Anybody notice this?

B

Banana

Guest
Originally posted by d8cam
2 quick questions.



1. I have the following: 1.7ghz Pentium 4, 1GB of PC2700 DDR Ram, plenty of hard drive space, and plan on getting one of the higher-end Geforce FX 5200's or 5600's, and I have the SB Audigy 2. Will this run ok?

2. Secondly, in the Half-life 2 development process, what was the first thing (back in 1998 or 1999) that you all finished part of and really got excited about? In other words, when did you all think in your heads that this is going to be something amazing?



Thanks.

1. I'd suggest an ATI 9800 for your setup, not NVIDIA.

2. Ken's first demo of the new character technology.


-Gabe


Found this in the sticky. So Valve is actively promoting ATI over NVIDIA? I like ATI more personally but is this a wise idea to try and side with one company? Maybe ATI paid them money for this? Hmmm. What do you all think?
 
That is strange.
I wonder if he was referring to the nvidia cards listed or something, because those 2 cards do suck IMO.
 
Purhaps they are predicting the demise of nvidia in which case means no more driver support from them in the far future which means Half life 2 wont be able to run as well on them with future graphical updates.

Just a theory. Could also be because they are argueabaly beter cards :p.

I used to stick up for nvidia but i aint so sure now lol
 
The Funny thing is he suggested the top of the line ATI card...why not suggest the top of the line NVIDIA.
 
While that could be true...i am not inclined to think it is a fake. But who knows
 
I would say ATI still leads on the gfx marked..
maby the newest FX is faster, but the radeon 9800 pro is still better..
Just my opinion..
 
Read Gamespy interview, dev says that ATi will be better for HL2.


"GameSpy: Is Half-Life 2 going to be the type of game that is really going to be pushing system requirements? Should the major computer manufacturers expect a bump in sales when the game ships, just because people will be upgrading their machines?
Doug Lombardi: I will sound arrogant as hell if I say yes! But I think that Valve tries very hard to support as far back with system as we humanly can, and in this case we're going back to a Pentium II 800 with 128 of RAM, but as get up to a Pentium 4 class you'll see better water and better effects. For folks who want the ultimate experience, they'll want the latest ATI card, and the fastest processor available from AMD or Intel. "
 
It's probably true, esp given the fact that they demoed it at E3 on ATI hardware.
Even Carmack promotes ATI over Nvidia now, because ATI can render more textures in a single pass. He explained how many passes each require for a single frame of Doom3 and it was a considerable difference, like Nvidia required almost twice as many.
 
But why lol. In all other games i have read about people say that the Nvidia base code for useing thee cards features is the beats ati's hands down.

they must be getting sumthing out of this, be it money or purhaps a deal on some new graphics card that runs HL2 how it should be played. Who knows eh.
 
yes but don t forget when you have money everything can be bougth.

Like if you recommand my stuff too people you can have a % of the sells !!!!

Some people think that the nvidia process for the publicity of they card on games.

But the gforce fx 5900 kick ass more than ati i saw the test.
 
Originally posted by dscowboy
It's probably true, esp given the fact that they demoed it at E3 on ATI hardware.
Even Carmack promotes ATI over Nvidia now, because ATI can render more textures in a single pass. He explained how many passes each require for a single frame of Doom3 and it was a considerable difference, like Nvidia required almost twice as many.

While I am aware of this, if i remember correctly, the last round of official benchmarks had Nvidia's top card beating ATI's in DOOM3. I still think ATI is better because Nvidia seems to have the whole philosophy that "As long as we can be the best in Doom3 people will pick us over ATI" so they heavily optimize their card (and even designed it) for Doom3. (Also, i am aware there were some Catalyst driver issues during that test so ATI was put in an unfair position).

I like ATI better.
 
They are payed to say that , Im sure it will run just as well on my 5900 as an 9800. They obviously have a deal with ATI.

Just because ATI spends more money on game tie-ins doesnt make it a better card despite what Johnny Carmack might tell you , I honestly dont think one is significantly enough better than the other to declare a winner , Id be just as happy with a 9800. They are basically the same card.
 
