GT300 new leaks?

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

08-19-2009, 03:03 AM
Barys

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaredpace

Yah if someone says they have an evergreen card at this time - it's believable. But to say you have GT300 card now.... Kinda bs. But who knows? maybe some people have gt300 protoype cards of A1???

Hm but who has said that he has a GT300 card?:confused:
08-19-2009, 03:56 AM
BenchZowner

Who knows...
08-19-2009, 07:06 AM
icecpu

very impressive specs, bring it on Nvidia
So, are we expecting score of 35,000+ on 3DMark 06
and 25,000+ on 3DMark Vantage
08-19-2009, 08:13 AM
Talonman

I cant wait to start a 300 Vantage recording thread over at EVGA...

(After they make a 300 Section.)

They will be some fun numbers to look at. Vantage is so GPU dependent.

It should be a good test to let the 300 shine, if it can... :p:
08-19-2009, 08:28 AM
Alexxx650

My comp in Crysis
http://keep4u.ru/imgs/s/2009/02/16/3...52fe10709f.jpg
08-19-2009, 08:41 AM
FischOderAal

Good :) I wish NVIDIA that GT300 is a success and they don't get surprised by the green team again :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dainas

Hit the nail on the head, it is fun seeing people go crazy in hope of ATI finally breaking the status quo though. All known hints scream more of the same from both teams. Every time half the forums scream that ATI is going to blow up the performance crown, and every time Nvidia nips back the crown.

Who cares if NVIDIA's chip is 10 percent faster but costs twice as much to make? (I'm exaggerating.) The performance crown is good for reputation (and a bit sales figures of the slower cards, where the real money is made) but not necessarily for NVIDIA's wallet :D And for a company, money is usually more important than reputation :)

That being said, my humble opinion is that GT300 might be the last big monolithic GPU made by NVIDIA. ATI's way is wiser from the business POV.
08-19-2009, 08:54 AM
Etihtsarom

After having switched to ATI's X2, I'm thinking of going back to Nvidia. ATI's driver support sucks, aftermarket heat sink arrived soo late, etcc. If the same cycle repeats itself this time, I'll wait till 5870x2 drives GT300 prices way down and jump on it. By that time, Accelero heatsinks should be ready soonafter, and hopefully drivers are good enough for 8x / 16x aa.
08-19-2009, 08:56 AM
Talonman

Big monolithic are fun though... :)
08-19-2009, 09:05 AM
FischOderAal

Quote:

Originally Posted by RagzaroK

After having switched to ATI's X2, I'm thinking of going back to Nvidia. ATI's driver support sucks, aftermarket heat sink arrived soo late, etcc. If the same cycle repeats itself this time, I'll wait till 5870x2 drives GT300 prices way down and jump on it. By that time, Accelero heatsinks should be ready soonafter, and hopefully drivers are good enough for 8x / 16x aa.

Shouldn't have bought a X2 then ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talonman

Big monolithic are fun though... :)

If you need the power, then yes, monolithic > CF/SLI every time. SLI and CF is retarded imho.
08-19-2009, 09:21 AM
Oberon

Quote:

Originally Posted by RagzaroK

After having switched to ATI's X2, I'm thinking of going back to Nvidia. ATI's driver support sucks, aftermarket heat sink arrived soo late, etcc. If the same cycle repeats itself this time, I'll wait till 5870x2 drives GT300 prices way down and jump on it. By that time, Accelero heatsinks should be ready soonafter, and hopefully drivers are good enough for 8x / 16x aa.

You're blaming the lag time for the introduction of third party coolers on ATI?

:slap:
08-19-2009, 09:53 AM
TurboDiv

GDDR5 + 512bit sounds all good but if I'm not mistaken that is only bandwidth between memory and GPU. If the GPU is slow what is the benefit from this much bandwidth ? If all this data cannot be calculated by the GPU than its going to come out like a big commercial gimmick. Nvidia suffered already from big expensive chips so im wondering what exactly are they planning. If the production process has matured, maybe they wont have that much trouble like GT200.
08-19-2009, 12:36 PM
Chumbucket843

Quote:

Originally Posted by FischOderAal

Good :) I wish NVIDIA that GT300 is a success and they don't get surprised by the green team again :D

Who cares if NVIDIA's chip is 10 percent faster but costs twice as much to make? (I'm exaggerating.) The performance crown is good for reputation (and a bit sales figures of the slower cards, where the real money is made) but not necessarily for NVIDIA's wallet :D And for a company, money is usually more important than reputation :)

That being said, my humble opinion is that GT300 might be the last big monolithic GPU made by NVIDIA. ATI's way is wiser from the business POV.

how could higher margins make them less money? also upholding a reputation like being socially responsible is a very important of business. for the making money part you cant say nvidia going in the wrong direction. have you heard of tegra? the mobile mark is a cash cow because lap tops are cute and trendy.
08-19-2009, 01:56 PM
570091D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

You're blaming the lag time for the introduction of third party coolers on ATI?

:slap:

i don't think he's blaming ati, if you're into modding, having to wait for aftermarket support is a reason to look at other products.
08-19-2009, 02:23 PM
cegras

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talonman

Big monolithic are fun though... :)

Really fun for nvidia, I'll bet.
08-19-2009, 02:44 PM
proxis

well, you don't have to be a Nostradamus to come up with those six lines from above
if you would ask most people before this thread "what specs do you reckon gt300 will have?" they'd answer in similar way, no?
08-19-2009, 03:14 PM
003

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew LB

I play Crysis just fine @ 1920x1200 with 8xAA and 8xAF with everything on "Very High".

No, you don't. Perhaps you enjoy 15-20fps, I don't know. But I certainly do not. As a general rule, I like my minimum framerate to not dip below 60 in FPS games.
08-19-2009, 03:20 PM
Bodkin

Quote:

Originally Posted by 003

No, you don't. Perhaps you enjoy 15-20fps, I don't know. But I certainly do not. As a general rule, I like my minimum framerate to not dip below 60 in FPS games.

+1. This
08-19-2009, 03:25 PM
quake6

And you (human eye) just can't see the difference between 30 and 60fps
08-19-2009, 03:34 PM
stangracin3

Quote:

Originally Posted by quake6

And you (human eye) just can't see the difference between 30 and 60fps

i can so dont be an ...

alot of people can. just because you cant tell 30 fps is choppy doesnt mean other cant. especially in source games i can tell between 60 and 100
08-19-2009, 03:50 PM
zanzabar

Quote:

Originally Posted by quake6

And you (human eye) just can't see the difference between 30 and 60fps

u cant see the difference but the computer works differently and u can feel the difference with input lag changing
08-19-2009, 03:52 PM
GoldenTiger

Quote:

Originally Posted by stangracin3

i can so dont be an ...

alot of people can. just because you cant tell 30 fps is choppy doesnt mean other cant. especially in source games i can tell between 60 and 100

Yup, it's been proven scientifically that fighter pilots in the USAF have been able to tell 140FPS or more, per articles I read at the time of the tests. Many can tell 30-50 FPS, and a lot can tell higher than that with ease. The whole "eye can only see 30fps" is a myth that's been debunked long ago.
08-19-2009, 03:53 PM
Final8ty

Quote:

Originally Posted by quake6

And you (human eye) just can't see the difference between 30 and 60fps

Funny how the people who always say that never have any research links to back that up.....never.

30fps & 60fps is like night & day to me.

play them on repeat loop.
www.echo147.adsl24.co.uk/temp/q3_30.avi (30fps)
www.echo147.adsl24.co.uk/temp/q3_60.avi (60fps)
www.echo147.adsl24.co.uk/temp/q3_120.avi (120fps) wont notice on a 60Hz LCD

http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html
08-19-2009, 04:05 PM
[XC] hipno650

Quote:

Originally Posted by 003

No, you don't. Perhaps you enjoy 15-20fps, I don't know. But I certainly do not. As a general rule, I like my minimum framerate to not dip below 60 in FPS games.

to be honest it is not all that hard to get good performance in crysis. I built a system for a buddy of mine using an overclocked i7 (to over 4ghz) and a pair of 1Gb 4870's in crossfire and it runs crysis (warhead) like a champ, Everything set to very high and 8xAA at 1920x1080 runs anyware between 20-60fps normally around 30-40fps. now normally i agree that anything below 60fps is not fun to use but cryengine 2 seems to run smoother at lower frame rates than most other engines (i think anyways although you can still kinda tell) i am willing to bet if you had a high clocked i7 and 3 overclocked GTX 285's in TRI SLI that you could get around 60fps min frames with the settings he mentioned. SLI does scale much much better in Crysis than crossfire does
08-19-2009, 04:12 PM
hurleybird

Funny how no one can remember the days of CRTs. Can you see a CRT flickering @ 60Hz? If yes, then you can see 60FPS at the very least.
08-19-2009, 04:14 PM
Final8ty

Exactly!

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page