ATI cards with nForce even a possibility?
well it seems that for the time being and in the near future ATI has the best video cards on the market, nad it appears as if it is going to stay that way for a while. There's been a lot of talk about an appl nforce motherboards, but what i wanted to know is, is there a performance gain with nforce when you are not using an nvidia graphics card?
Not entirely sure if this belongs in future hardware, but what the heck.
Not entirely sure if this belongs in future hardware, but what the heck.
Comments
The optional built in graphic chip (which is ~GeForce 4MX in performance) can be disabled easily in which case, like any other motherboard, looks for a graphics card in the AGP slot (or PCI for older display cards). If it's AGP 4x (or 8x) then it has to comply to standards. An ATI 9700 will outperform a Geforce4Ti on any compatable motherboard because it is a superior card.
The nForce is the newest chipset for AMD processors and will probably run every little component in the machine just-a-bit-faster than the nearest competitor. In the next few weeks or months, VIA will come out with it's KT400 chipset, which should be on par, or outperform the nForce chipset. The PC world is constantly updating. Our world is sputtering by comparison .
[ 07-31-2002: Message edited by: Fusion427 ]</p>
<strong>nForce2 will come in two versions. An IGP Integrated solutions and SPP which has no Integrated video. ATI should work fine for both as I believe they both have AGP. Nvidia's NV30 should be out this fall and looks to put nvidia back on top in the speed race. I like seeing this competiton myself.</strong><hr></blockquote>
earliest estimate ive heard about Nvidia's NV30 is December/January
by which time ATI should be gearing up to release their next gen vid card in just a couple months
if ATI plays their cards right they might just leapfrog Nvidia and take the crown for good.
all in all i have to say its nice to see some real competition in the vid card market. mabey now the prices will come down. $400 bucks for a vid card is just way over the top.. high end cards should be like 200, 300 tops.. vid cards are ALMOST more expensive than the fastest CPU out by intel. and intel is renown for charging way too much for their chips.
<strong>
all in all i have to say its nice to see some real competition in the vid card market. mabey now the prices will come down. $400 bucks for a vid card is just way over the top.. high end cards should be like 200, 300 tops.. vid cards are ALMOST more expensive than the fastest CPU out by intel. and intel is renown for charging way too much for their chips.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, if the highends cost just 2-300$, virtually anyone could buy one, then everyone would, then noone would have a card better than the others, making all cards average, which is not associated with high-end. Anyone following me?
<strong>
earliest estimate ive heard about Nvidia's NV30 is December/January
by which time ATI should be gearing up to release their next gen vid card in just a couple months
if ATI plays their cards right they might just leapfrog Nvidia and take the crown for good.
all in all i have to say its nice to see some real competition in the vid card market. mabey now the prices will come down. $400 bucks for a vid card is just way over the top.. high end cards should be like 200, 300 tops.. vid cards are ALMOST more expensive than the fastest CPU out by intel. and intel is renown for charging way too much for their chips.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, by that time ATI should have their low-cost lower performance version of the 9700 out... and that is potentially more devastating to nVidia because it'll eat into the low-end and OEM markets where the volume is. The high end cards are great show pieces, but their sales volume is a lot lower.
This will be the first time that the low-end cards are just as capable as the high end ones (i.e. fully programmable), just slower. This is a really important milestone and will hopefully encourage software developers to take this level of hardware more seriously, and do it sooner rather than later. The higher level tools (like Cg, OGL2, DX9, and ATI's shader tools) will hopefully help the new hardware adoption process along too.
<strong>No, by that time ATI should have their low-cost lower performance version of the 9700 out... and that is potentially more devastating to nVidia because it'll eat into the low-end and OEM markets where the volume is. The high end cards are great show pieces, but their sales volume is a lot lower.</strong><hr></blockquote>
In addition to their 9500 (I believe that name is official), they should (could?) also have a .13µ version of the 9700 (9800?), with increased clock speed and possibly more/faster onboard RAM. If those pieces are priced correctly (as always, but you know
Remember people, this is the first time in a long time nVidia have to catch up on ATi.
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>
This will be the first time that the low-end cards are just as capable as the high end ones (i.e. fully programmable), just slower. This is a really important milestone and will hopefully encourage software developers to take this level of hardware more seriously, and do it sooner rather than later. The higher level tools (like Cg, OGL2, DX9, and ATI's shader tools) will hopefully help the new hardware adoption process along too.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That would be really nice. I've always been disappointed when new cards are introduced, hypes the "insane" nju features and 3DMark is the only thing that seems to actually use them ...
I (finally) read about how the limitations on the older PC GeForce 2s and 3s,(which could be unlocked if one got the Quadro series of boards) were not present on the Mac versions. Consensus seemed to say that the reason was Apples implementation of the OpenGL standard. The reports of folks using the Riva software thing to turn their cards into 'SoftQuadros' seems to also support this line of thought.
Since it has been shown that software hacks don't work on the new GeForce4s, and the hardware hack is also not really working, I would suspect that there truly is a difference between the hardware...
Which means that Macs (again) get no love!
Where are the Mac OS X drivers for the ATI FireGL X1 boards!?! Optimized for Quartz Extrema AND Maya, none the less!
Where are the Mac OS X drivers for the nVidia Quadro XGL 900 cards?!?
Where is the rumoured nVidia/Apple Quartz Extreme/OpenGL AGP Pro110 8x graphics cards!?! With dual nv30 GPUs, 512MB DDR2 RAM, dual ADC ports!
WHERE, damnit!
[ 07-31-2002: Message edited by: MacRonin ]</p>
Programmer...that is a great feature Programmability in low end cards will be a boon for ALL gamers.
<a href="http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=1028114138"; target="_blank">DDR Support for NV30</a>
[ 07-31-2002: Message edited by: hmurchison ]</p>
But there are no nforce for Apple PCs, there probably never will. Why would Apple pair a 3 year old G4 with DDR. There probably is no need for DDR with the G4, it was designed for pc100 SD ram. Why do everybody think that DDR is the answer for an 3 year old chip?
Anybody think that a PIII would benefit from DDR?
The Athlon XP don?t benefit of the latest and fastest DDR, it don?t benefit of a 333 MHZ bus. It wasn?t designed for it.
The P4 loves fast DDR and can?t get enough of it, but it was designed for RD ram, which promised a rapid speed ramp. So the P4 was designed to be able to take use of that possibility, in fact it dependent on it. RD ram is in the drains right now and DDR has equaled/surpassed it in performance.
ATI will have the performance crown when the new card ships, they will hold it until nvidia releases the nv30. Nvidia will probably paper launch it in the fall and it will be available in December/January.
I don?t think that ATI have a response ready in the next 6 months. Look at the history of the fastest gfx cards lately.
Nvidia GF3
ATI Radeon 8500
Nvidia GF3 Ti500
Nvidia GF4 Ti4600
--(future releases)--
ATI 9700
Nvidia NV30
Nvidia had TWO launches between the ATI Radeon 8500 and the coming Radeon 9700. I think this pattern will continue.
I don?t think that ATIs up and coming card is all that it is hyped up to be. Sure it may be 251% faster in 1600x1200 with 4xAA, but who cares when ATI is just able to run games @ ca. 35 fps vs. nvidias 15 fps?
At lower resolutions, where people play, there probably isn?t that much difference.
[Asbestos suit ON - Flame Shield HIGH] <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />