nVidia gets smacked in AquaMark 3 (DX9) !!! - Page 2

Sharky Forums


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 22 of 22

Thread: nVidia gets smacked in AquaMark 3 (DX9) !!!

  1. #16
    Hammerhead Shark Kwonger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    1,436
    I'm not gonna think too much about this benchmark simply because the reviewer seemed very ATi oriented. He kept saying how the 5900 was running 256MB and that ATi could've done even better if it had that much memory (which I think is BS).
    Intel Pentium 4 3.0E GHz @ 3.6GHz w/ CoolerMaster Hyper 6+, Asus P4P800 Deluxe, 2x Kingston Value 1GB PC3200, Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 60GB D740X, 2x WD Raptor 36GB WD360GD (RAID 0), Sapphire X1950 Pro AGP 512MB, DELL 2007WFP, Hauppauge WinTV PVR-150, LG 16x DVD-ROM, LG 16x DL DVD-RAM, SoundBlaster X-Fi XtremeMusic, Logitech Z-5500, Logitech MX 5000 Desktop, Logitech MX Revolution

  2. #17
    Hammerhead Shark
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Out West
    Posts
    2,860
    The memory difference is meaningless, as the RAM on the video card is simply used as a texture buffer. The only time the card would need more than 128 MB is if it was running 1600x1200 at 4xAA or higher with very high res textures.

    The IQ difference is also debatable, as this review and the other review mentioned in this thread show reverse situations - In one, ATI is better than NVidia, in the other Nvidia is better than ATI, both using the same benchmark and the same drivers, just different frames.

    That said, I'm still glad I have a 9700.
    Last edited by s1203372; 09-15-2003 at 10:26 AM.
    One by one, the penguins are stealing my sanity.

  3. #18
    Mako Shark Chuck232's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    4,576
    Originally posted by patlo
    you are absolutely correct. The radeon in this case is 18.52% faster than the GF. You have a funny way of getting this number... not funny but a little more confusing way to do it.

    Anyhow... 22.7% is overstating it and i don't know how they got that number.... it is supposed to be 18.52%.
    Hmmm.... ::looks at above post::

    See this is what my post was directed at. The radeon is "22.7%" faster, not 18.52%...
    • -|C2D E6600|-|ASUS P5W DH|-|OCZ 2x1GB PC2-6400 Platinum XTC|-|Scythe Infinity|-|Seagate 7200.10 320GB|-|eVGA 8800GT 512MB|-|BenQ DW1655|-|Antec P180B|-|OCZ GameXStream 600W|-|LG L204WT|-
    • -|Dell XPS M1330|-|Core 2 Duo T7100|-|2x1GB DDR2 RAM|-|Hitachi 120GB 5400RPM|-|NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS 128MB GDDR3|-|Intel 3945a/b/g|-|8X slot load DVD+-RW|-
    • Sharky Extreme 3DMark Team
    • site

  4. #19
    Tiger Shark
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Posts
    950
    I'm 50% less confused now, but only 33% more informed.
    Asus A7N8X-X, AMD XP 1800+, 512 MB pny pc 2100 DDR ram, WD 160 GB w/8mb cache, 2 Maxtor 80 GB in striped RAID, Radeon 9800 pro flashed to XT, creative live value soundcard, Monsoon Planar media-9 2.1 speakers, Envision en910e 19" monitor, ACER AL 2051W 20" LCD, Antec Sonata case, Win XP pro

    3DMARK 2001 SE -- 10,745
    PCMARK 2002 -- 5003/3984/1282

  5. #20
    Tiger Shark
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Posts
    950
    Originally posted by Iceball_AARF

    Say that radeon fps= 100%, then 22.4fps=?;
    (22.4fps * 100%)/(27.49fps)=?
    ?=81.48%;
    100%-81.48%=18.52%
    18.52% |= 22.7% ; the GF is still slower, but not by the % they said
    Although it's equivalent, I think it's usually taught in algebra like this:

    (22.4fps/27.49fps)*100%=81.48%

    the formula is:
    (part/whole)*100%=??

    ie. 33 is what percentage of 66?

    (33/66)*100%=50%
    Asus A7N8X-X, AMD XP 1800+, 512 MB pny pc 2100 DDR ram, WD 160 GB w/8mb cache, 2 Maxtor 80 GB in striped RAID, Radeon 9800 pro flashed to XT, creative live value soundcard, Monsoon Planar media-9 2.1 speakers, Envision en910e 19" monitor, ACER AL 2051W 20" LCD, Antec Sonata case, Win XP pro

    3DMARK 2001 SE -- 10,745
    PCMARK 2002 -- 5003/3984/1282

  6. #21
    Hammerhead Shark
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,132
    Actually, i just used the way it was teached to me waaaay back around 7th grade , it seemed easy enough to grasp it (and yes i too am amazed that i can remember things like that )


    Peace.

  7. #22
    Tiger Shark
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Posts
    950
    ya people always do funky things with their braces (){}[]. use a ti89 or other symbolic utility and you start paying attention to braces, one non matching pair and you get an error, with no text editor to remind you to close your parantheses.
    Last edited by bigpoppapumpg; 09-15-2003 at 07:11 PM.
    Asus A7N8X-X, AMD XP 1800+, 512 MB pny pc 2100 DDR ram, WD 160 GB w/8mb cache, 2 Maxtor 80 GB in striped RAID, Radeon 9800 pro flashed to XT, creative live value soundcard, Monsoon Planar media-9 2.1 speakers, Envision en910e 19" monitor, ACER AL 2051W 20" LCD, Antec Sonata case, Win XP pro

    3DMARK 2001 SE -- 10,745
    PCMARK 2002 -- 5003/3984/1282

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •