Forum » Zvok in slika » Radeon,Geforce in slika.
Radeon,Geforce in slika.
glinik ::
OK dečki, zmagali ste!
Razlike ni!Saj ima navaden monitor enako dobro sliko kot trinitronec.Mater smo nori in mečemo denar skozi okno, samo da gor piše trinitron.Kako tele sem.80K sit sem dal za 19", ko pa že za 55K sit ali celo manj dobiš 19" (pač trinitron ne piše gor!) Malo razmislite ...
Lp
Razlike ni!Saj ima navaden monitor enako dobro sliko kot trinitronec.Mater smo nori in mečemo denar skozi okno, samo da gor piše trinitron.Kako tele sem.80K sit sem dal za 19", ko pa že za 55K sit ali celo manj dobiš 19" (pač trinitron ne piše gor!) Malo razmislite ...
Lp
kuglvinkl ::
In ja, CaqKa je dobil navodila, da briše vsak tvoj post, v katerem ne bo relevantnih screenshotov.
Your focus determines your reallity
Zgodovina sprememb…
- spremenil: kuglvinkl ()
Caligula ::
Za koga pa pol?
Ce vsi pravijo, da screenshot ne pove nic? Da je treba videt?
Sicer pa Caqa pozablja na linke testov, ki sem jih ze podal. Torej ne razumem kako sem referenca lahko samo jaz.
PA ce nebi bil neinformiran clovek, bi vedel, da VSA (torej ne 90%) ampak vsa testerska srenja soglasa s tem ,da ma ATI pac boljso sliko.
Limam spodaj malo morje informacij.
Preden nadaljujem-zanimivo, da v VSEH!!! testih, ki so kjerkoli, pravijo, da ima ATI boljso sliko.
Ne le to, povsod pravijo kako se je Nvidia s cisto najnovejsimi karticami popravila, a je se vedno slabsa pri sliki. Da ne omenjam kaj to pomeni sele kaksna je razlika pri vsem kar ni cisto novo! Pa Nvidia ima boljsi-a po mnenju testerjev predvsem na papirju. anisotropic filtering, ki je manj pomemben od Antialiasinga, ATI pa Nvidio pri Antialiasingu prezveci in izpljune!
Pa povsod pravijo, da screenshot ne pove se nic, ceprav se ze tam vidi nekaj. Zato ne stekam kaj bi pameten-racunalniso razgledan clovek imel od tega, da proba videt najbolj nemerodajne podatke ampak ce ze vztrajate:
Preden linkam beri tole:
Overall, when judging image quality, we have to give the hat to the 9800 Pro. There isn’t a huge noticeable difference in the Anisotropic quality, even though ATI’s may not be filtering certain angles "correctly". Most games have straight 90 degree angles or long hallways or ceilings or walls, etc. At 16XAF the ATI 9800 Pro 256MB looks awesome in games like Medal of Honor or Battlefield 1942. On the 9800 Pro 256MB we did not notice as many jaggies whereas on the 5900 Ultra, aliasing is quite apparent when you are given a static screen shot to gaze at.Where it is really important is duing movement in gameplay . We are going to look further into this with some following subjective opinion articles. Given those facts, the 9800 Pro still holds the IQ crown, but NVIDIA is right behind them. If they can improve their AA to match the likes of gamma correction and rotating grid or jittered grid, then the tables would most likely turn...or rotate in this case.
Both cards offer exceptional performance, but if I have to place my finger on which card I would choose for my primary system that I play my games on, I would have to opt for the 256MB 9800 Pro. It has better AA quality, and can play at 6XAA on a 256MB card very easily. It has also proven to be very strong in shader operations. It is not an easy decision for sure now. NVIDIA has done a great job at sizing up the issues with the NV30 and fixing those issues and making the NV35 an incredibly competitive part.
TUKAJ
Glink, slike tuki se pol ne povejo.
Jih je pa na tej strani, kjer so prisli do tega zakljucka veliko:
MAs pa tukaj se en link kje bos bral recimo-ATi is the obvious choice according to the diagram. Of course, this also applies for image quality. ..
To po tem ko so spilali p najmanj pol ure v praksi,..
Tukaj
The Radeon gang rules merciless in Mafia. The slowest Radeon card is faster than the fastest GeForce card. What more could we say? What is interesting to see is that 5700 Ultra is over 40 per cent faster than its predecessor. Probably, the shader improvements in the 5700 chip has something to do with it. Mimogrede, to, da ni tako hudo pri Nvidiah pravi za stekanje in ne a kvaliteto slike
Subjective analysis: Comanche plays OK on all the cards down to GeForce FX 5700 Ultra. ATi has a superior overtake in AA quality since there is a high contrast at edges in the game (for example mountains that meet light blue sky).
Counter-Strike offers funny numbers. So far we have only tested real fast cards in CS where the performance has been more or less identical between all the cards, but here's a clear difference. One thing that really surprises is how much faster a 9600 XT is compared to a 9600 Pro. The three cards which are placed last stutter noticeably when there are smoke grenades on the screen with AA activated. Beyond that, CS is one of the few games where we can see that nVidia and ATi's respective cards are actually very similar.
