I want the benchmark!!!

spitcodfry

spitcodfry

Newbie
Joined
Aug 10, 2003
Messages
1,770
Reaction score
0
No, this thread does not have a point. I simply wanted to rant about how much I want the HL-2 benchmark so I can see how my comp handles it. Would anybody else like to contribute to my ranting?
 
I want it so i can laugh at all the idiots who bought 5900's......
 
Why is one an idiot for buying a GeForce FX 5900 Ultra? I'd sure as hell take it over a Radeon 9800 Pro. :eek:
 
now now this is not a nvidia Vs. ATI thread
and by the way i dont have a good vid card ... cause im waiting to see whatwill work the best
 
Well, it doesn't make someone an idiot if they have bought a GeForce FX 5900 Ultra. Some of the people in these forums are mentally challenged. Such as crabcakes66.
 
Come on guys play it fair. It might be slightly optimized for ATI cards, but that doesnt mean its gonna be complete garbage on a FX 5900. Each card has its strengths and weaknesse's, and I bet you that when more future games that take full use of DX 9 , we will see these weaknesses's and strengths in each line of cards.
 
I'm beginning to think that future games such as Doom 3 and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. will run better on the 5900 Ultra, as compared to the 9800 Pro.
 
Ok, Half-life 2 will probably run better with a Radeon 9800 ... but I bet all my money that it will be like with 5-10 fps or something like that.

The same goes for the Geforce when playing Doom 3 or Stalker.

Point is, both cards will kick some serious butt!
 
They'll kick serious butt for the time being. But as usual there will be new cards on the horizon. *sigh* Technology is wonderful and all, but it's a pain to always have to keep up.
 
don't buy into the hype then. just because a new games coming out doesn mean you need to run out and buy a new graphics card. im sticking with my geforce 4 ti 4200 it will run it just fine. and the loss in uality is so minimal compared to a dx9 card that why would you pay 400 bucks for a new card just to see those effects,
 
Whatever anyone says, if cost were not an issue, I would pick the 5900 Ultra over the 9800 Pro just for nVidia's drivers. I prefer nVidia's drivers and I have become accustomed to them. Although because of cost issues I will probably end up getting an ATi card, I will be forever scarred for being parted from my drivers. ;(
 
It's not the cost that bothers me so much. It's the fact that there is ALWAYS something new coming out. I don't know. I like to have things set for at least a little while.
 
Originally posted by downthesun
Why is one an idiot for buying a GeForce FX 5900 Ultra? I'd sure as hell take it over a Radeon 9800 Pro. :eek:
Click to expand...

So would I. I've never seen so many fanATIcs in one place before.
 
Originally posted by Lyrids
Whatever anyone says, if cost were not an issue, I would pick the 5900 Ultra over the 9800 Pro just for nVidia's drivers. I prefer nVidia's drivers and I have become accustomed to them. Although because of cost issues I will probably end up getting an ATi card, I will be forever scarred for being parted from my drivers. ;(
Click to expand...

when was the last time you used an ati card/ati drivers? hmm? never? years and years ago? well alot has changed since you last used them, i can guarantee that.
 
i am currently a geforce 3 ti200 owner yet I know that ATI is currently better now
 
I want the benchmark 3..the rise of the machines! :p

i'm buying a radeon 9800 pro soon :)
 
Originally posted by Lyrids
Whatever anyone says, if cost were not an issue, I would pick the 5900 Ultra over the 9800 Pro just for nVidia's drivers. I prefer nVidia's drivers and I have become accustomed to them. Although because of cost issues I will probably end up getting an ATi card, I will be forever scarred for being parted from my drivers. ;(
Click to expand...

Drivers? I think it is time you asked someone who uses a ATi card about drivers....Their support is amazing now...
 
ATi's support is pretty good, thats why i'll take a ATi now again.
+I hear that ATi is better dan nVidia (the TR:AOD test)
 
Originally posted by d8cam
i am currently a geforce 3 ti200 owner
Click to expand...
Great card, I got one myself, hope it will run HL2 nicely :-D
 
Originally posted by jbscotchman
So would I. I've never seen so many fanATIcs in one place before.
Click to expand...
Cause HL2 will be a DX9 game, that's why fanATIcs love it and come here. We can FINALLY see what the R3x0 is made off :)
 
This is not supposed to be an ati vs. nvidia thread! Clam down peoples, we dont want anoter one of these!

BTW- I want the benchmark as well, I just keep worrying about getting hl2 and it runs super-slow on my machine (a la unreal 2)
 
Yes lets all start laughing HAHA you bought a card that will run faster in most current games and anything based on Doom 3 tech but will run like shit on DX9 games useing large numbers of pixel shaders, once again HAHA.

Oh that was such a good laugh, I laughed so hard I even wrote HAHA on the screen while doing it.

j/k
 
Originally posted by mrchimp
Yes lets all start laughing HAHA you bought a card that will run faster in most current games and anything based on Doom 3 tech but will run like shit on DX9 games useing large numbers of pixel shaders, once again HAHA.

Oh that was such a good laugh, I laughed so hard I even wrote HAHA on the screen while doing it.

j/k
Click to expand...
That doesnt make sense :dozey:
9800 Pro is most of the time faster in current games, and can do Doom III just as fast as Nvidia... Its just that we have to manually lower quality, Nvidia users gets that without an option :p
 
Too bad it doesn't "run faster in most current games"... they perform so closely that you won't notice the difference when you set the image quality so they look somewhat comparable. The cards go back and forth with a difference of less than 10fps in most games.

The only big differences in newer games come from the fact that nVidia already uses some real-time shadow optimizations to get faster performance in Doom3 and their cards absolutely suck with DX9 stuff (see the new Tomb Raider benchmarks).

With some games nVidia drivers won't let you turn on FSAA.

Their Splinter Cell performance is horrible.

They cheat (err... i mean... "optimize") on benchmarks.

I'm sorry... nVidia is just falling behind and doing everything they can (all kinds of optimizations) just to try to keep up with ATI. There is nothing more sad than people clutching onto hardware because of the company name.

The same goes for AMD now... Intel has them beat (maybe until they release their 64-bit chip) in price and performance on the higher-end processors... yet all the AMD fanboys still insist that AMD processors are faster and cheaper.

Let go of the name and go for the better hardware.
 
I want the benchmak as well.
1) nVidia still has better driver support than ATI. ATi's drivers are much, much better now, but nvidia is consatnly releasing better and new upgrades. I haven't had a new cat driver for monthes.

2)There will be no differnece between the 5900 and the 9800 that is noticable to the eye. the only differnce that will exist will be for people who have serious issues and have to (as EVIL put it) "Flex their e-penis". making up for somethign guys?

3)If i had themoney to buy somehting better than my 9600pro (and if i wanted to) I'd buy the the 5900u becuae I respect nVidia as a company much much more than ATi (even with the "cheating")
 
Originally posted by SidewinderX143
I want the benchmak as well.
1) nVidia still has better driver support than ATI. ATi's drivers are much, much better now, but nvidia is consatnly releasing better and new upgrades. I haven't had a new cat driver for monthes.

2)There will be no differnece between the 5900 and the 9800 that is noticable to the eye. the only differnce that will exist will be for people who have serious issues and have to (as EVIL put it) "Flex their e-penis". making up for somethign guys?

3)If i had themoney to buy somehting better than my 9600pro (and if i wanted to) I'd buy the the 5900u becuae I respect nVidia as a company much much more than ATi (even with the "cheating")
Click to expand...
1) Months is exagerating... And there should be another one out within weeks. Btw, does Nvidia have a forum where developers actually reply to posts?
Edit: And I forgot to mention, one time Nvidia didnt have a new driver out for some 3-4 months. Just scores of beta versions. Beta's are not official drivers.

2) The untrained eye. If I see a car with 350hp or a car with 200hp, I just see two cars that is about equally as fast. A car fanatic would beat me with a stick.

3) would you really? I mean, even if you had the money, all things considering? Considering DX9 speeds? Quality? FSAA? Etc?
 
Originally posted by SidewinderX143
I want the benchmak as well.
1) nVidia still has better driver support than ATI. ATi's drivers are much, much better now, but nvidia is consatnly releasing better and new upgrades. I haven't had a new cat driver for monthes.

2)There will be no differnece between the 5900 and the 9800 that is noticable to the eye. the only differnce that will exist will be for people who have serious issues and have to (as EVIL put it) "Flex their e-penis". making up for somethign guys?

3)If i had themoney to buy somehting better than my 9600pro (and if i wanted to) I'd buy the the 5900u becuae I respect nVidia as a company much much more than ATi (even with the "cheating")
Click to expand...

1) I've had many more problems with nVidia than ATI recently... and the quantity of driver updates doesn't matter as much as the quality of the updates.

2) If the Tomb Raider test shows anything about DX9 performance... then setting everything on the highest will have nVidia cards running less than half as fast as ATI cards... in some cases the Radeon cards even tripled the performance of the FX cards (which were running below the "playable framerate" area).

3) Why do you respect the bigger company when they are being beaten by the underdog... especially with all of nVidia's cheating nonsense?
 
Lets see....6 or 7 Catalyst drivers released this year versus....3 for Nvidia. So lets keep the facts straight.

All up, I really wish people could look at things objectively and with some hindsight. The main reason that ATI people are extremely pleased isn't because their card has the full support of the developers as their choice, so much as the underdogs ATI finally edging ahead of Nvidia who has held the crown for so long.
 
Ok, a few of you ahve good points, a few of yuo are completly worng.

3) Why do you respect the bigger company when they are being beaten by the underdog... especially with all of nVidia's cheating nonsense?
Click to expand...

ATi is by no means an underdog. Thier company is much larger and supplies products to many more compies than nVidia
Proof?
nVidia's shares outstanding: 159,592,000
ATi's Shares outstanding: 237,907,000

1) Months is exagerating... And there should be another one out within weeks. Btw, does Nvidia have a forum where developers actually reply to posts?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Edit: And I forgot to mention, one time Nvidia didnt have a new driver out for some 3-4 months. Just scores of beta versions. Beta's are not official drivers.
Click to expand...
good point, but they are driver updates that are available to the public, and they often times increase performance, quality, etc.


2) The untrained eye. If I see a car with 350hp or a car with 200hp, I just see two cars that is about equally as fast. A car fanatic would beat me with a stick.
Click to expand...
True, but i consider my self a hardware fanatic, and the differcen between 100fps and 110fps isn't owrth basing a decsion on.

2) If the Tomb Raider test shows anything about DX9 performance... then setting everything on the highest will have nVidia cards running less than half as fast as ATI cards... in some cases the Radeon cards even tripled the performance of the FX cards (which were running below the "playable framerate" area).
Click to expand...
Benchmarks are Benchmarks. I's rather jsut play the game and make a decsion for myself. But yes, the current crop of ATI cards are better in general than the nVidia ones.

3) Why do you respect the bigger company when they are being beaten by the underdog... especially with all of nVidia's cheating nonsense?
Click to expand...
3) would you really? I mean, even if you had the money, all things considering? Considering DX9 speeds? Quality? FSAA? Etc?
Click to expand...

I'm not going to into an argument about the chatign thiungs, but nVidia isn't the only guilty one...and futurmark retracted thier statment about that..

Yes, yes I would because ATi is jsut now coming around in driver and card quality. nVidia has always (up until recently) been making great cards and drivers.

Also, I have yet to hear of a game that has trouble running on an nVidia card. Part of the reason I respect nVidia is becuase they have always been helpful to game developers.
I was beta testing Savage, and some people with ATI cards (form a 7000 to a 9800 pro) couldn't get more than 10fps on any settings. Why? because ATI refeused to tell S2Games (the develpoment comapny) basic information about the card to help solve the problem.
 
True, but i consider my self a hardware fanatic, and the differcen between 100fps and 110fps isn't owrth basing a decsion on.
Click to expand...
I was refering to the IQ question and the untrained eye, not speeds.
Yes, yes I would because ATi is jsut now coming around in driver and card quality. nVidia has always (up until recently) been making great cards and drivers.
Click to expand...
Always recently :p

Also, I have yet to hear of a game that has trouble running on an nVidia card. Part of the reason I respect nVidia is becuase they have always been helpful to game developers.
I was beta testing Savage, and some people with ATI cards (form a 7000 to a 9800 pro) couldn't get more than 10fps on any settings. Why? because ATI refeused to tell S2Games (the develpoment comapny) basic information about the card to help solve the problem.
Click to expand...
I've heard LOTS of them. I just dont keep track on them all... But I can say, the 5900 has a SERIOUS problem with flickering apparently. And other lockups and stuttering and stuff. On the second thing, is that official? Has the devs said ATI wouldnt help them? Have you seen a mail from ATI explaining why they refuse? Cause otherwise I wont beleive it...
 
Originally posted by OCybrManO
The only big differences in newer games come from the fact that nVidia already uses some real-time shadow optimizations to get faster performance in Doom3 and their cards absolutely suck with DX9 stuff (see the new Tomb Raider benchmarks).

With some games nVidia drivers won't let you turn on FSAA.

Their Splinter Cell performance is horrible.

They cheat (err... i mean... "optimize") on benchmarks.

I'm sorry... nVidia is just falling behind and doing everything they can (all kinds of optimizations) just to try to keep up with ATI. There is nothing more sad than people clutching onto hardware because of the company name.
Click to expand...


I do believe that was the most ignorant post I've ever read. First lets anaylyze this:

"With some games nVidia drivers won't let you turn on FSAA."

Please name some games. If I'm not mistaken wasn't it ATI cards that can't use AA in Splinter Cell.

"Their Splinter Cell performance is horrible."

Read above statement.

"They cheat (err... i mean... "optimize") on benchmarks."

It doesn't matter what drivers you use with a FX5900 Ultra, they still beat the 9800 Pro in 3dmark 2003 in any case.

And as for your last statement, you do realize that Nvidia has been dominating the video card market ever since the days of the TNT2 and still is. Just recently has ATI finally showed some competion.
 
It doesn't matter what drivers you use with a FX5900 Ultra, they still beat the 9800 Pro in 3dmark 2003 in any case.
Click to expand...
Have you tried the 10.xx? :)
 
Too many threads turn into video card wars, now since this is one ill jump on and go with ATI because of their DX9 performance.

Edit: Grammer
 
anybody have an idea of when this benchmark will be released?

p.s. wtf does this ati vs nvidia bs accomplish?
 
Originally posted by jbscotchman
If I'm not mistaken wasn't it ATI cards that can't use AA in Splinter Cell.

"
Click to expand...

If Im not mistaken, wasnt AA automatically turned on in Splinter Cell for ATi Cards. Meaning you couldnt turn off aa on ati cards while playing splinter cell. Hence nvidia always wins the splinter cell benchmark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
bbson john
Hi everyone. I am new to this forum!
Replies
11
Views
6K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
B
Half Life 3 (FM)
Replies
11
Views
3K
D.r Gordon Freeman
D.r Gordon Freeman
Back
Top