happy medium
Lifer
- Jun 8, 2003
- 14,387
- 480
- 126
Hehe there won't be 10.13.. no 13th month .. that would be 11.01.
:biggrin:
Hehe there won't be 10.13.. no 13th month .. that would be 11.01.
naw, it's the professional users who are funding the r & d, not the tiny % that buy high end consumer cards.
The new cards are a big fail for AMD because:
- The $370 6950 is slightly slower than the $500+ Nvidia GTX 580. Big fail there.
- AMD doesn't have CUDA and has the nerve to have something else called "Accelerated parallel processing". Not good, it's not named CUDA.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-6850-6870-review/7
- AMD doesn't have GPU accelerated proprietary Physx and has the nerve to root for the open and free CPU accelerated one considering that the video card is mostly used in gaming not the CPU so it would be a good idea to run the Physx on the latter - We don't want that, we like to take a 40% hit when running a GPU accelerated Physx. What's the problem, we'll just caugh some more $$$ and buy a better video card - let the CPU idle, why use it?
- AMD doesn't have proprietary 3D and goes open source. So, no proprietary software, no proprietary glasses, no proprietary displays - but any 3D display with HDMI 1.4 (fail) - any glasses (Boooo!!!) including the passive ones and free software (the horror!).
http://www.pcworld.com/article/208551/amd_takes_open_approach_to_hd3d.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-3.html
Let's all fight against the open stuff and promote the proprietary one!!! Fight the CPU accelerated Physx, the [FONT=verdana,geneva]OpenCL[/FONT], the open 3D and let's support all the Corporate Proprietary Stuff they throw at us !1! And we like the slightly faster cards that are way more expensive - being at the top of the benches with a few FPS more - priceless.
You are right Wreckage. Physx is like an option in a car, an option that the AMD 'cars' don't come with at that. But unlike useful options like A/C, it's like an option that lowers horsepower, lowers economy, and only works on <1% of roads.
The new cards are a big fail for AMD because:
- The $370 6950 is slightly slower than the $500+ Nvidia GTX 580. Big fail there.
- AMD doesn't have CUDA and has the nerve to have something else called "Accelerated parallel processing". Not good, it's not named CUDA.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-6850-6870-review/7
- AMD doesn't have GPU accelerated proprietary Physx and has the nerve to root for the open and free CPU accelerated one considering that the video card is mostly used in gaming not the CPU so it would be a good idea to run the Physx on the latter - We don't want that, we like to take a 40% hit when running a GPU accelerated Physx. What's the problem, we'll just caugh some more $$$ and buy a better video card - let the CPU idle, why use it?
- AMD doesn't have proprietary 3D and goes open source. So, no proprietary software, no proprietary glasses, no proprietary displays - but any 3D display with HDMI 1.4 (fail) - any glasses (Boooo!!!) including the passive ones and free software (the horror!).
http://www.pcworld.com/article/208551/amd_takes_open_approach_to_hd3d.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-3.html
Let's all fight against the open stuff and promote the proprietary one!!! Fight the CPU accelerated Physx, the [FONT=verdana,geneva]OpenCL[/FONT], the open 3D and let's support all the Corporate Proprietary Stuff they throw at us !1! And we like the slightly faster cards that are way more expensive - being at the top of the benches with a few FPS more - priceless.
You realize that comparing a $500 card with a $370 card where the cheaper card is often no more than a tiny percentage behind or EVER overtakes the more expensive card is not an effective argument--you're blatantly ignoring the massive price/performance aspect of the cards. Even if you try to ignore all metrics but the one that helps your point (in this point, performance in a vacuum) then the 580 is destroyed by various CF configurations, and the 5970 still wins card vs. card.lets put this high resolution BS to bed with the gtx580 vs the 6970.
From the Anandtech review @ 25001600 4x aa.
but you failed right off the bat by saying 6950 instead of 6970.
Ya got me. That typo clearly dismisses everything.
- AMD doesn't have proprietary 3D and goes open source. So, no proprietary software, no proprietary glasses, no proprietary displays - but any 3D display with HDMI 1.4 (fail) - any glasses (Boooo!!!) including the passive ones and free software (the horror!).
http://www.pcworld.com/article/208551/amd_takes_open_approach_to_hd3d.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-3.html
Just like the 5970 and other cards that because they were the fastest they always demanded a price premium.Look, the 580 is a beast of a card but a terrible, terrible value.
I understand the premium top-performing parts carry, and I fully expect prices to drop sooner rather than later.Just like the 5970 and other cards that because they were the fastest they always demanded a price premium.
This is nothing new. When the market settles prices will drop. They always do.
I tend to agree, if only because I like 3D as a tech with great entertainment potential, and AMD seems to have Eyefinity and little else when it comes to investing in and pushing new devices. I just don't know if they have the cash to do it.I should emphasize that 3D, at this stage, is not a DIY sort-of-thing. AMD is trying to make it sound like it is, when in reality, it isn't. It's tightly controlled by the industry, and unlike software, there is actually hardware technologies involved. Until it becomes a DIY sort-of-thing, AMD should stop singing the praises of it's open approach and start taking control here.
The only reason AMD goes open source is because:
1. They don't have the resources to develop their own solution.
2. They're afraid to take any risks. They're afraid to be leaders. They're afraid to make a GPU faster than Nvidia's.
AMD should just buy out the 3rd party company or technology they're relying on for 3D. Not doing it yourself is just going to ultimately result in an inferior product. It reeks of unprofessional-ism. You're basically asking someone else to do the work you should be doing, similar to asking someone do homework or take a test for you.
How much news have you heard about open source 3D technology? Not much, because I'm sure most people are satisfied with their proprietary Samsung, Sony, LG, or Panasonic 3D TVs and glasses, and could care less about open technology. Manufacturers could care less about it either. Every manufacturer's panel and TV is different: you need proprietary technology to get the most out of the hardware. Why invest in something that makes it harder to differentiate your product from your competitor's?
Nvidia's solution works on any 3D display with HDMI 1.4a also, you know. I know, it's not free unless you have an existing 3d vision kit. But right now it's all about design wins, and most self-respecting large companies won't want a solution from a company that can't do it's own share of work.
Ya know what I just might do ? I may just grab a 6970 and a GTX570 and run both separately in my upcoming build. Driver testing / IQ / Min / Ave / Max frames.
Of course, I wouldn't return the one that was slower. I'd keep them both.
Seriously, this is what I am going to do.
And for kicks and giggles. Ill also run my 6870 in there as well, before giving it to the kids. Hell, may even test the old 9800GTX against them as well.
Going to be fun.
Looks at entertainment center, Sony blu-ray player works with LG tv. What were they thinking?
HardOCP seem to have a glowing review for these new cards. From performance stand point, they are a little disappointing I say for me, but that's because NV surprised w/ 570+580. however, I think these parts are priced right. adding more competition to 300-400 range doesn't hurt.
....
Yeah sure. Kyle is unprofessional. Except 90% of the [H] thinks his reviews are the best on the web, including me.
Just fyi [H] use default quality settings not HQ which favours AMD cards since they nerfed IQ for more performance (most reputable sites use HQ which for cards this high end makes sense). They don't seem very keen to let anyone know that fact - several people asked in the past and they never replied, other forum posters said they were using HQ and weren't corrected (despite there being a huge thread on the subject), but in about page 17 of the reviews thread they let it slip they were using default quality settings.
Combine that with 25*16 only graphs and their fixation with 30fps being enough and the radeons seem better then they do on most other sites.
Incidentally in the [H] review thread I dared mention that most people don't have a 25*16 screen, and most want 60fps not 30 - well someone else mentioned it, Kyle told them to hit the X if that's what they thought - I just backed the original poster up. Others agreed, someone mentioned if you are spending $1000 on a 25*16 monitor you'll not be interested in less then a GTX 580 anyway cause what's the point in saving a few $ when you are spending that much on the screen.
This annoyed Kyle so much he wiped all my posts from that thread and banned my account from even looking at it. The guy seems unable to take criticism and is very unprofessional.
Wow! You're kidding? Banned you, did he? Well, go figure. :shrug:
I did too, but he's doing a pretty good job of changing that opinion.
Kyle perma banned me many years ago for complaining about the site having issues. and this was a time when they had TONS of issues with the forums not working properly.Wow! You're kidding? Banned you, did he? Well, go figure. :shrug: