View Full Version : ATI 9800PRO 256 vs FX5900 Ultra 256
I3lackCoffee
05-12-2003, 09:04 AM
http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/S&V/radeon_9800_256mb.shtml
and
www.tomshardware.com (5900 review)
Silver_Lancer
05-12-2003, 09:09 AM
tomshardware isnt reliable...or wasnt last time i checked
i hate how fast the product cycles go, its just means consumers always get the shaft
saaya
05-12-2003, 09:18 AM
check this out
http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=378
the 5900 compared with the 9700pro , they seem to perform about the same , now wheres that nv35 thats performing 100% better than the nv30 at the same clockspeed nvidia? thats no nv35, thats a nv30a...
499? bye bye nvidia....
QuadDamage
05-12-2003, 09:28 AM
if you look at [S]'s review you'll see that NV35 whoops ati ass big time.
8 reviews (http://www.madshrimps.be/index.php?action=webnewsshow&id=1427)
Anandtechs is the best imho
beatnic
05-12-2003, 10:15 AM
i hope nvidia isn't using the driver trick.. nv35 is impressive anyway ;)
im a bit dissapointed with 9800 pro 256mb.. i hope there's still more room for the official cat 3.4
I3lackCoffee
05-12-2003, 10:24 AM
i hope nvidia isn't using the driver trick.. nv35 is impressive anyway
I'm hoping the same thing.
Silver_Lancer
05-12-2003, 11:02 AM
the bit-tech review is very well put imho
and with the huge cooling the 5900 still needs, the not much more chip architecture, and the SIZE of the card, the 9800 is still just better, i have owned a gf4ti4200 and ati9500 and i hafta say nvidia drivers are ez but the ati drivers work great too, ati still pwns the crown with sleek design and ability to keep right on top of a card that is coming after the 9800 but doesnt always outrun it
TerroH8er
05-12-2003, 11:40 AM
IMHO nVIDIA fails to excite me again. The only thing that I think is pretty good is the 5900's 4x AA and 8x AF tests. The 5900's 8x AA is crap I think.. the 9800 Pro leads the 5900 by more than 200% when 5900 turns on 8x AA (although admittedly the 9800 Pro only has 6x AA) @ Hexus
Yeah, Anand's is best, imo.
Anybody that can look at that not say nvidia's back in the game is just jaded. And they fixed any and all vis quality issues.
I LOVE having two real competitors.
theonetheycall
05-12-2003, 03:40 PM
nV could not cut it IMHO, I don't see the 5900 doing anything it has been heard about on paper.. another failed card from NV..
I am still waiting for the 9900 Pro.
I think the 35 looks like a good card myself, IMO it is what the 30 should have been.........
Maybe now we can move on with progress.:banana:
Originally posted by QuadDamage
if you look at [S]'s review you'll see that NV35 whoops ati ass big time.
My opinion is it should, it IS new technology........ anything else would have been a failure.
Banana_Boy
05-12-2003, 06:03 PM
i just cant believe the size of the thing, tis as long as a motherboard is wide, damn!
BrainStorm
05-12-2003, 07:49 PM
Well, at least it looks like we're gonna finally have some competition again, thank goodness!
Silver_Lancer
05-12-2003, 08:00 PM
i really dont think thats competition....its monstrous, but hopefully, cuz im a true $$$cheapskate
STEvil
05-12-2003, 08:13 PM
I would like to point you all here:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.tommti-systems.com/main-Dateien/files.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3D3danalyze%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUT F-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG
Take note of:
# NVIDIA patent 6323860 (Tile based Rendering)
Seems they might have finally used it.
BrainStorm
05-12-2003, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by STEvil
I would like to point you all here:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.tommti-systems.com/main-Dateien/files.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3D3danalyze%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUT F-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG
Take note of:
Seems they might have finally used it.
Just because they have a patent related to a given technology doesn't necessarily mean they use it in their products.
Silver_Lancer
05-12-2003, 08:45 PM
^^^what brainstorm said
and i thought of something else, just imagine if ATI made a board that huge with all kinds of noisy cooling how frikken fast it could be.....
WildKard
05-12-2003, 08:59 PM
Originally posted by Zroc
Yeah, Anand's is best, imo.
Anybody that can look at that not say nvidia's back in the game is just jaded. And they fixed any and all vis quality issues.
I LOVE having two real competitors.
Actually they didnt fix all the image issues, if you look at the reviews I think suhidan or hothardware one does an image quality comparison at 4x AA 8x AF and the nvidia card absolutely blurs the image horribly...which explains why it gets good performance using only those settings, and why any other AA/AF settings kill the performance
charlie
05-13-2003, 08:19 AM
OK,
things are interesting here...
Looks like NV35 beats R9800. BIG question, can the NV35 be OC'ed to beat the R9800 @ 480/380 (or higher)?????
IF not, So what? I hope Nvidia isn't just trying to get "#1 vid card out of the box" honors...
C
Originally posted by WildKard
Actually they didnt fix all the image issues, if you look at the reviews I think suhidan or hothardware one does an image quality comparison at 4x AA 8x AF and the nvidia card absolutely blurs the image horribly...which explains why it gets good performance using only those settings, and why any other AA/AF settings kill the performance
Eh? Hothardware says nvidia is slightly blurrier, Sudian says a tie, Anand says nvidia is slightly better. I couldn't find any of 'em saying anything remotely close to 'absolutely blurs the image horribly'. All any of the reviews have said is that the new drivers fixed any and all image quality problems...even on the 5800.
saaya
05-13-2003, 11:58 AM
NV35 whoops ati ass big time.
:stick:whoops ati ass big time? wtf u talkin of man? its like 5% faster then the 9800pro, they claimed it would be twice as fast as the 5800 ultra! if you look at the past graphic card generations youll see that a new generation is between 33-50% faster then the latest product on the market by release. the last releases are just stupid games between ati n nvidia. nvidia releases a card thats oficially 5% faster then the 9700pro, then ati releases a card thats 5% faster then nvidias, then nvidia releases another card thats 5% faster then the last ati card... i just hope it wont go on like this!
I don't see the 5900 doing anything it has been heard about on paper.. another failed card from NV..
I am still waiting for the 9900 Pro.
same here :p
Johnny Knoxvill
05-13-2003, 01:25 PM
lol,
http://www.komplett.co.uk/k/kl.asp?AvdID=1&CatID=24&GrpID=1&t=278&l=2
Gainward GeForce FX 5900 ULTRA 256MB DDR
£637.67 ~ $1000 :eek:
beatnic
05-13-2003, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by Johnny Knoxvill
Gainward GeForce FX 5900 ULTRA 256MB DDR
£637.67 ~ $1000 :eek:
:upset: ripoff! :mad:
Method Man
05-13-2003, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by Johnny Knoxvill
l
Gainward GeForce FX 5900 ULTRA 256MB DDR
£637.67 ~ $1000 :eek:
ROFLMAO!:p :p :p :D
Entuscan
05-13-2003, 02:22 PM
I hope that thats the price for that Gainward FX5900 Ultra with standard watercooling. Anything else would be extremely :frag: :rotf:
Hell-Fire
05-13-2003, 09:07 PM
$1000 for the 5900..I'll take 2 please.
Here is my shipping addy:
Dum Moron
1234 Got no idea what im buying Lane
Naive, NC
I think we should wait with the comparison of 5900Ultra and 9800Pro 256 until there are some new drivers out from nvidia. If you look at this the drivers they seem are quite strange: ( I'm no Ati fanboy and not interested in flaming against nvidia. I also have a GF4ti):
http://www.hexus.net/review.php?review=554&page=7
You can see how extremely the nvidia card blurs with 4xAA and 8xAF. Also on the hardocp review you can see on the 4x AA image quality comparison that nvidia clearly blurs the image, even quincux looks sharper. With 2xAA everything is OK also with 6xAA. It is very strange that nearly no site did some AA comparison including anandtech.com which tested the image quality of AF over 4 pages but didn't tested AA on a single page. I know this is only one little feature of the card but at present nearly every site compares the cards with 4xAA and 4xAF and this blurring effect can improve the frame rate quite a bit ( look at the xabre cards and their fast texture filtering)
http://www.chip.de/artikel/c_artikelunterseite_10482825.html
This is a german review, they oc'id the card to 450/500 and tested it versus the 5800 (1600x1200 4xAA and 8xAF). UT2003 and Splinter Cell are ok, about 10-20% more performance for the 5900. But in Q3A over 100% faster. This is probably their announced. "Too times faster....".
This looks like some serious driver bugs.
Maelstorm
05-14-2003, 08:31 AM
$1000 for the 5900..I'll take 2 please.
It is likely that those would be the water-cooled Gainward cards. Gainward's water-cooled 5800 ULTRA was similarly priced to this, so I think it's a fair enough to say that that particular website is talking about the water-cooled one.
The 5900 ULTRA is set out to MSRP at $500.00, so I wouldn't be so quick to make such comments.
Hell-Fire
05-14-2003, 12:41 PM
Hmmm....maybe you should take a step back and realize it was just a joke in reply to someone elses post.
Speaking of comments...$500 smackers is still to high a street price for a vid card.
It barely beats the 9700Pro and that card is $200 less.
jinu117
05-14-2003, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by H?l ?F??
Hmmm....maybe you should take a step back and realize it was just a joke in reply to someone elses post.
Speaking of comments...$500 smackers is still to high a street price for a vid card.
It barely beats the 9700Pro and that card is $200 less.
What's the news? P4 3.0 and 2.8 have over $150 price difference as it stands... And it barely beats 2.8 :P Top of the line will alway do that for ya. (I bet P4 3.2 will be $200 more expensive than 3.0 at the time of release :P)
Now, I am a little wary to change back to nVidia as that could spell reinstall of system from scratch... :P and the size of card could cause problem for my H2O setting as it stands right now.
But I see nothing wrong with the card... Have you seen doom 3 benchies of 9800 pro /w Cat 3.4 vs FX5900? ATI might have goofed off but Doom 3 will drive card sales when it releases.. nVidia is stepping back in. (If they can ship it as promised)
STEvil
05-14-2003, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by Zroc
Eh? Hothardware says nvidia is slightly blurrier, Sudian says a tie, Anand says nvidia is slightly better. I couldn't find any of 'em saying anything remotely close to 'absolutely blurs the image horribly'. All any of the reviews have said is that the new drivers fixed any and all image quality problems...even on the 5800.
Go read [H]'s review, and they've got pics, too.
They aren't much better than Tom's right now, but still good place for info.
gokickrocks
05-14-2003, 07:22 PM
for those that havent read the whole nv35 cheating fiasco...
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1086857,00.asp
Silver_Lancer
05-14-2003, 08:06 PM
dang, looks like nvidia did it again, not ruling out that it is a bug...but sure is convienent to come back saying it is
STEvil
05-15-2003, 08:51 AM
Hmm.
saaya
05-15-2003, 01:43 PM
It is likely that those would be the water-cooled Gainward cards. Gainward's water-cooled 5800 ULTRA was similarly priced to this, so I think it's a fair enough to say that that particular website is talking about the water-cooled one.
no, you have to buy the watercooling extra.
Johnny Knoxvill
05-15-2003, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by saaya
no, you have to buy the watercooling extra.
yeah i don't think that $1000 is watercooled, otherwise it would state so.
but no way would the price stay the same once it's released.
only in the uk would people pay so much money, i've seen people here buying geforce 5200 from the internet for ~$160 and they think they are getting a deal :rolleyes:
Originally posted by gokickrocks
for those that havent read the whole nv35 cheating fiasco...
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1086857,00.asp
I was about to post this.
We gotta keep the boys honest ya know.:D