Sounds like a loyalties war starting again. Just like AMD and Intel.
I agree. I wish it had some more features, such as Hardware T&L and support for DX8. But why pay $300 for performance you can get with $150? And yes, some areas the Kyro doesn't come out well. But lets look at some facts here:
Real world situations:
My friend has got a Geforce 2 GTS from Hercules. Nice card. Has TV out.
He and I are getting nearly the same frame rates on all we play. And in UT I'm wiping the floor. Something like Quake 3? Nope. Can't pull the punches he can.
But with Ultima 9 he can't even touch me.
(Systems are nearly identical otherwise. Same MB, he's at 900 I'm at 850, both T-Birds, same RAM, OS, etc.)
These experiences are repeated over and over.
So, some games just prefer they way things were. But something like Serious Sam? Now there I can get some pretty smooth rates as well. I love it.
The thing with the Kyro is that its use of bandwidth is nearly, if not, 100% efficient. You hear all these numbers thrown around about how wonderful the geforce chips are, what they can crunch. But what good are those numbers if you're starving them to death?? The technology can't keep up, memory speaking. Even DDR is struggling. Rambus shows ALOT of promise and I think it's only a short while before it's adapted to video cards. Or chips to the RRAM rather. But even then the latency can be horrid.
And what about the features? It's kind of unfair to bring those up simply because the GeForce 3, even compared to its predacesor the GeForce 2, is feature rich. And, might I add, is one of the only GPUs designed for use to take advantage of DX 8. Unquestionably, Geforce 3 is KING of the hill. There's no disputing that.
But I don't have $400 to spend on a video card.
There's only so much that can be done with memory and transistor technology. Limits are being reached and tricks are being played to get more performance, like Hyper Z-technology. But that won't last forever. Time to think smarter, not harder. I believe that, for the moment unless a newer design is thought up, the Kyro method of rendering is the next step in 3D rendering. Brute strength can't cut it anymore. To say that the Kyro is referbed crap is the same as saying a TNT2 is referbed crap. Both are tweaks come from older set technology. But it wasn't herald as such. (And YES the Kyro 1 did outperform the TNT. Its introduction came too late, however. Even the Kyro 2 can be considered late.)
For the time being, GeForce 3 reigns supreme.
And my Kyro 2 does everything I ever expected and more. I feel my investment was well rewarded. I do patiently await the Kyro 3. Interesting times are ahead. Either way, competition is good.
And if it can't perform? I'll have graduated with my E.E. degree by then and WILL have the money for a more King of the Hill kind of card.
"Suit the action to the word and the word to the action."
"Suit the Prophet to the task and the task to the Prophet."
"This is my Kyro 2, with which I am well pleased."
The Jolly Wizened Oaf!