Well extremely good hardware we ll wait around 2 years till the price drops down and then will buy it.Anyway i cant understand why we need so fast cards,, with my celeron 373 and my riva tnt i can play most games in acceptable frame rates/visual quallity.
pe. i can play colin mcray2 in 800x600 with full detail or sacrifase or baldurs gate2 or ff8 or or....so let them make super expensive cards and laugh at them when they will have to downprize cause nobody really needs them!
ps.Imagive the next week i will take a geforce2mx...then i predict that i will only need a new processor for the next couple of years.
pe. i can play colin mcray2 in 800x600 with full detail or sacrifase or baldurs gate2 or ff8 or or....so let them make super expensive cards and laugh at them when they will have to downprize cause nobody really needs them!
ps.Imagive the next week i will take a geforce2mx...then i predict that i will only need a new processor for the next couple of years.
60Hz on a monitor causes flickering, cause its of light. 30fps doesnt cause blockiness, at least not to me
i have a geforce sdr and it gives 67fps in 1024x768x16 but the card locks on my abit be6-2 motherboard so im back to my riva128. the game is still smooth, just gotta run 640x480x16 at 35fps till i get my tnt2 vanta. geforces take too much power
i wonder if the views will go to 10,000 and the number of replies to reach 1000. keep posting the latest news. heres a bit that i recently acquired. its the pricing.
the NV20 will cost about $800, but what most dont know, its for the 128mb verson. the 64mb will be more like $500, which is line with the ultra when it was released. the nv20 will lower the nv16's price to $350 but itll be from 1/2 to 1/4 the speed of the nv20. you get what you pay for
the NV20 will cost about $800, but what most dont know, its for the 128mb verson. the 64mb will be more like $500, which is line with the ultra when it was released. the nv20 will lower the nv16's price to $350 but itll be from 1/2 to 1/4 the speed of the nv20. you get what you pay for
Stred,
If you are running Sacrifice on a celery 373 and a TNT you are missing out on 9/10 of what the game has to offer, graphically that is. If that is OK with you then go with it. I won't tell you how to enjoy your games
But it is FAR from being any kind of proof that the rest of us don't need (er, well, WANT) new hardware so we can run it at 1280x1024x32 with FSAA. In fact, I'm doubtful that your current setup could play Crimson Skies, even at the lowest graphical settings, at a good enough framerate to avoid crashing in the obstacle courses. Again, that may not be your cup o' tea, but it is mine
Cheers,
Warden
(edited for typos)
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by warden on 01/29/01 04:59 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
If you are running Sacrifice on a celery 373 and a TNT you are missing out on 9/10 of what the game has to offer, graphically that is. If that is OK with you then go with it. I won't tell you how to enjoy your games
But it is FAR from being any kind of proof that the rest of us don't need (er, well, WANT) new hardware so we can run it at 1280x1024x32 with FSAA. In fact, I'm doubtful that your current setup could play Crimson Skies, even at the lowest graphical settings, at a good enough framerate to avoid crashing in the obstacle courses. Again, that may not be your cup o' tea, but it is mine Cheers,
Warden
(edited for typos)
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by warden on 01/29/01 04:59 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
Warden.
I really dont care to run any game in 1280x1024 cause i have only a 15' monitor so this resulotion would be unplayable.But Sacriface in my pc has really beutifull graphics and very smooth,unfortunately i have uninstalled it right now so i dont recall in what resolution i play it but let me explain to you something.All these games that are now in the market are optimazed for rivaTNT 1 or 2 cause when they started to made them the rivaTNT was the top so the goal for every game producer was in about 2 years that riva tnt will be in everyones pc the game will run in any pc for most sales.So except resolution thats a easy feuture to add in any game's 3d machine none of the new games are made for a geforce(no T&L...).I havent played crimson skies to answer you but i also dont care about it cause i am mainly a rpg player.I didnt say that all of you that have superior graphic card are stupid but i say about being practical,stop buying any new card the second it gets out,its uselles.For example now its the geforce era,all the games for 2 and more years will play excelent in geforces.
