Geforce FX

[JJADAMS]

What happened to it, I have been out of the loop for awhile, but was it ever released?

 

[AJPatel]

haha yeah
nVidia
PriceWatch

from $330 up = not many people have them

 

[chizow]

You're not missing much anyways. Go back to bed for a month and wake up to NV35.

Chiz

 

[1ManArmY]

I second that, skip the NV30 and wait for NV35 in the fall. I guess I;ll go with ATI for a hot minute. ATI 9700 Pro or ATI 9800 if I can get my hands on one by April 8th, my build date.

 

[Orbius]

The 9800pro is golden cant wait to get one.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Orbius
The 9800pro is golden cant wait to get one.

I'd hold off on the 9800 until the Cat 3.3's are released. There's already evidence that the substantial gains in AA/AF are merely driver path optimizations that will leave the 9800pro with only a clock speed boost over the 9700pro. Both use 2.8ns BGA, which leaves core clocks as the only major difference in performance. If you can get a 9700pro for substantially less, that might be the way to go.

By the way, NV35 looks to be much closer than anyone expected, as digit-life/xbit claims in their 9800pro review that both should debut at the same time in the second half of April. :Q Considering they just made a visit to nVidia HQ where they were shown working samples of NV35 as well as entire trays of testing samples, my guess is sooner rather than later.

Chiz

 

[nRollo]

"By the way, NV35 looks to be much closer than anyone expected, as digit-life/xbit claims in their 9800pro review that both should debut at the same time in the second half of April"

LOL- the ATI Faithful who've been having so much fun dissing the FX would be in 3dfx-land all over again if nVidia released the nV35 in April and it stomped the 9800.

 

[Keysplayr]

I'm excited to see what it can do against the ATI monster. I can't afford either one when they hit the retail shelves of course, but still anxious to see the brawl.

Keys

 

[chsh1ca]

Originally posted by: Rollo
"By the way, NV35 looks to be much closer than anyone expected, as digit-life/xbit claims in their 9800pro review that both should debut at the same time in the second half of April"

LOL- the ATI Faithful who've been having so much fun dissing the FX would be in 3dfx-land all over again if nVidia released the nV35 in April and it stomped the 9800.

Given the FX5800's lackluster performance, that's a big IF.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: chsh1ca

Originally posted by: Rollo
"By the way, NV35 looks to be much closer than anyone expected, as digit-life/xbit claims in their 9800pro review that both should debut at the same time in the second half of April"

LOL- the ATI Faithful who've been having so much fun dissing the FX would be in 3dfx-land all over again if nVidia released the nV35 in April and it stomped the 9800.

Given the FX5800's lackluster performance, that's a big IF.

What lackluster performance?!?
The card is as fast as all hell. Neck and neck with the 97/9800 in most cases. Even besting it some. And dont give me the AA/AF argument because the higher resolution we go, the less you even need these features. At 1280 x 1024, you would not tell the difference with AA/AF enabled or not, except for the loss in fps.

Your turn..

 

[Lonyo]

I'll take the next turn.

6 months.

There ya go.

 

[Lonyo]

CRAP! Maybe 2 more turns.

9700PRO = cheaper

Less noise from ATi.

 

[chsh1ca]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
What lackluster performance?!?
The card is as fast as all hell. Neck and neck with the 97/9800 in most cases. Even besting it some. And dont give me the AA/AF argument because the higher resolution we go, the less you even need these features. At 1280 x 1024, you would not tell the difference with AA/AF enabled or not, except for the loss in fps.

Your turn..

First of all, yes you would tell the difference. Second of all, it's not as big an improvement over the R9800 Pro at 1600x1280 as you're making it out to sound.

If you are playing your games at 135FPS at 1600x1200 -AA/AF, but could play them at 110FPS at 1280 + AA/AF, which would you choose? Personally, I'd choose the latter, but everyone's tastes differ. Simply put the FX line provides less than expected performance by far, and contrary to what you say here, the only benchmarks it actually does outperform the R9700/R9800 pro cards in is when AA/AF are disabled at resolutions above 1024. In those situations, it doesn't remarkably outperform it, it only does so by all things considered a marginal score, and also, in said situations, it doesn't mean the difference between playability and nonplayability. What's the use of an extra 20 odd FPS when you're already at or above 120? It's not going to do anything realistic. Something like only 1 in 10 people can tell the difference between 50 FPS and 60FPS anyway, and these cards aren't going to come close to dropping down to that low a speed.

The GeForce FX line performs on par with a 6 month old card, for a lot more money. IMHO the slight gain in FPS over the R9800 pro in non-AA/AF modes at 1600x1200 is worthless when you consider that you're comparing ~135 FPS to ~120FPS. At those speeds, the difference is irrelevant.

So yes, I feel justified in labeling it as lackluster.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Rollo
"By the way, NV35 looks to be much closer than anyone expected, as digit-life/xbit claims in their 9800pro review that both should debut at the same time in the second half of April"

LOL- the ATI Faithful who've been having so much fun dissing the FX would be in 3dfx-land all over again if nVidia released the nV35 in April and it stomped the 9800.

It's about time, I'd thought the ATI stomping was supposed to begin last year in November sometime. Oops, guess it takes nVidia 6 months to merely catch up and then an additional 3 or so to take the lead while ATI's invested little in their flag ships considering how similar the R350 is to the R300, they've had all that time and to assume they've done nothing with it but make the R300 a little faster and possible a little more effecicent, lofl.

When it's the end of March now and FX 5800's aren't even available now, at least far from large quantities, I'd be very very shocked if we were able to get our hands on an NV35 any time in April or even May for that matter, more like June at best...

 

[Killrose]

9800 will be for sale in late April. NV35 "might" be white papered then, but no way available.

 

[Lonyo]

I heard April 8th for 9800's.

Plus, 1280 with AA/AF would be SOO much better than 1600 without.

In Unreal Tournament, AF makes it soo much better, I get such bad texture blending, I'd rather have AF/AA speed than raw res speed. Now, if only I could afford a 9500PRO.

 

[themaster0628]

nvida is the king
i love nvida!

 

[nRollo]

Bunny:
"Oops, guess it takes nVidia 6 months to merely catch up and then an additional 3 or so to take the lead while ATI's invested little in their flag ships considering how similar the R350 is to the R300, they've had all that time and to assume they've done nothing with it but make the R300 a little faster and possible a little more effecicent, lofl."
Big deal. Let's see: ATI has had arguably the "best" card for 6 months out of the last 5 years. Woohoo. They are the past and future KING! No one can ever stand up to their genius!

CHshica:
"Simply put the FX line provides less than expected performance by far, and contrary to what you say here, the only benchmarks it actually does outperform the R9700/R9800 pro cards in is when AA/AF are disabled at resolutions above 1024"
You are overlooking the obvious and putting your own (meaningless) conditions on the equation:
1. A card doesn't have to be significantly faster because it came out 6 months later. All that matters is that it offer roughly comparable performance at the time you buy, which the FX does.
2. FPS players often don't care much about FSAA
3. ATI cards have more driver and hardware compatibility issues, period.

Lonyo:
"In Unreal Tournament, AF makes it soo much better, I get such bad texture blending, I'd rather have AF/AA speed than raw res speed. Now, if only I could afford a 9500PRO. "
Really? Your system isn't HALF powerful enough to play UT2003 at 1280 with AA/FF. I have a P4 2.53/512 PC2700/R9700Pro, and I play UT2003 at 10X7X32, 4X Aniso.
Why? Because I like to win, and it screws me up when UT2003 jerks and stutters using quality AF/AA settings.

 

[Rogozhin]

On my 19" monitor I don't play above 1024-I believe that this is probably the case with most gamers as they aren't running 20 and 21" sonys.


I have to use aa and af. This is necessary in the game i play the most FB. You have to have some good AA to see the difference in silloutes of planes, as to identifiy them.


Also i like to use at least 8x AF and most of the time 16x af, which the geforce cannot do.


Plus if you are going to compare the fx to the 9700 then compare it to the tyan card that is the latest revision running 400/400. It will eat that pos fx for breakfast in every bench you throw at it-plus it costs the same as the fx.


and it is quieter and only takes on pci slot.

ROGO

 

[sash1]

Originally posted by: JJADAMS
What happened to it, I have been out of the loop for awhile, but was it ever released?

yes, it's already out: here @ newegg

been around for a few weeks now.

~Aunix

 

[nRollo]

" It will eat that pos fx for breakfast in every bench you throw at it-plus it costs the same as the fx."

LOL- easy now, Rogochin. Pimping 9700s won't get you laid, rich, or into heaven.

BTW- where do you get the 400/400 BS?

The truth about Tyan
"I don?t know where the rumor about it started, but there was a lot of talk about the Tyan 9700 Pro card coming clocked at an overclocked state, near 400MHz at default. Well, that isn?t the case; this card is not overclocked by default. It comes clocked at the standard 325MHz core and 620MHz DDR memory speed."

"The final stable overclock on our card was 385MHz/340MHz (680MHz DDR)"

 

[sash1]

"Less noise from ATi."

Do you even KNOW how loud ATi's card is?...Didn't think so.... The Gainward FX is only 6dB louder than the 9700Pro, a difference I'm sure most won't be able to notice.

~Aunix

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Bunny:
"Oops, guess it takes nVidia 6 months to merely catch up and then an additional 3 or so to take the lead while ATI's invested little in their flag ships considering how similar the R350 is to the R300, they've had all that time and to assume they've done nothing with it but make the R300 a little faster and possible a little more effecicent, lofl."

Big deal. Let's see: ATI has had arguably the "best" card for 6 months out of the last 5 years. Woohoo. They are the past and future KING! No one can ever stand up to their genius!

More than six months...and counting. Seems to me you seem a little far too biased towards nVidia to notice the reality of the situation, nVidia lost time and they are behind. Taking back the lead will not be easy, nor will merely catching up be a walk in the park. The only thing that troubles me about you is you seem disturbingly gleeful dreaming of an NV35 crushing the 9800 Pro as soon as April. "Watch out ATI and ATI fans, nVidia is gonna totally smash you!" nVidia lost their performance lead, and I've been saying this several time now already that ATI could just as easily fall behind, but with the time advantage they gained with the unexpected release and success of the R300 ontop of nVidia's stumble and their missing out on a product refresh has gained a huge time advantage for ATI, and with they way ATI has been improving things (from the incredible paper R200 to actually getting that "paper performance" onto the hardware with the R300 ontop of incredible driver improvements), I just don't see how they could be pushed down so easily, even by the mighty nVidia. And as far as the "past and future king", I seem to recall a situation where nVidia was able to grab a lead againd the all mighty 3Dfx and then run with it, and they sure ran far. The fact that ATI has been able to rise up and grab such a decisive lead sure is a statement. How could such a thing happen if they'd had nothing "worthy" before the R300? It's a good wake up call for nVidia, I look forward to seeing what develops out of such stiff competition.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: AunixM3
"Less noise from ATi."

Do you even KNOW how loud ATi's card is?...Didn't think so.... The Gainward FX is only 6dB louder than the 9700Pro, a difference I'm sure most won't be able to notice.

~Aunix

Where is the Gainward card? Is it available yet and/or are there reviews that confirm this? Gainward = win

 

[Keysplayr]

The GeForce FX line performs on par with a 6 month old card, for a lot more money. IMHO the slight gain in FPS over the R9800 pro in non-AA/AF modes at 1600x1200 is worthless when you consider that you're comparing ~135 FPS to ~120FPS. At those speeds, the difference is irrelevant.


The NV30 was delayed over 6 months yes?
Well, from what I have seen (meaning the dozens of different benchmarks from just as many web sites) these cards, the ATI 9700 pro/9800 pro and GFFX 5800/Ultra are all Super Fast pieces of hardware. No doubt. If I owned both the top end cards from each company, I would constantly be swapping them back and forth in my rig just for fun. If I gave a GFFX 5800 Ultra to any devote ATI 9800 pro owner, they would say it was a piece of trash to my face, but would probably bust a rib to get it home and into their machine for a test drive. And I think if I gave a 9800 pro to a GFFX 5800 Ultra owner, I think the very same thing would happen. I know I would in either direction. If you say that you wouldn't, it would be a lie.
I know that I am talking to a lot of walls here, but those with open minds know what's up.