The Radeon cards are a lot faster in Battlefield, there's no doubt about it. Playing BF with AA/AF using a 5700 Ultra or lower is something we would never recommend.
Subjective analysis: Ask grandpa what graphics card was being used in the battlefield of the '40s and he will of course reply that it was a Radeon. nVidia suffers from a quite horrible mouse lag in a couple of games when AA is enabled and this game is one of them.
Pri sledeci igri niso viodeli nekih razlik v kvaliteti slike:
We mentioned before that nVidia has fixed their pixel shaders a bit. In Tomb Raider it is obvious to us that they have done a really terrific job even if the raised clock frequences of course also contributes to the huge difference in performance. But, it isn't even close enough for nVidias card to be given a shot to challenge the Radeon when we notice that a 9600 XT is even faster than a 5900.
V Jedi academy je Nvidia hitrejsa od Atijev prilizno kot je bil ATI od Nvidie pri Mafiji, o kvaliteti slike pa niso povedali nic
After ATi humiliated nVidia two times in a row, it is now time for nVidia to flex their muscles in Jedi Academy. ATi are outperformed totally and nVidia squeezes them in every price level.
The pair of 5900-based cards from Albatron gets defeated by "ATi-chipped" cards in seven out of eleven tests. That is, with the same thing as between 9600XT and 5700 Ultra. We also notice that 5900 Turbo isn't any noticeably faster than 5900 PV even with the presence of its extra 256 MB and 10 MHz.
To je sicer nepomembno, ker niso povedali ali zaradi kvalitete slike ali hitrosti.
Na Gamersdepot TUKAJ pravijo:
I don’t know how anyone could objectively look at the performance we’ve seen in these benchmarks and conclude that a 5900 Ultra is a smarter buying decision than a 9800 Pro – even the 128MB 9800 Pro (as used in the tests here) trumps the lofty 256MB 5900 Ultra. If you’re still “stuck in the past” and think that ATI is plagued with driver issues, than go ahead and keep your head stuck in the sand like an ostrich, buy a 5900 Ultra and then start crying when your pals are smoking your ass in games like Half Life 2 and Halo because they’re running ATI hardware.
Drugace se malo testov glede hitrosti pa slike :
Tukaj
Se nekaj screenshotov :
Tukaj
Pol so tukaj prisli do takega zakljucka, ker je odlocitev med njima tezka:
I am on the fence here and I can't seem to fall off one way or the other. With the impressive frame rates of the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, I would have to lean that way, if and only if, NVIDIA can clean up their AA and take their Aniso performance up a notch. If not, I would lean the way of the Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB card or a 128MB version for that matter. The frame rates are right up there and the IQ is to die for.
PA NASPLOH JE ATI BOLJSI V 3D GRAFIKI IN 9X IN CE ZDAJ KUPUJES GRAFO JE ATI PREPROSTO BOLJSA IZBIRA-PRI OBSTOJECIH ZADEVAH JE ENAK IN BOLJSI, PRI STVAREH, KI PRIHAJAJO PA BOLJSI. PA BERITE MALO V ZGORNJIH TESTIH-NVIDINI FRAME RATI PRECEJ BOLJ NIHAJO-TO SMEM ZE JAZ OPAZIL-KO JIH NE RABIS JIH SOPA V NEBO, TAM KO MORA PA RES KAJ DELAT JO PA POBERE. SKRATKA DA SE IZ TEGA SKLEPAT, DA BO V SAMIH IGRAH HITREJE POSTALA OZKO GRLO KOT ATI. TEMU KO JE SITACIJA RES GRAFICNO ZAHTEVNA FRAMERATE NE PADE TKAO MOCNO. SKRATKA NVIDIA JE SE VEDNO NASTELANA TAKO, DA NABIJA FRAME ZA BENCHMARKE. TUDI BRAT JE RECIMO V SERIOUS SAMU PROBAVAL MALO Z NIDIO PA RADEONOM KOLK KAJ RISE PA KOLIKO FRAMOV DOBIVA CE GLEDA V STENO,... IN NVIDIA JE VEDNO NABIJALA FRAME SAMO TAM KJER JIH JE ZE TKO NEPOTREBNO PREVEC-PREKO 500,.. NA SEKUNDO,.. TAM KO SE PA KAJ RES DOGAJA PA PADE FAJN POD RADEONA,..
Pa pri Radeonu imas se nekaj izbire pri driverjih in gres lahko na Omego. Nvidia je za svoje izdelke to preprecila, ceprav je bilo znano, da so bili boljsi. Skratka debilno posiljevanje z svojimi ozkimi grli-sploh pa ker se bojijo, da bi kdo brskal po njihovih driverjih in pogruntal, da goljufajo.
Pa res-kaj vam ni jasno? A avto se ocenjuje na parkingu, ko ga kupujes, al mora zalaufat pa se dobro pelat?
