Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: ChronoReverse on May 04, 2004, 10:58:48 am
-
It looks like the X800Pro about matches the 6800Ultra.
The X800XT PE tramples the 6800Ultra in almost every test I've looked at.
-
....and links?
-
www.atitech.com
Enter the contest!
Enter me as one of your 4 'friends', please? My email is [email protected] :) Please?
-
Try http://www.beyond3d.com/reviews/ati/r420_x800/
Temporal AA - for any R300 users wanting to experiment try the following link.
http://www.elitebastards.com/page.php?pageid=4533&head=1&comments=1
-
Looks good, no shader 3.0 support though.
-
I wouldnt bother with these new cards, go with the 9800xt and wait for PCIXpress cards.
-
the X800 only gets near the 6800 Ultra because ATI left out PS3.0 and other cool looking things. Nvidia looks like it'll come out on top on this one, they must have learned their lesson from the FX series *is somewhat dissappointed with FX 5600 (well, it works fine, but it could work better)*
-
Originally posted by Lonestar
I wouldnt bother with these new cards, go with the 9800xt and wait for PCIXpress cards.
PCI express is overrated, its only real imidiate benfit is to video editting.
I read a very convincing article that showed that 'currently' x8 AGP is not even slightly faster than x4. Currently no games utilise this extra bandwidth. Thats what PCI express is about, its not going to make much difference to graphics speeds until developers start making use of that kind of massive transfers.
You could spend a awful lot of money of that tech now and not see the benifit for a while.
-
Originally posted by Turambar
the X800 only gets near the 6800 Ultra because ATI left out PS3.0 and other cool looking things.
Theres nothing to benchmark Shader 3.0 with so that has no effect on results.
3.0 is very important to me, Im going to get a new card and that could well be the deciding factor.
-
Originally posted by RandomTiger
PCI express is overrated...
You could spend a awful lot of money of that tech now and not see the benifit for a while.
And by then you'll probably have to upgrade your computer anyway, so it would be waste now.
-
My thoughts exactly, Im going to forget about upgrading everything asside from a graphics card and push all my money into that.
-
Lol, I still have a Geforce2 32 megger . I think it's time I move up to something nice. It wont be this uber card though as my AGP slot doesn't even meet 8x.
-
Really seems to vary by benchmark. 6800 Ultra really beats the X800 XT in Call of Duty and other OpenGL games. In Direct3D, however, it appears that the X800 wins when anisotropic filtering is enabled. It's really a toss up. I personally think that the best bets in the market will be either the X800 Pro, 6800 GT, or 6800 non-ultra.
Basic advantage of the 6800: Bit more future-proofing since it has PS3.0, better OpenGL performance.
Basic advantage: Slightly less power-hungry (you'll still need a good PSU), better DirectX performance with anisotropic filtering enabled.
EDIT: Seems nVidia feels threatened. They've announced a 6800 Ultra Extreme at 450/1100.
-
Originally posted by J3Vr6
Lol, I still have a Geforce2 32 megger . I think it's time I move up to something nice. It wont be this uber card though as my AGP slot doesn't even meet 8x.
My Mobo supports AGP4x and my card is 8x compatible, it works fine.
You see compatible, you can also use it on AGP4x slots.:)
-
A price war would make my day
-
Originally posted by RandomTiger
A price war would make my day
Same here :D
And it will no doubt be a price drop on certain cards which will make it able for us to get say...a Radeon 9800XT much much cheaper than we would today :D
Only problem is that we have to wait a little while still :p
-
The Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB is already under 150 pounds, a bargain methinks, and certainly enough to keep up to date till Christmas, which is fair enough.
-
What's even more fun is a 9800 non-pro. Flashed to Pro. Then flashed to XT. With a Zalman cooler on it. If only my PSU could handle it properly (It's really killing my CPU overclocking).
-
Originally posted by RandomTiger
Theres nothing to benchmark Shader 3.0 with so that has no effect on results.
3.0 is very important to me, Im going to get a new card and that could well be the deciding factor.
Yes. Right now, the tests that the X800XT PE win aren't because of Shaders 3.0 at all since there aren't any tests that take advantage of that. Not even Farcry.
Out of interest RT, what feature of Shaders 3.0 are you interested in anyways? From what I've seen, almost everything 3.0 can do, 2.0 can do using multiple passes. I'm just curious which feature which cannot be done in 2.0 are you looking at (since I'll be looking into a new card as well and if the feature is something Im, interested in and has potential to make it into FS2_open...).
I'm thinking geometry instancing...
OpenGL has always been nVidia's strong suit. It's one of the reasons why I like nVidia cards. Nonetheless, the X800XT PE performed rather well in CoD with the settings 1600x1200@4xAA/16xAF.
PCI-E won't make a whit of difference in terms of performance (excluding issues with the new technology, the bridge chips and etc). We haven't even saturated AGP8x's half-duplex bandwidth much less PCI-E16x's full-duplex, double AGP8x bandwidth.
There's one more thing that the 6800Ultra should be able to beat the X800XT PE cleanly in: Doom3. But we'll have to see if the theoretical will match up with reality.
Both cards are pretty awesome. The fall refresh round is going to be great.
-
Originally posted by ChronoReverse
Out of interest RT, what feature of Shaders 3.0 are you interested in anyways?
Fry Cry is apparently getting upgraded to S3.0, 'apparently' the results are very impressive. I want this card to last me a long time, I cant afford to fork out every 6 months. ATI will eventually get s3.0 as well and I dont want to be left behind. But I want to buy a card now.
Also as a coder I might want to get into playing with making shaders at some point. I heard s3.0 can do loops and stuff.
My system is only a AMD 2400, its possible I may not see the top speeds that either card anyway. If I get s3.0 I will definely see the results.
Also it would be good for the SCP, as I imagine most other coders will go with ATI.
-
Your right though, if Im going to buy on the basis of s3.0, might be an idea to do more research on it.
-
I will be getting a new computer once this new generation of cards has come out along with the socket 939 motherboards. It seems that the ATI cards are comfortably leading in most of the DX8 and DX9 tests, but the crucial UT2004 tests looked inconclusive (since many games I play run on that engine) and the nVidia cards' OGL performance would be a big boost in Doom 3. I will just wait until retail drivers come out until deciding on either camp.
I read a very convincing article that showed that 'currently' x8 AGP is not even slightly faster than x4. Currently no games utilise this extra bandwidth. Thats what PCI express is about, its not going to make much difference to graphics speeds until developers start making use of that kind of massive transfers.
I saw that article as well, although I can't remember where it was now. The only benefit I can see in getting a PCIExpress motherboard is that this interface will probably become the standard in two years or so and new cards might only be available for PCIExpress.
-
Originally posted by RandomTiger
Fry Cry is apparently getting upgraded to S3.0, 'apparently' the results are very impressive. I want this card to last me a long time, I cant afford to fork out every 6 months. ATI will eventually get s3.0 as well and I dont want to be left behind. But I want to buy a card now.
Also as a coder I might want to get into playing with making shaders at some point. I heard s3.0 can do loops and stuff.
My system is only a AMD 2400, its possible I may not see the top speeds that either card anyway. If I get s3.0 I will definely see the results.
Also it would be good for the SCP, as I imagine most other coders will go with ATI.
Careful about Farcry. The nvidia demo was showing the difference between shaders 2.0+ and shaders 1.x not 3.0 and 2.0
-
Originally posted by Darkage
My Mobo supports AGP4x and my card is 8x compatible, it works fine.
You see compatible, you can also use it on AGP4x slots.:)
That's why I said I wouldn't be getting the uber pci express card. I was saying that I don't even have 8x so I wouldn't even consider the pciexpress thingy.
If anything I'll get an ati 9800-something or other. No idea, I'm not really thinking of wanting to waste money, though.
-
Why I intend to buy this (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=14-102-335&depa=0) when it drops a few more dollars.
-
Originally posted by ChronoReverse
Careful about Farcry. The nvidia demo was showing the difference between shaders 2.0+ and shaders 1.x not 3.0 and 2.0
There are some really dubious screenshots on the farcry site that arent meant to represent the difference between 2 and 3.
http://www.farcry.nl/nieuws/item/8541/
I think shot 3 is well below the quality of my GF4 so Im not taking them very seriously. Might play Far Cry tonight to try and get some screenshots to verify this.
-
Random, you could play Farcry on your 2400??? I have a 2400 and I would have never have dreamt playing a game like that, even if I had a 9800... Wow, I really should open my eyes.
-
AMD XP 2400, GF4, Far Cry runs nicely at medium.
The water shader effects look great.
Why on Earth wouldnt it be able to cope?
-
I don't know what people are talking about with Far Cry, I have every detail at the highest setting on my GF4Ti4200 and average about 25-30 fps, except for a few areas in the game where I have to set the detail to medium, the game runs fine.
-
Well, for me, it's always that I had a really slow computer that I could NEVER play latest release games. I was stuck with a 300 mhz and then a 400 mhz w/ the smallest amount of memory for YEARS. It was only until a couple of months ago that I moved up to a 2400 AMD.
So my mind is already set that any new game that comes out will never play on my computer.
-
it should be noted that Chrono is correct - there is no real difference between S2.0 and S3.0
-
Yeah the FarCry developers have mentioned that there isn't anything you can do on PS3 that you theoretically couldn't do on PS2.0. Apparently there are things that are available in PS3.0 that could in the future speed things up but in terms of image quality there isn't anything specifically new.
-
I've heard its the first shaders to allow loops and it allows for much bigger shader scripts. Surely thats got to make a difference?
Theoretically theres nothing you can do in hardware that you cant do in software, but its doesnt make it a good idea.
-
Originally posted by J3Vr6
So my mind is already set that any new game that comes out will never play on my computer.
Most good games allow you to scale the graphics options right down, doing that makes me sad but if you are willing to you can play loads of new games.
-
I hear ya, but my motto has always been: "Who wants to play at the minimum requirements anyway?"
-
Its not even the minimum requirements. According to HardOCP HalfLife 2's shaders don't even fully push the PS2.0 specification and essentially what PS3.0 does is open up some of the bounadaries.
Now thats not to say that a game in the next year or year and a half won't push that and start using shaders that utilize the extra abilities of PS3.0 but that should not be at the top of the list for decision making process.
I will not be buying either X800 or GeForce 6800. Too expensive and really not worth it for me. I usually skip 2 or 3 generations at a time at each upgrade so I'll stay with my Radeon 9700Pro which serves me just nicely and upgrade in a couple of years time when the new Maddox games Battle of Britain game comes out.
-
i have an FX, and a soon as i have a source of income, I'm getting a Series 6, and a good one. I have this dream of building my own comp, and one day I'll make it a reality! I suppose it'll have to wait till im in college (which i will be one year from now) and work from there. One thing i want to do is put it into some old crappy beige intel box so people will underestimate it
-
Originally posted by RandomTiger
I've heard its the first shaders to allow loops and it allows for much bigger shader scripts. Surely thats got to make a difference?
IIRC S2 has loops and the R420 pipeline is something near 65K instructions for a shader program
Theoretically theres nothing you can do in hardware that you cant do in software, but its doesnt make it a good idea.
Shader programs ARE software emulation - just running on the GPU since they've gotten sufficiently general purpose enough to be able to run some more generic routiens on pixels
-
Shaders 3.0 support _branching_. Shaders 2.0 does not.
The primary benefit of this is that it will allow for optimizations to be done in _special cases_.
As a matter of fact, the real benefit of Shaders 3.0 isn't better image quality. Shaders 2.0 can do anything 3.0 can do. What Shaders 2.0 cannot do is do what 3.0 does at the same speed on the same hardware.
This is why it is quite easy to convert to Shaders 3.0 from 2.0
AFAIK, the X800 has almost everything Shaders 3.0 requires except for the infinite instuctions length and branching in the pixel shaders. The vertex shaders should be 3.0 compliant.
Personally I think 3.0 shaders are a good idea. However, I don't think that 3.0 is so important that I'd buy the 6800 for sure over the x800.
We'll still have to see who will get the cards out on the shelf first. Additionally, it'll be more interesting to see the fall refresh cards (since that'll be when I'll probably get a new card).
-
The reason you don't see an ATI card with PS3.0 is because the R400 part had horrible yields, and was pushed back to R500.
-
Originally posted by Kazan
Shader programs ARE software emulation - just running on the GPU since they've gotten sufficiently general purpose enough to be able to run some more generic routiens on pixels
I know, that was an analogy
-
Originally posted by ChronoReverse
Personally I think 3.0 shaders are a good idea. However, I don't think that 3.0 is so important that I'd buy the 6800 for sure over the x800.
I want to keep this card for a long time, cant afford to fork out every 6 months. I'll be looking to keep this card for two years. My limited CPU means I might not see the top framerates of either of the cards and in two years time they will both be crap. But the 6800 will have shader 3.
-
I can't help but feel you'd be better off waiting till Christmas then, by then PCIExpress will have had some time in the real world and will be on its way to taking over as mainstream.... plus the next generation of cards should be out/coming out along with announcements for the games that'll really need them.
Right now there's just nothing out there that really needs the new power.
-
I would think the Graphics Card market is stepping into the transition of the CPU market where products can't be measured against each other. When they are though its incredibly bias :nod:, its just user preference now.. nothing more
-
I still stick with ATI due to nVidia's history of having problems with heat and other general poor marks from the engineering department
-
And ATI has a history of having problems with drivers.
When an architecture is completely rebuilt, you can't always base your decisions on past generations. Of course, the R420 is actually the same as the R300 and R360 at it's core, but my point still stands.
-
Grey Wolf 2009: not in the last yeah
-
I was just pointing out an example of how past performance doesn't always dictate future performance. Older ATI drivers were useless. Now, they aren't. Rather like the Omega modified ones myself...
-
(sorry for the little off-topic)
Here's a 30 second comparison of the ATi/nVidia boards for you guys. Looks like ATi won. :)
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2004/05/radeon_x800_vs_geforce_6800.html (http://www.bbspot.com/News/2004/05/radeon_x800_vs_geforce_6800.html)
-
I feel dumber for reading that review, thanks!
-
Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
What's even more fun is a 9800 non-pro. Flashed to Pro. Then flashed to XT. With a Zalman cooler on it. If only my PSU could handle it properly (It's really killing my CPU overclocking).
!?!! Explain, please - prob'ly getting a 9800-?? when i get my new puter. How do I do this, and where do I get the relevant files?
-
www.theregister.co.uk
look up the review yourself.
It seems that the ATI card can run on a reasonable PSU, and is a single slot setup. nVidia is known for huge, power consuming, jet engine heat&sound monsters. I want a silent, normal sized, cool card so I won't need liquid nitrogen cooling or a fan the size of a 747 to keep my case working.
-
Some of the 9800 cards (the high-powered ones, not the tiny ones) even run without any form of fan at all... just a specially designed heatsink. Quite impressive if you ask me. That said I keep edging closer to liqued cooling since it removes every damn problem related to heat.
-
I want my PC to be silent. I want it too work without problems. I don't care about overclocking. Therefore, ATI is better then nVidia.
-
I'm not defending nVidia, nor am I "bigging up" ATI or trying to put them down... but I have seen graphics corruption on GTA3 while running my new 9800 Pro that wasn't there when I was running a GeForce 4. Ergo nothings as straightforward as "silent and working without problems".
That said, the graphics glitch doesn't make it unplayable so I wouldn't call it a show stopper either. Both brands of card work - but it's down to the individual to decide what they can afford, want and need.
-
Kalfireth: That heatsink on the Sapphire Atlantis video cards is actually a Zalman heatsink, identical to the retail model in everything except for color, and costing more due to the fact they put it on for you.
pyro-maniac: BIOS flashing. The 9800 non-pro is identical to the 9800 Pro, and the only difference between the 9800 non-pro and the 9800 XT is the cooling and the fact that it has half the ram. ATI drivers do not specify ram quantities, hence, you can flash a 9800 non-pro to 9800 XT. Haven't done it myself, as I bought the card off my friend pre-modded, as he's getting a new setup before he goes off to college.
kasperl: Please state facts. Sure, the new 6800 Ultra uses a double slot cooling setup. It's not a dustbuster like the 5800 Ultras, though. And the 480w PSU requirement isn't real. A decent 350w handles it fine. This has been proven. The 480w requirement is for those with poor quality PSUs.