JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
vic20
Distinguished
- Jul 11, 2006
- 443
- 0
- 18,790
Yeah, its history repeating itself as per usual.
The 9700pro was toted as being the DX9 card to have, but really just ended up being the king of DX8. By the time we had games really using DX9 it wasn't exactly stellar. Great DX9 cards didn't happen until didn't happen until X800/850 and 6800GT.
8800GTX/Ultra is the 9700pro. King of DX9 with DX10 support introduced. Many people are calling the 2900 the GeForceFX, but I'll reserve that judgement until I see the card with drivers that aren't in BETA and we have some 8600 vs 2600 results. Could very well be the next FX, but with some driver updates and better pricing some redemption might be had. We'll see.
If DX10 is your thing we may have to wait until the new 850s/6800s (R700/G90 ??? ) come about.
I hate waiting :x
commanderspockep
Distinguished
- Jun 9, 2006
- 200
- 0
- 18,680
I'm just wondering where you got the year statistic from? The 2900XT really makes you wonder if ATI isn't that far behind. From all we know a major release could possibly be (I said could possibly be) around the corner. Maybe they have a secret weapon. I think the 2900 is proof that they can compete.
vic20
Distinguished
- Jul 11, 2006
- 443
- 0
- 18,790
I'm just wondering where you got the year statistic from? The 2900XT really makes you wonder if ATI isn't that far behind. From all we know a major release could possibly be (I said could possibly be) around the corner. Maybe they have a secret weapon. I think the 2900 is proof that they can compete.
I feel like an idiot. I didn't notice the reviews showing the 2900 meeting/beating the GTS had AA disabled.
Apparently AA makes the 2900's performance drop way down. In some games running AA at 2X the 2900 can't beat the GTS while it's running at 16X....
This is downright scary :?
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,040
- 0
- 50,960
Actualy that's not true.
The R9700 was and still is stellar for many people in the DX9 generation. Of the FX and R9700, the R9700 was the card to truely exploit HL2 and FartCry, and still even play Oblivion. The FX on the other hand only got D3 because of optimizations geared at that architecture. This is why I get annoyed when people call the R600 the FX of this generation, that gives the FX far more credit than it deserves. Are there the floptimizations, and crap of the FX? Does anyone think that there will be the lackluster performance in DX10 the way the FX sucked in DX9, and heck even full FP DX8.1 ? C'mon, no way!
What the R600 is similar to IMO, the R8500 (later on the scnene, more features, lackluster performance, required better drivers to get up to speed which only happened around the time the GF4 came out), without the Quack. The FX neither of these cards is, unless one of them turns out to been unable to run in the checkbox mode of DX10.
What the G80 looks to be similar to is the GF3Ti IMO, it's got the current speed, but it does have a slight feature difference where the R600 is closer to DX10.1 than the G80 based on architecture, however like the GF3 and R8500, this may matter little to most people in most situations. Heck it took Morrowind to even be able to show the difference between DX8.0 and DX8.1, so who knows if there will be such a revelation in the lifetime of either card.
Right now it looks more like a GF3 vs R8500 battle than R9700 versus FX.
vic20
Distinguished
- Jul 11, 2006
- 443
- 0
- 18,790
I had a 9700pro and still have two 9800pros lying around.
They were okay without AA, up to 1024 in most DX9 games. 50-100fps.
This isn't awful, but when DooM3/Farcry/HL2 came out I needed to switch to an X800XL to get decent 1280+AA performance.
It was smart to buy them when they were new because they were the best and stayed that way for quite some time, but I ended up having to replace them anyway for a much better DX9 experience.
Buying an 8800 just because you want it for DX10 games right now would be silly. Wait for the games to come out and see whats available for cards.
Buying it because you want the best card right now would be smart
Just as when the 9700pro was new, nobody could argue who was king.EDIT: At the Ape....
Sorry dude, running HL2 and Farcry on a lower res. and without AA isn't exploiting, its supporting. I didn't say 9700pro sucked for DX9, only it wasn't/isn't stellar. If it was stellar, nobody would have bother jumping on 6800s and X800s.
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,040
- 0
- 50,960
What system were you runing HL2 on where that was the case. I could run it at 2X AA and 1024x768 on my R9600Pro, and I was still mostly CPU limited by the OC'ed XP2000+, and FartCry was one of the games that started people heavily debating the differences between 16x12 no AA and 1280x1024 with AA on the R9800s because they could play the former better than the later quite well, and most people picked higher res with no AA. Really it was quite a capable card up until just recently.
Heck if you look at Cleeve's investigation the R9700P was coping well even in recent games. Sure resolution would be low now, but it's still playable, and while it may not be your idea of gaming, like has been mentioned a thousand times before, for many people that's good enough until they see a reason to upgrade.
I understand what you're saying, I just don't think you appreciate the market segment that DOES care about the impossible concept of 'future proofing' because they don't have the OPTION to upgrade every generation and they buy close to the top (like a GTS) to hang on for a few generations. Many of the cards now are destined to be looking at new games in 2009-2010.
Actually many people who owned R9700 and R9800s didn't jump then, because the benefit was intangible, especially to those on 1280x1024 17"CRTs and smaller 15" LCDs of the time (heck I know alot of reviewers that didn't have 1600x1200 monitors back then in either format :lol: ). Some of the people who bought the R9700/9800 bought it close to the end or even after the GF6800/X800 launched, but even then it still matters the longevity of the cards.
Anyone looking to own these cards for more than a year will care if either architecture has problems with the new standard. Last fall it didn't matter so much, now it matter more, and by this fall it will be the deciding factor how well these cards play DX10 titles and how they look to play more complex DX10s just over the horizon.
For the top end enthusiast they never care so much as current performance because by the time it matters new stuf is out, but for the GTS and below buyer, the closer you get to next gen the more important next gen playability becomes.
niz
Distinguished
- Feb 5, 2003
- 903
- 0
- 18,980
Well I can't find the lost Planet demo anywhere for download... or a DX10 version of Call of Juarez either... anyone got any pointers?
Oh and I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all the ATI fanbois who have given me such a great laugh with their R600 predictions over the last 6 months that I've already had my watercooled SLI'd 8800 GTX's. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Oh and I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all the ATI fanbois who have given me such a great laugh with their R600 predictions over the last 6 months that I've already had my watercooled SLI'd 8800 GTX's. :lol: :lol: :lol:
bum_jcrules
Distinguished
- May 12, 2001
- 2,186
- 0
- 19,780
From some SI's I have talked to... especially Falcon Northwest, thay have seem much more scaling with OC CPUs than with Ultras. Overclocking the card is different. The GDDR3 overclocks well as does the core but the higher bandwidth GDDR4 does not. I thought I should share that. I am going to push these puppies and see what I can get out of them once I get some other testing done. Don't want to break them and wait for another set.
bum_jcrules
Distinguished
- May 12, 2001
- 2,186
- 0
- 19,780
From some SI's I have talked to... especially Falcon Northwest, they have seem much more scaling with OC CPUs than with Ultras. Overclocking the card is different. The GDDR3 overclocks well as does the core but the higher bandwidth GDDR4 does not. I thought I should share that. I am going to push these puppies and see what I can get out of them once I get some other testing done. Don't want to break them and wait for another set.
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
That sucks
vic20
Distinguished
- Jul 11, 2006
- 443
- 0
- 18,790
What system were you runing HL2 on where that was the case. I could run it at 2X AA and 1024x768 on my R9600Pro, and I was still mostly CPU limited by the OC'ed XP2000+, and FartCry was one of the games that started people heavily debating the differences between 16x12 no AA and 1280x1024 with AA on the R9800s because they could play the former better than the later quite well, and most people picked higher res with no AA. Really it was quite a capable card up until just recently.
3GHz P4-HT, 1Gig Dual Channel, i865P
Yeah, FC runs great until you start using the binos or get to the level with all the volcanos spewing, then the card starts to choke.
Many games were like this. CoD2 runs great for the first few levels, then hammers the card and you have to turn stuff down.
Benches won't show this at all if they are not scripted in these parts of the game.
Heck if you look at Cleeve's investigation the R9700P was coping well even in recent games. Sure resolution would be low now, but it's still playable, and while it may not be your idea of gaming, like has been mentioned a thousand times before, for many people that's good enough until they see a reason to upgrade.
I can understand that if you had bought one very late in the game when they were down to under a couple hundred bucks. Everyone I knew that bought them new for $550 replaced at GF6/X800 era. in the latest. Just didn't cut the mustard for us anymore.
I understand what you're saying, I just don't think you appreciate the market segment that DOES care about the impossible concept of 'future proofing' because they don't have the OPTION to upgrade every generation and they buy close to the top (like a GTS) to hang on for a few generations. Many of the cards now are destined to be looking at new games in 2009-2010.
How many people is that anymore? Enthusiasts come up with cash and excuses all the time. Outside of them, I come across the the screaming deal shoppers and the value group more than anyone else these days.
Managing a computer store, the people I don't see coming back for a few years are the cheaper mainstream buyer. ($150-200 card shopper)
Actually many people who owned R9700 and R9800s didn't jump then, because the benefit was intangible, especially to those on 1280x1024 17"CRTs and smaller 15" LCDs of the time (heck I know alot of reviewers that didn't have 1600x1200 monitors back then in either format :lol: ). Some of the people who bought the R9700/9800 bought it close to the end or even after the GF6800/X800 launched, but even then it still matters the longevity of the cards.
I saw a huge difference with my buddy's 68Ultra and my X800XL and X850XT. Even my WoW addict GF noticed big time.....
Only cost me $300 CAN each for my X800XL and X850XT. I'm not rich and I upgraded 2 9800pros. I've since replaced them too.....
Only paid $275 CAN for an X1800XT 512MB. You can get an 8800GTS (EDIT:640MB) for $365 CAN right now...
Anyone looking to own these cards for more than a year will care if either architecture has problems with the new standard. Last fall it didn't matter so much, now it matter more, and by this fall it will be the deciding factor how well these cards play DX10 titles and how they look to play more complex DX10s just over the horizon.
For the top end enthusiast they never care so much as current performance because by the time it matters new stuf is out, but for the GTS and below buyer, the closer you get to next gen the more important next gen playability becomes.
With prices dropping so badly in the industry, I don't know how true that really is anymore. If the 2900XT sells poor, I'm sure they'll be damn near giving them away in a matter of months.
Is $300 a year to keep fairly up to date that tough to manage?
MEGAWATTZ2000
Distinguished
- Sep 2, 2006
- 137
- 0
- 18,680
Seems like a one-sided benchmark to me ...
The 8800 series cards have been out for sometime now and have had more time to mature, and new drivers and such have been received where as to have everything working smoothly.
The ATI card hasn't really even gotten the same chance, it's new I would hate for the fanboys to jump to conclusions, considering Nvidia had over a six month headstart.
I was recently with ATI just eariler this year, but jumped ship because of the new arrival of the 8800 cards, but hey just might be going back soon as ATI catches up ...
The 8800 series cards have been out for sometime now and have had more time to mature, and new drivers and such have been received where as to have everything working smoothly.
The ATI card hasn't really even gotten the same chance, it's new I would hate for the fanboys to jump to conclusions, considering Nvidia had over a six month headstart.
I was recently with ATI just eariler this year, but jumped ship because of the new arrival of the 8800 cards, but hey just might be going back soon as ATI catches up ...
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,040
- 0
- 50,960
I think you're thinking CRY-vision, and yeah that killed everything. Whatever you were running fluidly before now you had to drop down a level. But for the most part 16x12 in FartCry was playable and 1280x1024 was solid, without having to use workarounds like the FXs. That's the point.
COD2 was later though, and really I think you still miss the point of the playability, you're expecting far more from the hardware and too easily shift than someone who buys once in a while.
Your missing the point again, I'm not talking about the high end gamer, because let's be real they already bought a GF8800GTX at launch, right? Or are constantly rolling cards. At this stage in the game the people left are those that waited the first couple of months on the R9700 for the FX5800 to come out, then bought the R9700. Those same people are the market we're talking about now, or the people buying when the games come out. Those who constantly switch hardware couldn't care less what next week brings it's about current performance in Oblivion, Juarez, etc. because they know the cards are gone next weekend if there's something noticeably better.
Except right now that segment sucks. The GF8800GTS-320 is that buyer the HD2900XL is likely to be that buyer's market, and that's where the architecture differences will come in to play for the people who do only upgrade once every 2+years and not once every generation. They are different buyers, you say they're none, I know those very people, and see them in this forum all the time, those ones asking about 'finally upgrading the FX5900/R9800/GF6800GT/X800XL, etc. So c'mon, while I agree it's not the high end, this isn't the GF8800GTX and Ultra price range we're talking about here, nor the people who bought week one of the GF8800s' launch.
Actually many people who owned R9700 and R9800s didn't jump then, because the benefit was intangible, especially to those on 1280x1024 17"CRTs and smaller 15" LCDs of the time (heck I know alot of reviewers that didn't have 1600x1200 monitors back then in either format :lol: ). Some of the people who bought the R9700/9800 bought it close to the end or even after the GF6800/X800 launched, but even then it still matters the longevity of the cards.
I'm not saying there isn'ta difference, but you ignore those that don't buy every generation. You act as if the entire market ic comprised of the enthusiast segment when you say future performance means nothing.
All of that is about what the 'light gamers' in my office has paid in that entire period. Seriously, different segments.
Right, I notice they were giving away the GF7900 and GF7800 last round?
It won't happen until the end of the cycle.
for many yes, for an enthusiast, no, but the enthusiast market of above $250 is less than 5% of the market place, and alot of even those buyers save up to buy the best they can when the games need it, and then play the cards into the ground. Seriously the Oblivion forums were full of the FX5900 owners who suddenly needed and upgrade, and where did they go, straight to the high end, not to the GF7600GS/X1600 level, and upgraded most everything else at the same time.
Like I said your statement applies to the enthusiast market which I said isn't the issue, they could care less about 'future proofing', but those who go from 'build to build' and not 'card to card' definitely take that into consideration, and they're often the ones who go from AMD to intel and back again, same for nV and AMD, they ask around get the feel, spend what they think it good right, and then go on with other things. It's like buying a car for them. And I've seen enough of them here and in other forums to know that they are plentiful, and they all talk about the mythic 'future proofing', post 5-10 times to get feedback and are never heard from again for another 2-3 years. The enthusiasts know no such word exists, so the concern is of little use to them, they rip out their Opeteron to replace with a C2D, to replace with a quad core, etc. but they're a totally different group.
http://www.lostplanetcommunity.com/demo/
that web site only works on IE (maybe firefox, opera user me) and its an drop down box from downloads when on get to the hidden demo box (link above will take you strate there)
getting 125KB per connection so that’s about 800-900KB/s 5 mins and i reboot into vista and see what’s the fuss about
testing the game now
looks like an good card the 2900 but needs to be priced better (Nvidia <> ATI / Intel <> AMD )
--- off topic --
@VIC20
The HDD trashing you was getting can be Vista’s New fangled System restore running (it’s actually the Volume Shadow Service that is doing it) it gets worse the more stuff you have stored in program files and User folders (more so if you use more disk space then what system restore is set to use, it gets stuck in an loop trying to shadow copy but runs out of space and try’s to do more shadow copying and fails and so on does give up after 30mins- 1hr) Turning off shadow service will brake system restore and throw up lots of errors in event log so its best to turn off system restore (system protection > system restore) rember you not be able to use system restore after its been turnd off and revert pc back to older points
The other one can be SuperFetch but that should only happen when you exit a game or an big program (if the game uses more then 1gb of system ram you PC most likey will be pageing even if you got 2gb ram as I have found)
Turning the above 2 options probably will extend the hard disk life is turned off (superfetch seems to work as intended tho more so when you got 3gb of ram when gaming as every thing gets wiped out on 2gb systems and in turn pageing happens)
Other problem is with NVIDIA RAID drivers using a lot of CPU use under any load Fix for that is Turn off Command Queuing on all RAID channels (should be 3 of them)
{side note drivers Suck for vista posting working drivers is not the same as Working Optimised drivers}
that web site only works on IE (maybe firefox, opera user me) and its an drop down box from downloads when on get to the hidden demo box (link above will take you strate there)
getting 125KB per connection so that’s about 800-900KB/s
5 mins and i reboot into vista and see what’s the fuss about testing the game now
looks like an good card the 2900 but needs to be priced better (Nvidia <> ATI / Intel <> AMD )
--- off topic --
@VIC20
The HDD trashing you was getting can be Vista’s New fangled System restore running (it’s actually the Volume Shadow Service that is doing it) it gets worse the more stuff you have stored in program files and User folders (more so if you use more disk space then what system restore is set to use, it gets stuck in an loop trying to shadow copy but runs out of space and try’s to do more shadow copying and fails and so on does give up after 30mins- 1hr) Turning off shadow service will brake system restore and throw up lots of errors in event log so its best to turn off system restore (system protection > system restore) rember you not be able to use system restore after its been turnd off and revert pc back to older points
The other one can be SuperFetch but that should only happen when you exit a game or an big program (if the game uses more then 1gb of system ram you PC most likey will be pageing even if you got 2gb ram as I have found)
Turning the above 2 options probably will extend the hard disk life is turned off (superfetch seems to work as intended tho more so when you got 3gb of ram when gaming as every thing gets wiped out on 2gb systems and in turn pageing happens)
Other problem is with NVIDIA RAID drivers using a lot of CPU use under any load Fix for that is Turn off Command Queuing on all RAID channels (should be 3 of them)
{side note drivers Suck for vista posting working drivers is not the same as Working Optimised drivers}
Get it here with much faster transfer speed (at least for me)
http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_lostplanet_downloads.html
inztigator
Distinguished
- Feb 15, 2007
- 45
- 0
- 18,530
LOL...Another ATI fanboi and his ENVY at NVidia. Had ATI delivered as all the "wait for the R600" fans had said, then I sincerely doubt you would post these comments. Admit it, you are extremely frustrated and angry that ATI/AMD let you down. (Its part of life)
Yes I bought the 8800GTX card as soon as it was released, and am EXTREMELY happy with my purchase. There is no reason to believe that the 8800GTX will be inferior when DX10 games are thrown at it.
P.S> You say "Nice DX9 card you got there!", LOL, I say eat this...
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/505/3/
vic20
Distinguished
- Jul 11, 2006
- 443
- 0
- 18,790
Get it here with much faster transfer speed (at least for me)
http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_lostplanet_downloads.html
Already got both DX9 and 10 versions from gamershell 😀
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question GA-X79-UD5 stays on POST splash... any advice?- Started by VoodooTank
- Replies: 5
-
Question Trying to which by Gigabyte GTX 1650 to AMD Sapphire PULSE RX 580 8GB OC
- Started by Martin_135
- Replies: 4
-
Question AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D v. GeForce RTX 3060 Ti; New Integrated Graphics or Old Dedicated GPU?
- Started by isaacm8
- Replies: 2
-
-
Question Help needed with connecting an external monitor to my laptop ?
- Started by ciotime
- Replies: 13
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram