I drew a chart of what the future score of 42k would be like!

[Geforce4ti4200]

Took me quite a while, did I do a good job or are there any math errors? What I have drawn is the estimated score of a r420 at 620/560 overclocks powered by a 4GHz athlon64 with tons of ram bandwith too. The chart is in comparsion to my ti4200 score. the fps are an estimate of what the top rig(s) will get shortly after the release of the r420 :banana:

[unrealneo]

how the f*** did you work that out.:confused: :stick:

[macci]

I doubt that we will see anywhere near that big numbers in a while...even if we had a 4GHz A64 :)

Here's my best guess on how things will go:

Car hi result of 203FPS you got there is probably the only one that would be close to reality with 4GHz A64.

I'd say 650/350 FPS max for dragos.

And 480/220 max for lobbys.

Car low 530 max

And nature prolly wont go higher than 240FPS

So around 37k overall score

Just guessing here thou :D

btw, Geforce4ti4200, how did you come up with those numbers?

[zakelwe]

Another point is it going to be R420 or nv40 for the title. I know most bets would be on r420, but if nv40 can use 44.03 drivers then maybe it will be pretty close.

I've been saying this sort of thing since nv30 though and been wrong each time. I wish nvidia will get back at least level, I find their cards more fun to overclock.

Regards

Andy

[Endre]

We dont't really have an idea yeat on how fast R420 and NV40 will be. There have been rumours saying the R420 will be twice as fast as a 9800pro. Well, we'll se when it comes.

[Soulburner]

You expect 42k to be hit in the Spring? Not even close....maybe 35k with that card, and "maybe" 40k with the new processors/chipsets that will be out but even thats kinda stretching it....just MO though.

[unrealneo]

plus A64's scaling isn't linear.

memory efficiency increases as frequency goes up.;)

that's one of the great features of the on-die mem controller.:cool: :banana:

[Mitz]

wondering how did you do to get tha score?

nice one...

[CrashOv3r1De]

How about a 4Ghz FX

[pik-ard v1.1]

hm... either i did my math wrong, or you did. but i got a 41948 score from those fps...

and, are the bars suposed to be completely to scale?


(568.2 x 10) + (203.5 x 20) + (763.2 x 10) + (398.9 x 20) + (572.2 x 10) + 263.0 x 20) + (280.2 x 20)

5682 + 4070 + 7632 + 7978 + 5722 + 5260 + 5604

41948

[Soulburner]

Yeah its 41948, you should edit that....

[pik-ard v1.1]

hopefully this looks right. :p:

[Geforce4ti4200]

yes those bars should be to scale to the best of my ability. wow the bars are the hardest part too. very impressive looking for what is an estimated top orb score come mid 2004. I thought I had my numbers right, I was really tired too :( anyway the r420 is rumored to be 12 pipelines so shouldnt it give a big boost in nature over a 9800xt? im talking nearly 50% at same clocks plus a similar boost in dragothic. car chase and lobby are what cpus should push 6 months from now. wont we be using san diago chips by then? so I dont see a 4+ GHz overclock impossible by opp, fugger, macci, bowman, etc ;)

[pik-ard v1.1]

hey... i just got 554mhz off a t-bird 900 (see sig)... right now, it seems anything is possible. ;)

and, i checked the total score bars, and they are in preportion... ;)

[kommando]

Dude, thats a lil bit over the top.

I reckon, a64 and fx will be awesome late next year becasue their speeds would increase. So 35k will be a certinaity.

[Geforce4ti4200]

Originally posted by kommando
Dude, thats a lil bit over the top.

I reckon, a64 and fx will be awesome late next year becasue their speeds would increase. So 35k will be a certinaity.


yes but what if you throw in a r420? The r420 is gonna bench a heck of alot faster than that 9800xt :banana: dont forget guys, were talking about an r420 thats double a 9700 pro in speed and a little over 50% faster than a 9800XT. a rough idea is run 640x480 res with a 9800 pro or XT, your nature score should then be comparable and the drag will be higher on an actual r420 :)

[kommando]

wtf is a r420, havn't been following to much on hardware latley.

[unrealneo]

Originally posted by kommando
wtf is a r420, havn't been following to much on hardware latley.

next gen ATi

said to be:

12x1 600MHz? :slobber:

256 bit mem bus DDR2 1.2GHz+? :slobber:

that's about all that's rumored I think.

nobody knows about pixel/vertex units, etc...

oh yeah, on TSMC 130nm process. (0.13u)

[Severian]

You can probably work out how fast an R420 will work. Since ATI will probably run the same anti-aliasing algorithm's ect, it will probably scale fairly linearly with it's peak theoretical performance. If it is 12 pipelines wide, it'd simply be an extra 50% faster, per core clock.

Personally I doubt it will be 12x600. That would just put out....insane amounts of heat. When it releases I think 12x400, maybe even less is likely. Overclocked...maybe 500 max. However, that's still a good 35% faster. So how fast would an 9800XT clocked at 766/600 go? Well, I have no clue, but it's probably similar to an overclocked R420 :P

[Geforce4ti4200]

I heard r420 clocks will be 450/900

[pik-ard v1.1]

where did you hear that?

[Soulburner]

The core and memory clocks will both be higher obviously, not lower.

It will also overclock MUCH higher because it will be fabbed on the same .13 process that they are perfecting with the 9600. It was a good idea to start there first so they have everything ironed out and ready to go for the new card. If the 9600XT is reaching 600mhz without volt mods, then it would be safe to assume that the R420 will as well. It will just be much, much faster.

[unrealneo]

Originally posted by Soulburner
The core and memory clocks will both be higher obviously, not lower.

It will also overclock MUCH higher because it will be fabbed on the same .13 process that they are perfecting with the 9600. It was a good idea to start there first so they have everything ironed out and ready to go for the new card. If the 9600XT is reaching 600mhz without volt mods, then it would be safe to assume that the R420 will as well. It will just be much, much faster.

some 9600XT's are hitting 600 core on stock cooling!

i saw two REVIEWS where they managed it too!:slobber:

that's with 1.4x volts on the core, IIRC.

[Soulburner]

Yup its a good card for sure.

[Geforce4ti4200]

the r420 core is much more complex and gets hotter too, I dont see overclocks much past 500 on stock cooling. Use some really badass air cooling and this could get you around 520, use water and its 550. v mod that thing and use -100c casade cooling and you could get around 650 :D

[Soulburner]

Id expect 700+. Hell we are already seeing 720 from the 9600XT and the R420 is even more refined.

[Geforce4ti4200]

yea but the r420s core gets hotter and has much more transistors. I guess well find out but I dont think 700MHz is gonna be easy on an r420. r450 maybe :)

[Soulburner]

Yeah, I dunno but I think NV better have something MEAN up their sleeve to compete with it.

[zakelwe]

Talk on the nv40 says 8x2 pipelines ( or configurable 16 ) with 800Mhz GDDR3 memory and 48+GB/sec bandwidth, so twice as many pipelines and nearly twice as much bandwidth.

R420 is supposed to be 16x1 pipelines. All speculation of course.

I've read lots of stuff about reigsters and FP units but to be honest a lot of that stuff goes above my head.

Considering how much of a hit the 4x1 5700U has in 3dmark01 compared to a 4x2 5900 I think 8x2 would be very nice indeed. I'm thinking 26k in an AMD64 rig at 2400Mhz which would have been top of the ORB in August this year, not bad going on the cpu / video card fronts in 9 months ( release March 2004 ? ) for us mid range overclockers. Thanks Ati/nvidia/AMD and Intel :)

I guess nv40 will be an IBM chip, so it might overclock well now they have practiced with the 5700U, but as said above it will be very complex with lots more transistors. I wonder what sort of cooling is going to be shipped standard ? I think for overclocking maybe R420 / NV40 will be the first chip to actually need watercooling, though they might do some low resistence process to reduce this.


Regards

Andy

[KingInge2000]

Mabe we'll see a A64 EE or should we call it 3DME?:D

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by zakelwe
I'm thinking 26k in an AMD64 rig at 2400Mhz which would have been top of the ORB in August this year
I think that would be a fairly easy goal, the FX5900 has already done 27k now.

I do agree with everything else you said though, its all the same stuff ive been hearing, 800mhz DDR2 (1600mhz effective), etc.

[Geforce4ti4200]

this is what I have heard:

r420 is 12x1 at 450/450
nv40 is 8x1 at 600/600

the nv40 would need a 675MHz core to make up for its 8 pipes but the extra bandwith could make it pretty close but nvidia loses out since the faster ram would reduce nvidias profits considerably :(

[Soulburner]

Well according to what ive read, the NV40 will be the first of the generation, but the NV45 will be the big powerful one in PCI Express. NV40 will be AGP8x. I don't remember where I saw it.

[Geforce4ti4200]

both nv40 and r420 will first come out in agp, later it is likley there will be pci express versons of each, ati even has it called r423 specially for pci express. I have also heard those will be the last agp cards, maybe in high end only but I can see agp cards countinue being made for mainstream and low end like pci cards are made now but they are mx cards(geforce2 and 4 mx) also I hear something about agp to pci express bridge, I am thinking itll convert pci express on your motherboard to allow your "old" agp card to fit and work :)

[saaya]

dont overestimate the meaning of pipelines... going from 4x1 to 8x1 on my 9500q9700 only gave me like 1500 points extra... even less i think.

[Techmasta]

Holy Thread Resurrection! 5 months old.........

[ctgilles]

Originally posted by Techmasta
Holy Thread Resurrection! 5 months old.........

http://www.ctgilles.net/images/ForumFun/Misc/bump.jpg

:D

[Geforce4ti4200]

thats cause you were cpu limited. a 9500 is slower than a 9600 pro, a 9700 badly owns the 9600xt. on a fast cpu the difference can be 5k or more. now imagine 12 or 16 pipes plus higher clocks

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
a 9500 is slower than a 9600 pro
That is not true.

[Geforce4ti4200]

9500np<9600 pro<9500 pro

[AcEmAsTr]

dont u ever give up?

we are not going to see 40k with r420, were not going to see a 5k increase with fx-53.....


enough predictions!

[nailbomb]

dont u ever give up?

Rhetorical question?

[bigZ]

I can't see 40k happening, sorry; I'd loved to be proven wrong though.

We shall see when I've had the chance to play with both of these cards. When they say 50% faster... they say that a lot when they release new drivers, they mean they're 50% faster than the performance gain between the last driver update.

I really can't see a card all of a sudden dropping another 10k in 3dMark over the previous bleeding edge; it doesn't work like that.

As I've said, I can't wait to be proven wrong.

[Revv23]

if we are still using 3dmark01 by the time its possible to hit 40k then wtf id the point?


by that time it wont even give you a gauge on how your rig performs, just on how it does in an outdated benchmark.

[Jrocket]

Well we would use it for the same reason we use it now. Because it is the best gaming benchmark that takes into account every component in your computer.

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by Jrocket
Well we would use it for the same reason we use it now. Because it is the best gaming benchmark that takes into account every component in your computer.
It does not completely test your system for performance in todays games.

A Ti4200 can score 22k but still suck.

[sKiTz0]

Originally posted by Soulburner
It does not completely test your system for performance in todays games.

A Ti4200 can score 22k but still suck.
a large number of todays games are still mostly dx8 based. In something like ut2k4, that 22k gf4 rig would probably still rape my 14k r9700 rig. Throw something more like hl2 or far cry at it, and it may be a different story.

[Geforce4ti4200]

games are very cpu intensive, a faster cpu with a ti4200 will own a 9800 pro. ut2004 is like 90% cpu intensive. farcry is 75% a 22k score with the ti4200 should own a 22k with a 9800 pro in any game without aa/af

[nailbomb]

a 22k score with the ti4200 should own a 22k with a 9800 pro in any game without aa/af

Put down the crack pipe, and back away SLOWLY ;)

Two cards with identical scores, and the ti4200 will own the Raddy? How do you figure?

Tell you want, get some CPU clocks going equivalent to mine or Soul's or whoever, and let's setup a server and put that theory to the test, mkay?

I know this is gonna break your heart, but eventually you will have to give up that beloved card ;) Or then again maybe not....

[pulverizer]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
games are very cpu intensive, a faster cpu with a ti4200 will own a 9800 pro. ut2004 is like 90% cpu intensive. farcry is 75% a 22k score with the ti4200 should own a 22k with a 9800 pro in any game without aa/af

Where the F do you get the CPU intensive numbers anyway?
It all depends on the computer. Of course a 9800pro will be cpu limited in most systems today. So of course you will see more increase with more CPU speed. And on the other hand, the GF4 is mostly the limiting factor with todays cpus. Your arguments rarely make any sense, and if two systems are equal in one test, wouldn't that mean they are EQUAL in most games? There is NO way the GF4 would OWN the 9800Pro, they will probably get similar frame rates, but with the 9800 you get better image quality, even without AA/AF, and you dont get all the shady driver hacks that you need with the GF4 to have it equal to the 9800....

[zakelwe]

Games are moving more and more over to shaders, so the GF4 series has now really had it's day.

This also seems to indicate that 3dmark03 to be becoming more relevant, maybe if r420 and nv40 are powerful enough we might see some cpu variation in GT2 and GT3 ? One can only hope, it still is pretty boring compared to 2001.

Only a week or so to go before nv40 anyhow, hope it's not a damp squib.

Regards

Andy

[Peen]

I really love listening to someone whos best card is a Ti4200, saying how he knows everything. Really dude, get a job. Ive REALLY had them all, and 9800 Smokes the ti4200.


ACCEPT IT

[Geforce4ti4200]

ok why dont we have a challenge? what games and benchmarks do you guys got? I want to challenge my oced cpu and oced ti4200 against your stock cpu and stock 9800 pro. If you have a pentium4, set it to 2.4GHz or less. run your amd cpus at 133fsb and below 2GHz and lets try some games at 640x480 thru 1600x1200 and lets see where my ti4200 wins. I might lose out in 1600x1200 though, but ill own you in lower resolutions. sure a 9800 pro and slow cpu will give you higher res and better IQ but ill be getting higher fps than you due to faster cpu. just look at car chase in 3dmark ;) edit: I have quake3, an oldie but a goodie ;)

[zakelwe]

The inquirer reporting 12k for 3dmark03 nv40 .. of course just a rumour, would be nice though as I assume that is aircooled cpu and gpu.

Regards

Andy

[ctgilles]

I read the whole topic, and I just pissed my pants laughing :ROTF:

[Geforce4ti4200]

Originally posted by zakelwe
The inquirer reporting 12k for 3dmark03 nv40 .. of course just a rumour, would be nice though as I assume that is aircooled cpu and gpu.

Regards

Andy


not bad, is that stock too? thats double(or more) what the fx5950 produces with approved drivers(which are 1000-1500 slower than cheating drivers)man what could we be seeing overclocked? 18k? 20k with r420? :eek: :banana: :slobber:

[interman]

you're annoying

[Peen]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
ok why dont we have a challenge? what games and benchmarks do you guys got? I want to challenge my oced cpu and oced ti4200 against your stock cpu and stock 9800 pro. If you have a pentium4, set it to 2.4GHz or less. run your amd cpus at 133fsb and below 2GHz and lets try some games at 640x480 thru 1600x1200 and lets see where my ti4200 wins. I might lose out in 1600x1200 though, but ill own you in lower resolutions. sure a 9800 pro and slow cpu will give you higher res and better IQ but ill be getting higher fps than you due to faster cpu. just look at car chase in 3dmark ;) edit: I have quake3, an oldie but a goodie ;)

who runs games at 640x480?????

Ive been playing Halo at 1024x768 with 2x AA and 4x AF

Lets see what yer measly 4200 has. Ill downclock my P4 to stock 2.4C speeds and my 9800pro. I will tear you a new one no matter what in any game. Lets also do 3dmark01 at those settings as well as 3dm03

ok Quake 3 at 1024x768 2x AA and 4x AF. Ill do this when my stuff gets back

[AcEmAsTr]

you sir.... need a smack, why not wait for the next gen of gfx cards before making wank predictions!

[nailbomb]

If you have a pentium4, set it to 2.4GHz or less

Well gee I'd love too, but I'd have to underclock my rig, to come down to that level ;) :owned:

Maybe Peen can take you on at 640! THE HORROR!

[ctgilles]

Originally posted by interman
you're annoying

Ding-ding :D
Please call 555-ANNOYED to collect your prize :)

[AcEmAsTr]

Originally posted by interman
you're annoying


BEst post ever! :D :p:

[Peen]

I actually have him on my ignore, but i still find myself reading his posts

[ctgilles]

Originally posted by Peen
I actually have him on my ignore, but i still find myself reading his posts
I know someone who might be able to treat you for that :D

[AcEmAsTr]

a hitman?

[Peen]

lets do Doom2 lvl 1. 320x200 lets see who gets more FPS!

[ctgilles]

Originally posted by AcEmAsTr
a hitman?
Wasn't really thinking about that, but come to think about it, cool :)
Set up a central PayPal addy, everybody who wants can contribute :) Should be able to afford the best within 24 hours :D

[AcEmAsTr]

the best? should be able to afford ALL of the hitmen int he world within 10mins :p

[ctgilles]

Originally posted by AcEmAsTr
the best? should be able to afford ALL of the hitmen int he world within 10mins :p
So true :D

[[XC]thewildblue]

To deal with this sort of threat we need to call in someone special.....

In 1972, a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire...the A-Team.

[bias_hjorth]

Originally posted by pulverizer
Where the F do you get the CPU intensive numbers anyway?



he´s mr. prediction...
but at least we´re gonna see a lot less active geforceti4200 when the socket 939 and r420 comes out..:ROTF: :rotf:

[bias_hjorth]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
not bad, is that stock too? thats double(or more) what the fx5950 produces with approved drivers(which are 1000-1500 slower than cheating drivers)man what could we be seeing overclocked? 18k? 20k with r420? :eek: :banana: :slobber:


LOOOL this is getting redicoules...:rolleyes: :frag:

[Jupiler]

Guys, let's calm down now, OK?
I don't want this thread to result in a flaming contest.
If it continues the way it's going right now, this topic will be closed.
Stay on topic.
Thx. :toast:

[AcEmAsTr]

but its so fun, and he has no clue whatsoever!

[zakelwe]

Originally posted by AcEmAsTr
but its so fun, and he has no clue whatsoever!

I get the feeling GF4 will be here and predicting things whilst you are all are using bifocal screens and using big button keybaords with your gnarled old hands :) I sort of think of him as an armadillo with spears and arrows bouncing ineffectively off.

If you don't like the posts don't read them, they certainly stop a thread getting dull.

Regards

Andy

[***Deimos***]

If you really think about it, he's not far off. No doubt GF4-Ti series was hard for nVidia to top, especially since the fx was poor at DX9, and as noted most games STILL are majority DX8 feature (yes Far Cry too... that's why you don't REQUIRE Radeon 9800pro). GF4 has very fast DX8 (integer) PS, as well as fast combiners. So, at low resolutions where the fx/r3xx superior bandwidth doesn't matter, and using DX8 game with low poly count, I can see how the GF4-4200 would win.... also don't forget he said something about using faster CPU speed for his GF4-4200 vs your 9800pro, and we all know that at low resolutions, CPU will influence fps more.

BTW: That "75% CPU", whatever is BS. All game engines I've seen process game geometry, AI, sound, etc, in batches, where a certain portion of the scene is sent all at a time to the GPU.. wouldn't make sense to send 1 triange at a time, eh? For the most part, GPU works in parallel with CPU, but there are certain critical sections that must be done serially and thus one relies on the completion of the other to continue. I have yet to see a simple linear equation that could be solved in lieu of benmarking. Obviously, there is more running than just the 3d graphics, (ie sound, AI, physics, system kernel, icq).

However, what you can do (as 3DMark 2003 has done), is to use "inefficient" algorithms to excessively strain the GPU without actually requiring that much work from the CPU to send/receive the data/results. Ofcourse this leads into the nVidia driver contraversy, where nVidia eliminated these inefficiencies, but then again the benchmark was "inefficient" on purpose, since its supposed to test the GPU.

[***Deimos***]

IMHO: 3DMark2001 is DEAD. It no longer reflects the games you *should* be playing. Although majority of CounterStrike players have GF2MX/GF4X.. they are lost souls who dont count. Sure, every now and then I like to take out some old game for a retro-evening, but nowadays I'm playing Max Payne2 and Far Cry. As a gamer its your duty to upgrade to be able to play latest games... and not drag down the industry. Doesn't mean you must get top of the line, but no wonder we didn't see HL2 and Doom3, when the vast majority are still clinging to old cards as if they were your very own life.

GF4-4200: Yes I know that when Radeon 9500pro came out is could sometimes beat a GF4-4600, but usually not, and thus an overclocked GF4-4200 might seem sufficient to you. But, I'm hoping, all those ATI fans didn't buy their Radeons to be able to play "Doom II" or "Quake", or get the most fps in Quake3. It's for the beautiful new features in new games. So it doesn't matter what you get in 3DMark2001, unless benchmarking all day long is your idea of fun. I highly urge you to get a Radeon 9800pro (on sale $200) and Far Cry, now! And considering these "next-gen" cards whenever they "paper-launch", will be at least $500-600, and you're just fantasizing of owning one because you won't be able to, it's much better to get the 9800pro and enjoy now.

[pulverizer]

Hey I get at least 600 FPS in GL Quake. Maybe we should run that at 640x480 and see who wins....

[AcEmAsTr]

minesweeper!!!! on 640x480!! w0o0o0oo0t

[Geforce4ti4200]

375
358
318

thats with my ti500 at 255/565
I pushed it to 265/600 and only gained 4fps in 1024x768. this shows how cpu intensive games are, man my cpu at 220x9.5 for 2.09GHz is a bottleneck even to my ti500! run those 3 resolutions with all details to minimum, no aa/af and your 9800 pro will get owned by me if your cpu is slower than mine

[Peen]

well duh . the stuff u do is old skool. Most normal ppl get new hardware to play new games:stick:that TI500 sucks so bad, i just tried on in new games.
Whats ur score? ill be sure to make my cpu and 9800 Pro stock speeds and still walk all over ur 4200 and ur cpu:p:

[zakelwe]

This is an interesting to be honest. It goes to show that you really do need a balanced system, perhaps even more so with advanced AI, sound and physics coming up in new games for 2004/2005. No point having a very fast video card if you have a poor cpu, conversly with all the new shading effects no point having a great cpu and poor video card.

Sadly of course this means spending a lot of money.

I really think an AMD 939 FX53 with 1GB RAM and an nv40/r420 video card sounds like a mouthwatering machine. Add up the cost though and that is a fair amount of money assuming a new motherboard is needed as well.

If you take one step down on video card and cpu though you can have 80% of the performance for 50% of the cost, and still have a huge amount of grunt.

Regards

Andy

[Peen]

ya but my 2.4C stock speeds will walk all over his 2.09 tbred.

Ive had tbreds , and geforce4. No way i would stand a chanced against a 2.4C at even 2.2ghz 220fsb or so with radeon against even OCed 4200 on air

[zakelwe]

Originally posted by Peen
ya but my 2.4C stock speeds will walk all over his 2.09 tbred.

Ive had tbreds , and geforce4. No way i would stand a chanced against a 2.4C at even 2.2ghz 220fsb or so with radeon against even OCed 4200 on air

I tend to agree, but that is more from gut feeling than actually being able to work it out in my head

Let me check 3dmark 2001 scores so I have more of an idea.

Regards

Andy

[Peen]

I think I got like upper 16k to 17k with my 2.4C and 9800 stock

my 9800 is flashed to XT now so its probly up a few hundred more now. I dont do 3dmark its old and boring now :)

[zakelwe]

Originally posted by Peen
I think I got like upper 16k to 17k with my 2.4C and 9800 stock

my 9800 is flashed to XT now so its probly up a few hundred more now. I dont do 3dmark its old and boring now :)

ooh that's blasphemy on this forum.

Get the ducking stool out guys, it's another of those witches :D

Yeah, I just checked and another user got 16+K as well.

It depends on which game you pick to do your run what you brung shootoff, but I favour the 9800 Pro as well.

Regards

Andy

[Geforce4ti4200]

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6701486

he has the world record for stock 2.4c

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7022119


heres another with an oced 9800p


http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7613916

an xp2500 at 2.4GHz but score seems crappy!


http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7102234

ok anyway when I search the orb, only like 5 people with a stock 2.4c and 9800p are beating me. Most people get low to mid 16k so yes I own 99% of people with my ti4200

[Peen]

lol man, your so jealous. i laugh at ur silly comments. If you got a job , maybe you could get a 9800Pro:rolleyes: I dont see how me getting higher score then you is you owning me:stick: Shall I even OC slightly? I know, now lets do 3dmark03! rofl! 3dmark01 doesnt use any of the features of a 9800pro

[Geforce4ti4200]

im getting an a64 next thing and sticking my ti4200 in there and ill get way over 20k plus enjoy 1024x768 gaming at very high fps. I doubt id get a 9800 pro. when the ti4200 no longer cuts it ill probably go pci-e and get a dx10 card and another a64 on 65nm

early 2006: 4GHz a64 at 90nm with my ti4200 in there
early 2008 6 or 7GHz a64 at 65nm with r423 or later in pci-e

[nailbomb]

early 2006: 4GHz a64 at 90nm with my ti4200 in there

Spam deh post count! You can't be serious can you? 2006!()#%()#%

[bias_hjorth]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
im getting an a64 next thing and sticking my ti4200 in there and ill get way over 20k plus enjoy 1024x768 gaming at very high fps. I doubt id get a 9800 pro. when the ti4200 no longer cuts it ill probably go pci-e and get a dx10 card and another a64 on 65nm

early 2006: 4GHz a64 at 90nm with my ti4200 in there
early 2008 6 or 7GHz a64 at 65nm with r423 or later in pci-e

I see you havent tried far cry.. that game makes EVERY gfx out there slow down.. your ti4200 will not be able to make it run smooth with 2 out 6 six at very high - even at 3ghz amd ;)

[Peen]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200

early 2006: 4GHz a64 at 90nm with my ti4200 in there
early 2008 6 or 7GHz a64 at 65nm with r423 or later in pci-e

no comment:stick:

[Geforce4ti4200]

Originally posted by bias_hjorth
I see you havent tried far cry.. that game makes EVERY gfx out there slow down.. your ti4200 will not be able to make it run smooth with 2 out 6 six at very high - even at 3ghz amd ;)


I tried the demo, ran at 40fps average at 1024x768 max details. I can easily do 1600x1200 but id rather keep all the details so I use 1024x768. No game out there has given me a reason to upgrade. HL2 from what I hear will be playable at 1024x768 medium details on a stock ti500(1600x1200 for me on oced ti4200) while doom3 will be much more intensive, I hear itll run 1024x768 high details on a 9800xt or 800x600 medium+++ details on a ti4600. I can handle this generation of games and their engines :cool:

[bias_hjorth]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
I tried the demo, ran at 40fps average at 1024x768 max details. I can easily do 1600x1200 but id rather keep all the details so I use 1024x768. No game out there has given me a reason to upgrade. HL2 from what I hear will be playable at 1024x768 medium details on a stock ti500(1600x1200 for me on oced ti4200) while doom3 will be much more intensive, I hear itll run 1024x768 high details on a 9800xt or 800x600 medium+++ details on a ti4600. I can handle this generation of games and their engines :cool:


and the demo does NOT contain very high textures ;) 40fps out be out door.. around 10-15 inside would be your max... an if you play the normal 1280x1024 you´ll see your numbers go futher down ;) TRUST me :cool:


Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
I can handle this generation of games and their engines :cool:

yup indeed you can.. but NOT with any eyecandy ;)

[nailbomb]

early 2006

Don't you think Quake is going to get boring after the first 10 years?

[bias_hjorth]

btw try and ask JC-viggen (if he´s still around)

and could you plz. run demo 2 (far cry bench) for me?

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by bias_hjorth
.. but NOT with any eyecandy ;)
I agree. I have a system with a Ti4400 and I usually try my games out on both systems to see how they compare. Often times the Ti4400 will run everything my 9800XT does albeit without the high AA/AF going but it still runs very well.

I'll see how the next generation does on the card. It may be the last generation of games you try playing before seriously considering an upgrade. The Ti line has certainly seen its day in the sun.

[Revv23]

"thats with my ti500 at 255/565
I pushed it to 265/600 and only gained 4fps in 1024x768. this shows how cpu intensive games are, man my cpu at 220x9.5 for 2.09GHz is a bottleneck even to my ti500! run those 3 resolutions with all details to minimum, no aa/af and your 9800 pro will get owned by me if your cpu is slower than mine"


Don't you understand that that is because at this point a game that old is no challenge for graphics cards? Thats a cpu only benchmark because any modern graphics card can tear that game up every day of the week.

"I tried the demo, ran at 40fps average at 1024x768 max details. I can easily do 1600x1200 but id rather keep all the details so I use 1024x768. No game out there has given me a reason to upgrade. HL2 from what I hear will be playable at 1024x768 medium details on a stock ti500(1600x1200 for me on oced ti4200) while doom3 will be much more intensive, I hear itll run 1024x768 high details on a 9800xt or 800x600 medium+++ details on a ti4600. I can handle this generation of games and their engines "

You realize that you were running ZERO DX9 effects right?

And another thing, my Ti4200 did 13k with my OC maxed out, it also got about 40fps in UT04 max detail no AA/AF 1280x1024. Now, my 9800p does around 11k with my rig at stock speeds, and i got 45FPS at 1600x1200 with 8xAA/16XAF and better IQ to boot. Keep in mind i only can pull that kind of numbers on Deathmatch maps, but that still owns any Ti4200 I know of.

(though i will say i love my Ti4200, im actually using it right now (installing RAMsinks and new VGA cooler on 9800p)

[zakelwe]

Things are a changing it must be said, the GF4 is the pinnacle of DX8 cards in my opinion but now as more DX9 games come along a DX9 card that can chuck in the eye candy and run fast will be very very nice match up to a new powerful cpu. Might even last as well as the GF4 series has ? Maybe the hardware guys have now got the developers on the backfoot ?

I said I wasn't going to mod my FX 5800 but if nv40 is very good then I can see myself demoting it to benching duties.

Regards

Andy

[bias_hjorth]

well said zakelwe :)


btw. I didnt get any reply geforceti4200? Did you try the "demo 2" benchmark. As I said I would love to see you avarage fps. You said It was about 40fps... If you try the demo 2 you´ll see its not..

[DrJay]

In response to Geforce4ti4200; You will not break 20k easily with an A64 and your ti4200. In addition to overclocking your cpu (obviously), you will need to volt mod / watercool (or something colder) the ti4200. Your not even close on the gpu clocks you will need. On a high end system, 3dmarks are bottle-necked by the gpu and its clocks. If you upgrade to a socket 939 and overclock, your gf4 bottleneck will be more like a roadblock,.....enjoy!

[DrJay]

I sure hope somebody developes some sort of pci-e to agp adapter so gf4ti4200 can continue to use his ti4200 in future system upgrades, like oh say 2006 to 2008......and beyond! Otherwise, he is going to make some lucky grief counselor very rich.

[nailbomb]

I didnt get any reply geforceti4200?

:stick:

[PCBliss]

geforceti4200, get over it man. You are like a hippie

[texuspete00]

It's a lost cause. When he might get to see our point that he wont be playing games at 1600*1200... he just says he is happy with 1024*768 no AA/ no AF. When the time comes and maybe we are right he just may be happy with 800*600. 1024 is already getting kinda bad on any monitor 19" and up :sick:

Hate to tell you GForce but on UT2004 at 1280*1024 I was wondering if it isnt time to be a little more adventurous, perhaps vmod, on my 9700np. ~60-70 fps (large onslaught - not DM).

Im not saying it will bring to a whole new level, but I am starting to consider that I think my card should be watching it's 401k plan. Just something to consider that those of us playing games are starting to have a few titles to get back to tweaking for. And No, I dont want to underclock my cpu, nor disable its cache, shut off AA/AF, and then compare with you.

edit; oh yeah... Ive mentioned this to you before, but I do have a GF4 as well. If not my opinion, at least listen to those of others that have a GF4 and a newer card. One day you will get a new card and the love affair would be over. Its one of those things where once you've gotten use to using one, using older looks bleh...

[Daywalker]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
I tried the demo, ran at 40fps average at 1024x768 max details. I can easily do 1600x1200 but id rather keep all the details so I use 1024x768. No game out there has given me a reason to upgrade. HL2 from what I hear will be playable at 1024x768 medium details on a stock ti500(1600x1200 for me on oced ti4200) while doom3 will be much more intensive, I hear itll run 1024x768 high details on a 9800xt or 800x600 medium+++ details on a ti4600. I can handle this generation of games and their engines :cool:

Far Cry runs great on my P4@3.5 / 9800 Pro. I installed it on my laptop last weekend when I was out of town P4M-2.6, 4200 Go, and it looked like dog :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:. Sure, it was playable and would look OK if I didn't know any better, but I knew what it was supposed to look like.

[zakelwe]

Originally posted by texuspete2k2
It's a lost cause. When he might get to see our point that he wont be playing games at 1600*1200... he just says he is happy with 1024*768 no AA/ no AF. When the time comes and maybe we are right he just may be happy with 800*600. 1024 is already getting kinda bad on any monitor 19" and up :sick:

Hate to tell you GForce but on UT2004 at 1280*1024 I was wondering if it isnt time to be a little more adventurous, perhaps vmod, on my 9700np. ~60-70 fps (large onslaught - not DM).

Im not saying it will bring to a whole new level, but I am starting to consider that I think my card should be watching it's 401k plan. Just something to consider that those of us playing games are starting to have a few titles to get back to tweaking for. And No, I dont want to underclock my cpu, nor disable its cache, shut off AA/AF, and then compare with you.

edit; oh yeah... Ive mentioned this to you before, but I do have a GF4 as well. If not my opinion, at least listen to those of others that have a GF4 and a newer card. One day you will get a new card and the love affair would be over. Its one of those things where once you've gotten use to using one, using older looks bleh...

The main thing that is now changing is that new visual effects are now being done with DX9 that you don't get with DX8 cards so it is not just a case of reducing the resolution - it is that and more.

I agree with the rest of your post though.


You have to have a balanced system. Video guys get it too far towards the graphics card, but GF4 saying GF4 in 2006 is going too far the other way.

I'm sure he'll have an nv40 before I am through with him on nvnews.net though :D

Regards

Andy