tahrikmili
Member
IronicallyTwisted said:
The 3850 is simply the best card at its price point.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
AMD's RV770 / Radeon 4800 series will be the fastest GPU / graphics cards ever
- Thread starter camineet
- Start date
The 3850 is simply the best card at its price point.
IronicallyTwisted
Banned
Bidermaier said:
Thats bullshit. ATi has had a greater market share in the past than Nvidia, back on 06 they were selling more.
Kamakazie!
Member
IronicallyTwisted said:
Actually the 3870 shades out the 9600GT in most benchmarks and is significantly faster at higher resolutions. It is also pretty much exactly the same price as the 9600GT. Over here i can get the 3870 slightly cheaper in fact. Plus it can be put in to crossfire just like the 9600 and sli..... combine that with the fact that over the breadth of games, crossfire is the superior solution and the 3870 is a better solution. Another plus is that at idle (the state at which the cards are for the majority of the time) the 3870 draws roughly 10W less power.
Like i said. ATi is competitive with all it's card. It simply lacks a super high end variant.
IronicallyTwisted
Banned
Kamakazie! said:
http://www.techspot.com/article/88-geforce-9600gt-versus-radeon-hd3870/page10.html
As you can see, based on the seven games we tested using a number of various quality settings, the performance difference between the Radeon HD 3870 and GeForce 9600 GT worked out to be very small. Each product had its ups and downs and on average the 9600 GT turned out to be less than 1% slower than the Radeon HD 3870. Those wanting to use AA/AF exclusively should note that the 9600 GT appeared to be slightly better when using these quality settings.
Like I said, wheres ATi's 8800GT? And where were they before the 3870 came out late last year?
Kamakazie!
Member
IronicallyTwisted said:
Exactly. The 9600GT is SLOWER than the 3870. You said use 2 of them in SLI for the best price/performance this generation.... but crossfire is better than SLI so 2 3970s together is even better than 2 9600GTs and the 3970s can be had at the same price as them!
What does the 8800GT have to do with anything? It is SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive than the 3870. You can't compare cards in different price brackets. Your going round in circles further proving my point. All of ATIs cards are competitive on price/performance. They don't need cards in the high end for that to be true even though they do have the 3870X2 which is also great on price/performance.
Teknopathetic
Member
"What does the 8800GT have to do with anything? It is SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive than the 3870. You can't compare cards in different price brackets. Your going round in circles further proving my point. All of ATIs cards are competitive on price/performance. They don't need cards in the high end for that to be true even though they do have the 3970X2 which is also great on price/performance."
Significantly? What?
Significantly? What?
Kamakazie!
Member
On average, £20-£30 at my usual retailers last time i looked.Teknopathetic said:
Teknopathetic
Member
"On average, £20-£30 at my usual retailers last time i looked."
Then you're getting hosed. The difference in the US at sites like newegg, etc. is anywhere from 10-20$ (7-10£) or less.
Plus, if you want to talk about price/performance, the 8800GTS 320mb is 120$ or less with rebates at newegg.
Then you're getting hosed. The difference in the US at sites like newegg, etc. is anywhere from 10-20$ (7-10£) or less.
Plus, if you want to talk about price/performance, the 8800GTS 320mb is 120$ or less with rebates at newegg.
Kamakazie!
Member
Teknopathetic said:
I have just been and looked again (it has been a little while) and it does seem that the difference is much less now. So it would be correct that the 8800GT is the better single card buy....
My point still stands with the 9600GT though (which was the original point).
On a side note, how are retailers getting away with charging more for a 9600 than an 8800 when the 8800 is quite a bit faster?
The 320mb 8800 is a great card. I've had mine over a year now and have no reason to upgrade until the next refresh. You do get far better deals over there though. The 320mb is still around £90 here!
Teknopathetic
Member
"My point still stands with the 9600GT though (which was the original point).
On a side note, how are retailers getting away with charging more for a 9600 than an 8800 when the 8800 is quite a bit faster?"
Because it says 9600. Aren't the 8800GTS (non-G92) no longer being made?
"The 320mb 8800 is a great card. I've had mine over a year now and have no reason to upgrade until the next refresh. You do get far better deals over there though. The 320mb is still around £90 here!"
It is, though I sold mine the second the 8800GTs were announced and pretty much came out even.
On a side note, how are retailers getting away with charging more for a 9600 than an 8800 when the 8800 is quite a bit faster?"
Because it says 9600. Aren't the 8800GTS (non-G92) no longer being made?
"The 320mb 8800 is a great card. I've had mine over a year now and have no reason to upgrade until the next refresh. You do get far better deals over there though. The 320mb is still around £90 here!"
It is, though I sold mine the second the 8800GTs were announced and pretty much came out even.
IronicallyTwisted
Banned
Kamakazie! said:
Another interesting point worth noting is that adding a second graphics card did not give either product a distinct advantage, at least in Windows Vista 64-bit that was our platform of choice. We found that if the 9600 GT, for example, was faster in single card mode, it was also faster when tested using SLI. Again, while the results did vary over the 7 games tested, the average performance received from each card was very much the same, which is amazing considering how different their designs and architectures are.
ORLY?
Kamakazie! said:
You are dodging the question, not me. The 9600GT is basically the same card as the 3870. Nvidia also offers more options on the higher end that ATi can't compete with. So i'll say it again, if ATi is so great why can't they come up with competition to Nvidia's full range?
Kamakazie!
Member
Teknopathetic said:
But most people buying these cards have at least half a clue about their respective performance.
The original GTS cards were EOL's quite a while ago i believe.
Kamakazie!
Member
IronicallyTwisted said:
Yes. Across the board Crossfire is the superior technology.
I am not dodging the question. I have repeatedly stated that ATi are competitive with all of their cards but that they lack grunt at the high end.
I have never said that they can compete with nVidia at the high end and i also said that they don't need to. The money made from high end cards is tiny. There is very little profit there.
It would be good if ATi could become more competitive (at the high end) even if just to push the game forward a bit but it is by no means essential. Intel are the biggest graphics manufacturer in the world and they don't even make discrete cards.....
IronicallyTwisted
Banned
Kamakazie! said:
Yeah this is a gaming forum not the Microsoft Word forum. The high end market is where we live. I only buy the high end shit, as do all my friends. I could care less whats profitable, what I do care about is choice. ATi has one gaming card right now, and their best card is still the equivalent of the new low end Nvidia card. The original competition ATi had was the 2900 and the 2600, both of which blew.
Kamakazie!
Member
IronicallyTwisted said:
I have never tried to argue that ATi are competitive at the high end. I was replying to the people that said that ATi have nothing to offer across the board which is simply not true.
Whilst this is the gaming forum, there are plenty of people that game on mid-range cards, that's where you get the best value for money.
The 2900 was rubbish. No denying that. It was simply too hot and too slow for the price point it was. The 3870 is a different beast though. It is competitive, as are all of ATis current cards.
IronicallyTwisted
Banned
Kamakazie! said:
They are competitive mostly because they are low end and inexpensive. Sorry, I just disagree overall. Nvidia have been much more consistent this generation. I'm an Nvidia fan and I wasn't pretending the 5XXX cards were any good. When the best ATi can do is offer a single low end card to gamers, they have failed. When ATi can offer a full lineup of cards at every performance range, i'll change my tune.
I believe AMD has done two things that led to their downfall over the past few years.
1. Design choice by Engineers, getting your fucking head out of your asses and add TMU power. Do not design a GPU with a console approach (future scalability), make a fucking fast GPU for today's games and make money. Thats exactly what Nvidia's doing, so successfully.
2. Developer support. "Get in the Game" is laughable if you look at how effective "The way its meant to be played" effort by Nvidia.
2. The 38xx was the fastest card in its price category, almost twice as fast as the Nvidia's card. Nvidia evened the playing field months later, and lost a significant bit of market share too.
3. 38xx are much more power efficient compared to Nvidia's offerings.
Come back when you can shoot something better than blanks.
1. Design choice by Engineers, getting your fucking head out of your asses and add TMU power. Do not design a GPU with a console approach (future scalability), make a fucking fast GPU for today's games and make money. Thats exactly what Nvidia's doing, so successfully.
2. Developer support. "Get in the Game" is laughable if you look at how effective "The way its meant to be played" effort by Nvidia.
Oxymoron. You think a dual card GT200 board is possible after deeming it a monster? Think again, to me you are suggesting something akin to a dual G80 board which wasnt possible. Possible after a shrink? Maybe.camineet said:
1. The 38xx launch was a hard launch, much better than the 8800GT fiasco. Yes, thats after taking demand into consideration.Draft said:
2. The 38xx was the fastest card in its price category, almost twice as fast as the Nvidia's card. Nvidia evened the playing field months later, and lost a significant bit of market share too.
3. 38xx are much more power efficient compared to Nvidia's offerings.
Come back when you can shoot something better than blanks.
prodystopian
Member
Draft said:
Fixed. And good to see the fanboys aren't confined to just consoles.
MickeyKnox
Member
l fucking hope to god AMD can get their shit together again. The high end gpu market has such a stupidly quick turn around on performance monopoly complacency that not having those two doing everything possible to kill the the other leaves us with weak, expensive, stagnant crap.
Also, who the fuck is still stupid enough to be sworn to one chip maker? its 2008 people, not 1998.
Also, who the fuck is still stupid enough to be sworn to one chip maker? its 2008 people, not 1998.
Minsc
Gold Member
MickeyKnox said:
Is it just me or do Direct 3D games run really crappy on Radeon drivers? My 1950 Pro struggles to hold 30 fps on Typing of the Dead, but the much slower nVidia in my laptop runs it perfectly smooth.
Gothic I, ATI cards don't render the inventory screens correctly either, not a problem with nVidia cards.
This is the kind of problems I have when I think about getting another ATI card, so I probably won't.
Takeda Kenshi
blew Staal
MickeyKnox said:
I approve this message.
i hate bees
Member
It's about time ATi started throwing their weight around a bit more, will be interesting to see how it pans out.
I hate to hop on the 'driver' wagon, but I've owned 3 ATi cards in my time and I've found the drivers to be piss poor, usually having to go for the Omega drivers just to get all my games working at the same time (each driver iteration seemed to break compatibility with as many games as it fixed), I also found the control panel to be unnecessarily obtuse. Personally I'm not going near an ATI card until I read the reviews and get a feel for how people are getting on with the drivers.
Does ATi have any answer to Cuda? I remember Nvidia saying they were going to start supporting physics on the GPU for free through Cuda, stuff like that makes me proud to be green.
I hate to hop on the 'driver' wagon, but I've owned 3 ATi cards in my time and I've found the drivers to be piss poor, usually having to go for the Omega drivers just to get all my games working at the same time (each driver iteration seemed to break compatibility with as many games as it fixed), I also found the control panel to be unnecessarily obtuse. Personally I'm not going near an ATI card until I read the reviews and get a feel for how people are getting on with the drivers.
Does ATi have any answer to Cuda? I remember Nvidia saying they were going to start supporting physics on the GPU for free through Cuda, stuff like that makes me proud to be green.
proposition said:
AMD's server chips take a shit on anything Intel offers. So they won't be going bankrupt anytime soon.
You have to understand that 80 percent of a company like AMD, Nvidia, ATI or Intel's profit comes from selling lower end products to non-enthusiasts and big companies who then sell computers to non enthusiasts. You would be surprised at much much money the Nforce chipset for example generates.
SRG01 said:
It is, he doesn't know what he's talking about. 3870s are still cheaper than 8800gts, and most definitely cheaper than 9600gts in most places. ATI, from what I can tell, owns the sub-$170 market, and nVidia owns anything above $170. ATI hasn't released an incredibly awesome high-end card in a long time (even though the 3870 x2 was a nice stop-gap), but they've done well with the midrange in the last couple of months. If they can take the upper mid range or even the upper range back then more power to them. As long as we're getting this sort of competition from both companies, regardless of what price range these cards are in, who cares? ATI has the better featureset, nVidia has the faster cards.
br0ken_shad0w
Member
MickeyKnox said:
.
Bidermaier
Member
Using google uk shoping thingy the cheapest 3850 is £64.99 and the cheapest 9600 is £94.95
Kamakazie!
Member
bee said:
Your a bit late to the party. Already been there and done that.
nVidia is canabilising it's own product line with the 8800GT prices being the same as and sometimes less than the 9600GT prices.
irfan said:
I don't see why Nvidia couldn't have a dual GT200 card out by Q4 2008. JSS even said in the recent conference call that they'd be at several TeraFlops in a few quarters. They're not going to hit that with GT200 Ultra, so it's gotta be a dual-GPU card.
Plus, what in the heck does me deeming it a monster have to do with the likelihood of a dual GPU card coming out? And do you think Nvidia is gonna let AMD just take the performance crown later this year with the dual-RV770-based R700 / 4870 X2, without a fight?
I don't.
godhandiscen
There are millions of whiny 5-year olds on Earth, and I AM THEIR KING.
HD3870X2. I love mine.Draft said:
Thats pretty weird. My 3870X2 PWNS with Vista.dr_rus said:
What AMD/ATI is learning right now is that the high end does matter, not for profits, but for perception.
If you can't compete at the high end, people see that and think you can't compete at all.\
AMD and ATI offerings are largely price/performance competitive with Intel and Nvidia, but not at the high end, and AMD/ATI is having to squeeze their margins to get to that point. That's not a recipe for long term success. You have to have a 'halo car' type product, a product that kicks ass and has a good reputation among the enthusiast crowd so the lower levels look at that and say 'i want one of those'.
All the people acting like ATi is going to go bankrupt are hilarious though. ATi makes enough cash in the embedded/low end/entry level/oem markets to stay afloat, the high end market is only really a concern to them in that it affects the perceptions of their buyers in the other markets.
AMD as a whole is a bit more in danger, as they are getting their ass kicked by intel on a technological level, not just a design level. But even then, AMD's server stuff would be able to keep them afloat for a long time if they settled for a smaller share of the desktop market. They are slashing prices like crazy on their desktop chips to compete with Intel though, which is hurting their profitability.
Now that AMD and ATi should be well integrated, it will be interesting what they can do. The extra tech edge ATi gets from AMD should make them dangerous to Nvidia. If they can keep up with Intel's tech, they should do well against them with their design capabilities as well.
If intel keeps coming out with killer designs, they could take everyone out though, hardly anyone can compete with their tech. Maybe IBM, but thats about it.
If you can't compete at the high end, people see that and think you can't compete at all.\
AMD and ATI offerings are largely price/performance competitive with Intel and Nvidia, but not at the high end, and AMD/ATI is having to squeeze their margins to get to that point. That's not a recipe for long term success. You have to have a 'halo car' type product, a product that kicks ass and has a good reputation among the enthusiast crowd so the lower levels look at that and say 'i want one of those'.
All the people acting like ATi is going to go bankrupt are hilarious though. ATi makes enough cash in the embedded/low end/entry level/oem markets to stay afloat, the high end market is only really a concern to them in that it affects the perceptions of their buyers in the other markets.
AMD as a whole is a bit more in danger, as they are getting their ass kicked by intel on a technological level, not just a design level. But even then, AMD's server stuff would be able to keep them afloat for a long time if they settled for a smaller share of the desktop market. They are slashing prices like crazy on their desktop chips to compete with Intel though, which is hurting their profitability.
Now that AMD and ATi should be well integrated, it will be interesting what they can do. The extra tech edge ATi gets from AMD should make them dangerous to Nvidia. If they can keep up with Intel's tech, they should do well against them with their design capabilities as well.
If intel keeps coming out with killer designs, they could take everyone out though, hardly anyone can compete with their tech. Maybe IBM, but thats about it.
I hear ATI's overall image quality is better/clearer than nVidia's. Is this true?
I remember having an ATI X800 mobile card in my Sager Notebook, then switched to an nVidia 7900GT Go and then noticed the clarity wasn't quite as sharp as my X800. Has this changed with the newer 88XX series of nVidia cards?
I remember having an ATI X800 mobile card in my Sager Notebook, then switched to an nVidia 7900GT Go and then noticed the clarity wasn't quite as sharp as my X800. Has this changed with the newer 88XX series of nVidia cards?
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
That's toasty even for a 6800GT. 50-70c is about the norm. You should consider an aftermarket fan.neight said:
Also, the 7600GT performs just as well but uses less power and runs far cooler. The x6xx cards tend to offer the same performance as the previous series' x8xx card while being much more efficient.
I bought a Leadtek 6800GT because it came stock with a good heatsink and I removed the fan grill to help airflow. I've read other posts on forums about other people's 6800GTs reaching near 90c on load too.SapientWolf said:
And don't compare temps from the next gen to a previous gen. Compare temps from the competition of the same generation.
Kamakazie!
Member
isamu said:
It was in the past but with the 8800 series nVidia pulled out all the stops. nVidia may even slightly edge it now with the new cards, especially when it comes to FSAA/AA.
Did JSS say that they'll achieve Teraflops with a single card? For a SLI system yes. Check his wording again..camineet said:
It contradicts your own theory. Do you honestly think a dual GPU board is possible where each gpu is more than 400mm2 ? Keep dreaming.camineet said:
Well its quite clear which side of the fence you tip towards.:lol I'm saying nothing in regards to who will win the top crown.camineet said:
bigmit3737
Member
Sweet. I am still buying a 8800 GT though, so hopefully this drives prices down even more.
I know this post will get lost in this melee, but whatever.
The high-end PC graphics market doesn't matter very much - ATI having contracts for the 360 and Wii this gen will keep them going for a long, long, long time. What does matter is this interesting bit:
Nvidia has no CPU line.
Here's where we will be a few years down the road:
- Intel and AMD will have comparable integrated CPU/GPU solutions that offer substantial entry-level performance; mostly just an extension of where we are now, but with AMD truly integrating the entire solution into one chipset.
- Via will be in the process of owning them both in the embedded box and ultra-small PC market with its Pico-ITX and low power/price/performance CPUs.
- Nvidia will likely have a good GPU lineup, but any CPU designs they might be working on will have the same problems gaining traction in the market as Via's initial CPUs did a few years ago. Nvidia might even be shut out of chipsets for Intel and AMD at this point if they choose to design a CPU, just like Via suffered with Intel a few years ago.
Nvidia's in a hard spot right now, since all they can do without running into problems is keep the GPU lines cranking and keep doing chipsets. All of their competitors have CPU lines, which adds additional revenue. If anyone in this game will go bankrupt (lol right), it would be Nvidia.
The high-end PC graphics market doesn't matter very much - ATI having contracts for the 360 and Wii this gen will keep them going for a long, long, long time. What does matter is this interesting bit:
Nvidia has no CPU line.
Here's where we will be a few years down the road:
- Intel and AMD will have comparable integrated CPU/GPU solutions that offer substantial entry-level performance; mostly just an extension of where we are now, but with AMD truly integrating the entire solution into one chipset.
- Via will be in the process of owning them both in the embedded box and ultra-small PC market with its Pico-ITX and low power/price/performance CPUs.
- Nvidia will likely have a good GPU lineup, but any CPU designs they might be working on will have the same problems gaining traction in the market as Via's initial CPUs did a few years ago. Nvidia might even be shut out of chipsets for Intel and AMD at this point if they choose to design a CPU, just like Via suffered with Intel a few years ago.
Nvidia's in a hard spot right now, since all they can do without running into problems is keep the GPU lines cranking and keep doing chipsets. All of their competitors have CPU lines, which adds additional revenue. If anyone in this game will go bankrupt (lol right), it would be Nvidia.
Similar threads
- Locked