when is the Geforce3 going to be available to buy?

[aUt0eXebat]

anyone know? and if it is already, where can I buy it?

 

[arod324]

I'm not sure where you can get it, but I know that a friend of mine pre-ordered it, and it should be coming in two weeks. Try www.nvidia.com because I don't think any other stores have it right now.

 

[XGamer]

Hum, You would be pretty dumb to buy one right when it comes out. Yer friend who already pre-ordered one isnt to bright. First off, G3's are slower than Geforce2 ultra's in low resolutions, in the benchmarks already done ive seen. Second, if you think these cards are worth $600, yer nuts. Im gonna laugh at you guys when NV25 comes out in fall, and Geforce 3's drop to $250 range.

 

[arod324]

Well, he bought it for $500 actually, and well, I guess it's his choice to buy it. I wouldn't call him a geek, because he really doesn't know how to do stuff with his computer, but he just likes to game.

 

[bpt8056]

Who would play in low resolutions with the Geforce3 anyways? However I still wouldn't buy it at that price. As other have said, it would be wise to hold out till the next generation of video cards come out. Just remember that the Geforce3 won't be able to really flex its muscles till DX8 games come out and take advantage of its features. The card is great, but the time to buy it now isn't.

 

[aUt0eXebat]

ill wait a month or so, but im not waiting for another card to come out, then when that new one comes out ppl will say oh wait for another one to come out. ill just buy the geforce 3, then buy the next one that comes out..

 

[Malichite]

If anyone knows a US site to preorder the GF3, please post since I think quite a few would be interested.

 

[TbirdJayC]

the GF3 is most definitely not slower, and any benchmark that sudjests such is flawed, the GF3 is roughly twice as fast as the GF2, now i cant agree with the 500$ price tag, and waiting for the NV-25 is probably the right move, but the GF3 is still an amazing card. In my opinion the FIRST good card to come out of that vile company since GF1, considering the GF2 in all its forms had horrible image quality, and until recently a broken S3TC implementation. Bottom line, if you have the means, go for it, otherwise save up for the NV-25

 

[darth maul]

dsajhfposadhfashdn;f on;ofd hahfdsoHhP*Y(*y9ufhoihfsadjgf@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MY MY MY, you do know with every video card release there are people that say "you'd be nuts to buy this generation wait till XYZ comes out, that will be the one to get". Ummmmmmm, there is never a good time to buy it seems......lol. Good thing I never listen to those that say that, or I would still be using a 8meg RIVA 128...

 

[Kishkumen]

Actually, I wouldn't mind buying a GeForce3 for $500 myself. I like to some 3D programming just as a hobby and the programming features I've been reading about would be a lot of fun to play around with. Which is just as John Carmack indicated, if you're a developer you'll probably want one, if not you probably wouldn't notice any difference between an GeForce2 Ultra.

 

[XGamer]

Humm, Tbird, Sorry man, you need to get some new souces. Dude, a G3 isnt twice as fast as a G2. HAHA, Yer crazy, That would mean that with a G3, I would have 800 FPS in low resolutions(which is what I play at) over the 400 fps I am at now. If you think thats true, then you probably have bought a P3-1.5ghz thinking you are gonna get 500 mhz of more power. And yes a G2 ultra is faster than a G3 in low resolutions and 16 bit. And by low resolutions i mean,(640x480x16, 800x600x16). The g2 ultra had higher fps in all both resolutions. And the benchmarks are done by professionals. So you cant argue they are flawed. You should go read up on how the g3 acctuly works and what they have added since the G2 Ultra's.

 

[TbirdJayC]

ahem...at 1024 by 768 by 32 the gf3 gets about 150 or so fps, compared to a GF2's 70 or so, last time i checked 150/70 was 2 or so...and my source is Nvidia, not the local benchmark page.

 

[XGamer]

Humm, your source is nvidia? No wonder you are so wrong. Dont you think Nvidia have issues like "Marketing" to deal with? Seriously man, Dont trust what you read off Nvidia Website. Read benchmarks off sharkyextreme and anandtech.com. They are reliable. And also, if you read what I said in my previous post, I was talking about low resolutions in 16bit, which is what almost everyone plays at. I dont know to many professional gamers who use 32 bit over 16, there is a very small visual difference, but it takes FPS down quite a bit.

 

[ErikaeanLogic]

um, raise your hand if you're going to buy a $500 video card and play in 16-bit with lower resolutions. . .hmm, I didn't think so!

 

[UKtaxman]

They got them on preorder at www.dabs.com if your in the UK. They got 3 different models ranging from £405 to £450, so they aren't as expensive as they could have been. But still thats a lot of wedge to throw on a 6 month cycle.
I'm sure graphics cards used to range between £50 and £150 tops! Where on earth has this huge escalation come from? I remember buying an 8MB V2 for £125 and thinking I was being ripped off for that!

 

[XGamer]

Yeah, Busta, and raise your hand if you are acctuly stupid enough to buy a $500 video card...that has very little performance over another card that is $300 less..

 

[ErikaeanLogic]

Raise your hand if you can spell properly, dude.

To replace an Ultra with a GF3 would be economically unwise, true. However, there are people who have been waiting to make a high-end card upgrade who might have considered an Ultra before. . .and can now make such a purchase, buying into a whole new technology instead of simply a faster memory speed to hide the inadequacies of the memory-bandwidth of the current card's chipset.

Just my opinion, you know. There's probably no need to begin name-calling, is there?

 

[UKtaxman]

In my opinion anyone that spends that sort of money on a graphics card needs their head examined. I really think that Nvidia are pricing themselves out of the market. Not too long ago I spent £125 on a Voodoo2 and I was gutted and felt ripped off. Now the V2 was a huge jump over anything else on the market at the time. So how huge is the jump between a GF2mx and GF3 in real terms. Now I'm not talking fps, but graphical ability? Will we be able to look at 2 pc's 1 with an mx, the other with a GF3 and say straight away without benchmarking "that IS the GF3 you can tell cos it looks sh@t loads better than tyhe other"?-I think not. Obviously it is a better card, but £450/$600 better-no way.
I really hope ATI and PVR come to market at around £150 to £200, and kick Nvidia in the teeth. It's people that pay those prices that are forcing the market up there. If no one bought them they would know that the market doesn't want to pay that sort of premium for a toss pot of extra performance.