FX5950, still better than 9800XT...

[cm123]

so many post here are on how they think the 9800 (ATI as a whole) are so great and that nvidia hardware doesn't do this or that right... I see reviews like this as well. A few others flame back with at least nvidia cards work w/out issues like displays blacking out etc...

I wonder how many of you are responding as experts w/out ever using each card? among other concerns?

I question many review sites at times as it seems they like to follow the ad bucks and/or whoever/whatever gets them the readers and such... look at the DX9 with nvidia, sites clearly not in favor of nvidia for the time being are flaming them with all they got, yet when ati and there lastest drivers caused issues, they barely reported it then when ati said, oh your all wrong, just someone making us look bad.... oh ok, lets let that go, even though there are many forum users having troubles. some not to that extend yes... but again more ati issues... do we hear about that, NO, we hear how nvidia is not up to par and so on...

I own a r9800, 5950, 9700 and returned (ebay the other ati's) a 9800XT (thank god), I DID have issues with all the 9800's and blacking out my displays among various game(s) issues etc..

Yes before you ask or flame, I am a engineer within the PC industry - NOT with neither ati nor nvidia (as senior engineer have used ati cards in the past years to win crn system of the year(s) award as well), i am just looking for the best card(s) for myself like most other people are... and believe not everything is being held to a fair playing ground...

.... 2D desktop, the look and feel are better and faster by far with the 5950 ver all ati cards
.... 2D desktop does not always display at all with the ati cards (out of sync), never issue 5950
.... Games (i will only list a few), MS rise of nations - 1024x768 only option with last 2 drivers w/ati (never tried older than last 2)... nvidia i have NO issues (with frame rates on with ati - 45fps, nvidia 60fps), warcraft, graphics are much smoohter and look better, more responsive as well (i know ati it suppose to be faster, but does not feel that it is), total war - new ati drivers fixed the fact it would not even play, however the map moves sooooo slow very late in the game, graphics look great although!, nvidia on total war - never slows down, never locks up, graphics are close to ati but ati may have the edge, however ati late in the game is not as enjoyable due to jerks etc...

...the list goes on, i am sure many of you would like to say, did you try this, or change this setting, what does it matter? really! Nvidia card JUST WORKS! and works awesome right now... your crazy if you think this is the time to let up on ati... push them no matter what side your on - better products in the end... i did try the cards on 3 different systems (intel, 3.2, 3.0 & 2.8, Intel 875 MB. super micro MB, mushkin ram, wd special drives in 1, 10k wd in1 & maxtor dmp 9 in1, audigy ZS).

now my question, how many of you own a 5900 or 5950 and found it to be slow and of poor quality graphics and such as many either say, imply or drop the hint of in there reviews? please post your postive remarks as well!

you would never believe at heart, i am a ati fan would you? (there is a review up address some of the 2d issues above around the web finally - the extreme system review)

 

[Tab]

so many post here are on how they think the 9800 (ATI as a whole) are so great and that nvidia hardware doesn't do this or that right... I see reviews like this as well.

Lets see those reviews!

I question many review sites at times as it seems they like to follow the ad bucks and/or whoever/whatever gets them the readers and such...

How do you expect them to make money to keep up the website?

when ati and there lastest drivers caused issues, they barely reported it then when ati said, oh your all wrong, just someone making us look bad...

Yes, ATI Cats 3.8 burnt my house down

oh ok, lets let that go, even though there are many forum users having troubles. some not to that extend yes... but again more ati issues... do we hear about that, NO, we hear how nvidia is not up to par and so on...

Many forum users? Which ones?

I own a r9800, 5950, 9700 and returned (ebay the other ati's) a 9800XT (thank god), I DID have issues with all the 9800's and blacking out my displays among various game(s) issues etc..

Your bought a card over ebay? What game issuses? If its blacking out most likely because its defective and you got suckered on ebay into buying it.

.... 2D desktop, the look and feel are better and faster by far with the 5950 ver all ati cards

Guess what, my 1700+ feels faster than a opteron cluster!

Games (i will only list a few), MS rise of nations - 1024x768 only option with last 2 drivers w/ati (never tried older than last 2)... nvidia i have NO issues (with frame rates on with ati - 45fps, nvidia 60fps), warcraft, graphics are much smoohter and look better, more responsive as well (i know ati it suppose to be faster, but does not feel that it is), total war - new ati drivers fixed the fact it would not even play, however the map moves sooooo slow very late in the game, graphics look great although!, nvidia on total war - never slows down, never locks up, graphics are close to ati but ati may have the edge, however ati late in the game is not as enjoyable due to jerks etc...

I suppose since it was jerky this was ATI's fault? The rest of your computer was perfectly configured?

...the list goes on, i am sure many of you would like to say, did you try this, or change this setting, what does it matter? really! Nvidia card JUST WORKS! and works awesome right now... your crazy if you think this is the time to let up on ati... push them no matter what side your on - better products in the end... i did try the cards on 3 different systems (intel, 3.2, 3.0 & 2.8, Intel 875 MB. super micro MB, mushkin ram, wd special drives in 1, 10k wd in1 & maxtor dmp 9 in1, audigy ZS).

Yea, I love my opertron cluster and my ATI 9999 PRO XT too!

you would never believe at heart, i am a ati fan would you? (there is a review up address some of the 2d issues above around the web finally - the extreme system review)

Yea, link please....and information about those so called 2d issuses...

 

[Lonyo]

I haven't had an issue with my 9800 in any game I have tried so far (not all that many yet, but that's because I get into playing games, and it works for the ones I want to play at the moment).

I've had issues (not sure if they're software or what) with games shutting down randomly (with both the 9800 and my Ti4400).

I have had NO issues with my 9800np so far, not a single one that is something that hasn't happened before (such as games randomly shutting down, most probably something else). Drivers have been fine (Cat 3.6 at the moment), and the card came bundled with a DVI -> VGA adapter and some cables, which my GF4 did not. (Both retail).

I may not have used a GF FX, but I have used a Ti4400 and 9800 and had pretty much no problems with either of them. And for me with Medieval: Total War my Ti4400 seemed to be weird, wasn't very responsive at 800x600. Haven't used the game with the 9800, because I haven't reinstalled it yet.

 

[cm123]

here's your link on 2d... (followed buy just a part) - good to see a review site tell it as it is!

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/building_gaming_opteron_2003_Part1/page6.asp

"Looking at these numbers, ATI?s 2D performance significantly falters behind NVIDIA?s. At a 3-megapixel resolution, the ATI Radeon 9800 Pro is 25.6% slower than NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, and if you were to run the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra at a faster core clockspeed of 430MHz (to bring NVIDIA?s 2D mode closer to its 3D clocksped), there is a 35% performance difference. At the popular resolution of 1280x1024, even at stock clockpeeds the ATI is 21% slower than the NVIDIA! These differences are noticeable

Part of the superior 2D performance you see above is due to hardware, but driver overhead also plays a big role. That has always been a historical challenge for the driver engineers.

Now, some of you are about to flame me for not considering that ATI has made significant gains with their CATALYST drivers or noting that NVIDIA?s beta Detonator drivers have bugs that cause visual glitches and ignore the 2D performance issues. Indeed, some sites may say that I?m like an ostrich with its head stuck in the sand if I think ATI drivers are still plagued with driver issues.

Bottom line? Choosing which video card deserves to be in your system is clearly a personal decision because there are more variables than driver stability or 2D performance. Some of the FiringSquad staff use NVIDIA in their personal machines and some use ATI in their personal machines. For this system, however, we?re running GeForce FX 5900 Ultra.

[At the end of the day, Alan and I agreed that ATI is currently running better in DX9 benchmarks, but in light of the issues that we?ve encountered with IL-2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles, Flight Simulator 2004, and NASCAR 2003/i875P performance at low resolutions with ATI?s CATALYST drivers, we feel that NVIDIA hardware is generally more compatible with a wider variety of applications/platforms, which is also very important - Ed]"


the perfect configured PC, makes no sense, again read the post... the nvidia works!

no, i did not buy on ebay, selling them there although.

look even here at anand's.... most all the new nvidia reviews drive home issues and such with dx9 etc...


how do i expect them to make $$$. 1st thats not my issue although, work to post review all the facts on a even base, do it good, the add bucks will still be there, plus you will be doing a true service to your readers...


comment to #2... total war, the 9800 with newer drivers works fine, just very late in game slows down lots.

also i should be clear that i am not saying the ati products all suck, they do many things right... just NOT as good/or right as nvidia

 

[Blastman]

THis sounds like Nvidia trolling. From a post 12 days ago ? days ?ago.

Given the driver issues with ATI right now ? ?

What driver issues? You didn?t mention any in that thread. (Edit besides dying monitors)

...the list goes on,

I guess your mileage will vary. Here is a sampling from one of THG ? recent (last month) reviews with the 5900 ... ...regarding tghe 5900 ... ...

Battlefield 1942 - Secret Weapons of WWII

Those results are very surprising since the original BF1942 has already been released for many months and the game does not use any pixel or vertex shader effects. Maybe NVIDIA's drivers have trouble with the game running at maximum quality settings? We noticed a rough bucking of the graphics even at 70FPS which made playing the game almost impossible with these quality settings. We also found this effect without the use of FRAPS.

Tomb Raider - Angel Of Darkness

The game did not render anything with the old NVIDIA v44.03 driver so we can only show the scores of the actual v45.23 drivers.

S Flight Simulator 2004

The v44.03 driver only worked in 1024x768. The cockpit was missing at higher resolutions and the image scaled vertical to half of its size.

Edit: took out personal reference to Nvidia troll.

 

[Zk1]

nVidia was critezised/flamed alot but with good reason, preformence in some games, HL2 and TR:AOD comes to mind, was worse then horrible, in HL2 for example the 5900u had the same preformence as a 9600p. Alot of other things about the NV3x cards were also wrong (like the shady "optimizations" in games and 3D mark).

ATI is by no means perfect, i dont think any1 have said that, but they have clearly had less problems then NV during this generation of cards.

I havent heard anything about the new 5950 but on the previous cards this generation nearly every1 seems to agree that the ATI cards have superior image quality, desktop that is, in games it varies from title to title, even if ATI has the lead there to. U also talk about Warcraft graphics being smoother on NV cards(i asume u mean WC3), the rewiews here on AT cleary says something else...

now NV seems to have gotten thear stuff togeather. I think the GeForce FX cards (atleast the 59x0 and 5700 series) is a good buy, even though i prefer the ATI 9800/9600 series over the NV cards thearfor when i buy a card in a month or so it will be a ATI 9800 pro, not becuz i think the 5900 is a POS but becuz the 9800 seems to offer better preformence in more games then the 5900 and for the fact that the ATI card has had no sevear IQ/Preformence problems, at least in games i want to play like HL2

 

[Blastman]

Well I have to get this off my chest.

Cm123, when I see posts like yours and given the level of ethics that Nvidia has displayed in the last year (scoundrel level). I?m ... "beginning to believe" ... that Nvidia is hiring people like you to troll the forums and spread misinformation of how great Nvidia drivers are ? ie. ? ?Everything works magically right out of the box, whereas ATI has all sorts of problems.? Sure not the case in Tom?s review. It was the Nvidia cards that had all the issues.

 

[reever]

Wait a minute, you are complaining about 2d performance? How exactly would a home user stress a cards 2d capabilities outside of a speicificed benchmark?

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: reever
Wait a minute, you are complaining about 2d performance? How exactly would a home user stress a cards 2d capabilities outside of a speicificed benchmark?

PWNED.

a tnt2 is just as fast as a 9800XT in 2d.

 

[Mingon]

Now now ATI fanboys back from the flames of this post , he has a point about 2D speed whether you agree with the rest of his post or not.

2D Performance Differences
While waiting for Brandon to send me the Radeon 9800 Pro and GeForce FX 5900 Ultra for test, I used a QuadroFX 2000 because I needed a running system. You see, when I evaluate components for stability, I don?t use a dedicated test bed or specialized suite ? I force the component to work in a production system. Obviously I do a clean install of WinXP, etc. but the ?test system? and my ?primary system? for day-to-day work becomes one and the same. I install Windows, move my email and documents over, set up my ICQ and other critical applications and unplug my previous PC. This lets me pick up nuances of performance or compatibility that might otherwise be missed.

When I moved to the Radeon 9800 Pro (with clean VGA drivers), I immediately noticed something was off. My system seemed slower ? like it was a little bit laggy. I felt as if my hard drive was slightly fragmented or that my Internet connection was just a hair congested. Quick checks showed that it wasn?t so.

Now, I wrote the article on 2D performance 2 years ago to disprove that 2D performance was ?fast enough.? But even then I was convinced that in 2003 all cards were fast enough? it was time to run the numbers and yet again, I discovered that 2D performance continues to be overlooked.

You can feel the difference at 1280x1024 and above

Looking at these numbers, ATI?s 2D performance significantly falters behind NVIDIA?s. At a 3-megapixel resolution, the ATI Radeon 9800 Pro is 25.6% slower than NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, and if you were to run the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra at a faster core clockspeed of 430MHz (to bring NVIDIA?s 2D mode closer to its 3D clocksped), there is a 35% performance difference. At the popular resolution of 1280x1024, even at stock clockpeeds the ATI is 21% slower than the NVIDIA! These differences are noticeable and it?s not until you get down to 800x600 that it?s subjectively noticeable.

It?s easy to discount these numbers and say that the differences are small but again, I wasn?t thinking about measuring 2D performance when I came up with this article. As I mentioned earlier, the difference in 2D speed comes across as a system that feels more responsive. Webpages appear to load just slightly faster (when in fact it?s just that the time between parsing of the HTML and rendering it to the screen that has been reduced) and windows draw faster. Even though this differences are only a split second, you should ask yourself how much time you spend browsing the ?net, how many Windows you?ve clicked/dragged, how many miles of text and images you?ve scrolled through? It?s not trivial when you add it all up.

Firing Squad Building the Ultimate High-End Gaming Workstation:

 

[reever]

Even though this differences are only a split second

Excuse me, but it seems like this guy is digging very hard to find un-noticeable and unquantifiable differences between the 2 cards

 

[cm123]

Blastman, you could say the same of you? perhaps ati is paying you?

...after all i am only the engineer that gave the thumbs up in 99/2000 to ati over nvidia in the 1st amd system crn (computer reseller news) ever tested winning editors choice of the year posting the fastest marks ever for a desktop at the time INCLUDING the fastest 3d only beat in 2d by our 2nd place 2nd system (intel based) WITH a Nvidia card beating ATI in 2d...

...if anything, the people who know me complain of my liking of 3D labs and ATI, not giving nvidia a fair run...

also, nvidia cards do work, don't forget ati has had bad drivers issues for some time, R9700 had issues running in some cases without bios changes to make boot correctly etc... I am NOT saying nvidia is perfect, but the review industry (not everyone) needs to take a fair look at ati as well when recomending to consumers etc...

ask this of people, which companies cards have you owned and had issues with the most? YES some have issues with nvidia, truth be told, as with our tech. support, nvidia has less AND the issues are NOT as bad.

2d stress, well read the link i incuded, i find firing s. to be 100% correct, i notice the same issues in my every day use, ati 2d IS 25% or MORE slower and it is of notice-able amount in 2d.

my point on review sites saying that graphics are so much better on the ati, while that is my point, i have both and do not see that and many who have had both also would and will agree, then i have to ask, ad bucks, reader approval or in-complete testing? firring s. summed up in my link above by saying in his own company about half take the nvidia as better still, i take that as one of the few honest review comments from a site... as i too see that trend.

 

[chorner]

just stopping by to read; but here's my 2 cents

I've swapped between ATI and Nvidia cards for the past who knows how long now, and quite honestly I've had just as many problems with my Nvidia cards as I have with my ATI cards. Both at one point or another have had some very slight driver anomolaies, but both had the same amount in my opinion.

The only card that has given me more troubles than any other, was not due to drivers or the card itself anyways. I was unhappy with the performance of my Nvidia GF4 at the time, and was waiting for something better to come out; but just HAD to get the best possible perfomance out of the sucker because my games I was playing (MOHAA, and Unreal Tourney '03) just weren't smooth enough at all times with the quality I thought was a bare minimum for me. So can you guess what I did? Constantly clocked my card and system to the absolute max ... and of course it gave me problems

Now for 2D, the Nvidia cards have always been much faster for me with Flash authoring and Photoshop. Thats a fact.

Anyways, thats my honest opinion on the matter between another ATI vs. Nvidia thread

 

[reever]

...after all i am only the engineer that gave the thumbs up in 99/2000 to ati over nvidia in the 1st amd system crn (computer reseller news) ever tested winning editors choice of the year posting the fastest marks ever for a desktop at the time INCLUDING the fastest 3d only beat in 2d by our 2nd place 2nd system (intel based) WITH a Nvidia card beating ATI in 2d...

Ok, so you can't be unbiased!This is about the millionth time I have heard somebody say this, it's sorta getting tired

also, nvidia cards do work, don't forget ati has had bad drivers issues for some time, R9700 had issues running in some cases without bios changes to make boot correctly etc... I am NOT saying nvidia is perfect, but the review industry (not everyone) needs to take a fair look at ati as well when recomending to consumers etc...

Umm they are taking a fair look, go read up on reviews, if there is a problem they post it, so far I haven't seen any problems at all with Ati cards in any review that were unable to complete benchmarks or plray games, so i have no idea what the hell you are talking about. But hey since they had driver issues in the past lets be suspicious of every review and not believe them that they hd no problems, but we should believe you, good job.

2d stress, well read the link i incuded, i find firing s. to be 100% correct, i notice the same issues in my every day use, ati 2d IS 25% or MORE slower and it is of notice-able amount in 2d.

So you used the number 25 percent. I'm sure you can quantify that without using a benchmark, yeah. right.

my point on review sites saying that graphics are so much better on the ati, while that is my point, i have both and do not see that and many who have had both also would and will agree, then i have to ask, ad bucks, reader approval or in-complete testing? firring s. summed up in my link above by saying in his own company about half take the nvidia as better still, i take that as one of the few honest review comments from a site... as i too see that trend.

Sure, don't trust anybody except the one who conveys the same point you want, and goes with your agenda. But don't trust anybody else because they could be getting paid to ignore problems, but believe firingsquad, what a hypocrite. The only honest comments are the ones you agree with, yeah, you have no bias.

Yeah, its all one big conspiracy.

 

[Vonkhan]

Of course, nVIDIA cards "work fine" ... however, who in their right minds would wanna pay $500 for something that f*cks up on DX9

 

[1ManArmY]

If you wish to spend your money on a GFX card produced by a company that is engaging in less than desireable activities just to keep up with the competition then by all means do so. Just the Facts Jack!:beer:

 

[cm123]

reever... well you seem not worth my time to respond, but i will anyway, i dont dis/or agree with firing s. and there methods or anyone else... except the truth!!! I guess thats something you cant handle...

problems running games in reviews??? your inventing, not ever said that was happening, you most have a confidence issue or something? review a product saying we have to see what happens with nvidia, ms wrote the os for ati and nvidia no showed up, come on!!! talk some about the facts about you can NOT even run the CURRENT drivers from ATI in some cases!!!

I am not unbiased, I love 3Dlabs cards, everything about them, the way ati and nvidia should be, I like ati, they keep the industry moving, and well sometimes not as good as they get credit for, but hey its working!

your 2d performance comment? well are we compensating for something? i agree'd with firing s., nvidia has better respond period!

trust... well right now your the only one i don't trust the most, i think everyone, if given a reason enough can find a way to look past a companies issues if they choose, the question is? do you want them doing that for you???

ps... the 5950 is less $$ ($100) in almost all cases than the 9800XT... myself, that matters not...

 

[chorner]

Hey guys ....


Just a quick question for you :

Since when do you give a crap about the company anyways? Shouldn't you guys be concerned WHAT the fastest, and most feature rich card is on the market? Since when did WHO makes it matter?

I don't give a crud who makes the card in my machines, just as long as its the fastest, best quality (picture), and feature rich. It could be Hon Twan Wong making my card, I couldn't care less who made it if it were the best.

Too many of you dorks are concerned with who made it, what the practices of the company are etc. Who cares? You know why I don't care? Bad publicity helps the consumer.

Think about it.

 

[reever]

talk some about the facts about you can NOT even run the CURRENT drivers from ATI in some cases!!!

Lets talk some english here. I have no come across a review that had problems playing or running games with current or earlier catalyst drivers, if you think i should just believe you or firingsquad you are wrong.

As for the rest of your post, i cant even understand it, typing fast when you are angry does not help either

 

[Mardeth]

Why would practically all of the reviewers be biased?

Of course there are a few hardware sites that say something else but sometimes it seems that they do it to get people link them on threads like these to get viewers...

I understand if you think Nvidia is at the moment better, but in my eyes twice as fast DX9 performance is the greatest issue (plus Ive had my share of problems with Nvidia) that will make me buy ATis products.

Bad luck maybe?

And before you say that with 3 ATis you had they cant all be bad, let me say that I had to return my nvidia card twice and not even on the third time did I get a fully working card, I was just so tired of the process and the card was playable (some glitches and texture errors) so I gave up.

 

[Blastman]

In the Hardocp ? 5950 review ? the 9800XT ran fine. In fact the only issues mentioned were for the Nvidia card ? 5950 ? flashlight rendering issues (Halo) and blurry ground textures (FS 2004). Not only that, the XT outran the Nvidia 5950 by an average of 21.5% on the 6 games benched ? (custom demo?s on newer games to eliminate cheating)


Max Payne 2 ? ? ?XT ? 33.6 % ? faster
Halo: CE ? ? ? ?...XT ? 37.5
Tomb Raider AOD ?XT ? 9.5
UT3 ? ? ? ? ? ......XT ? 15.1
Flight Sim 2004 ? ..FX ? 4.7
XIII ? ? ? ? ? .......XT ? 38 ? ? Total = 129/6 = 21.5% faster for XT.

I?d hardly call the 5950 better than the XT.

 

[cm123]

I think you miss some of the point, lack of reviewers pointing out issues due to many things including knowlege or lack there-of possibly...

here's a link of Questionable optimizations in ATi's drivers? from tom's

http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic...ml#questionable_optimizations_in_atis_drivers

he even points out a few things he/they proved, unlike others just saying, look 1000mph where nvidia is much less, when its NOT that simple and may or can lead to mis-information to the consumer. Yes this might not be a case of cheating but yet again drivers issues on ati's part, still adds up to a issue(s).

someone hit it on the nail, who cares on the brand, but who gives the best total package or whatever a consumer may be looking for, however again, if reviews lean someone in a direction due to any reason other than facts, you get the point...

my point is, i find the same issues as toms & firing s. (and some others), yet so many reviews either refuse to or are not of enough knowledge to find these same issues/points nor report them, YET point out nvidia sucks at dx 9 or such, i will take the bet of lets just wait and see when that time comes of playing a dx9 game thats released and look again, cause unlike many here find right now the 5950 blows away the r9800 & 9800xt in almost ALL situtions including 2d for performance and quality plus it hasn't issues like ati does (examples: new drivers has some issues with some displays - i had that myself, findings such as tom's saw where quality is less to beat out other cards performance, lack luster 2d - even matrox is faster, try them out yourself) yet the only nvidia major item is, does it play dx9 well, that is yet to be truly seen. Nvidia rarely to never lets down on major items like that, unlike matrox or ati has before.

i guess in some fairness you are now seeing a few more reviews that make a possible point of, is ati all as good as the talk from some? also pointing out a few issues here and a few there, odd that each reviewer does not collectly find the same issues as with nvidia, many are doing there best to state a point that has NOT yet even occured, could this be good in the end for nvidia? maybe they will work very hard to be sure they have it all right when the time comes ver ati getting some easy breaks from many...


"I?d hardly call the 5950 better than the XT"

do you own both? ...I do....

 

[reever]

I think you miss some of the point, lack of reviewers pointing out issues due to many things including knowlege or lack there-of possibly...

maybe because THE ISSUES DID NOT COME UP DURING THEIR TESTING

he even points out a few things he/they proved, unlike others just saying, look 1000mph where nvidia is much less, when its NOT that simple and may or can lead to mis-information to the consumer. Yes this might not be a case of cheating but yet again drivers issues on ati's part, still adds up to a issue(s).

Yes there's an issue in one benchmark, no evidence of issues in anything else. Last time I checked you cannot play a benchmark

yet so many reviews either refuse to or are not of enough knowledge to find these same issues/points nor report them,

Because they dont have issues when running their tests, why do you not understand this concept. Just because oyu get problems does not mean eveyrbody has the exact same problems and it is because your card and drivers are from ATI

YET point out nvidia sucks at dx 9 or such,

Because they can prove this, you cant prove there are issues in games that occur in everybodies computers, especially when they encounter no issues in the review

will take the bet of lets just wait and see when that time comes of playing a dx9 game thats released and look again, cause unlike many here find right now the 5950 blows away the r9800 & 9800xt in almost ALL situtions including 2d for performance and quality plus it hasn't issues like ati does

Do you only read one firingsquad and tomshardware reviews and draw all of your conclusions from them or something? No, the 5950 does not beat the 9800xt, not even in almost ALL situations, and get off the 2d performance crap, this is not an issue for the general consumer, and if people want 2d quality and performance and NEED as much as they can get, they wont buy a nvidia card either

xamples: new drivers has some issues with some displays - i had that myself, findings such as tom's saw where quality is less to beat out other cards performance, lack luster 2d - even matrox is faster, try them out yourself

I have on idea where you are seeing this in Toms reviews, he makes just about 0 mention of bad image quality on ati cards and no mentions of 2d anything. Matrox cards are better than FX cards also, they are MADE for it

yet the only nvidia major item is, does it play dx9 well, that is yet to be truly seen.

No, it is seen right now in the limited amount of games and benchmarks we have right now. It will become worse and worse and more apparent as time goes on

Nvidia rarely to never lets down on major items like that, unlike matrox or ati has before.

You obviously dont understand the scope of the problems Nvidia has had in the last 1 and a half years.

i guess in some fairness you are now seeing a few more reviews that make a possible point of, is ati all as good as the talk from some?

That's odd, it seems to be the other way around, everybody seems to be questioning nvidia about their performance and quality, maybe you should take your blinders off and venture into the world that doesnt consist of 2 sites

also pointing out a few issues here and a few there, odd that each reviewer does not collectly find the same issues as with nvidia, many are doing there best to state a point that has NOT yet even occured, could this be good in the end for nvidia?

Yes it's all a big conspiracy, everybody is out to get either ati or nvidia.

maybe they will work very hard to be sure they have it all right when the time comes ver ati getting some easy breaks from many...

What? Can anybody translate this?

 

[reever]

oops, IE just farted

 

[1ManArmY]

excuse you