GF3 not (significantly, if any) faster than GF2 Ultra (new benchmarks!)

[cool]

look at this one

 

[rommel]

well even if those benches are true arent there other more significant changes with this new gpu...after all speed is only part of the picture...nes pas

 

[MikeyP]

The Geforce2 Ultra actually should be faster in low resolutions and 16bit color, it can do more pixels/second. Where the Geforce will shine is in DirectX 8 titles and in higher resolutions/32bit color. Of course, the next generation of cards will be out by the time good DirectX titles start coming out, so save your cash

 

[NOX]

All I'm hoping for is that the price will drop for the GF2 Ultra. I really want a Herc GF2U, for my system.

 

[S0me1X]

AT has already predicted Geforce3's performance in current games. Read anandtech's article.

 

[NOX]

<< AT has already predicted Geforce3's performance in current games. >>

Predicted? Did he predict that earthquake in Seattle too?

I'll wait for the real thing, or when a real review from AT is available.

 

[Noriaki]

Damn how many threads do we have to have about this topic?

The GF3 won't be any faster in todays games than a GF2 Ultra, and maybe even a bit slower becuase of the lower core clock..but damn...if an Ultra's not fast enough for you in current games you have issues...

The strength of a GF3 will be shown when developers start making use of programmable T&amp;L. No this does not help it be faster in current games, and no it does not help it make sense to buy a GF3 today. Don't buy a GF3 today that would be dumb. By the time Programmable T&amp;L is in use the GF3 will be half the price is it now. But nVidia had to make a programmable T&amp;L engine or the developers never would have started using it.

Get a Radeon or a GeForce2 now, and until games like Doom3 start coming out you'll very nearly match the GF3 for performance.

Unless you have a major woody for FSAA there is no good reason to get a GF3 now (the GF3 can do 4x FSAA equivilant with a 2x FSAA speed hit).

 

[Dark4ng3l]

I think the big problem is that witch that huge price tag there is little, if any performance increase and this is why people are whining about. I mean would you like someone with a GF2 ultra that he bought for like 400$ beat your GF3 you purchases for a huge amount of $$$$$ in any benchmark?

 

[Noriaki]

Dark: Yeah I understand where you are coming from and *I* certainly don't like the price tag. I think it would be nuts to consider buying this card right now.

 

[lazyboy]

Noriaki is def. right. Programmer need to optimize the software for the GF3. Then you will see the difference.

 

[GD695372]

It's kind of interesting that the GF3 is outperforming the ultra at higher resolutions. It's also nice to see some eifficiency come from nvidia. I guess brute force died with 3Dfx.

 

[S0me1X]

<< Predicted? Did he predict that earthquake in Seattle too?
I'll wait for the real thing, or when a real review from AT is available. >>

My point is: right now, GF3 benchmarks on current games doesn't really say much about GF3's true power (except for GF3's improved FSAA).

 

[NOX]

<< My point is: right now, GF3 benchmarks on current games doesn't really say much about GF3's true power (except for GF3's improved FSAA). >>

Yeah, that was my point too. We don't know for sure what it is capable of doing, not yet anyway. Though I agree with most, the $$$$$$ is outrageous. I will buy a GF2 Ultra once the price drops.

 

[xtreme2k]

Basically the GF3 is like the P4, requiring optimisating to show its strength.

 

[Dulanic]

<< Basically the GF3 is like the P4, requiring optimisating to show its strength. >>



Sort of but its very different also. Speed wise the GF3 is faster, heck the Ultra has 50Mhz over the GF3. So it doesn't need optimization for speed, it just allows a ton of new things.

 

[dawheat]

<< Basically the GF3 is like the P4, requiring optimisating to show its strength. >>

Not really- the GF3 clock for clock looks at worst to be as fast as a GF2, probably slightly faster.

And in any case high res/32bit the GF3 does take a substantial lead and with FSAA its pretty awesome.

But definitely not worth 500 clams today. Maybe near the end of the summer we shall see. But I really wouldn't say if someone did pick it up that they're a fool. A bit extravagant of a purchase- but very very nice.

 

[Rand]

Wow!
Anand has already predicted how the GF3 will score!
I guess I should take Anand's predictions over actual benchmarks of it?
lol

Besides possibly FSAA the GeForce 3 likely won't be much faster than an Ultra in today's games. At low res I can see an Ultra being FASTER than a GF3 in fact, while in high res the GF3 would probably be a bit (not much) faster.

 

[Cherrypez]

I'm waiting for a Geforce3-Ultra.

You know it's coming when the Geforce3 RAM is faster(3.8ns) than the Geforce2-Ultra and yet it is clocked at a lower speed(230MHz for the G3 vs. 250Mhz for the G2U). 3.8ns ram should do 263MHz at it's rated speed... not to mention overclocking.

Gimme that GF3-Ultra lovin!

 

[xtreme2k]

Prolly cost 1K for the GF3Ultra

 

[Cherrypez]

I'll wait anyway because my old Geforce2-GTS is still cranking out plenty of frames.

Maybe when Doom comes out and makes my GTS seem like a Riva128... But that's probably over a year away.

 

[xtreme2k]

same here
happy with my GF2 32MB

 

[lazyboy]

My GF264Pro is more than plenty for now. If I could just afford another for my other machine...

 

[Spook]

Wow, I was really whole heartidly ready to get a GF3, even if it only gave a 25% increase or so over the GF2 Ultra... But wow, I didn't expect this crappy of scores...

Looks like I'll have to wait for the GF3 Ultra to debut in 3 or 4 months, and see what the scores are on that...

I'm also waiting for tribes 2, to see what the scores look like on that...