The fight continues between the nvidia and the ati fanboys. Boring!!!
Anonymous at 20:51 9/12/2003
didn't that comment sound paided? :P
Anonymous at 15:0 7/12/2003
This show was bad ass. I love fanboys!
Anonymous at 7:49 7/12/2003
Yeah no kidding. =P
Anonymous at 16:49 6/12/2003
haha ... these arguments are funny as
Anonymous at 12:21 5/12/2003
People may wonder why Megagames would post this news. I think they're trying to stir up another ATI/Nvidia fan boy argument. Looks like it worked. =P
just another statistic at 14:4 2/12/2003
has anyone actually watch the show? well i did and its awesome, why do go through technical stuff, just appreciated was these people had done and how they did it using current day technology to better understand the human body through the use of the martial arts...
Anonymous at 9:17 1/12/2003
Nvidia have bottomed out on performance. If only videologic was still in the game....
Anonymous at 0:7 1/12/2003
oh yeah, check this one out: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=684635&Sku=W261-0060&CatId=320
200(!!!) processors on a single chip! neato!
Anonymous at 23:55 30/11/2003
want to see what an OpenGL graphics workstation card can do? you can get a 3DLabs Wildcat, which normally competes with the Quadro FX 3000s for about USD $300, down from USD $3,000. It has 208mb of DDR memory, and two chips (geometry engine and rasterization engine) as well as a neat cooling system. check it out at http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=515936&Sku=TC3G-1002&CatId=320. It should give you solid gaming performance, on par with what NVIDIA and ATi offer (although the memory speeds ar quite a bit slower, so don't expect this to be an upgrade if you have, say an ATi Radeon 9700 pro or better), and gives you the drivers and hardware optimizations to decrease render time if your one of those who is a gamer as well as someone who creates graphics using Maya etc. on a PC/Workstation, or who creates knew models/maps using UnrealEd etc....
Check it out!
Anonymous at 14:54 30/11/2003
nVIDIA rules!
Anonymous at 12:45 30/11/2003
thanks for pouring some of your knowledge on us, i apreciate
This is no disadvantage to us gamers, however, since it is not feasible to use those features in real time anyway. (heck, if you wanna get technical about that, NVIDIA hardware has a hard enough time running FP32 in real time anyway, necessitating a move to FP16 about 70% of the time, with FP12 taking up a huge chunk of the rest of the time. FP32 offers no appearent advantages anyway, recent quote from an interview with John Carmack from computergaming.com [the CGW website], "[when] NVIDIA hardware looks really bad is when running 32bit floating point code on it". This failty, however, does not retard NVIDIA's workstation graphics however, since there is no real need to render in real time with those settings anyway.).
Well, as always, that's my two cents, and at a bargain price too!
The full potential of a graphic workstation card like the Quadro FX and ATi FireGL series lies in their driver/software suites. The latest of which contain already optimized profiles for different rendering platforms (i.e. Maya etc...). The architectures are based on existing hardware that is shared between the gaming cards and the more expensive workstation variants.
The main difference architecturally is that the chipsets of the workstation cards, which rarely have to do real-time calculations, are optimized for sorting information used to render different parts of the scene (i.e. the chipset will sort and send the data used in shader calcs to a pre-defined memory bank that is used to store such data, antialiassed samples are sent to that specific buffer, etc...).
The drivers also include features that are not feasible when rendering in real-time, such as the option to antialiass 16x samples, rather than the usual max of 4x (or 6x on ATi hardware/drivers).
All of these features improve the way 3D graphics are created by allowing for simple migration from one rendering platform to another. The extra visual quality features, combined with the ability to use higher resolutions than are feasible in real-time, such as 2048x18xx+, and using true, 128bit studio color, as well as taking advantage of the maximum floating point precision the hardware is capable of (in the case of the Quadro FX 3000, FP128), allow developers to create much more accurate models and scenes than would a regular gaming card. This means that, when we get the final product, be it a game or a movie, etc., we get the truest image possible.
However, to get such performance with the silocon used (as the gaming and workstation variants use essentially the same chips, with a similar core of capabillities) folks must pay the $1000+ dollars extra, since without the drivers included with the more expensive cards, you cannot unlock the greater capabilities for single-scene rendering. This is
Anonymous at 15:10 29/11/2003
"its also odd that the vid cards that were used to develop games are not good for gaming?"
i think gaming card have to do it live and not multimedia
want ati 9600pro or xt at 22:41 28/11/2003
i don't understand one thing. if maya is used to make games, and the making of games require a gfx workstation card that costs $3000+ where the end product is a game that runs on the more mainstream video cards. y doesn't mainstream cards have to power to be used for the development?
is there a reduction in polygon count from the development 3dmodels and the ones that are actually marketed? i'm not sure how that works cause i think reducing the polygon count would alter the model's appearence.
its also odd that the vid cards that were used to develop games are not good for gaming?
something is missing, does anyone know the what and whys?
R@R at 8:5 28/11/2003
Plain and simple. Nvidia does not render ANY game in FP32! It is capable of doing it at that higher precision, but when it does, the games in question run like syrup. So they opt to run games with FP12, FP16. And they are doing this with DX9 games as well! The minimum specification for DX9 applicatiuons and games is FP24. They cannot run it properly even with their complier program in FP32. And the visual difference is there. Especially that they also run their complier program to change the shader instructions from PS2.0(DX9 FEATURE) to PS1.1, PS1.4(DXFEATURES) Trust me. You see the diffeernce in water rendering scenes when Nvidia's uses dx8 shaders caompared to DX9 shaders in land scapes and water. DX ps2.0 is more detailed. And as games become more complicated with those shader features, Nvidia will not be able to use the complier program to alter shaders without altering IQ dramatically. As seen with Halo on a FX card already.
""With the exception of the Pixel Shader 1.4 test at 1024x768 where the 5950 Ultra barely slid by the 9800 XT, and the same test at 1600x1200 where the 5700 Ultra nudged past the 9600 XT, the Asus built Radeons simply outclassed the NVIDIA powered cards. If you are seeking proof that NVIDIA needs to coerce more performance from their parts executing Pixel Shader 2.0 code, look no further."
That's somebodys quote. And that sums it up for FX hardware and dx9 shaders.....good luck you fx owners playing dx9 games at their FULL image quality. Good way to spend $200-$500+
Amsterdamned at 4:54 28/11/2003
On a complete other note: It would be very cool when somebody would use the information from this docu and implement it into a game. Say byebye to Tekken, Soulcaliber and Mortal Combat. And please welcome "real" martial-games
edit: forgot me name
Anonymous at 4:53 28/11/2003
On a complete other note: It would be very cool when somebody would use the information from this docu and implement it into a game. Say byebye to Tekken, Soulcaliber and Mortal Combat. And please welcome "real" martial-games
Nuno at 4:14 28/11/2003
I dont understand something in this slide : http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031023/nvidia-nv38-nv36-12.html says 12 bits is good because X-Box, Geforce 4, ... as only 8 bits. 16 bits seems already enough. 32 bits is excelente. What's bit float? (30 bit, 28 bit?) So i dont understand why nvidia says ati 24 bits isnt good? It's a little less than 32 and a bit higher than 16 so what? I note they have managed to get more speed with the new drivers maybe they have made all the transistors in their chip work (they have more than Ati). Maybe the 32 bit unit is now doing 16 bit calculations? But Here: http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031023/nvidia-nv38-nv36-18.html It is said that there is no quality difference between ati and nvidia but there should? But why not? Ati 24 bit; Nvidia 32, 16, 12. Nvidia should have better quality if it is doing 32 bit. Ati should be better if nvidia is doing 16 bit. Right?
http://www.penstarsys.com/editor/tech/graphics/nv_ati_dx9/index.html This article tries to explain but it can do much like saying nvidia does more almost VS3.0, where is more or what is more?
The prof that ati is better than nvidia is very simple, nvidia to meet ati performance level must have 900Mhz memory system while ati has only 600Mhz!! it's 1/3 faster, even so doesnt beat it!!!
Ati is like AMD but at graphics, get more/same with less. But this is bye no mean that nvidia isnt good, making video cards that achive that speed is really amazing, that said this mean that ati cant make their cards work at that speed or ati doesnt need it yet since it can beat nvidia at 1/3 lower clock speed, making their cards cheaper or having higher profit margins.
Any one knows the price difference between 600Mhz memory and 900Mhz? I note that nvidia is using lower memory clock on the 256MB versions any one knows if Ati does the same?
Grundy at 20:8 27/11/2003
For those of us who DO produce animations and games, this card is an excellent piece of hardware. Without cards like this, none of you would have your amazing games or movies to bitch to each other about... Have you ever tried loading up Maya with just a Radeon or Geforce? HA! I think this article is very strongly related to gaming, contrary to what those first few Anonymous said. It's pretty much saying, "If we can make something look this good now, imagine what the games will look like when we start producing everyday games with these cards!" ( In a lot of cases they already do. )
So stop bitching at this card and the article, you owe your games to highend hardware like this.
Anonymous at 17:37 27/11/2003
eshaiz! aussiez! the xma will be broadcasted on the australian tv on january nex year!
Anonymous at 17:22 27/11/2003
I definitly would want to watch this, but not sure if it's going to be on in Australia though...
I don't think this card handles real world physics as in movement, but probably real-world lighting.
as for dissing US highschools, whats wrong with US highschools? i've never been to one so i can't comment.
Anonymous at 16:45 27/11/2003
BOOBIES ARE SOFT!!!!!!!!
llikrevo at 10:21 27/11/2003
first of all, this is a damn cool story, i'm soo gonna watch that show
second, some anonymouse was right, the card doesn't help the final image, it keeps track of alot of damn triangles, alot more than what are used in game,s this is for video progects and high demand visxual calculations, based on real world physics, not games and a games "real world physics" which is . . balanced . . . video cards do alot more than just produce the image now, they calc interactions and such
and third, this doesn't make any nvidia card better gor gaming or any ati card worse, IE just because company A makes good plastic does not mean company A makes better chocolate than company B
if you don't knwo what that means move to canada and go through a real high school education
and don't mock my spelling, i just type bad, it's all perfect where it counts
Anonymous at 10:12 27/11/2003
LOL
Blatant marketing sponsored by nvidia.
Anonymous at 8:55 27/11/2003
"With the exception of the Pixel Shader 1.4 test at 1024x768 where the 5950 Ultra barely slid by the 9800 XT, and the same test at 1600x1200 where the 5700 Ultra nudged past the 9600 XT, the Asus built Radeons simply outclassed the NVIDIA powered cards. If you are seeking proof that NVIDIA needs to coerce more performance from their parts executing Pixel Shader 2.0 code, look no further."
The truth is out Nvidia and you die hard fanboys. Have fun playing DX9 games that use Pixel shader 2.0 code. As ALL dx9 games will.
Maybe Nvidia supporters should buy this $2000+ card and hope it has better dx9 performance because the gaming video cards in the FX line don't.
Anonymous at 8:26 27/11/2003
Why would MegaGames even print this story? Like Anonymous below said, this is a Professional Workstation card. You don't use it for Gaming. Which this site is dedicated to. So why mention this when the card would be absolute crap for gaming? And the Cost is actually in the $2000-$3000 range for it. And since it's the same hardware core as the Nv3xx cards, DX9 shader performance would still be lacking.
Anonymous at 7:21 27/11/2003
Quadro is workstation graphic card which surves only 1 advantage over casual cards.. Its OPENGL which is standard 4 3d appilications. It also has faster AA 16x and some others less useful features. The bottomline is that no gamer gets advantage, he could probably get better speeds with Nvidia Geforce FX5950 or radeon something. The card itself costs around 1000 USD. As for " i find it best.. output bla bla" then 3d data is rendered, i dont see how quadro has anything to do with it, cuz its just for 3d editors viewport not 4 final images...
shitfaced at 23:4 26/11/2003
hey all you first post losers,, i invented that "first post" saying, i invented is in the early 50's, when i went to write a letter to my boss in the complaint box, i added "ha ha all u mf's i got first post so go blow yourself a new one"
Anonymous at 20:5 26/11/2003
no you wont
Loser at 19:48 26/11/2003
Wooooooooo yeah! 2ND POST!!!!!!!! But some day I will be first post I swear!
Grundy at 18:13 26/11/2003
The Quadro boards are the best I've ever used... Hope they show XMA downunder...
