in Codecreatures.
At this stage of the game, what else matters?
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDIxLDM=
https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2003/01/1.gif
Printable View
in Codecreatures.
At this stage of the game, what else matters?
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDIxLDM=
https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2003/01/1.gif
Um, how about every game that is out right now? I'm sure if people are going to pay 400 bucks they want performance NOW.Quote:
Originally posted by GB_Cobber
in Codecreatures.
At this stage of the game, what else matters?
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDIxLDM=
http://www.hardocp.com/images/articl...d31HIx_3_1.gif
You call that anihilation? I'm sure CPU bottleneck had a little to do with it.
Depends on who you believe.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1779&p=16
The FX does not win many AA&AF tests on this review, Its all up to who you believe.
Its performance in racing & flight sims. :pQuote:
Originally posted by GB_Cobber
in Codecreatures.
At this stage of the game, what else matters?
I would not call that annhiliation. Look at it this way.
Baseline 9700 only lags a bit. The 9700 can be OCed a hell of a lot more than an FX making up this difference.
When you look at AA and AF the IQ level of a 9700 at 2x is similar to an FX at 4x. So compare those two and then add OCing and you got close to a tie.
I want this card to rock as badly as the next guy. However it doesn't.
Look at these Unreal benchmarks .
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1779&p=14
Which review do you believe?
Matters to me a 50-60 Dba vacuum cleaner noise ,also matters that card card is allready overclocked and overvolted and produce huge heat and cost 100$ more for 5 Fps more or less and hawe worst quality in AA/AF and less FPS with AA/AF on and i dunno but i never played Codecreatures .Quote:
Originally posted by GB_Cobber
in Codecreatures.
At this stage of the game, what else matters?
But since Codecreatures is the only thing that matters to you , you sould not hawe problems with the rest :)
Umm... I think the FX sucks as much as the rest of you, but how can a stock card be overclocked and overvolted? Over from what? Those are the stock speeds and voltages. The fact that Nvidia set the stock speed of the ultra pretty close to the current process ceiling doesn't mean that it's OC'd. Also, it's retailing for $399. The cheapest retail 9700 pro is the FIC for $295 at newegg. That's $100, not $150.Quote:
Originally posted by TimisoaraKill
Matters to me a 50-60 Dba vacuum cleaner noise ,also matters that card card is allready overclocked and overvolted and produce huge heat and cost 150$ more for 5 Fps more or less and hawe worst quality in AA/AF and less FPS with AA/AF on and i dunno but i never played Codecreatures .
But since Codecreatures is the only thing that matters to you , you sould not hawe problems with the rest :)
However, for the performance and noise, it should be CHEAPER than the 9700 pro (since the 9700 is faster with equivalent AA/AF), not more expensive.
GAH! A WELL-REASONED AND THOUGHT OUT POST? IN THIS FORUM? INCONCEIVABLE!Quote:
Originally posted by s1203372
Umm... I think the FX sucks as much as the rest of you, but how can a stock card be overclocked and overvolted? Over from what? Those are the stock speeds and voltages. The fact that Nvidia set the stock speed of the ultra pretty close to the current process ceiling doesn't mean that it's OC'd. Also, it's retailing for $399. The cheapest retail 9700 pro is the FIC for $295 at newegg. That's $100, not $150.
However, for the performance and noise, it should be CHEAPER than the 9700 pro (since the 9700 is faster with equivalent AA/AF), not more expensive.
(you keep using that word. i do not think it means what you think it means)
Quote:
Originally posted by s1203372
Umm... I think the FX sucks as much as the rest of you, but how can a stock card be overclocked and overvolted? Over from what? Those are the stock speeds and voltages. The fact that Nvidia set the stock speed of the ultra pretty close to the current process ceiling doesn't mean that it's OC'd. Also, it's retailing for $399. The cheapest retail 9700 pro is the FIC for $295 at newegg. That's $100, not $150.
However, for the performance and noise, it should be CHEAPER than the 9700 pro (since the 9700 is faster with equivalent AA/AF), not more expensive.
Card is stock like this only because with 450 mhz core it would be beat by 9700 and is overvolted to reach those CPU speeds (500mhz) for that the card push the huge amount of heat .
The 500 mhz with the actual core revision hawe a lot of artifacts and need that 50dba fan to cool the card so you must be blind to not see that .
This card is pushed over the limits , what you talk about stock ???? , They could release the final speed @ 535 mhz GPU with 0 room for overclocking and huge heat and artifacts so what you would say then ,...you would say that is stock ?
At the end the card work with more speed that is sould work , Nvidia guys are not stupid , if they had cut a bit from core this would be a total disaster 7 monts after 9700 and with less speed .
They still have a month until it ships, hopefully they can bring it together and get the last quality issues set aside. Perhaps increase performance and tweak out the driver set. Bringing up its performane. The 9700 card is a good six+ months ahead of the fx being on the market, so I assume it is a more mature product with better performance. Nvidia in the past has been able to add a good amount of performance with thier driver sets. I'm not in any way let down at all. Since....
I for one was never going to buy either card. I'll wait for the next generation nv35's mainstream unit, or ati's next mainstream part. The 9700 and the fx are both too expensive for me. Both cards are loud. Just one more so than the other. Although I doubt those people with a delta fan will be able to hear it. :)
If it is the manufacturer specified clock speed and voltage, then its stock. In its present condition it passed QC for nVidia and possibly a third party audit. Then its stock. Where "Stock" lies in the objective scale of the technology doesnt matter.Quote:
Originally posted by TimisoaraKill
Card is stock like this only because with 450 mhz core it would be beat by 9700 and is overvolted to reach those CPU speeds (500mhz) for that the card push the huge amount of heat .
The 500 mhz with the actual core revision hawe a lot of artifacts and need that 50dba fan to cool the card so you must be blind to not see that .
This card is pushed over the limits , what you talk about stock ???? , They could release the final speed @ 535 mhz GPU with 0 room for overclocking and huge heat and artifacts so what you would say then ,...you would say that is stock ?
At the end the card work with more speed that is sould work , Nvidia guys are not stupid , if they had cut a bit from core this would be a total disaster 7 monts after 9700 and with less speed .
I mean, if Ford dropped a supercharged 5.0 with a turbo and NOS in their Mustangs...thats stock. It doesnt matter how much more powerful/stress inducing it is then the normal 2.6.
Yes is stock but is the same like an XP2100 overclocked to 2250 mhz (xp 2700) with pumped 1.9 volt with a Swiftech and 8000 Rpm fan , all this packaged and sold by AMD as 'Retail' XP 2700 .Quote:
Originally posted by Isezumi
If it is the manufacturer specified clock speed and voltage, then its stock. In its present condition it passed QC for nVidia and possibly a third party audit. Then its stock. Where "Stock" lies in the objective scale of the technology doesnt matter.
I mean, if Ford dropped a supercharged 5.0 with a turbo and NOS in their Mustangs...thats stock. It doesnt matter how much more powerful/stress inducing it is then the normal 2.6.