HardOcp reports that GFFX ultra is canceled!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TimisoaraKill


I did not talk about 40 series , i also use 40.72 wich i find ok , what i dont't like about official 41.09 is that they are official but not WHQL , i expect personaly that drivers on Nvidia website to be M$ certifyed .
As well DX 9 is out and everybody hawe it but official NVDA driver is still a non WHQL DX8 driver .
Newer drivers released hawe instability and artifacts problems in some games , i talk about almost every driver up to 41 like 42.70 ,42.01 ,41.80 and i can't remember all the junk stuff i tested .
In the other side ATI hawe Official DX9 Stable WHQL drivers so go figure .

---

Ummm... Maybe because ATI has a DX9 card out and Nvidia doesn't? :p

Actually, I would certainly hope that we could get non-WHQL drivers from nvidia's website. If we had to wait for Nvidia to get all their beta's tested by MS, we would wait as long between driver updates as ATI! ;)

I think it's obvious to evryone that ATI has the better hardware right now, at the very least the best hardware for the price, and that Nvidia has the best drivers. Anyone contesting either point is acting like a pure fanboy.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Colossus
It wont be a year and a half before nvidia's next release. I believe they are shooting for summer for there NV35.

You can babble all you want. It will not change my opinion.

Most home users don’t use AA or AF. They don’t even know what it is *ROFL*
AND for your information, IQ vs. IQ is stupid. It is a test that the reviewers need to use his/her own judgment to determine the winner. It’s not that accurate, NOW if they had some kind of software that can judge IQ vs. IQ then I might be open to the reviews. But since there isn’t, I don’t want to hear it. Each reviewer will make there own comments based on who is and isn’t paying for there services. And don’t tell me they don’t get paid. You don’t need to show your ignorance to that extent.

---

Yes, without proof an IQ vs IQ test is stupid however, a review like those we saw with the GFFx where each card was shown at different settings was very nice. I feel that it can be a very good thing as it allows us as a consumer to be a little more informed about our purchases.

As for the comment on 'reviewers' getting paid, while that probably does happen, I'd expect a respectable site to give a fair review, I'd also hope that you or I was knowledgable enough to detect the 'funded' reviews.

The year and a half I was refering to was that from the release of the GF4 series to the NV35 is about a year and a half. Sure, there will be the NV30 in Feb. or March but this card is such a waste that it doesn't even deserve to be talked about.

As I've stated in previous posts, if you are dead set on the NV35 and are willing to wait that long, you might as well look at the R400 as well. Despite your obvious favor of Nvidia, I'd expect someone who knows enough about computers as you did, to not have a blind loyalty to one company.

ATI has gotten better, and today's release of the new Cat 3.1 drivers are a testament to that. Whether or not you are willing to give them another shot, is up to you.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by s1203372


Ummm... Maybe because ATI has a DX9 card out and Nvidia doesn't? :p

Actually, I would certainly hope that we could get non-WHQL drivers from nvidia's website. If we had to wait for Nvidia to get all their beta's tested by MS, we would wait as long between driver updates as ATI! ;)

I think it's obvious to evryone that ATI has the better hardware right now, at the very least the best hardware for the price, and that Nvidia has the best drivers. Anyone contesting either point is acting like a pure fanboy.

---

What you trow me here m8 , i don't give a s*hit if Nvidia does not hawe any DX9 card out , they sould support the today software and the hardware they hawe now in stores and not what they will hawe in future .
The main thing is that DX9 is out for a long time and everybody use this ,....so as a profesional hardware builder they sould release a official driver set compatibile for DX9 .
So what you say is that when 3Dmark 2003 is out we can't test with our actual videocards with Official driver because Nvidia does not hawe any DX9 cards out ? , this is plain stupid.
Is up to you to juge who hawe the best drivers , i find myself stuck with DX8 Beta driver and in the other side they enjoy DX9/WHQL drivers ,...even if i never owned a ATI card call me a fanboy m8 ,keep up the inteligent stuff i enjoy this .

I never said I would never give ATI another shot. However I had posted in quite a few posts that I am going to try the next release from ATI.
I hope now that the drivers for there Radeon series seem to have matured some, I wont have the same issues as I had before.

I am not really interested with the GFFX, but I would love to see what comes out next. I wouldnt be able to stand the loud fan cooling the card. I would of gone out and gotten a Vaporchill just to chill that video card!

I am not a blind fanboy, but I do know what I like. There is a difference there. I will always pick the solution that had less problems overall. Speed is not the major factor when I purchase equipment. Im not saying speed has nothing to do with what I choose, but if I had to choose a card that was 95% reliable compared to a faster card that was 75% reliable. I would choose the 95% reliable card. Even if I have to pay more to get it.

Does that sound like blind faith? No. I have worked with so many different kinds of processors, video cards and motherboards and I know what I would never buy again and what I would buy again in a heartbeat.

What the hell is all this mindless babble? Can all just get over this and move on. So nVidia came up with a lemon for NV30, so what? I'm not loyal to either company. I will buy the best there is for price vs performance. If it happens to be ATi on the day, so be it. If its nVidia well yes I'll take it too.

Jesus Christ! who's the git that drove the shortbus into sharkyforums today?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Colossus
However I disagree about comparing IQ vs IQ.

---

Wow.... I'm speechless. So I guess if a video card allowed you to set it to 4x AA and its method of doing this was to make everything look like an atari game that would be fine by you... as long as the settings were the same.

Edit: I think I speak for everyone when I say you just lost any respect you had...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TimisoaraKill
What you trow me here m8 , i don't give a s*hit if Nvidia does not hawe any DX9 card out , they sould support the today software and the hardware they hawe now in stores and not what they will hawe in future .

---

I'm glad to see you agree with me. Nvidia should be, and is, supporting the cards they have out (GF4s which are DX 8 cards) and not the NV30 which isn't out yet.

Quote:

---

The main thing is that DX9 is out for a long time and everybody use this ,....so as a profesional hardware builder they sould release a official driver set compatibile for DX9 .

---

The drivers are compatible. That's the wonderful thing about reverse compatibilty within an API. They could run DX12 and the current drivers would still run fine. Each generation is required to support the previous generation

Quote:

---

So what you say is that when 3Dmark 2003 is out we can't test with our actual videocards with Official driver because Nvidia does not hawe any DX9 cards out ? , this is plain stupid.
Is up to you to juge who hawe the best drivers , i find myself stuck with DX8 Beta driver and in the other side they enjoy DX9/WHQL drivers ,...even if i never owned a ATI card call me a fanboy m8 ,keep up the inteligent stuff i enjoy this .

---

3DMark 03 and DX9 will both run with current drivers on a GF4, GF3, GF2, ... You just won't be able to run the DX9 only tests. It's the same if you have a Radeon 7500 or GF4 MX now, with the nature test in 3dmark 02.

Without DX9 hardware, DX9 drivers are useless. Beta drivers are GOOD. It means we don't have to wait through the endless MS qualifications to get new drivers. As long as they periodically release a WHQL driver, we are all fine.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by s1203372

Without DX9 hardware, DX9 drivers are useless. Beta drivers are GOOD. It means we don't have to wait through the endless MS qualifications to get new drivers. As long as they periodically release a WHQL driver, we are all fine. [/B]

---

I will not answer to the other bull because you turn alround the question , the betas might good for you but not for 'us' .
I hawe costumers who call daily to our store after Nvidia card purchase and ask me why when they try to install official XP driver the os say "use this driver by your own risk , this stuff might cause instability and blabla '
So i must answer to all this stuff wich i don't like!
I also think that you are the guy who argued with me about FX to be stable and not overclocked and with default safe 'specs' ,...for those safe specs they canceled the thing .
Anyway , for now on don't reply anymore to my posts , i will ignore you .

This reminds me of the old 3dfx vs nvidia iq vs fps debates. As then, the standard position is if nvidia has better iq, then iq is more important (32 bit color). If someone else has better iq, then fps is more important (fsaa).

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Paladyr


Wow.... I'm speechless. So I guess if a video card allowed you to set it to 4x AA and its method of doing this was to make everything look like an atari game that would be fine by you... as long as the settings were the same.

Edit: I think I speak for everyone when I say you just lost any respect you had...

---

You had lost all respect from me. If you are dumb enough to think that there is NO standard on what 2x/4x AA or AF is then you are ignorant. There is a standard as to those settings have to support. So they can never look like atari style of graphics!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Colossus


You had lost all respect from me. If you are dumb enough to think that there is NO standard on what 2x/4x AA or AF is then you are ignorant. There is a standard as to those settings have to support. So they can never look like atari style of graphics!

---

Actually there aren't...maybe if some directx verstion demanded hardware AA or aniso there'd be a standard, but as of now, there's no standard for what 2x anti-aliasing means.

If you decide to insist that there still is, how do you explain the quality differences from say...the good ol' voodoo5/radeon/gf2 days?

I had read somewhere that there is a standard that card manufactures need to follow in creating a GPU for support of AA and AF. There are quite a few ways to supply antialiasing. Some use Multisampling or Superscaling. Depending on which approach a card manufacturer implements in the drivers/hardware determines the clarity of an image and speed.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Colossus
I had read somewhere that there is a standard that card manufactures need to follow in creating a GPU for support of AA and AF. There are quite a few ways to supply antialiasing. Some use Multisampling or Superscaling. Depending on which approach a card manufacturer implements in the drivers/hardware determines the clarity of an image and speed.

---

Thing is that AA has become smoothvision for ATI, and quincunx for Nvidia (as far as multi-sampling is concerned). They're not claiming to be exactly like the other. In fact, I think this is much better, it gives the individual chip designers to develop better algorithms for AA. The problem is that one manufacturers AA implementation ends up not being exactly the same as anothers, making it very useful for them to post comparisons....and well, let's fact it, part of a reviewers job is to give their opinion.

I should hope, and am glad you feel free to disagree with them, but I would personally hate it if they stopped providing some pics from which a quality comparison can be made.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Colossus
I had read somewhere that there is a standard that card manufactures need to follow in creating a GPU for support of AA and AF. There are quite a few ways to supply antialiasing. Some use Multisampling or Superscaling. Depending on which approach a card manufacturer implements in the drivers/hardware determines the clarity of an image and speed.

---

There are specific methods of AA, but there is no standard for how the hardware manufacturers implement them. Even if both cards use super sampling as their AA method, repeated reviews have shown that the quality of the end AA image, and the performance hit associated with it can vary from chip to chip.