept and get publicity while on the way to a truly competitive card which includes things like T&L and vertex shaders. I hope it succeeds at this, at least, as I would love to see them make a top end, feature loaded card in the future. Three major players in the high-end graphics market would be good thing for most all of us. :cool:

Cheers,
Warden
 
G

Guest

Guest
yeah powervr needs a flag chip that would shoot for the high end. The problem is that doing that could also mean big loses for them !!
why 3dfx went bankruptcy ?
so they shoot for the main stream I think...

I will try to use more reasoning and less passion on my future posts !!
:)
I edited this post because it was really a crap
sorry holygrenade
:(<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by powervr2 on 04/24/01 05:51 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

HolyGrenade

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2001
3,359
0
20,780
0
Do you think I should even dignify powervr2 by answering to his rants?


<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red>
 
G

Guest

Guest
The bottomline is the Kyro 2 is a crap card. They've been failing from the beginning. The Kyro was a crap card. The neon was a super crap card. the pcx2 was crap and the pcx2 was again super crap.

It never managed to do anything against the competition of the same generation. No body calls the tnt2 a gaming card. a lot of the computers with the tnt cards go to big businesses. If you work then you will know, you do work on those computers. you don't play games on those.

If you bought a Geforce GTS instead of the Kyro, you wouldn't need to upgrade again. If you get the Kyro 2, you'll probably want to upgrade again straight away. you'll probably be better off with a ati rage 3d charger or something.

You try to show how good the kyro is by linking into the middle of reviews only to the bits that show the kyro 2 to be favourable. But most of us read the whole thing and find the kyro to be crap.

You were claiming the kyro 2 has no perfomance hits with fsaa or multitexturing, but it does. look at the reviews you posted your self like this one <A HREF="http://www.fastgraphics.com/reviews.php?id=37" target="_new">here</A>.

Atleast the posts from other Kyro people like teasy make sense. You are just chatting rubbish all the time, posting bs at the people who disagree with you. Any one in the right mind will avoid the kyro 2. you can go buy four kyro2s like you've been saying. We are certain that you are definetly NOT in the right mind.



<font color=blue><b>Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?</b></font color=blue>
 

rcf84

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
3,694
0
22,780
0
The bottomline is the Radeon2 is a the card that whips the Geforce3. Kyro2 and kyro3 cards will steal 3rd party card makers. While ATi radeon2 in many favors will the Geforce3. Image a Radeon2 64mb AIW.

Leader of the Anti VIA-Nvidia Army
 
G

Guest

Guest
there are many people out there that are very annoyed !

they buyed a geforce 2 that was not cheap... (a few months ago)
and now there are better cards for the same price (or even lower) (geforce 3 ,kyro 2 )

so they want (doing that unconsciously) to prove that they did the right choise...

of course there will be FSAA penalty I never mention otherwise !!!
but the penalty is not that great comparing with others !

I already stated that with a lousy cpu kyro don't do well you could mention that link but I could also put others <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1435" target="_new"> Reviews </A> <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by powervr2 on 04/24/01 05:04 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Yeah! thats why you're gonna replace your kyro 1 you baught last month with a kyro 2. lol!

<font color=blue><b>Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?</b></font color=blue>
 
G

Guest

Guest
lol
I can do that whithout losing all my money !!!

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by powervr2 on 04/24/01 05:05 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
G

Guest

Guest
So it is all coming out. The Kyro loses performance when you turn on FSAA. Also slows down with multitexturing just like other cards. but it also has problems with dx8. lol!

so basically it is a tnt class card with tile based rendering that scores low to medium frame rates. lol!


<font color=blue><b>Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?</b></font color=blue>
 
G

Guest

Guest
sorry about that !!
I will try to refrain myself in the future
;)
I edited my last resply to you ...

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by powervr2 on 04/24/01 05:53 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Please googalite stop lying here !!!

noko I am sure the prices will drop to geforce 2mx prices when kyro is out
;)
 
G

Guest

Guest
" 3DMark2001 is a DirectX 8.0 application, which uses DirectX 8.0 features that are not supported by a majority of DirectX 7.0 drivers. These features are therefore disabled on these older drivers unless DirectX 8.0 had specific knowledge that the driver supported these features. The KYRO card in question was not enabled in DirectX 8.0 since we could not verify that the driver would work in a stable fashion with these features turned on.
The problems you are seeing with 3DMark2001 can therefore be fixed one of two ways. Either a DirectX 8.0 driver can be written for the card, or a subsequent version of DirectX, if the driver is verified to work correctly, could enable the feature for the DirectX 7.0 driver.

Brian Marshall
Program Manager
DirectX Graphics Core API
"

They (microsoft) didn't test kyro cards so they disable this features !

" The KYRO card in question was not enabled in DirectX 8.0 since we could not verify that the driver would work in a stable fashion with these features turned on. "

bad microsoft bad !!!
 
G

Guest

Guest
Which bit is a lye?

The taste of your own medicine. its a bit sour isnt it?


<font color=blue><b>Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?</b></font color=blue>
 
G

Guest

Guest
lol
"So it is all coming out. The Kyro loses performance when you turn on FSAA "

less than other do


"Also slows down with multitexturing just like other cards. "

less than others


"but it also has problems with dx8. lol!"

that will be resolved before kyro 2 release, I was only refering that problem because many reviews are using directx8 and it's not fair.


there are many ways to lie the more common is telling only half the truth...

"so basically it is a tnt class card with tile based rendering that scores low to medium frame rates. lol! "

A tnt-2 card that beats sometimes geforce 2 ultra ? Curious ...


I also don't like to see reviews that compare traditional 16 bits with kyro 16 bits . that is not fair!
kyro 16 bits quality are close to others at 32 bits it renders always at 32 bits...

please googolite you must try to use some reasoning instead of bold passion (like I will try) it's only a video card nothing more !!!
;)<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by powervr2 on 04/24/01 06:12 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

OzzieBloke

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2001
167
0
18,680
0
Struth, the possums have their claws out tonight!

I think two things needs to be clarified here, and quick-smart.

To the folks who say the Kyro 2 is crap: What the hell kind of performance are you looking for in a card that is one half to one third the price of an ATI or a GeForce card, eh? Of course, compared to those, it is crap! But for the price/performance ratio, it's a brilliant card. OEMs would make a killing with it, and it would put any TNT M-64 to shame in a second.

To the people who are singing praise of Kyro 2: Overall, it can't compete with the GeForce 2/3 on raw performance alone... price/performance, definitely, but if you want the bells and whistles, you go GeForce, or maye Radeon 2 when it hits the shelves.

BUT

The tile-based rendering of the Kyro is an important step forward in the right direction, I believe. If someone can properly implement full tile rendering, properly, combine it with a programmable vertex shader and T&L unit, put some on-board cache on the damn thing, THEN you will have a card worth singing the praises of. Whether this will be a future Kyro or Radeon or GeForce is to be seen.

I realise people have opinions, but ah heck me! Opinions with a little thought are a hell of a lot more pleasant to read than straight-out flaming and bitching.

Edit: Add to that, enough rendering pipelines such as the Kyro has done, and better methods to deal with overdraw so that coders don't have to fart around like a wombat on golden syrup trying to get games to run respectably.

Cow with legs spread wide either dead or playing 'cello.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by OzzieBloke on 04/24/01 10:41 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
G

Guest

Guest
ok kyro 2 is not the best perfomance card!
but sometimes on higher depths it can beat an ultra
and that is good don't you think ?
 
G

Guest

Guest
An excerpt from the <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1461&p=2" target="_new"> latest Anandtech article</A> regarding the now infamous anti-Kyro II document from NVIDIA, in case you haven't read it yet :wink: :

<font color=red> The majority of the document was intent on presenting the Kyro II as an unreliable, borderline dangerous solution for any of NVIDIA's customers to offer. Unfortunately for NVIDIA, many of the arguments NVIDIA made in the document were grossly exaggerated. While the Kyro II does have its issues (we'll get to those in a second), they are not nearly as devastating as NVIDIA had made them out to be. However we all know that NVIDIA is one of the most competitive companies in the sector currently, and we shouldn't have expected any less of them, especially when threatened so quickly by nothing more than a value priced graphics accelerator from the creators of the Power VR.

The shock over the document in the community was expectedly great, but there is one thing that you have to take into account. <b> Hundreds of similar documents have come and gone from other manufacturers in the industry, </b> it's a part of their marketing in such a highly competitive sector. <b> Imagine the uproar that would be generated had the internal marketing documents of AMD, Intel or even 3dfx been revealed. While we all accused NVIDIA of taking statements about the Kyro II out of context (which they did), aren't we partially guilty for taking NVIDIA's marketing documents out of their context? </b> We all know better than to believe the information that was presented as fact in the document, after all, it was a sales tool and how many of us really believe the sales pitches we're given so often in our lives? Yet we were seemingly shocked to see it. This isn't to justify it; it's simply a different perspective. Just something to think about, <b>I'm more than certain a lot of companies out there have some internal documents that would look utterly disgusting if they ever surfaced. </b> </font color=red>
I guess this pretty much sums up my feelings about it.

Cheers,
Warden
 
G

Guest

Guest
the fact is that we have proof that nvidia done that!
we could not say the same for ATI or imagination.

I also found something on that article that can represent what I think about kyro 2:

<font color=red> From our recent review of the Kyro II you’ll realize that we positioned it not as a cost effective competitor to the GeForce2 MX, but rather an alternative to the more expensive GeForce2 Ultra or GeForce3. While the Kyro II clearly doesn’t boast the same feature set as the GeForce3, it is a good card to have in the interim between now and the point where DX8 titles start using the potential of the GeForce3 coreb</font color=red>
 
G

Guest

Guest
I read that too. The problem I had with it is this statement (pointed out earlier in this thread) that is found later in the article:

<font color=red> If, however, you must upgrade now and won't upgrade again for quite a while (read: over 9 – 12 months), then the GeForce3 may be an investment worth looking at. </font color=red>
If you read his statement that you quoted, while remembering that he considers "over 9 - 12 months" to be "quite a while," then it puts a different light on things. I have said from the beginning that the Kyro II should do fine, <i> for about the next year or so, </i> but I consider that to be a <i> short </i> time between upgrades, not "quite a while." I want a card to last two years if I can get it to, and that has been my complaint all along: I don't think the Kyro II (or the GF2 MX or the Voodoo 5) will be good for more than a year. The GF2 GTS and above won't run games with all the DX8 effects, but I think they will still be perfectly usable.

Regards,
Warden
 
G

Guest

Guest
OK one more quote from that Anandtech article:
<font color=red> And as you have undoubtedly heard, the R200 or successor to the Radeon, will not be released until the fourth quarter of this year. We actually commend ATI on this decision since the theory behind it is that by that time there will hopefully be titles available that can actually use the hardware. </font color=red>
I can see Anandtech's point about waiting until the games come out, but doesn't this have its flaws too? If it wasn't for the GeForce 3 and the Xbox, developers would be handicaped in getting DX8 games out the door--no hardware to do the final testing on. If you think about it, it's really only because there is some DX8 hardware out now that ATI can get away with such a strategy, as games or even DX versions don't come out before hardware is developed that supports the new features. (In the case of DX, the hardware only needs to be close to release to be supported by it.) But the DX8 hardware is out there so ATI's strategy should work for now. I just wonder if it won't come back to bite them eventually.

Regards,
Warden
 
G

Guest

Guest
LOL! Yes it is... Did you actually read the whole thing? Just curious.

Cheers,
Warden
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS