|
|||||||
| Windows XP & Linux NVIDIA Display Drivers If you have a problem with the NVIDIA ForceWare Drivers on XP or Linux then this is the place to get help! |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Nov 30, 2004, 08:09 PM
|
#1 |
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
|
possible ati 'optimisatiion'
was not sure were this would be appropriate so came to this forum by default.
chx this - http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.ph...57&postcount=9 anybody confirm/deny this with PROOF?
__________________
|
|
|
Nov 30, 2004, 08:29 PM
|
#2 |
|
Semper ubi sub ubi
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 702
Rep Power: 51  |
logical flaw in the argument?
I suspect FP24 shaders being used instead of FP16 is a design consideration* made by Valve, not a deliberate attempt by them to cripple Nvidia FX cards. The poster suggests you can't see the difference between FP16 and FP24... I'm guessing there would have to be a difference on some rigs at least.
I'm getting onto shaky ground re: my technical knowledge, but isn't it a design constraint by Nvidia that forces the FX cards to jump to FP32 from FP24, rather than just rendering FP24? Sounds to me like a horse/cart scenario. The logic argument is a double negative: Nvidia cards are incapable of showing FP24 (negative), so Valve should step-down (negative) to FP16. The 'positive' premise, of course, is that a higher FP is desireable for a better experience. I have not seen sufficient evidence to suggest otherwise. ----- * I've done some more research. The FX card is a DirectX 8 card, and Dx8 has two modes, 16 and 32FP. The ATI 9xxx+ series are true DirectX 9 cards, whose spec is 24 and 32 FP. So for ATI is adherring to the official specification, whereas the FX card is basically 'last year's card' -- as expected. ~No~ conspiracy here.
__________________
Veteran of the PC Microchannel / EISA wars of the late 1980s. Last edited by Ubergrendle; Nov 30, 2004 at 08:52 PM. Reason: ammendment re: Dx9 |
|
|
|
Nov 30, 2004, 09:29 PM
|
#3 |
|
Author Spirit Drivers
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: France
Posts: 86
Rep Power: 0 |
Exactly I force the fp16 on the geforces fx the quality difference have not visible view that I have to modify to compile it but not all not having the sources of the drives, I was not able to do a lot of things but I have to apply a method for mix at once the fp32/fp16 12, to have a render identical and more of performance alone problem this
finds inmore complex, sometimes the colors are poorly reproduces and that gives an unpleasant effect
__________________
Core 2 Duo E4400 @ 3,375GHz Albatron 8600GT 630/840(Shaderclock 1700) SLI "Just for fun score records 3dmark 2006 11050" Asus P5N-E SLI 2x1024 Geil PC6400 4 4 4 12 2 200G Sata Seagate Windows XP, Vista - Ubuntu/fedora. And XBOX360/PS3  Author Spirit Drivers since 2003 - Evolution Drivers and now Framerate Drivers |
|
|
|
Nov 30, 2004, 09:52 PM
|
Thread Starter
#4
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
|
thx for reply guys. guess it does not really matter, i just get tired of the ati fanboys go on about how bad nvidia because they lie & cheat & how great ati is because they do not.
as long as the game is playable on both platforms i guess it is all good.
__________________
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 01:04 AM
|
#5 |
|
HardwareHeaven Extreme Member
|
Well, you have to give some credit to nVidia as their cards have been doing some extra work with FP32 instead of the less taxing FP24. Although it would not benefit 6800 users by going FP16, FX users could get massive boosts. Shame on Valve for not hookin up all those FX owners out there with something so easy to fix but I guess money goes a long way.
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 02:29 AM
|
#6 | |
|
Author Spirit Drivers
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: France
Posts: 86
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
__________________
Core 2 Duo E4400 @ 3,375GHz Albatron 8600GT 630/840(Shaderclock 1700) SLI "Just for fun score records 3dmark 2006 11050" Asus P5N-E SLI 2x1024 Geil PC6400 4 4 4 12 2 200G Sata Seagate Windows XP, Vista - Ubuntu/fedora. And XBOX360/PS3 Author Spirit Drivers since 2003 - Evolution Drivers and now Framerate Drivers |
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 03:50 AM
|
#7 |
|
ein Krieger
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Clemson Uni
Posts: 3,127
Rep Power: 0 |
i think the point of this is that instead of making hl2 run fp16 on fx cards, they just forced fx cards to run dx8.1. which is just stupid.
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 04:16 AM
|
#8 |
|
DriverHeaven Junior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Philippines
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 0 |
Yeah, apparently. I wonder why they didn't go with FP16 instead of FP24.
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 04:38 AM
|
#9 | ||||||
|
HardwareHeaven Extreme Member
|
ROFL he saved the compair image useing a 24 bit depth! Any they were tooken pobubly on the same card...
he needs to take seprate images nvidia 16bit/24bit on , ati 16/24 bit onand save it as 32 bit http://www.hackerz.tc/hzinternal/tot...-and-32bit.jpg NOT RESIZED OR EDITING ALTERING THE IMAGES IN ANY WAY ESPECALLY NOT IN PHOTOSHOP as he mentioned ... I highly doubt he was playing the game in 1024 x 384, per the image size (2048x768 / 2 shots) so he did alter the images and ADOBE does wonders when resizeing and dithering images.... here is a shot he provided of just nvidia @ 16 bit an you can tell the IQ is poorer http://xanderf.dyndns.org:8080/image.../guess_who.jpg maybe this would be better if he wasn't linking to other people images/work??? Quote:
 Oh looky I wonder of wich company he is a fan???  Quote:
 Quote:
thats nice  the same people that think that the DNA drivers are "orgional" and and KillerSneak RoCKZors 1111!1Take anything said @ guru3d says with a truck load of salt.... Quote:
So insted of catering to nvidia it simply falls back to DX8.1 of wich they have 100% /full support.... makes total sence!!! Quote:
Since when is it news that this game is ATI sponcerd / optuimzed ??? But not nearly as optimuzed as a "ment to be played" games for nvidia cards Quote:
Beleave what you want but it's the truth weather you want to see it that way or not. Thats why I went to ATI. To buy nvidia you must just accept it and move on but I have a consiance and understand the "BIG picture" you see nvidia is couseing the graphics card companies to have to optumize just to hold thier ground agenst nvidia's un impressive hardware and "super drivers" ATI has added AI thier form of optumizeing still nothing near the size nor skill in wich nvidia's been doing it for years.... With AI at least you can turn it all off unlike nvidia allowing you disable "some"... When is it they were busted? with the 5800FX? when they hardware couldn't pass muster and nvidia leader ship were yelling mad, red face pop a vaien out your forhead mad and needed every last FPS just to try to keep from downing in 9700/9800 ATI Card sales after that release they picked up the gountlet of optumizeing specfically for bechmarks, games it's so simple to cheat.. little in the drivers and get some help from the developers and walla..... every one remember the issing smoke and bullets in 3dmark03. To this date thier drivers even approved one contain optumizations such as PS 2.0 ones even in 3Dmark APPROVED drivers... and any ones long as they are not APP specific to jst 3dmark . I remember the MASSIVE difference when I switched from Nvida to ATI in games, in benchmarks, mostly in IQ and image effects etc that nvidia simply cut out inthe name of HIGHER fps. they lost me forever or untill suck day as thiey fell confortable enough with thier hardware performance not to need it...This is not the first time issues have been fixed on a card by tricking it I rember FAR CRY (NVIDIA's game) you could fake a ATI device you'd get higher IQ/ detail and removal of a few bugs and the performance would be less. NV's been doing APP detection for a long time now. Most noteably busted when you'd rename FAR CRY.exe to somthing like FART CRY.exe you get a SIZEABLE performance drop on nvidia cards... Buying nvidia just say hey all this bullhock your doing is geat and do more. To the competitiors of nvidia you say "this is how I want you to act also" So, If you see ATI, SIS, VGI, optumizations, it's becouse Nvida fans made it ok and nessacary I've learn to live with what they do... But to say their not is not telling your self the truth Theres my 2 bits.... take it how ever you like
__________________
Last edited by The_Neon_Cowboy; Dec 1, 2004 at 05:29 AM. |
||||||
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 05:09 AM
|
#10 | |
|
DriverHeaven Junior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Philippines
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 0 |
The game IS ATI sponsored, and is probably optimized for ATI cards as well. But that's not the issue.
Why didn't Valve just use FP16 instead of FP24 for better compatibility? I'm sure FP16 is supported by ATI cards. If you do the 3dAnalyze test (I did) there really is no difference in IQ. And, you think ATI doesn't cheat too? They're both competitive COMPANIES, both of them need to utilize "secret" measures to keep up with one another. Quote:
Last edited by nookadum; Dec 1, 2004 at 05:16 AM. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 05:27 AM
|
#11 | ||
|
HardwareHeaven Extreme Member
|
Quote:
ALL games should be 16 MAX No!!! .... Is there a difference YES!(I thought Nvidia could handle FP24? Since doom III uses only 16bit and 24bit bit texture on nvidia cards, only for them, per ID SOFTWARE's previous statements to that effect) SO your saying all those games UT2004, DOOM III, FAR CRY, HALO ETC shouldn't be optumized for nvidia ????? and super tested to run beter on thier cards? Only if you own an ATI card FYI: ATM I don't own an NVidia card nor an ati card Both sides will be doing it now to some point they have to... thanks nvidia I think no body should be doing it! they should be a basic standard like OPenGL and DX9 and the games should adhere to it and strive to run the same on all cards with the accpetion of hardware supported features... but to optumize a game specifically to one band is distastefull... but hey you can only say one thing ... thanks nvidia Quote:
I could expect that from a game change but from a driver means thier pulling something.... remember when they botched thier optimuzations and UT2004 ran exteremly poor so poorly nvidia got them to release the demo with out a bechmark so as to buy them time and maybe it wouldn't be so obvious... I mean come on... in some high end areas in bechmarks a while back when they first hit the 9800 was even beating the 6800!is some cases .. then next driver walla they're impressively beating the 9800 in the same exact tests... ATI has great hardware and decent drivers, Nvidia has less then impressive hardware performance wise and supper drivers, heck the 6800's useing like 2x the power and putting out alot more heat compaired to ATI's soultions too! I wish we still had 3DFX man would we all be bette off but nvidia forseen the threat and bought them out and added thier future features to thier FX line (thats were features like "SLI" came from) Could you imagine the guys from 3DFX made thier own startup! EDIT: is some cases (nforce4 system) note this is against only a X800XT http://www.behardware.com/medias/pho...IMG0010389.gif http://www.behardware.com/medias/pho...IMG0010390.gif http://www.behardware.com/medias/pho...IMG0010392.gif http://www.behardware.com/medias/pho...IMG0010394.gif keeps up with / beats SLI 6800U's
__________________
Last edited by The_Neon_Cowboy; Dec 4, 2004 at 04:41 PM. |
||
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 05:45 AM
|
#12 | |
|
DriverHeaven Junior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Philippines
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
BTW, I own a Radeon 9550. The only thing that peeves me is their OpenGL/Linux support (I work too). I know they're [ATI] working on it, but they should've concentrated on that more than this CCC crap. If NVIDIA can do it, why can't ATI? |
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 05:46 AM
|
#13 |
|
The Great DaK
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 317
Rep Power: 0 |
Neon, how bout you just get it through your head that Nvidia isn't the devil...ATI does all the same crap they just don't get caught or get as much bad publicity for it. Although I do like your do dea of no one doing it and having standards, I do want them at the same time. Although the companies do them for competitive reasons it often gives Nvidia and ATI users alike more performance at no visible IQ loss (nothing wrong with IQ loss if it's something you'd only notice when comparing 2 screenshots). Oh well
__________________
P2 X4 @ 3.6ghz, 4gb ddr3, SSD, 5870 @ 950/1250 + a 3ghz i5 lappy
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 05:48 AM
|
#14 | |||
|
ein Krieger
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Clemson Uni
Posts: 3,127
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 05:50 AM
|
#15 |
|
ein Krieger
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Clemson Uni
Posts: 3,127
Rep Power: 0 |
If you have to sit down and compare two screenshots to notice an IQ difference, then you're playing the game for the wrong reason IMO.
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 05:54 AM
|
#16 | |
|
Semper ubi sub ubi
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 702
Rep Power: 51 |
Quote:
Some people have pointed out that the spec for D9 allows for 'partial precision', but basically to invoke this Dx8 mode it would require specialised coding. Although not an overly complex coding effort, it would require substantial additional work in terms of regression testing. Valve looked at the deployments, realised FX cards made up less than 2.5% of their target market, and focused their efforts elsewhere. Remember, this is Nvidia's fault -- they were the ones releasing a Dx8 card right on the cusp of the debut of Dx9. The 9xxxx series was better positioned market wise since day 1. Besides, this is all moot anyways... a customised Nvidia driver for HL2 will be out in weeks now that this knowledge is circulating. I don't think that this is a big deal. Optmising drivers for benchmarks specifically, however...
__________________
Veteran of the PC Microchannel / EISA wars of the late 1980s. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 06:05 AM
|
#17 | |
|
Obvious Closet Brony Pony
|
erm..... yeah, 2048x768 image is 1024x768 resolution for both.. nothing wrong with either...
another weird thing.... both images appaear to identical for my tastes.... really, taking 2048x768 image and then using adobe to find the differences.. aside from the obvious parts that are completely different due to something like the little wave in the water or the "Saving"..... it's.... identical....
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 07:59 AM
|
#18 |
|
DriverHeaven Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Poland / Cracov
Posts: 24
Rep Power: 0 |
FP16 should be standard - not FP24 of FP32.......
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 08:46 AM
|
#19 | ||
|
DriverHeaven Lover
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In your backyard
Posts: 236
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
By the way, why are all your posts full of spelling faults? Is it because you want everybody to share your ATI fanboy enthusiasm, so that you typed it really fast, or do you just need a really good typing course?
__________________
System 1: CPU: AMD Athlon 64 3200+ (socket 939) | DVD-RW: Sony DVD RW DW-U18A | Motherboard: MSI K8N Neo2-54G | GFX: nVidia Geforce 6600 GT | Monitor: Samsung SyncMaster 1100DF | RAM: 1 GB Kingston PC 3200 | Sound: Soundblaster X-Fi | Main HDD: 2 * Western Digital Raptor 36.7GB Serial ATA 10000RPM @ RAID 0 | Storage HDD: Maxtor DiamondMAX Plus 9 120 GB 8 MB Cache | DVD: Lite-On 16* DVD | OS: Windows XP SP2 | PSU: Sweex 650W PSU System 2: CPU: AMD Sempron 3000+ | Motherboard: MSI K7N2 Delta2-FSR | GFX: nVidia Geforce 6200 256 MB | Monitor: Hercules Prophetview 920 PRO | RAM: 1 GB Kingston PC 3200 | Sound: Nvidia Soundstorm | Main HDD: Maxtor DiamondMAX Plus 9 80 GB 8 MB Cache | CD-ROM: NEC 52* CD | OS: FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE | PSU: A-Open 300W PSU Laptop: CPU: AMD Mobile Sempron 3100+ | GFX: SiS M760GX 128 MB | Monitor: 15" XGA TFT LCD | RAM: 1 GB Kingston PC 3200 | Sound: Realtek AC '97 audio | HDD: 40 GB | DVD-RW: Slimtype DVDRW SOSW-833S | OS: Windows XP PRO SP2 |
||
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 09:46 AM
|
#20 | |||
|
HardwareHeaven Extreme Member
|
This POST the guy made has been RE: posted all over the web forums now, around the globe....
http://www.steampowered.com/forums/s...hreadid=193170 only productive thing is agerd nvidia users and started mud thowing between nvidia and ati fans Quote:
 HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!!I repeat AGAIN, I used to be the BIGGEST Flameing NVIDIA Fanboy on this site... So remember who your talking too.....an EX nvidia enthusiast Then one day I opened my mind and shut my mouth... Now I'm more of an ati fan why? My cup runeth over with The facts of what nvidia's is/ has been doing. No you won't find in togeather on any one page and wrtten by GOD himself like it would take for you to take any of it as truth or understand. IT'S BEEN OVER YEARS many sources I only repeat what I've read If haveing a nack for the FACTS and the REAL is meaning I'm a ATI fanboy then heck yea I am... What ever you want to call it...When you base you openion and information on the FACTS and base your preferance of that same information. NOT BOWING TO ANY BRAND, NAME, OR OTHERWISE.... Oh Wait You must be a fan boy ... You don't seen anything but prise of nvidia all the rest must be all lies made up by fanboys is it...? It makes no since to argue even when I've backed up clams with simple and absoulte proof you still will not beleive why? becouse your mind is closed on your mouth open... Yea I mis-type and mis spell deal with it or ignore my posts I care not  Quote:
I don't know but when I resize or save images with photo shop they always look so much better then everything else ... Also For all we know both shots are 16 or 24 no way to tell is there? and you can't just "trust the sourse" there is no accountabilty behind it... Quote:
for the other guys saying this not aiming this at you. If you take nvidia and force FP16 and get a boost... You know what you force ATI to FP16 they get a boost as well... It's not ATI's fault nor vavles that Nvidia only uses only FP16 or FP32 Nor that ATI belives over FP24 isn't needed, optumized for card brand games games was made main steam by nvidia and later thier "ment to be played"... much later ATI counterd with "Get in the game" So like I said where any time you find driver/ optumizationg / or FPS cheat in a game or it leans it support twards one brand or another... you can thank only one company NVIDIA and thier fans.... For saying hey this is OK and this is what I want to see more off... when they forked out thier money for a nvidia card. $$$ drives company's, They fans don't open up thier wallats and say change this it will happen....It don't work as well with game makers with thier hands in the $brand cookie jar.
__________________
Last edited by The_Neon_Cowboy; Dec 1, 2004 at 10:18 AM. |
|||
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 10:34 AM
|
#21 | |
|
Apple Fanboy?
|
lookin at the images quickly i see no major differences - both look pretty good imho
i'll play games no matter how "good" the graphics are, as long as the gameply is up to par
__________________
Chris - The Aussie Super Mod
Hardwareheaven Rules - Sig Request Thread How you can help HardwareHeaven by using Digg! Hardwareheaven Super-Moderator Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 02:42 PM
|
#22 | |
|
Semper ubi sub ubi
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 702
Rep Power: 51 |
Quote:
#1. Dx9 has FP24 as one of the two standards. #2. Everyone is arguing "FP16 is good enough", but what if Valve's argument is "FP24 is good enough to avoid FP32"? I'm sure everyone would agree there is a difference between FP16 and FP32. What if Valve was using FP24 in most cases to try and AVOID the coding for FP32 everywhere? I was looking at some benchmarks, and found this comparison for Dx9 2.0 Shaders in Far Cry. You can see that all the 'true' Dx9 cards perform very well... X800 is ~slightly~ better than Nvidia's 6800 line, but the margin is insignificant. I'm willing to bet even that Nvidia would win if the tests were at a higher res. The 9xxxx series though thoroughly trounce FX cards in these tests though. http://www.ixbt.com/video2/over2k4-fcs20-1024.shtml Only the best FX cards (5900, 5950) can beat the 9800pro, and then only the 128mb model.
__________________
Veteran of the PC Microchannel / EISA wars of the late 1980s. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2004, 03:19 PM
|
#23 |
|
Author Spirit Drivers
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: France
Posts: 86
Rep Power: 0 |
Good day, good I like the graphic cards and this that she can do but me, I have gone out the spirit fury that uses the method fp16 for the geforces fx (modification sm2.0 of the to compile) but nothing of well astounding one, it is clear that there has a performance increase but the geforces fx or geforce 6 never will arrive at the level of the archicteture r3xx being given that nvidia... the nvidia have a partial precision, the data are slowed down... and the management of the shaders is poor ly to integrate to the hardware of nvidia, they would have been necessary to do a based games on are own hardware, nvidia does not want to respect the norms dx9 so worse for him... but this than it can do, this is to put the fp16 for the geforce fx, this will already be a beginning,the nvidia one a potential huge one but the one will not be exploited because of a false support dx9
__________________
Core 2 Duo E4400 @ 3,375GHz Albatron 8600GT 630/840(Shaderclock 1700) SLI "Just for fun score records 3dmark 2006 11050" Asus P5N-E SLI 2x1024 Geil PC6400 4 4 4 12 2 200G Sata Seagate Windows XP, Vista - Ubuntu/fedora. And XBOX360/PS3 Author Spirit Drivers since 2003 - Evolution Drivers and now Framerate Drivers |
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2004, 01:37 PM
|
#24 |
|
DriverHeaven Lover
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: canada
Posts: 248
Rep Power: 0 |
Neon-***I wish we still had 3DFX man would we all be bette off but nvidia forseen the threat and bought them out and added thier future features to thier FX line
(thats were features like "SLI" came from)*** 3DFX screwed themselves and pretty much went out of business. Nvidia bought the leftover pieces, they DID NOT buy them because of future threats, as 3DFX had NO future. In fact they were behind the curve in many of their later products--such as only 16bit colour when everyone else was doing 32bit. |
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2004, 02:14 PM
|
#25 |
|
DriverHeaven Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 670
Rep Power: 0 |
So do the 6800* Nvidia cards force dx8.1 as well?
If not, theres nothing to complain about... |
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2004, 02:38 PM
|
#26 | |
|
HardwareHeaven Extreme Member
|
Quote:
No future, they were young and about the the hotest thing since the dawn of personal computers when it came to gameing. they added all kinda of new stuff, new ways of thinking, things like SLI way a head of thier time. Insted of setting druleing of the ATI of nvidia card you'd been in the store druleing over a 3dfx one. behind  Huh? I'd say they were a head of them selfs...Lets put it this way Nvidia bought then out and when they finally started useing the advanced technolgy they aquired (tech in use and stuf they wer working on) from 3DFX with the FX series. so good it was used years later, hardly behind. Remember 3DFX's time was before radeon / geforce ever took off.. They were haveing financial problems wich stems from many things like developement etc. For example the 5500 had been out for a short while they were at the edge of relaseseing the 6000 series... they wer little guys filling big shoes. (means higher costs/lower profits ) but before they went into much production of the 6000 they were bought out.. even thier commercail they put out was funny... a first ... I've never see and ATI or nvidia commercail on TV EVER. Even if you did it's wouldn't be funny and make ya laugh... till this day thier commercal will made people bust a gut laughing... IF 3dfx was still going we'd all be better off today even if they wer the bottom of the heap they would have pushed nvidia and ati to strive harder and would of brung us new technoligies and brung us in new directions
__________________
Last edited by The_Neon_Cowboy; Dec 3, 2004 at 02:50 PM. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2004, 11:02 PM
|
#27 | |
|
DriverHeaven Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
FP32 is the way to go, its the standard for OpenGL and it will be for dx10, so Nvidia do have a technical advantage over Ati for future software titles, but they just are implementing it at the wrong time so they have to compensate with other methods. I think nvidia has a much better gpu (N40 vs R420) if the can have on par performance with nearly the same specs (16x1 pixel, 6x vertex) with N40 running at aprox 80% the clock speed as R420.
__________________
everything and nothing |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2004, 11:06 PM
|
#28 |
|
DriverHeaven Founder
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 32,480
Rep Power: 179  |
guys lets take it down a notch before it gets really out of hand, thanks.
|
|
|
|
Dec 4, 2004, 03:34 AM
|
#29 | |
|
DriverHeaven Lover
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: canada
Posts: 248
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardw...eviews/2509/1/ which pits your 5500 against the geforce 2 GTS. Not that will change your mind. I was building and selling systems at that time, as well as gaming, and continually benched new cards cards as they came out. I'm not saying they were crap, or even very far behind, and were miles ahead of ATI and the S4Savage, which were the other players at the time. But they were falling behind, and losing much revenue lost from not licensing their chips as they had before. Nvidia put them out of business by licensing a better product to a lot more manufacturers, not by buying them to close them down as you so foolishly allude to. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 4, 2004, 05:20 AM
|
Thread Starter
#30
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
|
coldfront. your post was right on the money but i think it is going to fall on deaf ears.
__________________
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
