Forum » Kaj kupiti » ATI8500 vs. GF3Ti200
ATI8500 vs. GF3Ti200
_Mortal_ ::
Welcome to id Software's Finger Service V1.5!
Name: John Carmack
Email: johnc@idsoftware.com
Description: Programmer
Project:
Last Updated: 02/11/2002 15:43:58 (Central Standard Time)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 11, 2002
-----------------
Last month I wrote the Radeon 8500 support for Doom. The bottom line is that it will be a fine card for the game
I had a pre-production board before Siggraph last year, and we were discussing
the possibility of letting ATI show a Doom demo behind closed doors on it. We
were all very busy at the time, but I took a shot at bringing up support over
a weekend. I hadn't coded any of the support for the custom ATI extensions
yet, but I ran the game using only standard OpenGL calls (this is not a
supported path, because without bump mapping everything looks horrible) to see
how it would do. It didn't even draw the console correctly, because they had
driver bugs with texGen. I thought the odds were very long against having all
the new, untested extensions working properly, so I pushed off working on it
until they had revved the drivers a few more times.
My judgment was colored by the experience of bringing up Doom on the original
Radeon card a year earlier, which involved chasing a lot of driver bugs. Note
that ATI was very responsive, working closely with me on it, and we were able
to get everything resolved, but I still had no expectation that things would
work correctly the first time.
Nvidia's OpenGL drivers are my "gold standard", and it has been quite a while
since I have had to report a problem to them, and even their brand new
extensions work as documented the first time I try them. When I have a
problem on an Nvidia, I assume that it is my fault. With anyone else's
drivers, I assume it is their fault. This has turned out correct almost all
the time. I have heard more anecdotal reports of instability on some systems
with Nivida drivers recently, but I track stability separately from
correctness, because it can be influenced by so many outside factors.
ATI had been patiently pestering me about support for a few months, so last
month I finally took another stab at it. The standard OpenGL path worked
flawlessly, so I set about taking advantage of all the 8500 specific features.
As expected, I did run into more driver bugs, but ATI got me fixes rapidly,
and we soon had everything working properly. It is interesting to contrast
the Nvidia and ATI functionality:
The vertex program extensions provide almost the same functionality. The ATI
hardware is a little bit more capable, but not in any way that I care about.
The ATI extension interface is massively more painful to use than the text
parsing interface from nvidia. On the plus side, the ATI vertex programs are
invariant with the normal OpenGL vertex processing, which allowed me to reuse
a bunch of code. The Nvidia vertex programs can't be used in multipass
algorithms with standard OpenGL passes, because they generate tiny differences
in depth values, forcing you to implement EVERYTHING with vertex programs.
Nvidia is planning on making this optional in the future, at a slight speed
cost.
I have mixed feelings about the vertex object / vertex array range extensions.
ATI's extension seems more "right" in that it automatically handles
synchronization by default, and could be implemented as a wire protocol, but
there are advantages to the VAR extension being simply a hint. It is easy to
have a VAR program just fall back to normal virtual memory by not setting the
hint and using malloc, but ATI's extension requires different function calls
for using vertex objects and normal vertex arrays.
The fragment level processing is clearly way better on the 8500 than on the
Nvidia products, including the latest GF4. You have six individual textures,
but you can access the textures twice, giving up to eleven possible texture
accesses in a single pass, and the dependent texture operation is much more
sensible. This wound up being a perfect fit for Doom, because the standard
path could be implemented with six unique textures, but required one texture
(a normalization cube map) to be accessed twice. The vast majority of Doom
light / surface interaction rendering will be a single pass on the 8500, in
contrast to two or three passes, depending on the number of color components
in a light, for GF3/GF4 (*note GF4 bitching later on).
Initial performance testing was interesting. I set up three extreme cases to
exercise different characteristics:
A test of the non-textured stencil shadow speed showed a GF3 about 20% faster
than the 8500. I believe that Nvidia has a slightly higher performance memory
architecture.
A test of light interaction speed initially had the 8500 significantly slower
than the GF3, which was shocking due to the difference in pass count. ATI
identified some driver issues, and the speed came around so that the 8500 was
faster in all combinations of texture attributes, in some cases 30+% more.
This was about what I expected, given the large savings in memory traffic by
doing everything in a single pass.
A high polygon count scene that was more representative of real game graphics
under heavy load gave a surprising result. I was expecting ATI to clobber
Nvidia here due to the much lower triangle count and MUCH lower state change
functional overhead from the single pass interaction rendering, but they came
out slower. ATI has identified an issue that is likely causing the unexpected
performance, but it may not be something that can be worked around on current
hardware.
I can set up scenes and parameters where either card can win, but I think that
current Nvidia cards are still a somewhat safer bet for consistent performance
and quality.
On the topic of current Nvidia cards:
Do not buy a GeForce4-MX for Doom.
Nvidia has really made a mess of the naming conventions here. I always
thought it was bad enough that GF2 was just a speed bumped GF1, while GF3 had
significant architectural improvements over GF2. I expected GF4 to be the
speed bumped GF3, but calling the NV17 GF4-MX really sucks.
GF4-MX will still run Doom properly, but it will be using the NV10 codepath
with only two texture units and no vertex shaders. A GF3 or 8500 will be
much better performers. The GF4-MX may still be the card of choice for many
people depending on pricing, especially considering that many games won't use
four textures and vertex programs, but damn, I wish they had named it
something else.
As usual, there will be better cards available from both Nvidia and ATI by the time we ship the game.
Name: John Carmack
Email: johnc@idsoftware.com
Description: Programmer
Project:
Last Updated: 02/11/2002 15:43:58 (Central Standard Time)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 11, 2002
-----------------
Last month I wrote the Radeon 8500 support for Doom. The bottom line is that it will be a fine card for the game
I had a pre-production board before Siggraph last year, and we were discussing
the possibility of letting ATI show a Doom demo behind closed doors on it. We
were all very busy at the time, but I took a shot at bringing up support over
a weekend. I hadn't coded any of the support for the custom ATI extensions
yet, but I ran the game using only standard OpenGL calls (this is not a
supported path, because without bump mapping everything looks horrible) to see
how it would do. It didn't even draw the console correctly, because they had
driver bugs with texGen. I thought the odds were very long against having all
the new, untested extensions working properly, so I pushed off working on it
until they had revved the drivers a few more times.
My judgment was colored by the experience of bringing up Doom on the original
Radeon card a year earlier, which involved chasing a lot of driver bugs. Note
that ATI was very responsive, working closely with me on it, and we were able
to get everything resolved, but I still had no expectation that things would
work correctly the first time.
Nvidia's OpenGL drivers are my "gold standard", and it has been quite a while
since I have had to report a problem to them, and even their brand new
extensions work as documented the first time I try them. When I have a
problem on an Nvidia, I assume that it is my fault. With anyone else's
drivers, I assume it is their fault. This has turned out correct almost all
the time. I have heard more anecdotal reports of instability on some systems
with Nivida drivers recently, but I track stability separately from
correctness, because it can be influenced by so many outside factors.
ATI had been patiently pestering me about support for a few months, so last
month I finally took another stab at it. The standard OpenGL path worked
flawlessly, so I set about taking advantage of all the 8500 specific features.
As expected, I did run into more driver bugs, but ATI got me fixes rapidly,
and we soon had everything working properly. It is interesting to contrast
the Nvidia and ATI functionality:
The vertex program extensions provide almost the same functionality. The ATI
hardware is a little bit more capable, but not in any way that I care about.
The ATI extension interface is massively more painful to use than the text
parsing interface from nvidia. On the plus side, the ATI vertex programs are
invariant with the normal OpenGL vertex processing, which allowed me to reuse
a bunch of code. The Nvidia vertex programs can't be used in multipass
algorithms with standard OpenGL passes, because they generate tiny differences
in depth values, forcing you to implement EVERYTHING with vertex programs.
Nvidia is planning on making this optional in the future, at a slight speed
cost.
I have mixed feelings about the vertex object / vertex array range extensions.
ATI's extension seems more "right" in that it automatically handles
synchronization by default, and could be implemented as a wire protocol, but
there are advantages to the VAR extension being simply a hint. It is easy to
have a VAR program just fall back to normal virtual memory by not setting the
hint and using malloc, but ATI's extension requires different function calls
for using vertex objects and normal vertex arrays.
The fragment level processing is clearly way better on the 8500 than on the
Nvidia products, including the latest GF4. You have six individual textures,
but you can access the textures twice, giving up to eleven possible texture
accesses in a single pass, and the dependent texture operation is much more
sensible. This wound up being a perfect fit for Doom, because the standard
path could be implemented with six unique textures, but required one texture
(a normalization cube map) to be accessed twice. The vast majority of Doom
light / surface interaction rendering will be a single pass on the 8500, in
contrast to two or three passes, depending on the number of color components
in a light, for GF3/GF4 (*note GF4 bitching later on).
Initial performance testing was interesting. I set up three extreme cases to
exercise different characteristics:
A test of the non-textured stencil shadow speed showed a GF3 about 20% faster
than the 8500. I believe that Nvidia has a slightly higher performance memory
architecture.
A test of light interaction speed initially had the 8500 significantly slower
than the GF3, which was shocking due to the difference in pass count. ATI
identified some driver issues, and the speed came around so that the 8500 was
faster in all combinations of texture attributes, in some cases 30+% more.
This was about what I expected, given the large savings in memory traffic by
doing everything in a single pass.
A high polygon count scene that was more representative of real game graphics
under heavy load gave a surprising result. I was expecting ATI to clobber
Nvidia here due to the much lower triangle count and MUCH lower state change
functional overhead from the single pass interaction rendering, but they came
out slower. ATI has identified an issue that is likely causing the unexpected
performance, but it may not be something that can be worked around on current
hardware.
I can set up scenes and parameters where either card can win, but I think that
current Nvidia cards are still a somewhat safer bet for consistent performance
and quality.