I really dont care to run any game in 1280x1024 cause i have only a 15' monitor so this resulotion would be unplayable.But Sacriface in my pc has really beutifull graphics and very smooth,unfortunately i have uninstalled it right now so i dont recall in what resolution i play it but let me explain to you something.All these games that are now in the market are optimazed for rivaTNT 1 or 2 cause when they started to made them the rivaTNT was the top so the goal for every game producer was in about 2 years that riva tnt will be in everyones pc the game will run in any pc for most sales.So except resolution thats a easy feuture to add in any game's 3d machine none of the new games are made for a geforce(no T&L...).I havent played crimson skies to answer you but i also dont care about it cause i am mainly a rpg player.I didnt say that all of you that have superior graphic card are stupid but i say about being practical,stop buying any new card the second it gets out,its uselles.For example now its the geforce era,all the games for 2 and more years will play excelent in geforces.
tfbww
Distinguished
- Jan 3, 2001
- 211
- 0
- 18,680
OK, I'm finding this hard to believe (no offense). I have a pii333 w/ a TNT (slightly OC'd) and there is no way you could play Alice, for instance. I similarly doubt that Combat Flight Simulator 2, Giants, or Halo (upon its release) would run well, if at all. I guess when you push everything down to 640x480 and all options off it's "acceptable" but it isn't "good." Certainly your card and monitor are matched but, alas, there is a world of joy out there that we both are missing (Alice @ 1600x1200 & 32bit color).
Did I mention that Halo wouldn't run on it either?
----
Mmmmm... open faced club sand wedge
Did I mention that Halo wouldn't run on it either?
----
Mmmmm... open faced club sand wedge
Stred,
Whoa, hey, no offence meant man. Sacrifice has new engine technology that scales the graphical detail, especially polygon counts, on the fly according to what your system can handle. So my comment about missing 9/10 of the graphics was literal. Beautiful the graphics may be, and smooth (because the engine automatically makes sure they are), but there is a LOT you are not seeing. Try it out on a high end gaming machine before you condemn the benefit of having more graphical muscle behind it (including a bigger monitor to take advantage of it).
Also, and again without meaning any offence, I disagree with some of your other points. First, games are written to run ACCEPTABLY on 2 year old graphics cards (so they hit a wide audience), but they can usually take advantage of much newer hardware if you have it. Consider Quake 3: Running every level at 1024x768x32 (the minimum for GOOD graphics in most peoples opinion) was not possible with the current graphics cards when Q3 came out, but yet the game supported it and then some. Remember that software makers can somewhat predict where the graphics card market is going, and can also adjust their engines to meet new graphics technologies, even while the game is in development.
Second, the next generation of games and game engines are advancing much more quickly than in the past. This is due in no small part to the Xbox and DirectX 8. Microsoft needs Xbox launch titles by next fall and the Xbox uses the NV20 and DX8. Therefor they are making SURE that the ability is in the hands of the developers to write for this hardware. PCs will also use the NV20 and DX8. Using scalable technology like that in Sacrifice will let game makers hit their wide audience, yet still take full advantage of NVIDIA's next card. Those games are nearing completion now, not in 2 years.
Now does this mean I'm going to run right out and buy the NV20 when it's first released? Hehe, no... unless I win the lottery I'll be stuck with my TNT for quite a while yet
Cheers,
Warden<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by warden on 01/30/01 04:05 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
Whoa, hey, no offence meant man. Sacrifice has new engine technology that scales the graphical detail, especially polygon counts, on the fly according to what your system can handle. So my comment about missing 9/10 of the graphics was literal. Beautiful the graphics may be, and smooth (because the engine automatically makes sure they are), but there is a LOT you are not seeing. Try it out on a high end gaming machine before you condemn the benefit of having more graphical muscle behind it (including a bigger monitor to take advantage of it).
Also, and again without meaning any offence, I disagree with some of your other points. First, games are written to run ACCEPTABLY on 2 year old graphics cards (so they hit a wide audience), but they can usually take advantage of much newer hardware if you have it. Consider Quake 3: Running every level at 1024x768x32 (the minimum for GOOD graphics in most peoples opinion) was not possible with the current graphics cards when Q3 came out, but yet the game supported it and then some. Remember that software makers can somewhat predict where the graphics card market is going, and can also adjust their engines to meet new graphics technologies, even while the game is in development.
Second, the next generation of games and game engines are advancing much more quickly than in the past. This is due in no small part to the Xbox and DirectX 8. Microsoft needs Xbox launch titles by next fall and the Xbox uses the NV20 and DX8. Therefor they are making SURE that the ability is in the hands of the developers to write for this hardware. PCs will also use the NV20 and DX8. Using scalable technology like that in Sacrifice will let game makers hit their wide audience, yet still take full advantage of NVIDIA's next card. Those games are nearing completion now, not in 2 years.
Now does this mean I'm going to run right out and buy the NV20 when it's first released? Hehe, no... unless I win the lottery I'll be stuck with my TNT for quite a while yet
Cheers,
Warden<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by warden on 01/30/01 04:05 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
Well warden and tfbww i guess that we have a misunderstanding there..you gave me examples about games that they just came out (at least in my country,greece) like giants,alice so of cource i dont expect them to run fantastic in a TNT as i said above this is now the geforce era.But for quake3 i was playing in 800x600 full or 1024x800 low,only unrealT was a bit heavy,so this i am saying really is that i agree with you that now a TNT is finished but untill november-december was ok.Thats why after all i am going to buy a geforce2 MX.Thats why after 2 years i will buy the NV20 MX!! (the what?) and so on, so on....
Well I dont know.. I bought a TNT2 Ultra half way through the year (last year). I admit that installing the TNT2 improved the visuals of at least one game Quake3 and that was it. Mind you I had a Celery 333/TNTU combo and was running Sacrifice at 800x600 with the setting set at medium.
I orginally had a Vodoo Banshee with the Celery and that ran most of the stuff I played resonably.
I upgraded to the TNT2 expecting better results and found that my video card is now bound to the CPU. I did not get better frame rates (in some games it gave me worse results such as UT and Unreal) ALthough Dus Ex ran fine and gave me better frams (playeable on 1027x768 at 25fps)
I admit that back then I had problems running it because of the CPU could not handle the calculations needed to transform and light the objects in the scene.
I now have a p3 800 and I can run most things at any resolution with playable results (except UT: which is just unplayable.. mind you it behaved better when I had the banshee)
There have been other problems which have caused my video card to misbehave now (AGP at 89Mhz) so I had to turn down a couple of features off.
One question pops into mind: Will the NV20 like a 89Mhz AGP bus
I orginally had a Vodoo Banshee with the Celery and that ran most of the stuff I played resonably.
I upgraded to the TNT2 expecting better results and found that my video card is now bound to the CPU. I did not get better frame rates (in some games it gave me worse results such as UT and Unreal) ALthough Dus Ex ran fine and gave me better frams (playeable on 1027x768 at 25fps)
I admit that back then I had problems running it because of the CPU could not handle the calculations needed to transform and light the objects in the scene.
I now have a p3 800 and I can run most things at any resolution with playable results (except UT: which is just unplayable.. mind you it behaved better when I had the banshee)
There have been other problems which have caused my video card to misbehave now (AGP at 89Mhz) so I had to turn down a couple of features off.
One question pops into mind: Will the NV20 like a 89Mhz AGP bus
the nv20, being from the geforce family, should fare much better on O/C agp bus. only prob is itll cost $500 for the 64mb when the nv20 is out
About the fps thing.. If I understand correctly, stating that a certain card delivers e.g. 120 fps – means on AVERAGE. Of course 120 or 80 fps doesn’t make a difference as actual FPS, but may be a huge difference in MINIMUM fps; which is what really counts. Remember the Kyro ? Its not fun to have a 100 FPS average, but to be able to count the frames under cetain circumstances (say, a nearby eplosion). Minimum frame rates is what matters, not average… Having a card that is able to deliver 200 fps on average, means you have will quite some headroom when it needs to render a complex explosion right next to you… at what moment it may only do 30 or less…
As for those people saying how good there TNT is.. try downloading the Black & White WinAmp plugin (really rocks !!) www.lionhead.co.uk. I tried it at work with a P3-933 and a TNT2M64, and it was unplayable at anything beyond 640x480 (and even then..). At home it runs silk smooth at 1600x1200 on a P3-500 with Geforce2 GTS. I have also loved my TNT2 Ultra, but it just doesn’t cut it anymore for the upcoming games… but then again, if you’re on a (tight)budget, there are many great (often budget !) games that also guarantee hours of delight on a P300-tnt… or less. Remember Dungeon Keeper ? Half Life ? Red Alert ? Collin McRae (I) ? Leasure suit larry (or whatever he was called ;-) ?
As for those people saying how good there TNT is.. try downloading the Black & White WinAmp plugin (really rocks !!) www.lionhead.co.uk. I tried it at work with a P3-933 and a TNT2M64, and it was unplayable at anything beyond 640x480 (and even then..). At home it runs silk smooth at 1600x1200 on a P3-500 with Geforce2 GTS. I have also loved my TNT2 Ultra, but it just doesn’t cut it anymore for the upcoming games… but then again, if you’re on a (tight)budget, there are many great (often budget !) games that also guarantee hours of delight on a P300-tnt… or less. Remember Dungeon Keeper ? Half Life ? Red Alert ? Collin McRae (I) ? Leasure suit larry (or whatever he was called ;-) ?
800x600x16 looks fine and it beats paying $800 for the NV20 hehehe. guys, keep this post at the top by posting more NV20 news
hehehe. guys, keep this post at the top by posting more NV20 newsI say there is going to be a big fat problem with the NV20, and nvidia has definitly not learned from the past. If you look at the specs, the core speed is way faster then the memory clock. So it is sort of like the GF2 GTS in a way. You saw the problem with the GTS. The memory lagged behind the chip and lagged the performance. Why can't nvidia learne from ATI, which made their clock equal equal and had no problem.
noko
Distinguished
- Jan 22, 2001
- 2,414
- 1
- 19,785
Why keep this at the top? Anyone working here for Nvidia? I am enjoying all of your comments so KEEP IT UP.
Nvidia NV20 will push the industry as in games, push ATI to produce something better and us to work harder for that magical card that beats all others. I believe Nvidia woke up a sleeping giant, ATI. ATI Radeon 2, 3 to 4 times faster than a Radeon? Maybe not a NV20 killer but how about the Radeon 2 Max? If $800 big bucks, bangs, then the Radeon 2 Max will explode. Radeon 3? Ati's 6 month cycle went out the door or has it? My friends this is an exciting year.
Nvidia NV20 will push the industry as in games, push ATI to produce something better and us to work harder for that magical card that beats all others. I believe Nvidia woke up a sleeping giant, ATI. ATI Radeon 2, 3 to 4 times faster than a Radeon? Maybe not a NV20 killer but how about the Radeon 2 Max? If $800 big bucks, bangs, then the Radeon 2 Max will explode. Radeon 3? Ati's 6 month cycle went out the door or has it? My friends this is an exciting year.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Tried moving SSD from old PC to new one, now it won't boot from either
- Started by scyer327
- Replies: 9
-
Question why my pc dont have sound after install new Nvidia GPU Card?
- Started by sudsaviour
- Replies: 3
-
News Windows 11 will reportedly display a watermark if your PC does not support AI requirements- Started by Admin
- Replies: 17
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram