POLL:::6800 ultras, or X850XT ?

[housecat]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
The facts are, SLI dosnt work in every game. Even when you try to force it, not all games benefit from it. Widescreen monitors do not work with it properly, putting many "power users" out of luck. Im not going to spend $1200+ on just video cards, to A) Not have it work all the time, B) Have to set my WS LCD to a 4:3 res just to play a game.

Thats fine, dont be a first adopter. Stick with a really fast 9700 Pro. ATI did.

People dont realize how feeble they were before the R300. And then you'd be wise to know that the R300 is from ArtX, a company they aquired in 2000.

ATI has been a OEM company, nothing spectacular besides those they bought out.

They've been running on that architechure for some time now. Yeah it was good, but they bought it from an AMERICAN company from California.

It will be amusing to see them fall on their faces again when they try to deviate from that architechure drastically.

Come on guys, lets get that bridge chip done.. how long does it take? And lets get SLI out.. and those OGL drivers, and those 64bit drivers.. need i go on?

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: Poozler

Originally posted by: CraigRT
I'd go X850 for sure

well you asked, why do you look confused if you get opinions.
SLI sucks, so X850 is an easy vote. Plus, i've always liked ATi.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: housecat
LOL, you dont have the same performance as SLI.. try 2048x1536 crank the AA/AF.. watch your card go up in a puff of smoke.

I cant believe the arguments coming out of the anti-SLI crowd. "Can't see 180fps"??? You completely miss the point of a faster video card.. high res, graphic options, and overall smoother performance.

Last I checked, 1600x1200 was high res, which is what I run at. Most of my games don't support higher, and I would never go higher any time soon. Heck, going 1600x1200 is new for me, and since it runs smooth I'll be fine there. Don't notice a big change from 1280x960, so wouldn't expect much at 2048x1536. Why you would run at that res with everything cranked up is beyond me. Don't need more than 2x AA at 1600x1200...

80fps is the highest your monitor supports? Try vsync off.

At 1600x1200, the highest refresh rate it has is 75hz, which means the highest FPS you can see is 75. Which is perfectly fine, as the human eye can't really notice higher than 60 anyway.

Bottom line is SLI is going to be able to do more instensive games, high res, more grahical options than your X850. Also get shader model 3.0, not bad for a "freebie".. I'd certainly rather have it than not.

Aside from Farcry(which I've never played and probably won't) and AoE3(which I won't play either), I don't know any other game that is using shader 3.0 or planning on using. Oh wait, unreal3 engine will have it too... but wait, I won't be playing unreal3 engine games either. And it's not out till 2006. Your logic is sound, but not a purchase issue worth bringing up.

Its actually more like a vastly superior video card, with more advanced features.. and from a company who doesnt put up those god-forsaken .net drivers from hell!

Never talk about drivers until the ratio of forceware threads to catalyst threads change. As it stands, in support forums across the net, more people complain about forceware than catalyst. You can check that yourself. Start here.

Damn x850s are ovecompensating for their lack of manhood with dual slot eh? Sounds pretty weenie to me.

Its like comparing a souped up honda civic riceburner (R300 on steroids?), that looks and sounds really annoying, sitting next to a 2005 Lingenfelter Twin Turbo Z06 Corvette. For the dimwitted out there, Twin turbo=SLI, LS6=NV40

Simply outgunned.

The x850XT PE is completely silent for one thing, so it's more like a chrysler 300c with huge power but silent style. Compared to say... driving a twin turbo Z06 Vette down a 30mph speed zone. WASTED POWER. Keep the supercars to the race track, and the super graphics power to computers that will actually use it. Not gamers.

 

[housecat]

Thats utterly ridiculous.

Few notes: life doenst end at 1600x1200.. theres alot of AA/AF, and alot higher resolutions. Most people with SLI have very high res displays (2048x1536 or 1900x1200, or something similar). So its not wasted power.
Its only wasted on you. Because you've made it out to be a waste. Like I said, speak for yourself.. not deride a superior technology to the X800 series.

And I guess avoiding SM3 games is a solution.. i think. :roll:

About driver quality, theres no dispute that the 64bit/linux support from Nvidia is superior.
As for the "thread count" method of seeing who has better drivers, I will give you the same reply I would typically get from a forum guru "its user error". Or poorly configured systems.

and this is just damn ODD

Keep the supercars to the race track, and the super graphics power to computers that will actually use it. Not gamers.

NOT GAMERS? who in the hell is going to use SLI super graphics power?

I guess when the R500 comes out and its as fast as current SLI rigs, I can rest assured that you will be saying the same thing about it.






The crux of the matter is: since SLI is a two card solution, people pretend its not a fair comparison to a single card. But it is, they both put out benchmark results. They both operate as a single card.

So if the x850 was as fast as SLI, I'm sure you would be saying how useless that extra power is..

and that you are going to downgrade to something much slower, so that you arent "inconvenienced" by a vastly superior card, right?



Some WANT the power.
ATI doesnt have any power.

Leave that to the American engineers.

When you want skullfvcking power, you go SLI.

If you are meek, and easily satisfied.. ATI has a fine line of turbocharged ArtX R300s for sale still.

 

[Malak]

I don't "avoid" sm3 games, I just don't like any of the ones developed or in the process of being developed. Pure coincidence. The point is that there's only 3 I can think of that bother with the tech, haven't seen anything to show sm3 as better than sm2, but I would love to see an article if you know of any.

And your comparisons are just plain stupid, and your ignorance is astounding.

 

[housecat]

I'M AGAST!

WELL SIR! YOUR BREATH IS ATTROCIOUS, AND YOUR KNICKERS UNFIT!

GOOD DAY!

 

[Gamingphreek]

Malak just log off right now. YOu are making no sense. Im sure if (hypothetically) the X850XT(PE) SLI was at 180FPS and the 6800U (non-sli) was at 80fps you would be all over it. Stop showing your bias.

Ill buy whichever card is faster at the time (I got my 5900XT because it had VIVO and was cheaper at the time).

You say you here more complaints about forceware. Well seeing as official forceware drivers are not released often i can see why, people are running beta drivers.

DOnt even start with SLI is crap. Maybe its not for you, OK fine. But dont go spreading misinformation. SLI is MUCH MUCH faster than a single X850XT(PE), and yes it does come at a cost. If you dont like it dont buy it, but dont go saying it is crap when you know full well it isn't.

-Kevin

 

[Ackmed]

Wow, I think housecat is more bias than anyone on these forums. Bias and ignorant, a terrible combo.

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: malak
I don't "avoid" sm3 games, I just don't like any of the ones developed or in the process of being developed. Pure coincidence. The point is that there's only 3 I can think of that bother with the tech, haven't seen anything to show sm3 as better than sm2, but I would love to see an article if you know of any.

And your comparisons are just plain stupid, and your ignorance is astounding.

And sure. I'll school you in the arts of Shader Model 3.0 if you really want a skullfvcking.


1. PS3.0 offers great efficiency and will offer much higher performance than PS2.0

2. Effects will be easier to implement, and those same effects less stressing on the hardware through PS3.0

3. PS3.0 offers full precision (32bit floating point), while 2.0 does not (24bit). Anyone who has studied Nvidia's new pixel shaders will know that it has PLENTY of power to use this as well.

4. VS (vertex shader) 3.0 will bring exponentially greater image quality over VS2.0 and where we'll see the biggest IQ improvements. This feature finally brings us displacement mapping that DX9 originally promised.

Simply put, Shader Model 3.0 is a very big deal and will remain the standard until 2006 when Longhorn and DX10 is released.
I should also note, that as I've stated in the past, Nvidia moving to 32FP with the NV30 was a wise move.
Now, the move to PS3.0 was much easier from an engineering standpoint and their 2 years of experience working with 32FP hardware will likely give them huge performance gains over the ATI PS/VS3.0 hardware whenever that gets here.




Heres some opinions from people above me and you, the Developers:
Shader model 3.0 opinions from the devs
http://www.gamers-depot.com/interviews/dx9b/001.htm
Shader model 3.0 information (also former shader comparisons)
http://www.elitebastards.com/p...4136&head=1&comments=1

Oh, and your requested tech demos and some general info from MS on the subject.
NV40 Tech demos http://developer.nvidia.com/ob....html#NV40_Video_Clips

MS and NV SM3 info
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/...dermodel30_NVIDIA.mspx






You really dont want to go round and round with me on R300 (yes thats what you essentially have, and the ONLY reason why your drivers are decent) versus NV40.

 

[housecat]

o and excuse my "ignorance" on the issue. i guess when i get educated on shader model 3.0 and the benefits to the R300 architechure over it.. i will finally see the light, that SLI is just "too much power for us".

you and ackmed can shine some light on the situation for the innocent bystanders, no?

 

[Creig]

Housecat - SLI isn't for everybody. I don't know ANYBODY who runs games at 2048x1536 with AA/AF. Do you? Most people would be happy running 1600x1200, which either the 6800U or X850XT can handle.

Its like comparing a souped up honda civic riceburner (R300 on steroids?), that looks and sounds really annoying, sitting next to a 2005 Lingenfelter Twin Turbo Z06 Corvette. For the dimwitted out there, Twin turbo=SLI, LS6=NV40

And that analogy is just plain wrong. The X850XT is slower than a 6800U SLI setup, obviously. But not THAT much slower. Come on.

I realize you like SLI, so do I. But it has its place and not everybody needs it.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: Creig
I realize you like SLI, so do I. But it has its place and not everybody needs it.

Can't see SLI as anything more than bragging rights myself.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Runs quieter. I doubt it... they are probably both the same. Remember the X850XT uses a dual slot cooler as well. Read Anands review on it. Less power... eh probably.

I agree with the rest of your statement.

You need to spread out and read some real reviews.
link

Well, I just bought an Enermax 460W PSU for 89.00. Has a 33A 12V rail. Should be palunty for SLI.

I would hope so.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Stop showing your bias.

:wine:

 

[sparkyclarky]

Originally posted by: malak

Originally posted by: housecat
i dont mind being a beta tester.

sli ultras will absolutely SMOKE anything you guys have here.

raggin on sli.. makes me sick.

its a BIG BOYS TOY son.. stick with the weenie man single slot solution and be a woman.


i dont diss on those willing to go SLI, much better than what i have.. or any of you have.



or we can be whiny little b!tches because we are too cheap or poor to try the good sh!t.

nothing wrong with a x850.. but sli ultras is pure unadulterated excessive uber pwnage.

theres no way around that.

First off, you are full of it. My "weenie" x850 is dual slot for one thing. For another, it puts out more FPS than my monitor can actually show in hl2. 2nd, I can OC pretty easily and get more performance down the road if I need to. And 3rd, it costs more than half as much as your WASTE OF MONEY SLI garbage. That's right, for less than 50% of the cost, I get the same performance. You can't see 180 fps so why bother spending money to get it? I'm happy with 80fps, as that's as high as my monitor is going to support at the resolutions I play anyway.

Your whole argument seems to revolve around not being able to "see" a benefit from SLI. Frankly, that's flawed. Your monitor most certainly will benefit from higher framerates assuming that you turn off V-sync. Your eyes most certainly will discern a noticeable difference in smoothness between 80 and 180fps. The single most noticeable FPS increase will probably be the advantage in really graphically intensive scenes where cards drop into the 30s or lower. Calling SLI a "WASTE OF MONEY" is a joke. It is not a waste, as there is most certainly benefits to be had from it. It might not be a good financial decision (depending on your income), but that doesn't automatically make it a waste of money. Your overclocking argument is also negated when the entirely contingent nature of overclocking is figured in. And again, even an overclocked x850 is not going to stand up to an SLI rig. I'll repeat this again - SLI is for those who want the overall best performing gfx solution for games in the consumer market, where money is not an object. This simply cannot be debated, and the more you try, the more you'll show that you clearly have blinders on.

 

[Malak]

Even benchmarks have shown that SLI does not produce double the performance, but the premium of getting a new mobo and double-up on video cards is more than double. Buck exceeds bang, not worth it. Furthermore, it's buggy. It doesn't support all games. It could be obsolete when dual-gpu's hit and turn out to be cheaper and faster, which makes it no longer future-proof. Just say no to SLI.

 

[KBtn]

Nvidia! !!!

 

[Todd33]

I'd take one X850XT PE or 6800U over SLI anything. Double the noise, heat and headaches. No thanks.

 

[sparkyclarky]

Originally posted by: malak
Even benchmarks have shown that SLI does not produce double the performance, but the premium of getting a new mobo and double-up on video cards is more than double. Buck exceeds bang, not worth it. Furthermore, it's buggy. It doesn't support all games. It could be obsolete when dual-gpu's hit and turn out to be cheaper and faster, which makes it no longer future-proof. Just say no to SLI.

Buck exceeds bang on pretty much any card over the GF4 Ti series. You're not getting 3-4x the performance with a 9800 series card costing 3-4x as much, and you're certainly not getting a full 7-8x the performance by going with the latest gen which costs 7-8x as much. It's a bit buggy, but not too bad, and it's first gen - it'll take a few months for the kinks to get fully worked out. It supports most games that could use the speed it offers. I'm unsure what you're getting at by dual-gpu's, since SLI is dual-GPUs. If you mean dual core, I wouldn't count on that anytime soon, as we're over 200 million transistors on a single GPU die already. Nobody ever claimed it was future-proof, as there is no such term in the computer world. The fact is (and interestingly enough, you haven't ever commented on this the numerous times I've stated in this thread) that SLI is for those who want the overall best performing gfx solution for games in the consumer market, where money is not an object. This simply cannot be debated, and the more you try, the more you'll show that you clearly have blinders on.

Sorry for quoting myself at the end there, but you don't seem to get that point. Not everybody buys bang for the buck. I mean, hell, a console provides a hell of a lot more bang for your buck gaming then a computer ever will, but we all (presumably those in this thread do at least) still buy new computer hardware.

 

[housecat]

just say no to being a malak.. err i mean moron.

 

[housecat]

im still waiting on ackmed and malak to back up their big mouths, and tell me how im ignorant/biased.

its amazing in life how those who truley are ignorant and biased, are always the first to call other people those names.

and everyone knows it doesnt get much more ignorant or biased, than those two clowns.


no reaction to my shader model 3 post you requested malak? all that information, adn i bet you didnt read a sentence of it.. because you are bound and determined to oppose SLI/Nvidia.


theres a simple fact of computing that you cannot defeat here malak/ackmed, and that is that SLI owns your x850s.
just because you bought x850s, does not mean that somehow SLI is no longer vastly superior..

and dont forget theres a ton of performance room in those drivers. while your fast 9700 Pros are completely maxed out, have been. Thats why you actually got decent drivers with an ATI card.

Dont even ask me to educate you two again, unless you are serious about wanting info.

You asked for demos of shader model 3.0 and i was kind enough to deliver, the advantages are obvious.


The message is clear, malak/ackmed and the ATI fanboys have failed.

 

[Malak]

First, how am I biased? My opinion is based on the facts I've addressed already.

Secondly, and this is from one of your links:

I can not think of any effects that can be done in PS 3.0 that can't be done in PS 2.0. Under PS 2.0 they might take some extra passes, or maybe a few more instructions, but the final result should exactly match the equiv PS 3.0 Shader.

3rd, I am not a fanboy. I even suggested an nvidia card to a friend, EVEN SLI. But dual 6800U's is retarded and a waste of money.

 

[zakee00]

There's no current NEED for SLI with any current game. Unless somebody is running a ridiculous resolution, a 6800U or X850XT will do quite nicely for the next couple of years.

SLI is simply bragging rights at this point in time.

define need. do we need to play games? do we need computers? do we need dualcore processors?
that was a stupid thing to say.

 

[zakee00]

Malak just log off right now.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: zakee00

There's no current NEED for SLI with any current game. Unless somebody is running a ridiculous resolution, a 6800U or X850XT will do quite nicely for the next couple of years.

SLI is simply bragging rights at this point in time.

define need. do we need to play games? do we need computers? do we need dualcore processors?
that was a stupid thing to say.

Ok. A single video card like the x850XT PE can play any game at high resolution on high detail with reasonable framerate. You have met the requirement of doing the max in the game. Full AA and AF will only hurt performance, not make it better, and massive resolutions aren't supported in most games. Heck, I have one game that doesn't support higher than 1024x768. While SLI with 2 6600GT's might be worthwhile to someone, the OP is taking about SLI with 6800U's, which is completely worthless. Furthermore, as I've said before, future tech is not in SLI, they are moving towards dual gpu, which will be cheaper and faster at the same time. SLI is not futureproof, not useful for high end, and not practical for bang4buck reasons.