On the topic of current Nvidia cards:
Do not buy a GeForce4-MX for Doom.
Nvidia has really made a mess of the naming conventions here. I always
thought it was bad enough that GF2 was just a speed bumped GF1, while GF3 had
significant architectural improvements over GF2. I expected GF4 to be the
speed bumped GF3, but calling the NV17 GF4-MX really sucks.
GF4-MX will still run Doom properly, but it will be using the NV10 codepath
with only two texture units and no vertex shaders. A GF3 or 8500 will be
much better performers. The GF4-MX may still be the card of choice for many
people depending on pricing, especially considering that many games won't use
four textures and vertex programs, but damn, I wish they had named it
something else.
As usual, there will be better cards available from both Nvidia and ATI by the time we ship the game.
Is reading in the bathroom considered as multi-tasking?
Senitel ::
Lepo _Mortal_ da bereš za seboj:
A high polygon count scene that was more representative of real game graphics
under heavy load gave a surprising result. I was expecting ATI to clobber
Nvidia here due to the much lower triangle count and MUCH lower state change
functional overhead from the single pass interaction rendering, but they came
out slower. ATI has identified an issue that is likely causing the unexpected
performance, but it may not be something that can be worked around on current
hardware.
A high polygon count scene that was more representative of real game graphics
under heavy load gave a surprising result. I was expecting ATI to clobber
Nvidia here due to the much lower triangle count and MUCH lower state change
functional overhead from the single pass interaction rendering, but they came
out slower. ATI has identified an issue that is likely causing the unexpected
performance, but it may not be something that can be worked around on current
hardware.
VASkO ::
to je ze pred nekje tremi tedni bilo objavljeno
ATI ima na rage3d forumu pomoje svoje usluzbence, ki nagovarjajo folk, da naj ne obupajo (z tri mesece govorijo, da bo naslednji teden popravljen set gonilnikov pa se jih zaj ni). Carmack je ziher hotel, samo ni smel, povedati, da JE hardwarski bug na trenutnih karticah.
ATI ima na rage3d forumu pomoje svoje usluzbence, ki nagovarjajo folk, da naj ne obupajo (z tri mesece govorijo, da bo naslednji teden popravljen set gonilnikov pa se jih zaj ni). Carmack je ziher hotel, samo ni smel, povedati, da JE hardwarski bug na trenutnih karticah.
Mr.B ::
Ok zakaj pa bi jaz igral MOHA na 500MHz mašini , če ni to niti minimum, tu še kej drugega nebi delalo. Imam skor 1G mašino z MX-ko , pa pa deluje z vsemi podrobnosi na 800x600. Na resoluciji 1024x768 pa je treba skoraj vseh podrobnosti ukiniti.
Če bi imel 2G mašino pa bi mi padel FPS na polovico ., koga to zanima . Za ATI je treba pač imeti močnejši procesor.Lahko pa so težav nekje v softweru , pa rabijo gonilniki procesor za kakšen izračun.
Tisti ki kupuje kartico za 100.000 sit pač nebo nabavil mašino z najcenejši procesor z najcenejšo plato z minimalno količino rama. Drugače pa . Jaz ko igram pod XP-ji s 512MB rama MOH , se poraba fizičnega rama dvigne na 390MB , hm. Dejte doma pustiti v mašini 128 MB rama pa igrejte MOH potem pa dejte notri ostali ram , ki ga imate.Če mislite da imate sedeaj slide show , kaj boste pote rekli s samo 128MB.Pa vam GeForce 4 ULTRA +Mega , ki izide čez štiri mesece, nebo nič pomagalo. Sedaj boš rabil čim večji prenos iz rama do grafične kartice. Poglejte malo teste , ki jih je naredil tom z navijanje rama za P4.
Nekje sem bral test ,kako se obnesejo sedajšne grafične kartice pri igrah ki prihajajo. Ups nobena gk ni mogla poganjati igric ki prihajajo z vsemi podrobnosti ? Pa kar je bilo zanimivo , je da močnejši procesor ni pogala nič k rezultaom.Res pa da serija GF4 ni bila testerana.
A ste kej razmišljali, če je GeForce 4MX , ali karkoli počasneje od GF3 , hitrejša od Radeona 8500 , in zakaj ? eden izmed odgovorov je tudi ta da igra ne uporablja vseh funkcij kot bi jih lahko , kot jih pod 8500 . Prav tako pa kaj mi bo dvesto FPS-jev pri igrah ki so isšle pred dvema letoma.
Ps : Koliko pa jih ima težave z Radeonom pod VIa chipsetom. Žal na unem forumu , ni noben težave z intlovimi platama. Saj jaz nisem nič opazil ??
Če bi imel 2G mašino pa bi mi padel FPS na polovico ., koga to zanima . Za ATI je treba pač imeti močnejši procesor.Lahko pa so težav nekje v softweru , pa rabijo gonilniki procesor za kakšen izračun.
Tisti ki kupuje kartico za 100.000 sit pač nebo nabavil mašino z najcenejši procesor z najcenejšo plato z minimalno količino rama. Drugače pa . Jaz ko igram pod XP-ji s 512MB rama MOH , se poraba fizičnega rama dvigne na 390MB , hm. Dejte doma pustiti v mašini 128 MB rama pa igrejte MOH potem pa dejte notri ostali ram , ki ga imate.Če mislite da imate sedeaj slide show , kaj boste pote rekli s samo 128MB.Pa vam GeForce 4 ULTRA +Mega , ki izide čez štiri mesece, nebo nič pomagalo. Sedaj boš rabil čim večji prenos iz rama do grafične kartice. Poglejte malo teste , ki jih je naredil tom z navijanje rama za P4.
Nekje sem bral test ,kako se obnesejo sedajšne grafične kartice pri igrah ki prihajajo. Ups nobena gk ni mogla poganjati igric ki prihajajo z vsemi podrobnosti ? Pa kar je bilo zanimivo , je da močnejši procesor ni pogala nič k rezultaom.Res pa da serija GF4 ni bila testerana.
A ste kej razmišljali, če je GeForce 4MX , ali karkoli počasneje od GF3 , hitrejša od Radeona 8500 , in zakaj ? eden izmed odgovorov je tudi ta da igra ne uporablja vseh funkcij kot bi jih lahko , kot jih pod 8500 . Prav tako pa kaj mi bo dvesto FPS-jev pri igrah ki so isšle pred dvema letoma.
Ps : Koliko pa jih ima težave z Radeonom pod VIa chipsetom. Žal na unem forumu , ni noben težave z intlovimi platama. Saj jaz nisem nič opazil ??
France Rejects Genocide Accusations Against Israel in Gaza,
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
ChiefThunder ::
Brez zamere Mr. B, sam včasih so tvoji posti rahlo čudni. 0:) No, kar se tiče tega; vsi vemo, da rabiš za igranje novejših špilov dobro mašino, sploh če hočeš višjo resolucijo in kakšen detajl več... sam za to se ne gre tuki. Kartica, ki nosi tolk visoko ceno, bi morala meti oreng izpiljene gonilnike in nasploh nebi smela imet takih velikih problemov. To drži, da rabiš za ATI-ja močan procesor vsaj 1ghz, vendar ga tud za ostale nove kartulje. Kar se pa tiče tega buga, kokr je meni znano, FPS- ji zlo padejo kljub močnemu procesorju, kar je zna bit zlo moteče. Poleg tega mislim, da je za hardcore gejmerje vseeno boljša nvidiia, ki ima boljšo podporo in nasploh manj problemov.
Kar se tiče prihodnjih iger in njih zahtevnosti; sej to nič novega, že nekateri zdajšnji špili spravijo klečat (ob vseh detajlih) današnje grafične. Tisto s procesorjem je pa mal čudno; da ni razlike me 1ghz in 2ghz?
Nova serija Gf4 se pa tud oreng pribljiža Radeonu- nView, mpeg2 odkodirnik, 2 vertex cevovoda, in ostalo, ne samo surova hitrost...
Kar se tiče prihodnjih iger in njih zahtevnosti; sej to nič novega, že nekateri zdajšnji špili spravijo klečat (ob vseh detajlih) današnje grafične. Tisto s procesorjem je pa mal čudno; da ni razlike me 1ghz in 2ghz?
Nova serija Gf4 se pa tud oreng pribljiža Radeonu- nView, mpeg2 odkodirnik, 2 vertex cevovoda, in ostalo, ne samo surova hitrost...
... po liniji najmanjšega odpora. ;)
danielka84 ::
heh, zakaj se kuj nekaj zbadate :\
Jas bom raje kupil Radeona 8500 z 128 MB rama :D
naj tisti ki IMAJO radeona8500 napišejo tukaj, če je res ta problem tak "kritičen" kot tukaj vsi (skoraj vsi) navajate...
ajd
Jas bom raje kupil Radeona 8500 z 128 MB rama :D
naj tisti ki IMAJO radeona8500 napišejo tukaj, če je res ta problem tak "kritičen" kot tukaj vsi (skoraj vsi) navajate...
ajd
Mr.B ::
France Rejects Genocide Accusations Against Israel in Gaza,
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
VASkO ::
Mr. B - tupis
tebe ne bi motilo, ce ti v OpenGL spilu naenkrat pade FPS na manj kot polovico iz neznanih razlogov in potem moras save/loadat spil, da spet dela normalno? tega na online igranju ne mores...
pa nasploh ma ATI zelo slabe OpenGL gonilnike, o tem je Carmack govoril, ce ne gre drugace si preberi Mortalov copy/paste Carmackove izjave zelo natancno, bos videl. Ta pomanjklivost se pokaze v dosti benchih, kot tudi v spilih, kjer bi radeon MORAL mocno nasekati vse GF3 kartice, ampak mu to ne uspe. V GLexcess ima za 2x nizje FPSje kot gf3 (ti200).
tebe ne bi motilo, ce ti v OpenGL spilu naenkrat pade FPS na manj kot polovico iz neznanih razlogov in potem moras save/loadat spil, da spet dela normalno? tega na online igranju ne mores...
pa nasploh ma ATI zelo slabe OpenGL gonilnike, o tem je Carmack govoril, ce ne gre drugace si preberi Mortalov copy/paste Carmackove izjave zelo natancno, bos videl. Ta pomanjklivost se pokaze v dosti benchih, kot tudi v spilih, kjer bi radeon MORAL mocno nasekati vse GF3 kartice, ampak mu to ne uspe. V GLexcess ima za 2x nizje FPSje kot gf3 (ti200).
ChiefThunder ::
Mr B., ravno o tem sem govoril, že obstajajo špili, ki pristižejo peruti ternutno najboljšim karticam (zgoraj omenjeni Aqunaox, SS:SE, MOHAA, pa še so), kar se pa tiče 128mb pomnilnika, pa sploh ne pride do izraza...
... po liniji najmanjšega odpora. ;)
Mr.B ::
Ok , to da moraš reštartat špil nisem vedel , kakor sem nahitro preblal , je bilo rečeno samo to da pade , nič pa da se noče popraviti.
Za 128MB Radeona pa je treba počakati. Dal sem primerjavo samo z GeFrce 2 kartice , ampak je treba videti oz . počakati da pride v teste radeon 128. Tu je treba videti , kako dodatnih 128MB vpliva ko se aktivera vse funkcije same kartice oz. špila.
Drugo pa še vedno ostaja odprto : Res je da večina home userhjev uporablja VIO , itd. Zanima me ali se o dogaja tudi platam z intlovim chipseti. Prosil bi link .
Za 128MB Radeona pa je treba počakati. Dal sem primerjavo samo z GeFrce 2 kartice , ampak je treba videti oz . počakati da pride v teste radeon 128. Tu je treba videti , kako dodatnih 128MB vpliva ko se aktivera vse funkcije same kartice oz. špila.
Drugo pa še vedno ostaja odprto : Res je da večina home userhjev uporablja VIO , itd. Zanima me ali se o dogaja tudi platam z intlovim chipseti. Prosil bi link .
France Rejects Genocide Accusations Against Israel in Gaza,
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
mrcartoon ::
Najbolj zanimivo na tem forumu je da čez Ati-jevega Radeona pljuvajo tisti ki dotične kartice še v rokah niso imeli kaj šele da bi jo uporabljali. Vse izjave se opirajo na članke na tej in tej internetni strani, pa ste že kdaj razmišljali o pristranskosti teh člankov, na monopolni status Nvidie,itd. Najbrž ne, saj vse kar piše je 100°% resnično in s tem seveda tudi sveto...ccc...Jaz sem si najprej lastil Herculesovega Propheta Gf3 Ti200 in bil bolj kot ne razočaran saj kartica ni dajala pričakovanih rezultatov pa sem si rekel zakaj pa ne bi preizkusil še Radeona 8500 Retail in glej ga zlomka kartica me je prav pozitivno presenetila. Lepa slika, hitrost, stabilnost so same nekatere lastnosti te kartice. Veliko igram online shooterje in bug-a o katerem vi trobite še nism zasledil, čudno?! Jah apriorij je treba pljuvat po Ati-ju sej edino Nvidia rulz, podobna situacija je bila pred let ko je bil 3Dfx na vrhu in mu je začela v zelje hodit Nvidia, spet so se oglašali pristaši Voodoo-ja in Nvidio pljuvali po dogem in počez, po tem pa itak vsi veste kaj se je zgodilo. Eh škoda besed, saj bo v vsakem primeru obveljala vaša, ki imate računalniški trg v malem prstu... teoretično... Vsem tistim, ki se zanimate za nakup Radeon-a 8500,pa vam lahko brez slabe vesti kartico iz vsega srca priporočim...
lp, MrCartoon
lp, MrCartoon
_Mortal_ ::
mogoče je pristranski kaj TI veš.
Is reading in the bathroom considered as multi-tasking?
ChiefThunder ::
mrcartoon: sej noben ne pluva čez atija, pač povemo, kar je res. tist, ker bo pa odštel 80k+ za kartico, bo pa menda vedel kake funkcije ima prej prebral kakšen test... Kar se tiče praktičnih izkušenj- sej testi in razni problemi, ter debate na drugih forumih izhajajo prav iz tega.
peace. 8-)
peace. 8-)
... po liniji najmanjšega odpora. ;)
_Mortal_ ::
Jz sm sm od Carmacka slišal da obstaja ta problem z drugih strani pa ne. Npr: Reactor,X-labs...
Is reading in the bathroom considered as multi-tasking?
Daishi ::
Med Ati Radeon 8500 ("taprau" ™) vs nVidia GF3 Ti200 ni primerjave.
Vsi testi, ki sem jih empiricno probau (RTCW prek mreze . . .) dajo prednost Ati-ju (bolsi, lepsi, hitrejsi, . . .).
Prihajajoci spili (beri Unreal 2) so pokazali, da je nVidia GF3 Ti200 nezadostna resitev Ati Radeon 8500 pa je za silo (nVidia GF3 Ti500 lih tko).
Torej nVidia GF3 Ti200 se resi sam, ce jo clouk navije.
Jst bi sou definitivno z Ati-jem. Eventuelno s Hercules inacico, ka zgleda bol "jezna" ™.
>:D
Vsi testi, ki sem jih empiricno probau (RTCW prek mreze . . .) dajo prednost Ati-ju (bolsi, lepsi, hitrejsi, . . .).
Prihajajoci spili (beri Unreal 2) so pokazali, da je nVidia GF3 Ti200 nezadostna resitev Ati Radeon 8500 pa je za silo (nVidia GF3 Ti500 lih tko).
Torej nVidia GF3 Ti200 se resi sam, ce jo clouk navije.
Jst bi sou definitivno z Ati-jem. Eventuelno s Hercules inacico, ka zgleda bol "jezna" ™.
>:D
Uros - Essedi Gorica
ICQ No.: 56362066
ICQ No.: 56362066
Zgodovina sprememb…
- spremenil: Daishi ()
mrcartoon ::
Daishi: nisem te čisto dobro razumel kaj si mislil s tem da je Gf3 Ti200 nezadostna Radeon 8500 pa komaj zadostna rešitev za igranje Unreal-a 2??? A to pomeni da bo ta špil tako požrešen da ga tudi zdaj najboljše kartice ne bojo mogle normalno prebavljati ali kaj???
morphling1 ::
Gf3 ti200 je greh pustiti ne OC zato je narejen, sicer sem jaz trenutno na Ati-ju sam bom šel spet nazaj na nvidio, ker Ati enostavno nima dobrih openGL driverjev, pa tu ne mislim špile za te je odličen, ampak za kako resno uporabo,kjer ga nvidia poseka da je kar hudo, škoda sicer zelo dobre karte čakat na nove driverje pri Ati-ju je pa tudi brezveze, ker edino kar popravljajo so izboljšave za igre in kompatibilnost z njimi, ostalo je isto.
http://www2.arnes.si/~mlivak/ Nekaj kar naj bi bila moja domača stran, pa nikoli ne bo :)
mrcartoon ::
morphling1: resna uporaba?? Na katere programe ciljaš? Zanima me tudi url strani kjer je ta razlika med Ati-jem in Nvidio pri uporabljanju resnih programov razvidna in kjer nvidia pelje scat Ati-ja... (test benchmarks?)
Zgodovina sprememb…
- spremenil: mrcartoon ()
VASkO ::
mrcartoon, jaz sploh nisem NVidiot niti fanATIc (upal, sem, da bom v kratkem fanATIc, samo zdaj pa ta pizdarija)! ce pa imas zelo hitro masino, se ti padec FPSjev na oko ne pozna, ce mas pa kakega athlona 1ghz ali manj pa se! dejstvo je, da je napaka ali v hardawreu ali v gonilniku pa pika! v bistvu sem jaz upal, da bo tokrat ATIju uspelo, samo kaj, ko je njihov driver developer team kot kaksna studentska klapa, ki nic pametnega ne vejo v realnem casu skupaj spravit. kaj bos s kartico, ki jo danes kupis za 80 jurjev pol pa 6 mescev moras cakat na zadovoljive gonilnike zanjo- mrs u p.m. ATI!
_Mortal_, te strani niso ATI orientirane, tudi razni reviewi niso. Poglej malo na Rage3D in njihov forum. Tudi ZVESTI fanATIci ze dvomijo v ATIja, kaj bom govoril, beri sam.
mrcartoon, hoces link: izvoli brati
test pove, da so ATIjevi gonilniki svohni, nekje 2x hitrejsi, nekje 6x pocasnejsi 8-O
_Mortal_, te strani niso ATI orientirane, tudi razni reviewi niso. Poglej malo na Rage3D in njihov forum. Tudi ZVESTI fanATIci ze dvomijo v ATIja, kaj bom govoril, beri sam.
mrcartoon, hoces link: izvoli brati
test pove, da so ATIjevi gonilniki svohni, nekje 2x hitrejsi, nekje 6x pocasnejsi 8-O
Zgodovina sprememb…
- spremenil: VASkO ()
kuglvinkl ::
mrcartoon: jep, na Anandtechu je test beta Unreal 2. Vse kartice (razen GeF 4 oz. se še ne ve) pokleknejo. In hiter CPU ti ne pomaga nič.
Your focus determines your reallity
ChiefThunder ::
tud na Gf4 so že sprobal zadevo; če koga zanima- tukaj.
... po liniji najmanjšega odpora. ;)
|KoRn| ::
A maybe kdo ve, kje je mozno najdit kak test, kjer bi primerjali:
GeForce 4MX 440 ter ATI 8500 LE, kajti razlika v ceni je samo 5.000 SIT!!!!!!!!!!!!
GeForce 4MX 440 ter ATI 8500 LE, kajti razlika v ceni je samo 5.000 SIT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Freak on a leash!
tha_man ::
No, no, |KoRn|, od GF4 MX je pa Radeon 8500 sigurno boljši, o tem ni nobenega dvoma! Dvom se poraja le v primerjavi z GF3 Ti200, sploh če slednjo naviješ.
danielka84 ::
No, tale link k ga je dal ChiefThunder je v vseh testih
Radeon8500 boljši od GeForce3 Ti200, razen v enem od desetih!
Torej...
Heh pa sploh me ne gane tole kaj pišete o Radeonu8500!
Ko sem videl sliko na testnem računalu, sem vedel da bo moj! Sprobal sem Q3A, SeriousSam 2, unreal, NFS2000, AOE2, Wolfensteina, ter mnoge druge in ni niti za trenutek kaj šteknalo ali se opazlo da bi vpadli frejmi...
vse je blo na high in na 1152 x 864 x 32 na Morganu 1100Mhz in 512MB SDRAMA!
Jaz samo rečem da prvo sprobajte praktično, pol pa govorte... :\
Radeon8500 boljši od GeForce3 Ti200, razen v enem od desetih!
Torej...
Heh pa sploh me ne gane tole kaj pišete o Radeonu8500!
Ko sem videl sliko na testnem računalu, sem vedel da bo moj! Sprobal sem Q3A, SeriousSam 2, unreal, NFS2000, AOE2, Wolfensteina, ter mnoge druge in ni niti za trenutek kaj šteknalo ali se opazlo da bi vpadli frejmi...
vse je blo na high in na 1152 x 864 x 32 na Morganu 1100Mhz in 512MB SDRAMA!
Jaz samo rečem da prvo sprobajte praktično, pol pa govorte... :\
Mr.B ::
Jp Razen če se niso pri mlacomu zmotili , sedaj prodajajo Radeona 8500 128MB.
France Rejects Genocide Accusations Against Israel in Gaza,
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
Tic ::
ejte...
Radeon je "fizično" extremno močna kartica, še posebno retail varjata. Daje jo pa samo pamet-gonilniki. S časom bodo to odpravljali, in s tem bodo impruvali tudi hitrost, kjer ja pa strojne še za nekaj časa....(to vam pravim da bo blo usklajenost, tko da boš vedno lahko igral najnovejše igre, če nebodo ATIjevci zaspali...:D )
Tko, da...... I"ll stick to Radeon
Radeon je "fizično" extremno močna kartica, še posebno retail varjata. Daje jo pa samo pamet-gonilniki. S časom bodo to odpravljali, in s tem bodo impruvali tudi hitrost, kjer ja pa strojne še za nekaj časa....(to vam pravim da bo blo usklajenost, tko da boš vedno lahko igral najnovejše igre, če nebodo ATIjevci zaspali...:D )
Tko, da...... I"ll stick to Radeon
persona civitas ;>
ChiefThunder ::
Mah, primerjava Ti200 pa Radeona 8500 retail ni na mestu, ker je radeon občutno dražji, prej LE 8500 pa Ti200. Tud na unem testu sta obe kartici precej izenačeni, sam radeon bi lohka bil še boljši in upam na to, da bojo enkrat skup gud gonilnike spacal, pa da pol vidmo ves potencial.
Aja; cena radeona s 128mb rama je 105k- dej ne me smejat, no...:( Zadeva zihr ni tolk vredna. A je kdo že kakšen test zasledu te inačice?
Aja; cena radeona s 128mb rama je 105k- dej ne me smejat, no...:( Zadeva zihr ni tolk vredna. A je kdo že kakšen test zasledu te inačice?
... po liniji najmanjšega odpora. ;)
eland ::
Kje ste vsi lastniki Radeona 8500? Morda pa vsi raj nabijajo špile kot visijo na forumih:) In ne se tok sekirat glede Unreal2, ko bo prišel ven, če bo, bomo pa kupil takrat nove mašine; jest bom svojega AMD1000 mel še vsaj eno leto (no, mogoče manj;) ), ker bo vsaj tok časa tud dober in pol bo morda tud Clawhammer v igri - kdo ve.
Zgodovina sprememb…
- spremenilo: eland ()
JohnyB ::
Haj tkole mam R 8500 ..ne bom zdej hvalu po dolgem in počes ker se ve da je ZAKON ( moje mnenje )!!!
..kako bo pa delal v pol v Unreal 2 se bom pa pol obremenjeval ..ane
..do takrat bom pa lepo užival ...
..kako bo pa delal v pol v Unreal 2 se bom pa pol obremenjeval ..ane
..do takrat bom pa lepo užival ...
Apple iMac
||_^_|| ::
jst mam radeona 8500 že od novembra in do zdej še nism zasledu nobenih poly bugov zato me je pa tut zanimal kva de hel je to.
Tic ::
...jest ga mam tudi, ker itak drgač nebi govoru, če nimam lastnih izkušenj ...:D
persona civitas ;>
_Mortal_ ::
Zanimivo je da vsai ki kritizirajo radeon-a ga sploh nima oz. ni imelo. Prvo rabš vidt in pol ocent.
Is reading in the bathroom considered as multi-tasking?
ChiefThunder ::
bedni ste s tem hvalisanjem- če mam jz, pol je pa itak najboljše, ane? :))
... po liniji najmanjšega odpora. ;)
_Mortal_ ::
tisti ki kritizirajo pa če je nimam jes je bedna
Is reading in the bathroom considered as multi-tasking?
mrcartoon ::
:D No bil sem lastnik Gf3 Ti200 in zdaj sem ponosni lastnik Radeona 8500 retail, zakaj dragi chief misliš da bi bil pristranski in hvalil kartico samo zaradi tega ker je moja in ne zaradi njene kvalitete. Imel sem obe---> dobil, sprobal, se odločil---> in moja odločitev je Radeon...
mrcartoon ::
Pravkar prebiram super test grafičnih kartic v novi reviji Pc format in prav zanimivo kdo je zmagovalec testov...Radeon 8500. Piše da je to najboljša kartica do prihoda Gf4... Le zakaj ???!!!:D
JohnyB ::
mrcartoon, se čisto strinjam s tabo ! Tudi jast sm imu najprej GF3 Ti 200 potem pa sm dobu 8500 in sem se odloču za slednjo grafikuljo :D
Apple iMac
Mr.B ::
Za tiste , ki še niste brali tegale :
GeForce MX 4 I don`t think so:\
GeForce MX 4 I don`t think so:\
France Rejects Genocide Accusations Against Israel in Gaza,
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
ChiefThunder ::
Kva si hotu s tem povedat?- sicer se pa nebi branu enga. :D
... po liniji najmanjšega odpora. ;)
Mr.B ::
Če mi ga dajo, se jaz tud nebi branil.
France Rejects Genocide Accusations Against Israel in Gaza,
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
To accuse the Jewish state of genocide is to cross a moral threshold
R0K ::
Mr.B : a ti misliš, da mi čakamo na MX verzije ?! Mal si mim usekal ... glej samo Ti verzije!
VASkO ::
evo, sem pa razocaran, smo se vsi cudili, zakaj je r8500 od herculesa tako poceni? pravzaprav ni!
sem pogledal za hec na herculesovo stran, ce je kartica ze predstavljena in glej ga hudirja - launch price je 250 evrov, tako, da se bo cena dvignila ziher za 10 jurjev, ko pride v trgovine. ce gledamo na geizhalsu, vidimo, da se dobijo radeoni OEM built by ATI tudi za 250 evrov, to je pri nas seveda visje - okoli 65 jurjev. Me prav zanima, koliko bo kostal herculesov radeon, ko bo na voljo.
sem pogledal za hec na herculesovo stran, ce je kartica ze predstavljena in glej ga hudirja - launch price je 250 evrov, tako, da se bo cena dvignila ziher za 10 jurjev, ko pride v trgovine. ce gledamo na geizhalsu, vidimo, da se dobijo radeoni OEM built by ATI tudi za 250 evrov, to je pri nas seveda visje - okoli 65 jurjev. Me prav zanima, koliko bo kostal herculesov radeon, ko bo na voljo.
eland ::
Za vse kupce Radeonk pri nas se pazite Quantuma - pri njih sem vplačal ATI8500 retail. In včeraj pride dan D, ko moram dvigniti kartico. In kaj mi dajo? . Sama kartica je na zunaj ista kot polna , tako da sem jo nesel na srečo v Mlacom prevert in kaj je rezultat? Da so mi dal LE verzijo!!! Hotel so me nategnt do konca in na koncu se je prodajalec začel dret name da sem tečna stranka!!!In kao da so pri JAE jih zajebal, ker so to naročil tam in da kao zavajajo tudi tam.Za preverbo imam tam rezervirano kartico za 73000 sit pri JAE in če ne bo to to, grem na inšpekcijo zjebat vse po vrsti in vas jutri obvestim tudi o njihovi poštenosti.
Pa pazte se kaj kupite, ker ni vse zlato kar se sveti.
Pa pazte se kaj kupite, ker ni vse zlato kar se sveti.
_Mortal_ ::
VAsko pravzaprav je cena je v akciji. In nekje na herculesovi strani sem zasledil ceno 169.99 USD
Is reading in the bathroom considered as multi-tasking?
Vredno ogleda ...
| Tema | Ogledi | Zadnje sporočilo | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tema | Ogledi | Zadnje sporočilo | |
| » | Graficna kartica - kaj kupiti do 30.000,00 sitOddelek: Kaj kupiti | 1944 (1510) | globoko grlo |
| » | 3 grafike za 28k sit: GF3Ti200, GF4MX440, ATI Radeon 9000 - Kaj kupiti?Oddelek: Kaj kupiti | 1955 (1188) | Zheegec |
| » | Poden od podna: Hecules in R8500 LE (strani: 1 2 3 )Oddelek: Strojna oprema | 7415 (4640) | rap3r |
| » | Geforce4Oddelek: Novice / Grafične kartice | 2070 (2070) | tedybear |
| » | GF 4 MX (strani: 1 2 )Oddelek: Strojna oprema | 5782 (4737) | TheJack |