NVIDIA and its troubled GeForce 400 series [Guru3D.com]

Pathetic if true.

 

If that's true its good news, not bad news, i wasn't expecting mass shipment of the cards until about May, especially to the second tier people who work for both sides.

 

Also have a look at the Mono website. It's an open source version of .NET that allows cross-platform development in C# (and similar languages). It made progress recently.

http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

 

Im not right with you,

- ATI 9700Pro - 9500 a lot faster of Nvidia offers at this time..
- 9800 series, largely better of the FX5000 (not hard, it's surely the wrongest move of Nvidia).
- Nvidia introduce SLI ( and i was one in the first SLI users) who give them the lead, and the 6800ultra alone was a real solid card ( but the refresh X850XTX was not bad at all in single card.. )... huum good memories, DFI NF4 + 2x 6600GT / 6800 ultra
- X1900XTX-X1950XTX (GDDR4), equal and faster for the second of the 7000series , crossfire added, ATi take back the lead in overclocker teams..
AMD buy ATI:
2900 XT ... slower of Nvidia 8000 series and not a good series, but peoples was wait too much of it: a lot of new technology, a complex architecture, it was cost too much, heat too much ( 512bits ring memory controler for example..) AMD try do a hard marketing around it, and fail...

- 3870.....

- 4870: slower but priced really well, and offcourse faster in crossfire or quadcrossfire) ATI keep the crown in Overclocked world, in all modes: 2x 4870, 2x 4870X2.... more of 3/4 of the top scores was released with ATI.


This is not a comparaison of ATI & Nvidia perf, but just for see what have happend when AMD have buy ATI... The point is Nvidia have won the heart of a lot of gamers with the first Geforce series / GF1-2-3-4, many gamers was just not look at ATI back in old (good )days.

Im not really sure AMD buying ATI was a good thing at start, I still ask me if ATI learn of AMD, or if it's not AMD who have not learn enough fast of ATI.

 

I don't know why people like to act like ATI won the 4800 vs 200 series, the 200's were faster at nearly everything.

 

+1. I owned both and can say that Nvidia had em beat overall with the GT200 series.

 

This is because ATI's method of housing the stream processors within the core it self instead of giving it its own clock speed allows ATI's architecture to expand more than Nvidia's. Think about it this way ATI has their stream processors clocked under 1GHz but this allows them to put more of them in as it makes less heat. Nvidia clock theirs above 1GHz separate from the core clock which generates more and more heat only a die shrink can somewhat help Nvidia's method of doing things. Even Mr. Moore over at Intel has said that he prefers ATI's method as it has a much longer lifespan to grow and become more powerful as we have seen. Nvidia seem to have hit a brick wall when it comes to their method hence the lower clock speeds. If Fermi was built using 32nm it may have been a different story.

 

Yet for several generations now, nvidia cards have proven to be more powerful even with lower clocks, and according to you, inferior architecture, how does that logic work :S

 

This sounds a lot like AMDs dominance over Intel during the days of Athlon v Pentium IV. Intel was clocking like crazy and not winning. There was a 3.0Ghz ish limit.

Now who is on top???

It all goes in cycyles and for now AMD has the upper hand in the VGA sector of performance. I doesn't really matter though because current games coming out demand even more than these cards can put out.

So I'm going to wait till Intel or AMD comes out with the next big thing. I can't believe it has taken this long to play Crysis like it should be. :S .

 

Not sure if this was posted before, but Charlie's sidekicks seem...very much like him. Fanboyism like no other:

http://www.semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1598


- PR-0927

 

Hahaha , That forum its a Joke , first and last time i go waist my time in there.

 

LMAO. I love how they are talking about how G3D is "misleading people" yet they are in a site that has ZERO benchmarks and tests done and they only have charlie's speculations to go with.

 

Yeah, their forums are populated by the dumbest people on the net, most of them believing they are of superior intellect since they don't follow Nvidia, but believe everything a wee fat hormonal man says.

The whole place feels like a cult with the hero worshiping, very creepy.

 

Read 2 first posts and hit close tab. Someone over there should look in the mirror before making unfounded bs accusations. uke2:

Charlies cult of fanATIsm can remain there, or even better, I encourage everyone feeling the same jump in there and leave rest of us here have a good chat with good ppl.

 

ATI and NVIDIA chips are made in the same fab and mind you. GPGPU is nothing for ATI and they have AMD behind them.

First thing is that it clearly shows that you don't have technical knowledge that you where talking about.

Hard core gamers don't play old games and OGL games my friend.

they look for best game experience and Dx11 which was released a long time back and is supported by ATI for almost 6 0r 7 months now.

even Nvidia had lots of driver crashes in the past and had game issues which will be fixed in the next driver. and i think you haven't used a ATI card for a long long time. now the Drivers are really GR8.

There was a story where a rich guy who takes his servant to a shop to buy a shirt.

the worker buys the best shirt in the shop with the money he saved and the owner had to by the same shirt.

So the rich guy paid 300$ extra to the shop keeper.

The rich guy proudly telling the servant that his shirt is expensive lol

it shows how big of a fool that rich guy is lol

Low price doesn't mean that the product is bad. open your Eye man... geee

 

I like whatever gives me better value. Before the 8800 GT I had ATI's 9800 XT PRO (it's olddd). Worked fine, but now I have the 8800 GT which works fine too.

Kinda pointless debating ATI vs. NVIDIA since a conclusion will never be reached; it's not THAT easy to make a GFX unit, and all companies have some "troubled" times.

Unless it's Apple of course, then I could care less.

 

:bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang:

I wish a mod would delete Size_Mick's post on the first page, i can't be the only one who is sick of seing it being repeatedly quoted by people too lazy to read the full thread.

And to the ATI guys getting riled by it, would you like to buy my pet troll?
He's a nasty little thing, but im sure you will enjoy feeding him.

 

I think that a "hardcore" gamer knows classics, and its descendants. So, the "harcore" gamer recognises and expect the news Quakes and Dooms, and he plays them. Even now we gather some friends and play on LAN Quake 3. And i know that it doesn't deliver the lastest gaming experience, but i know that any gamers that dare to call himself like that recognises a classic and recognises the good thing of OpenGL games, whether they are new or old.

A gamer that want the lastest graphics, lastest technologies and else in his games and kicks out other games that doesnt deliver that, that gamer i call him "graphic whore" XDD I think that no one will play Crysis in 4 years. But all we know that it delivered the lastest features in "gaming experience"