9800GX2 serious AA problem :! 8xQAA

[ddarko]

I'm sorry, I ordinarily keep clear of these things but the tacky boasting of your wealth that's imbedded in your remarks is too much. No one cares and the fact you need to preen and boast is more telling about you. And quite frankly, your reasoning is just ridiculous. There is almost no item or service, no matter how expensive, that CAN'T be paid for by at least a few people in this world. Billionaires can afford to buy a $100 million plane or estate. So, because a few people in the world can, without batting an eye, spend $100 million to buy a house, by your twisted logic, it would be inaccurate to say $100 million for a house is "a lot of money"? $100 million is "a lot" of money by any measure; the fact that it can be easily afforded by a few doesn't make it any less accurate to say it's a lot. Similarly, $600 for a graphic cards is a lot of money when the average cost of an aftermarket add-in graphic card is probably less than a $100. The fact that a very small segment of the market can afford to buy a $600 card doesn't make it any less accurate to say that $600 is a lot of money for a graphics card.

Finally, what gives you the arrogance and entitlement to tell other people that because you can afford and are willing to pay $600 for a graphics card, others aren't entitled to say it's too much for them? Fine, go ahead, no one's stopping you from spending your money as you see fit. But NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING, entitles you to sneer at those who won't or can't spend $50 on steak dinner or $6000 on vacations in "the suburb I live in" or $200 gas as they take their boat to the lake. That is contemptible.

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: dug777
Well, if I wanted bulk AA at that high res, I wouldn't be buying the 9800xtxtxtxgxt2 because it's not the best single card solution, according to the numbers the OP has posted...screw semantics about 'playable', that's entirely subjective (as you'd well know haveing hung around these kind of forums for donkey's years)

It's also very expensive...

Did I mention it's expensive?

Really? When it can cost me $150-$200 to fill up my truck and boat on the way to a lake, $600 for a video card is a "lot"?

When a good steak dinner is over $50, $600 is a "lot" ?

Dug, as an attorney at law, you think $600 is a "lot"?

When a XBox game like Guitar Hero costs $100, $600 is a "lot"?

When any fishing pole I own costs over $200, $600 is a "lot"?

When any fishing graph with GPS is over $500, $600 is a "lot"?

When almost every portable ice fishing shanty is over $500, $600 is a "lot"?

When a decent shotgun is over $1000, $600 is a "lot"?

When I look up stats on the suburb I live in and find the average price spent on a vacation is $6000., $600 is a "lot"?

Having hobbies, and just living, isn't cheap these days Dug. Buying the best of anything usually isn't either. If AMD had the best performing CPUs and GPUs, they'd be charging the high prices as well.

They don't have the performance to justify higher prices, so they price according to where they're at in the hierarchy and 100s of guys like you post "It's just too much for a video card!"

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: dug777
Well, if I wanted bulk AA at that high res, I wouldn't be buying the 9800xtxtxtxgxt2 because it's not the best single card solution, according to the numbers the OP has posted...screw semantics about 'playable', that's entirely subjective (as you'd well know haveing hung around these kind of forums for donkey's years)

It's also very expensive...

Did I mention it's expensive?

Really? When it can cost me $150-$200 to fill up my truck and boat on the way to a lake, $600 for a video card is a "lot"?

When a good steak dinner is over $50, $600 is a "lot" ?

Dug, as an attorney at law, you think $600 is a "lot"?

When a XBox game like Guitar Hero costs $100, $600 is a "lot"?

When any fishing pole I own costs over $200, $600 is a "lot"?

When any fishing graph with GPS is over $500, $600 is a "lot"?

When almost every portable ice fishing shanty is over $500, $600 is a "lot"?

When a decent shotgun is over $1000, $600 is a "lot"?

When I look up stats on the suburb I live in and find the average price spent on a vacation is $6000., $600 is a "lot"?

Having hobbies, and just living, isn't cheap these days Dug. Buying the best of anything usually isn't either. If AMD had the best performing CPUs and GPUs, they'd be charging the high prices as well.

They don't have the performance to justify higher prices, so they price according to where they're at in the hierarchy and 100s of guys like you post "It's just too much for a video card!"

yes, $600 is a "lot" for GX2 .. if that is what you mean .. for a Video card it is a "lot" for so temporary ...

it is a "lot" for what little it offers compared with NVIDIA's own [much better sli] solutions

 

[tuteja1986]

When some pays $600 for a GPU i think the buyer would want to play his game on a big high res monitor like Dell 3007FPW with Quality AA not CSAA. If you don't know the difference , then just do read up on them. Also CSAA doesn't provide consistent quality across all games (compatibility) and polygon edges (polygon intersections).

Anyways you would be better off buying 2x 9600GT or 2x 8800GT for $400 than $600 card that has loads of profile , driver problem on release.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: apoppin


yes, $600 is a "lot" for GX2 .. if that is what you mean .. for a Video card it is a "lot"

Yeah sorry Rollo but $600 is a lot and I should also note that fishing is boring.

A 8800GT will probably play any game out there at a higher resolution and settings than a Xbox360.

While the GX2 is a cool card it is more of a show piece like a $5500/hour hooker.

Of course for me a pair of 9600s at $300 is a lot of money. Stupid priorities.

 

[dino26]

well it depends on the res you run....a lot of people run 720p televisions as a pc monitor so it might make sense to run 8x aa if you cant run higher res.....however i wouldnt really recommend running a card like that if you only run 1366X720 or lower resolution as these cards are better suited for high res gaming.

 

[mhouck]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: dug777
Well, if I wanted bulk AA at that high res, I wouldn't be buying the 9800xtxtxtxgxt2 because it's not the best single card solution, according to the numbers the OP has posted...screw semantics about 'playable', that's entirely subjective (as you'd well know haveing hung around these kind of forums for donkey's years)

It's also very expensive...

Did I mention it's expensive?

Really? When it can cost me $150-$200 to fill up my truck and boat on the way to a lake, $600 for a video card is a "lot"?

When a good steak dinner is over $50, $600 is a "lot" ?

Dug, as an attorney at law, you think $600 is a "lot"?

When a XBox game like Guitar Hero costs $100, $600 is a "lot"?

When any fishing pole I own costs over $200, $600 is a "lot"?

When any fishing graph with GPS is over $500, $600 is a "lot"?

When almost every portable ice fishing shanty is over $500, $600 is a "lot"?

When a decent shotgun is over $1000, $600 is a "lot"?

When I look up stats on the suburb I live in and find the average price spent on a vacation is $6000., $600 is a "lot"?

Having hobbies, and just living, isn't cheap these days Dug. Buying the best of anything usually isn't either. If AMD had the best performing CPUs and GPUs, they'd be charging the high prices as well.

They don't have the performance to justify higher prices, so they price according to where they're at in the hierarchy and 100s of guys like you post "It's just too much for a video card!"

yes, $600 is a "lot" for GX2 .. if that is what you mean .. for a Video card it is a "lot" for so temporary ...

it is a "lot" for what little it offers compared with NVIDIA's own [much better sli] solutions

I'm pretty sure that the Ultra's and 8800GTX were priced pretty high when they came out. I'm also pretty sure that the 8800gtx's still haven't fallen that much lower as evidenced by the link. So why should a card that out performs it be expected to cost less than this "outdated"(used sarcastically)card on it's launch? It's called a premium.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: ddarko
I'm sorry, I ordinarily keep clear of these things but the tacky boasting of your wealth that's imbedded in your remarks is too much. No one cares and the fact you need to preen and boast is more telling about you. And quite frankly, your reasoning is just ridiculous. There is almost no item or service, no matter how expensive, that CAN'T be paid for by at least a few people in this world. Billionaires can afford to buy a $100 million plane or estate. So, because a few people in the world can, without batting an eye, spend $100 million to buy a house, by your twisted logic, it would be inaccurate to say $100 million for a house is "a lot of money"? $100 million is "a lot" of money by any measure; the fact that it can be easily afforded by a few doesn't make it any less accurate to say it's a lot. Similarly, $600 for a graphic cards is a lot of money when the average cost of an aftermarket add-in graphic card is probably less than a $100. The fact that a very small segment of the market can afford to buy a $600 card doesn't make it any less accurate to say that $600 is a lot of money for a graphics card.

Finally, what gives you the arrogance and entitlement to tell other people that because you can afford and are willing to pay $600 for a graphics card, others aren't entitled to say it's too much for them? Fine, go ahead, no one's stopping you from spending your money as you see fit. But NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING, entitles you to sneer at those who won't or can't spend $50 on steak dinner or $6000 on vacations in "the suburb I live in" or $200 gas as they take their boat to the lake. That is contemptible.

Who's "sneering"?

Does gas cost more for me than you?

Do the hobby items I listed cost more for me than anyone else?

The point was about anything you do these days costs money, and things don't cost what the did in days of yore.

$600 for a video card that can last the user 12-18 months doesn't seem outrageous to own the "best of the best" single slot to me.

The GF2 Ultra cost $500 way back in 2000!

The 9800GX2 isn't meant to be a bargain part like it's competitors, it's meant to be the fastest single slot solution available, by far.

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: nRollo

$600 for a video card that can last the user 12-18 months doesn't seem outrageous to own the "best of the best" single slot to me.

The GF2 Ultra cost $500 way back in 2000!

The 9800GX2 isn't meant to be a bargain part like it's competitors, it's meant to be the fastest single slot solution available, by far.

$600 is ridiculously overpriced for a card that will be beat by a better performing single GPU solution in 3-6 months.

Oh, and you can get nearly the same performance for half the price with a 9600gt SLI. Even counting an SLI motherboard ($100) it's still cheaper by $200.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: apoppin


yes, $600 is a "lot" for GX2 .. if that is what you mean .. for a Video card it is a "lot"

Yeah sorry Rollo but $600 is a lot and I should also note that fishing is boring.

A 8800GT will probably play any game out there at a higher resolution and settings than a Xbox360.

While the GX2 is a cool card it is more of a show piece like a $5500/hour hooker.

Of course for me a pair of 9600s at $300 is a lot of money. Stupid priorities.

if HW is your priority then GX2 is for you
-i think a pair of 9600s makes far more sense for 99+% of gamers than a single GX2

the only advantage to GX2 - besides playing better at 25x16 -
--is bragging rights and $600 is a lot to spend for a couple of month's bragging .. unless you have lots of friends that pretend to like it

And i would also guess some of those $5,500/hr hookers might be really good bang-for-buck . . .
-if they charge you by the minute
:clock:

:laugh:

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

$600 is ridiculously overpriced for a card that will be beat by a better performing single GPU solution in 3-6 months.

Oh, and you can get nearly the same performance for half the price with a 9600gt SLI. Even counting an SLI motherboard ($100) it's still cheaper by $200.

1. You don't know when new parts are launching.

2. You don't know what the performance of new parts will be. What if these new parts outperform the GX2 by 15%, cost $600 themselves, is it worth waiting 6 months for the 15%?

3. 9600GT Sli a.doesn't have an upgrade path b. isn't as powerful c. requires an Sli motherboard d. isn't a single slot solution

Hard to argue with the vaporware Schneiderguy- back when the G80 launched we all thought the R600 was to have been there before it, and twice as powerful. Look what happened there.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: mhouck

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: dug777
Well, if I wanted bulk AA at that high res, I wouldn't be buying the 9800xtxtxtxgxt2 because it's not the best single card solution, according to the numbers the OP has posted...screw semantics about 'playable', that's entirely subjective (as you'd well know haveing hung around these kind of forums for donkey's years)

It's also very expensive...

Did I mention it's expensive?

. . .

Having hobbies, and just living, isn't cheap these days Dug. Buying the best of anything usually isn't either. If AMD had the best performing CPUs and GPUs, they'd be charging the high prices as well.

They don't have the performance to justify higher prices, so they price according to where they're at in the hierarchy and 100s of guys like you post "It's just too much for a video card!"

yes, $600 is a "lot" for GX2 .. if that is what you mean .. for a Video card it is a "lot" for so temporary ...

it is a "lot" for what little it offers compared with NVIDIA's own [much better sli] solutions

I'm pretty sure that the Ultra's and 8800GTX were priced pretty high when they came out. I'm also pretty sure that the 8800gtx's still haven't fallen that much lower as evidenced by the link. So why should a card that out performs it be expected to cost less than this "outdated"(used sarcastically)card on it's launch? It's called a premium.

i have heard that same thing applied elsewhere - unrelated to HW - as a premium for stupid people

$319 for a GTX, that IS about right .. the GX2 is not double the performance of 2 GTXes. 2 cheap GT9600s in SLi are practical for most gamers at half that price.

Having a Gaming hobby is relatively cheap ... *except* for GX2

EDIT .. hold the presses!

Lookie here: a PAIR of 9600GTs for SLI for $260!!!
after 2-MiRs
http://www.ncixus.com/products...sku=28428&promoid=1020

you still think GX2 is worth a *premium* of $340?

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: apoppin


yes, $600 is a "lot" for GX2 .. if that is what you mean .. for a Video card it is a "lot"

Yeah sorry Rollo but $600 is a lot and I should also note that fishing is boring.

A 8800GT will probably play any game out there at a higher resolution and settings than a Xbox360.

While the GX2 is a cool card it is more of a show piece like a $5500/hour hooker.

Of course for me a pair of 9600s at $300 is a lot of money. Stupid priorities.

It was only $1000 an hour!! And I'm very sorry to have betrayed the people of new yo...uh, never mind...

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: nRollo

1. You don't know when new parts are launching.

Neither do you. All we can do is look at nvidia's history. 7950gx2 sound familiar?

2. You don't know what the performance of new parts will be. What if these new parts outperform the GX2 by 15%, cost $600 themselves, is it worth waiting 6 months for the 15%?

Most likely they will outperform the GX2 by far more than 15%, since SLI scaling isn't that great in most games. A 256sp or even a 192 sp flagship card would easily be 50% faster than the GX2 in some games that don't scale well like Crysis.

3. 9600GT Sli a.doesn't have an upgrade path b. isn't as powerful c. requires an Sli motherboard d. isn't a single slot solution

a. Like the 9800gx2 has an upgrade path? :laugh: Quad-SLI, awesome. 400watts of power for the video cards alone, plus twice the cost for a best case 50-60% performance increase. And it requires a SLI motherboard, which you argue against in point C?

b. 80-90% as powerful for 50% of the cost... seems like a good deal to me. If you do actually need the power of two 8800gts 512's you could just buy two of them for $400-450

c. Even with a SLI motherboard it's still cheaper than a GX2

d. GX2 is dual slot

 

[Obsoleet]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Is there a link to a credible site in English. I have not seen this mentioned on any actual tech news sites.

dude , you keep making a fool out your self. Computerbase is hell alot more creditable than your fav Hardocp website.

That's just truth. Had to give props to tuteja.

Regarding the topic though, doesn't surprise me. I wouldn't suggest anyone buy into NV's proprietary SLI tech.
Be a smart buyer, get a 8800GT or GTS and be done with it, quit playing into these companies who are doing everything they can to convince you to buy 2 (or now 3) VPUs. Quit making other people rich and save a little cash you consumers.

If you can't own at games with 1 VPU you aren't going to own anyone with 2 or 3.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: nRollo

1. You don't know when new parts are launching.

Neither do you. All we can do is look at nvidia's history. 7950gx2 sound familiar?

2. You don't know what the performance of new parts will be. What if these new parts outperform the GX2 by 15%, cost $600 themselves, is it worth waiting 6 months for the 15%?

Most likely they will outperform the GX2 by far more than 15%, since SLI scaling isn't that great in most games. A 256sp or even a 192 sp flagship card would easily be 50% faster than the GX2 in some games that don't scale well like Crysis.

3. 9600GT Sli a.doesn't have an upgrade path b. isn't as powerful c. requires an Sli motherboard d. isn't a single slot solution

a. Like the 9800gx2 has an upgrade path? :laugh: Quad-SLI, awesome. 400watts of power for the video cards alone, plus twice the cost for a best case 50-60% performance increase.

b. 80-90% as powerful for 50% of the cost... seems like a good deal to me. If you do actually need the power of two 8800gts 512's you could just buy two of them for $400-450

c. Even with a SLI motherboard it's still cheaper than a GX2

d. GX2 is dual slot

1. Well, I might have a little more insight than you, but not on parts this far out. In any case, we can't "look at the past" because parts launch when they're done, not on some "It's been 3 months! Launch now!" type timetable. Again, look to the R600 that taped out almost a year before it launched.

2. As I said, you have no idea how they will perform, none whatsoever because unless you're under NDA and getting parts way in advance, you just don't know and have no cause to speculate. So double the stream processors means 50% more performance? Like it does for the 9600GT and 8800GTS? Hmmmmm, I (don't) see your point.

3. AMD/ATi fans like to talk about how much high end parts cost these days, mainly because AMD/ATi have no high end parts. So when X1900XTXs and X800XTPEs were selling for well over $500, were you posting "What a ripoff!"? Or how about FX series CPUs that offered 10% more performance for double the cost?

Like I said, if you want the best, you have to pay the price. The reviews of the card show this single card often outperforms 3 X 3870 (which costs the same) and competes with 4 X 3870 (which cost more). To get two, and a level of performance you can't get anywhere else, you have to pay.

Most people would love to pay $1200 for a CPU that offered 50-60% more performance than the $500 one. Instead they get 10-15% for more than double the cost.
(not to mention the cpu doesn't even really matter in gaming anymore- any 2.4GHz C2D and up will be pretty much the same as a QX9650 in games)


Edit:

d. GX2 is dual slot

Really? It uses two PCIE slots? Mine doesn't. Those SLi solutions you mention do.

 

[Wreckage]

Not to defend Rollo here as I think $600 is a lot to spend on a video card, but I know people who spend far more than that to get just a few extra horsepower out of their cars.

It's all relative.

The GX2 is the best card on the market right now. You have to pay a premium for it. Just like those extreme quads from Intel that were going for over $1000.

Do I think it's worth it? No. But then I also would never buy a Lexus or a $300 shirt.

I drive a 9 year old Jeep and wear mostly free shirts.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Obsoleet

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Is there a link to a credible site in English. I have not seen this mentioned on any actual tech news sites.

dude , you keep making a fool out your self. Computerbase is hell alot more creditable than your fav Hardocp website.

That's just truth. Had to give props to tuteja.

Oh don't give me that crap. 20 plus reviews find no faults, one German one does and you are going to hound me because I want more proof.

Get off your high horse. I'm not saying that there is not an issue. Just saying that anytime someone posts from one source, these same people cry and ask for another source.

Either way it blows the doors off any other card and this nitpicking is hilarious.

 

[apoppin]

3. AMD/ATi fans like to talk about how much high end parts cost these days, mainly because AMD/ATi have no high end parts. So when X1900XTXs and X800XTPEs were selling for well over $500, were you posting "What a ripoff!"? Or how about FX series CPUs that offered 10% more performance for double the cost?

actually i DID .. but then i am not a AMD fan

Like I said, if you want the best, you have to pay the price. The reviews of the card show this single card often outperforms 3 X 3870 (which costs the same) and competes with 4 X 3870 (which cost more). To get two, and a level of performance you can't get anywhere else, you have to pay.

Not really .. i don't think i will be compromising with a much cheaper X3 solution .. and a PAIR of 9600GTs in SLi - for $260 [after MiRs] - will get 99% of gamers the same practical performance

GX2 is for only one reason - well two - but really 1

*bragging rights*

for nvidia and it's fans
-damn common sense and damn the cost!!

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: nRollo

2. As I said, you have no idea how they will perform, none whatsoever because unless you're under NDA and getting parts way in advance, you just don't know and have no cause to speculate. So double the stream processors means 50% more performance? Like it does for the 9600GT and 8800GTS? Hmmmmm, I (don't) see your point.

Roughly two times the performance of the previous generation... just like nvidia has done for the past however many years.

Or are you trying to say the next gen nvidia cards will suck to sell more GX2s? :Q

3. AMD/ATi fans like to talk about how much high end parts cost these days, mainly because AMD/ATi have no high end parts. So when X1900XTXs and X800XTPEs were selling for well over $500, were you posting "What a ripoff!"? Or how about FX series CPUs that offered 10% more performance for double the cost?

3870x2 isnt high end? News to me. No, I wasn't posting that the high end parts were rip offs "back then", but at least I wasn't reccomending them (cough 7800gtx 512 cough)

Most people would love to pay $1200 for a CPU that offered 50-60% more performance than the $500 one. Instead they get 10-15% for more than double the cost.
(not to mention the cpu doesn't even really matter in gaming anymore- any 2.4GHz C2D and up will be pretty much the same as a QX9650 in games)

Then why are you comparing CPUs and GPUs for gaming purposes? apples to oranges

Really? It uses two PCIE slots? Mine doesn't. Those SLi solutions you mention do.

:roll:

Since when did the definition of "dual slot" change from a fan that takes up 2 slots to using 2 pci-e slots?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy


Since when did the definition of "dual slot" change from a fan that takes up 2 slots to using 2 pci-e slots?

Several years ago.

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: schneiderguy


Since when did the definition of "dual slot" change from a fan that takes up 2 slots to using 2 pci-e slots?

Several years ago.

sure...

 

[BFG10K]

That's one theory, but another is most reviewers don't bench it because of greatly diminishing returns moving from 4X AA to 8X AA.

What reviewers do or don?t do doesn?t concern me. The fact is the main reason to buy high-end cards is to crank the AA, especially SLI solutions. Running around with 4xAA on SLI is likely to yield CPU limitations.

Anyway, you were telling us you used Quad SLI because of its high AA levels but now you?re telling us about diminishing returns. Sorry, but that argument is a total flip-flop.

That said, Firing Squad used either 16X CSAA

16xCSAA is 4xMSAA + 12xCSAA. From a technical perspective it?s usually weaker than 8xMSAA, especially in situations where CSAA falls back to base muti-sampling such as stencil shadows.

So how many people would pick the diminishing returns of 8XAA and a low 33fps average over 4X AA and a 50fps average?

You need to ask that question when the 8xAA performance is fixed, thereby making it run faster than 33 FPS. As it stands now you?re comparing broken figures which aren?t valid.

Can you show us which resolutions and games the 3870X2 offers playable framerates that the 9800GX2 doesn't so we can see why a person looking for the best single slot card would buy a so much slower 3870X2?

There?s a performance issue with 8xQ that needs to be fixed regardless of how fast the 3870X2 is or isn?t.

 

[BFG10K]

Oh don't give me that crap. 20 plus reviews find no faults, one German one does and you are going to hound me because I want more proof.

Really? And which of those 20 plus reviews used 8xMSAA?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Looking at Chris Ray's benchmarks using 16xCSAA and 16xQAA
I think the drivers need some maturing.

 

[BFG10K]

16xQ has always had a large performance hit because it's 8xMSAA + 8xCSAA. In fact 8xS is usually faster than 16xQ.