Those to GeForce FX cards, can you tell me what kind of GeForce it is? (I.e. GeForce 4)
 
Originally posted by ulukai
yes but don t forget when you have money everything can be bougth.

Like if you recommand my stuff too people you can have a % of the sells !!!!

Some people think that the nvidia process for the publicity of they card on games.

But the gforce fx 5900 kick ass more than ati i saw the test.

I'm sorry...but i dont really understand what you are saying here. That aside, the 5900 does seem to beat out ATI in some tests, but when you up the rez and max out FSAA and AF, ATI still seems to be slightly ahead and if not that it holds its own.

I think Nvidia is full of it...They try and brand a lot of new games with their logo but so what?
 
Yes. Valve is pro ATI, they obviously seem to have a business deal. It's business.
 
Originally posted by DimitriPopov
They are payed to say that , Im sure it will run just as well on my 5900 as an 9800. They obviously have a deal with ATI.

Just because ATI spends more money on game tie-ins doesnt make it a better card despite what Johnny Carmack might tell you , I honestly dont think one is significantly enough better than the other to declare a winner , Id be just as happy with a 9800. They are basically the same card.

How do you know that ATI spends more money on game tie ins? I dont know if this is true or not but i have personally seen more games with Nvidia branded ont hem than ATI ...maybe i am looking at the wrong games but that is what i see. And i am sure it will perform well on both cards because it would seriously hurt valve to completely alienate any one brand despite their personal preference.
 
Hey guys that was my e-mail that I sent to Gabe. I am not an ATI fanboy....as of right now I own a Geforce 3 ti200.
 
hahahah i just noticed something, where is the magazine on the pdw? :\
 
Valve has publicly stated that the brand of card does not matter when running HL2, only the amount of power it has. An ATI and a similarly powerful Nvidia card should run the game just about the same.
That said, ATI and Valve do have a partnership.
 
Or, what he's saying is in the opinion of a fellow gamer and if he was a consumer planning to purchase HL2, his honest opinion would be that ATI cards are better. It's nothing to do with business... that's a very arrogant and ignorant point of view. Valve isn't the normal software company. They interact majorly with their fan base, they've been spying on us for the last five years trying to improve and create features that we want to see and they're not neutral about things. If you asked Gabe which game, in his opinion, he'd rather play - Doom 3 or Stalker he'd probably give you his honest opinion on it. It doesn't mean he's secretly promoting for Id Software or ... the other one, it just means that in his personal opinion he'd rather play one over the other.

From what I've seen anyway, the latest ATi card is better than the GeForce 5 and I'm actually considering upgrading my GeForce 4 to the latest ATi 9800.

That above statement I've just made is a good example actually. Because I've said that does it a) mean I'm an ATI fanboy, b) mean that I've got some business deal with ATI to promote their shit or c) I genuinely believe that the ATI product is better?

Same applies for Gabe.
 
pimp
mp5kengraved.jpg
 
yse, 9800 > 5800 ; thing is, the 5800 isnt top of the line, the 5900 is (ive noticed two ppl made that mistake)
sounds like they have a deal, because opinion wise, its kinda weird that so much of valve would side with ATI, without a single pro-NV comment yet.
Also whats the use of talking about AA and AF, when Gabe himself said that at the moment neither work with HL2?
I guess we'll just have to wait and see the benchmarks
 
...and now for something completly different.
Really, but what in the holy heck does that have to do with what we're talking about?
 
Seems to me like they either get payed by ATI, or they use the radeon 9800 as their base card.
:borg:
 
I was confused when people where chattin about 5800. The 5800 was a failure and replaced with the 5900 pretty quickly.

The 5900 is supposed to be the fastest card on the market but have worse image quality than the 9800, in most peoples opinion.

From all the opinions and benchmarks ive seen so far i would also go for a 9800pro over any Nvidia. I dont blame Valve for doing the same.
 
well, I just switched from Nividia to ATI.
I have done ALOT of unbiased research in the graphics card market, I'm not one to spend money until I have. Yes, in some, SOME benchmarks the Nvidia Geforce FX 5900 Ultra was better, however, even then the difference between no AA or AF and Some AA/AF was huge, and overall image quality wasn't as good as the 9800 Pro.
in the end, price was the deciding factor for me, and the 9800 was MUCH cheaper then either the 9800 Pro or the 5900 Ultra.

in the end, it depends on the user, Personally, I don't care who makes the card, I just want the best available, and after the research I did, ATI won.
 
Originally posted by vakuum
I would say ATI still leads on the gfx marked..
maby the newest FX is faster, but the radeon 9800 pro is still better..
Just my opinion..

Agreed, my friend.
 
Most reviewers use common benchmarks when reviewing products.
nVidia drivers are HEAVILY OPTIMIZED for common benchmarks so reviews give you that false feeling of speed.

Now, check out this unbiased review (that's right, stop reading Tom's, who said that the Radeon 9500 uses the RV300 core and made some other huge errors with pipelines, VS, etc.) which makes use of less-common benchmarks:
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=3x5900u&page=1

Poor 5900U...it gets spanked even by the 9700 in some tests. It gets its a$$ kicked by the 9800 almost every time.
ATi, specially when you need Image Quality, is the king.
 
What worries me more is no AA in HL2 (see other threads). Does any enlighted soul know which card is more relying on strong AA performance - FX or Radeon ??
 
Originally posted by Chris_D
Or, what he's saying is in the opinion of a fellow gamer and if he was a consumer planning to purchase HL2, his honest opinion would be that ATI cards are better.

I agree with Chris. Why does everything have to be a conspiracy with you people? If you made a game engine, then tested it out on two different cards, and found that one card ran it 50% better than the other, WHAT EXACTLY WOULD YOU SAY WHEN PEOPLE ASKED YOU WHAT CARD TO BUY?!

Valve may be promoting ATI for business reasons, and they may not. Don't pretned like you have the answers just to defend the fact that you own an NVidia card. I own an Nvidia card, that doesn't mean there isn't a graphics engine out there that runs a lot better on an ATI card!

Just accept the possibility that HL2 may in fact run considerably better on ATI hardware than Nvidia. Valve is saying that it will, why would they say that if they knew they would be proven wrong once the game came out? Risking your reputation like that for a few bucks from ATI would be stupid.
 
It's probably business. I saw Half Life 2 on ATi.com several weeks back, and that's why I bought my 9800 Pro.. for that reason. Promote the card with the right game and they will be sold.
Personally, I love my card and I'm glad I was sucker'd into buying it only for the fact that ATi and Half Life 2 seem to go together well.. used on Demos, ATi-pro comments, ATi.com promotes HL2.. etc..
I'd pay whatever for the card associated with such a good game as HL2.
:)
 
Originally posted by marksmanHL2 :)
But why lol. In all other games i have read about people say that the Nvidia base code for useing thee cards features is the beats ati's hands down.

What do you mean by nvidia base code? Dont you think developers want to lighten their workload and just code for opengl or directx, than having to do more work because another card is crap when using the "real" base code?
 
Originally posted by NiteStalker
Those to GeForce FX cards, can you tell me what kind of GeForce it is? (I.e. GeForce 4)

That would be the FX series kind of GeForce. (You can call it a GeForce 5 if you like)
 
Let me clear some things up for you guys. Nvidia has and still is cheating at benchmarks. Any site that the 5900 Ultra outperforms the 9800 Pro is running optimized fx drivers. Yes, it is also true the fx cards sacrifice image quality for higher fps.

The fact remains that the 9800 Pro and 5900 Ultra are basically tied performance wise. However, the 9800 Pro is better in other aspects, most notibly it's price. This is why Valve suggests an ATI card. They would not go with an inferior card maker to run their game.
 
Originally posted by Gud
What worries me more is no AA in HL2 (see other threads). Does any enlighted soul know which card is more relying on strong AA performance - FX or Radeon ??

Check the above link.
 
[points up]
fann - boi!

Both companies use "optimized drivers". Optimization isn't a bad thing.

Now, if the game looks worse after the optimization then you talk about IMAGE QUALITY.

As for benchmarks--they're a big steaming pile of headcrab poop and are only used so that morons have some way to compare graphics cards since relevant comparisons are difficult.
 
Back
Top