Printable View
I have noticed no issues of text quality during post but really, I must ask, is the quality of your post screen really such a big issue? I would like to think the visual quality of your actual working environment and of course games is the important factor. We don't spend $600 on videocards to admire our screen during an FDISK.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ben805
It's a BIOS issue. DFI just haven't fixed it yet. As proof, look at the latest update to the Biostar TForce. It lists that the ATI BOOT screen problem is fixed, proof that it's a BIOS issue.
The thing is that it's been here since geforce FX (earlier games looked so crappy there isn't much difference to make), what garrantees me it'll be here tomorrow is called FPS race. as long as a sufficient amount of people can't tell/don't care, there really isn't that much of a problem to deal with, if having a slightly lesser IQ can get you that +3% needed to be king of the hill...Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Both companies have IQ problems in different applications, been that way since the dawn of videocards.
Anyone who had a 9700pro/9800pro will remember the washed out textures in UT2003. Anyone who had a FX will remember the sheer pain of looking at Far Cry on it.
With a little tweaking on either cards drivers all iq issues can, and are, FIXED. Just takes a little work.
Rivatuner is your friend.
What specifically can RIVA help with? More specifically...can it get rid of those damn moving shadows in BF2 on Guns and far off textures?
it definitely cant fix the angle dependent AF nvidia is using -> hardware limitation, confirmed by nvidia engineers.
How about you show before you say. I have an x1900xtx here and I haven't seen any shimmering.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
I believe what he was pointing out to you was the entirety of the quote which states nVidia suffers from the problem moreso then ATi.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
What annoyed me the most back when image quality really was an issue was the SMD's used to filter the VGA output.. good old matrox ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
I read the article start to finish the day it came out. You well know the reason I quoted you. You think I didn't read the quote I took from the article??? Come on man, be a little smarter than that.
As I mentioned in my original post it is what you implied, aka, that they both have an equal problem with shimmering. That is not true.
Don't play word games...:slapass:
Just download the videos from here http://www.thetechlounge.com/article...id=232&page=11
And you will notice the difference between them.
Shimmering only shows at extremely high resolutions, and on high quality lcd's, mainly widescreens. Says it right there in that review.Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmad
Also, nowhere did I say it was equal on both, I merely said shimmering occurs on both brands. Read my post and say where I said it was equal.
As for High quality AF, never said it could be done on NVidia cards, it was on the FX series, but since then NVidia has used the same AF method ATi was using up until the x1k series.
As for rivatuner, you can play with the L.O.D. and usually get a much better, shimmer free picture. That plus High quality = no shimmering on either brand. It's at default settings that it occurs for both brands.
That was when NVidia had a nasty bug that wasn't clamping the lod with AF involved, which brought new jaggies into the picture when textures moved. It has since then been fixed compared to that, and now only shows up at verrrry high rez, just like with ATi cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVaLVe
Like I said before, both brands have their ups and downs, it's merely a matter of preference at this point. :fact:
Ok, I ran some 3Dmarks05/06 and play BF2 for a little while, IQ wise the ATI is only slightly better but hardly noticeable, I don't know how to explain it but graphics look slightly smoother, contrast a bit more profound, as expected overrall the ATI looks a little warmer than my 7800GT, slightly more orange/red hue in BF2. I have a 19" LCD so maybe the IQ will be more obvious on CRT or better/bigger screen. Performance over the 7800GT is impressive, I set everything on High at 1280x1024 @75hz and 6X AA, If I remember correctly fraps reports about ~85 FPS....game play is butter smooth, didn't notice any shimmering yet. Overall I do like this card, it's fun to play with, but the gain I get isn't like jaw dropping or anything, the stock fan is loud at 100% load but that's what the fan control is for, since I'm running phase change with the compressor humming along the fan noise of this card doesnt bother me too much. For the games I play and the LCD I use.... the 7800GT do just fine, if I have to build a brand new machine solely for gaming instead of benching I would definitely get the 7900GT instead and use the left over $200 for something else. :D :D
Maybe you have your red sunglasses on? [H] is a respectable site, there's no reason to doubt them.Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmad
That's debatable :p: [H] isn't the most enlightened of hw communities, though it does have a big following. Not to mention they just LOVE using different settings for different videocards in their reviews and can many times sound very biased towards one side. All that has known to happen at [H]. But then again there isn't one single site out there that does reviews exceptionally well consistently.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaLDoL
The point being you can't look at one review's statements in a vacuum, they need to be compared with reviews by other sites to see if there is a common problem.
Perkam
A lot of ATI fans discredit [H] because they were the ones that came with the first Doom 3 benchmarks and showed the 6800u beating the hell out of every ATi card. Although other sites confirmed [H]'s results, every ati fan was pissed at [H], and accused them of nvidia favourism.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
To me, [H] is a great site, they introduced this whole new concept of benchmarking by comparing the max playable setting and using min/max FPS graphs.
I like [H]'s way of reviewing as well, they're the ONLY one's who tell you the max playable settings for all cards in the review, and personally I too like to know(and honestly usually care MORE about) the minimum framerate...
If 2 cards can both go over 60 fps, wouldn't you prefer to know which one doesn't go below 30?
That's ton times better on ATI...Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVaLVe
Anyone know of any videos comparing ATI HQ vs NVIDIA HQ with shimmering bug fixed?
I'm actually leaning towards 7900GTX SLI a bit (basically because of noise and I'm experienced with SLI), however I always like trying new things and I'd love to judge for myself if ATI IQ really is that much better... Hmm... better wait till Oblivion benchies are released (real and official ones). Should be monday, no?
Monday should definitely be the day.
Imo... they should release benchmarks before the game's released, so you can prepare for the game in advance (ie make important hardware upgrade decisions such as video card), know what to expect etc. As it is now, you're gonna be missing out on a day or three of actual gaming just to read reviews, look at benchmarks and purchase hardware. :rolleyes:
Well, monday it is then.
Ok, after messing around with the voltages this card is now rock solid at 700/830. GPU won't clock higher than 700 probably due to excessive heat. I'm only using 1.475. :D
By the way, I did a thorough inspection on all the text in dos environment and holy smoke batman.....I was wrong!! actually those are the detail of the text, the pixel are much more sharper that's why they looks choppy. I'm not sure if this is good or bad :lol:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Wrong about a few things in your list:
1. nVidia doesn't have better AA. ATi also supports super sampling via adaptive anti-aliasing (alpha textures anti-aliased) and matches nVidia's transparent super sampling algorithm. The 8xS mode that nVidia supports is technically a bit better than ATi's 6xAAA but it also incurs a much larger penalty thus making it useless for anything but old titles at high resolutions. With Crossfire, ATi cards support modes greater than 8x and the performance is way beyond SLi.
2. ATi has color saturation controls now in CCC that do nearly the same thing digital vibrance does.
ATi's angle independent AF cannot be matched by nVidia hardware no matter how much tweaking you do since it's an inherent hardware limitation.
SLi goes 16xSSAA, Crossfire goes 14xAA... SLi DEFINITELY has better AA, and generally better performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by 5150 Joker
Adaptive AA only uses SS on 2d textures, not the whole image. Also, 6xAAA does NOT match 8xSAA, no way no how. Either way, both 6xAAA and 8xSAA are both useless for new titles, as you stated, but 4xSSAA will still take 4xAAA any day of the week. :fact:
SuperSampling does every pixel on NVidia cards, there's a difference.
Angle independant AF I already said was ATi only, it's their big thing over nvidia right now honestly.
I read in an article, I forget where, that said when you use SM3 no matter with ATI or Nvidia that you have no AA. Is this true? The article also said that at higher resolutions with no AA there were a lot of jagged edges. I always game at least 1600 x 1200 and will of course only want to play at higher resolutions with any future upgrades. WTF? :confused:
These results would disagree with your assertion: http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...nce/page12.aspQuote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...crossfire.html
http://www.hothardware.com/viewartic...&articleid=791
SLI gets slaughtered at antialiasing modes above 4x and no it doesn't have "better" AA.
Adaptive Antialiasing does exactly what nVidia's Transparent Antialiasing does and that is work on an object or polygon that passes alpha test and then has edge antialiasing done on it. However, ATi's adaptive antialiasing (quality mode) takes a much smaller hit than Nvidia's transparent super sampling.Quote:
Adaptive AA only uses SS on 2d textures, not the whole image.
Nobody said it matches it but the difference between the two isn't very pronounced nor is 8xS very practical for 90% of the new games out there at a decent resolution. Even 8xS isn't full supersampling, it's 4X multi-sample with a 2X super-sample (4xRGMS + 2xOGSS).Quote:
Also, 6xAAA does NOT match 8xSAA, no way no how.
Actually 6xAAA takes a very minimal hit on ATi cards: http://www.beyond3d.com/reviews/ati/r580/index.php?p=13Quote:
Either way, both 6xAAA and 8xSAA are both useless for new titles, as you stated, but 4xSSAA will still take 4xAAA any day of the week. :fact:
At 1600x1200 4xAAA/8x AF X1900 gets: 93 fps
At 1600x1200 6xAAA/16x AF (increased AF!) X1900 gets: 88.3 fps
Only in 8xS mode and unfortunately that mode takes a substantial performance penalty.Quote:
SuperSampling does every pixel on NVidia cards, there's a difference.
HQ AF, much better AA performance in Crossfire vs SLi above 4xAA/A, HDR+AA.Quote:
Angle independant AF I already said was ATi only, it's their big thing over nvidia right now honestly.
Very nice post 5150 Joker. Some one doing research on the subject is very refreshing...