What has happened to GFX cards?

Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce' started by cjs007, Feb 24, 2012.

  1. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    1600x1200 required expensive monitors in 2004? Ummm.... no? My CRT from 1993 supported up to 1600x1200. And thats what I used. You must be talking about LCDs. Which were just making their way onto the scene around that time, CRTs were still a favorite due to their speed and superior image quality.

    And the LCDs of that time most had a native resolution of 1280x1024. Not sure about 800x600, I never seen an LCD with a native resolution that low.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2012
  2. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,231
    Likes Received:
    740
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    VGA didn't support 1600x1200 in 1993. Support for resolutions beyond 1024x768 weren't added until the mid-late 90's.....but, keep posting bull****. Some of us actually lived through the time period. I've had monochrome displays, EGA, CGA, VGA, SVGA... Haven't missed a standard yet.

    My 17" monitor (native resolution of 1280x1024) purchased in 2004 was $280....which, for someone working part-time due to college, was a lot of money. My average paycheck at the time was $80/week and had to cover car insurance, gas, food, tools for work and computer parts. Of course, you're still a kid so I wouldn't expect you to understand....
     
  3. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    Perhaps the computers in 1993 did not support 1600x1200, but their monitors could. And I gamed at that resolution (in 2004). Whether you want to believe it or not, it happened. The monitors themselves can do it.

    Look it up. Its a ViewSonic 17 1993.

    You were making $80/week part time in 2004? Where do you live? Thats horrible. Im sorry for you.

    Also, dug up some of my old magazines. Found the issue from 2004 where Maximum PC tested the 6800 Ultra. And according to them:

    At 1600x1200:
    Halo - 73.6 FPS
    Doom 3 - 38.7 (4xAA, 8xAF)
    Far Cry - 32.3 (4xAA, 8xAF)

    So perhaps Guru3D had some flawed results in their testing. I would trust Maximum PC long before Guru3D.

    Fine print:

    "Tests were run with a Xeon 3.4GHz and 1GB of DDR RAM"
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2012
  4. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,231
    Likes Received:
    740
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700

    The original VGA standard only supported up to 640x480 and was extended to 800x600 and then 1024x768 in the early 90's, under the SVGA "standard". Resolutions beyond 1024x768 were added in the mid-late 90's under the XSVGA "standard"....which is where 1600x1200 was added (under the XGA "standard")...

    In 2004, I worked an average of 15-20hrs a week, making $5.25/hr (minimum wage at the time).

    MaximumPC isn't a good source....bad history there. Their review was also done 6 months after Hilbert's (Hilbert's was in April 04, MaximumPC [according to their article] was done in October 04). During that time period, nVidia was well known for reducing default IQ settings in the drivers to give the impression that newer drivers actually provided better performance (and thus, better benchmark results).

    Hilbert's review was done using a Pentium4C at 2.8ghz
     

  5. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    Dude, just look for my monitor. Its a ViewSonic 17 inch model number 1782 17HV2. I couldnt find anything on it and the manual only indicates factory timings does not list maximum resolution. The highest factory timing listed happens to be 1280x1024 @72hz. And that was in 1993.

    Nice excuses. So your saying nvidia somehow reduced image quality in their drivers to give it a magical 20-30FPS boost in performance? Im sorry, but for some reason I highly doubt any quality setting in the driver can give you that kind of boost other than AA or AF.

    Maximum PC was a very reliable source back then. Havent read magazines in years so I dont know about now.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2012
  6. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,231
    Likes Received:
    740
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    That monitor wasn't produced until 1994, by Matsu****a.

    Actually, if you knew even 10% of what you think you know.....you'd know it was made public many years ago. nVidia was caught by several review sites reducing the default IQ settings in their drivers. That's why nVidia made such a huge deal of it with ATI/AMD.

    MaximumPC has never been a "very reliable source".... They're no different from PC Mag....

    Edit: Apparently the forum is censoring the manufacturer's name....lol
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2012
  7. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,710
    Likes Received:
    4,536
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    You Crazy???...Maximum PC aint got S*'T on Guru3D...
     
  8. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    I suppose I can add this to my list of me being the only person to own one:

    A 1993 ViewSonic 17 inch CRT

    [​IMG]


    Please do inform me of anything I else I have that no one else does. I already have the fastest and only 8800. And now the only ViewSonic17 made in 1993.


    Hopefully you can understand my position.

    But looking back I got very similar performance with my 6800 that Maximum PC had listed in their benchmarks.

    Example, I could just barely max out Far Cry at 1600x1200 and they had it listed at 32FPS which is probably about where I was and same with Doom 3.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2012
  9. Agent-A01

    Agent-A01 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    898
    GPU:
    1080Ti H20
    GTFO noob. You like to talk about sh1t you have no knowledge of and then try to argue your way out of somewhere and throughout that process it makes you seem even more stupid than possible. :ban:
     
  10. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    Awww. Is someone mad that I dont trust the "information" floating around this forum?

    Im not the only person that laughs at some of the stuff you and your friends post.

    Like the whole "why is it not using more than 320MB" thing. That was rich.

    Dont be mad that you have nothing to contribute to the argument other than insults.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2012

  11. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,231
    Likes Received:
    740
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    Viewsonic lists no information about the 17VH2 themselves. The information I posted came from a 3rd party electronics repair site.

    The manufacturing company name was in fact correct as Viewsonic is a "fabless" company. The actual manufacturing company no longer exists under it's brand at the time those displays were being made. But, to "update" the information a bit....the displays were purchased from what is now Panasonic and sold under the Viewsonic brand. Panasonic is the current name of the company that actually produced the displays for Viewsonic, as the manufacturing company actually changed it's name to become Panasonic.
     
  12. Agent-A01

    Agent-A01 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    898
    GPU:
    1080Ti H20
    Cool story bro, but i wasnt in that arguement, it was you and sykozis. shall i link you to the thread?
    and the various other threads where you spread misinformation? like how your 8800GTS is faster than a gtx 470, windows wont install on a less than 30gb drive, or maybe the one where you said all pastes are electrically conductive? :wanker:

    and what is it, like 10 to 1? nobody is with you bro, youre all alone here.
     
  13. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    Im missing the part in this where my monitor was not produced until 1994.....



    1. Still never said my 8800 was faster than a GTX470. Anywhere in that thread. So not sure where your getting that.

    2. I was trying to help someone select a drive that would be suitable for Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit and 30GB is not as others had agreed with me. Even you I believe.

    3. Perhaps I got electrically conductive and capacitive mixed up then. I was merely trying to say that thermal compound introduced to the circuits on a PCB can cause problems. You got me on that one.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2012
  14. ---TK---

    ---TK--- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,112
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    2x 980Ti Gaming 1430/7296
    haha the 8800gts is nearly as fast as a 470. good stuff
     
  15. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    Yea mang. You should see how many frames I get in Metro 2033 with full DX11. **** is like 50FPS.
     

  16. Agent-A01

    Agent-A01 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,363
    Likes Received:
    898
    GPU:
    1080Ti H20

    1. Lol you sure said it was just as fast as a 470 when the 470 is what 4x faster than yours? trololol

    2. See now your changing your words you said "IT WILL NOT install on a drive less than 30gb"

    3. How do you get those 2 mixed up? are you dumb or a troll? regardless Most pastes are not Conductive OR capacitive. so therefore that makes you an idiot. :infinity:

    good stuff eh tommy?
     
  17. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,231
    Likes Received:
    740
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    Wow....you lack any form of comprehension skills....yet, think you know everything...


    I'll bold and underline the important part for you....

     
  18. ---TK---

    ---TK--- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,112
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    2x 980Ti Gaming 1430/7296
    maleficarus reborn?
     
  19. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    1. I stated that based on texture fillrate my 8800 would be more comparable to a GTX470.

    2. I did say that. But that was based off what Microsoft had posted, and I did not continue to defend that it would not install on 30GB. I continued to defend the fact that it would be hard to contain on 30GB. Im already up to 36GB and I have not done anything to my install since. Windows just keeps using more space over time.

    3. I believe in the post, it stated that being capacitive can cause problems when introduced to circuits. So can being electrically conductive. They seem pretty similar to me.
     
  20. Cambria

    Cambria Banned

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800GTS 320MB
    Alright. So where does it say that it was not produced until 1994?

    I mean, that was your claim. Are you trying to say that you just made it up for the sake of being a dumbass and now saying that you could not find information on it?

    I mean, if your going to claim that a monitor I HAVE SITTING RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME and YOU DONT was not produced until 1994 then at LEAST find some information to back it up.
     

Share This Page