Pa Caqa upam, da si se zdaj bolje informiral lo doticni zadevi.
Se da ze z eno zadevo, ki se ji rece Google.
Nekateri smo pa tudi sami sebi referenca in smo vse opisano na lastne oci videli.
Pa ko ze toliko nabijate o nepristranosti-jaz si ne znam predstavljat kako bo moja ali vasa slika nepristrana. Oz kako, bi druga stran o tem lahko bila prepricana. Mene vase slike ne zanimajo, ker ste jih sposobni optimizirati,.. ker ce tolk nabijate o verodostojnosti neki mora bit narobe in jz zadjemu verjamem tistemu, ki skos hoce neke dokaze. Taki sami ponavadi lazejo, nategujejo,..
Poleg tega ima Nvidia sedaj uradno politiko optimizacije driverjev, ki pa je skrita javnosti. Odkrito priznavajo, da skusajo predvsem softwersko izpopolniti svoje izdelke in testerji opozarjajo, da se v vecini primerov to izkaze v taki in drugacni goljufiji. Oz da zrtvujejo kvaliteto za framerate,.. It sounds like ATI worries that optimizations in software (which may or may not impact image quality), may lead to shortcuts in hardware that inevitably damage the viability of the popular APIs. Then again, given NVIDIA’s public stance on driver optimizations, it will be interesting to see if ATI is able to stand firm on its higher ground and continue to put down competitive benchmark numbers. We sure hope so. On the other hand, NVIDIA’s Tony Tomasi is more optimistic about his company’s ability to make valid optimizations by not affecting image quality. According to Tomasi, software engineers were previously able to make judgment calls on their own optimizations, which is why the 3D Mark03 snafu went down. Through its new policy, however, driver optimizations have to be registered, published internally, and verified by a quality assurance team. Unfortunately, because optimizations are to remain confidential, the only way to uncover incompatibilities between optimizations and other applications is for NVIDIA to catch them, or for the end users to report them. If NVIDIA’s new initiative facilitates better performance and focuses more attention on image quality, then the policy will certainly prove a boon. Then again, it requires more effort than ever from impartial reviewers to ensure quality isn’t taking a back seat to simply winning benchmarks.
Hand-optimized code is only a part of what NVIDIA hopes to accomplish. After all, Tomasi points out that NVIDIA helps every willing developer optimize its code paths. It is also dedicating more resources than ever to developing a run-time compiler for efficient code execution. “Optimizations aren’t new,” Tomasi quips, “shaders simply provide an extra level of programmability with which to work.” It’s understandable NVIDIA would want its shaders to run as quickly as possible, we just hope it can do so without any other adverse effects
NA DRUGI STRANI PA SE JE ATI TEMU ODREKEL:
: Though ATI has been guilty of the same aggressive optimizations NVIDIA has recently taken flak for, its current position seems to be one of concern. Chris Evenden, ATI’s director of marketing, is quick to point out that hand-optimizing programmable shaders for improved performance in one application or another is a slippery slope. Not only does it open the door for fudging image quality, but it also takes time from the driver guys that could be better purposed for making holistic improvements. And once DirectX 9 games begin to proliferate, picking applications for the special “hand optimization” treatment will consist of rounded up all of the applications used to quantify performance. What about the other games, though? Many users may find that their “popular” games run particularly well, while others don’t. In such an environment, performance numbers gleaned from games (and especially synthetic tests) will mean less than ever. Perhaps that is why ATI committed to removing application detection code from its CATALYST driver when it was discovered that 3D Mark03 was special-cased. Chris’s statement, in full:
“Not doing what an application asks is a risky path to start down. It becomes a question of where you draw the line. Economize on shader accuracy here, only apply anisotropic filtering there, and pretty soon you're not giving the gamers the experiences that the developer wanted them to have. The software developers and artists already know that there is a trade off between image quality and frames per second - and they made those decisions as they put the game together. We really see our role to do exactly what they ask, and do it faster than anyone else.”
Skratka, mate pa zato slike s testov, mnenja in zakljucke testerjev, moje skromno mnenje,... zdej pa lepo vas prosim gobcajte kar hocete.
Pa meni je vse to vseeno. Men Nvidia se vedno ni nic bolj dalec kot ATI. Sam v tem primeru sm meu razliko moznost videt sam doma na dveh compih in je Nvidia sla v posvojitev. Ni pa noben rekel, da moja naslednja kartica ne bo Nvidia.
Trenutno je ATI ob enakih cenah boljsi nakup.
Z racionalnega stalisca. Nenajnovejse kartice imajo pa po mnenju teterjev sploh pri ATIju boljso sliko.
Pa linke, ki so te stvari potrjevali ste ze meli pa se piskate.
IN pol bi frajer z screenshotom rad primerjal. CAR.
Ce vsi pravijo, da screenshot ne pove nic? Da je treba videt?
Sicer pa Caqa pozablja na linke testov, ki sem jih ze podal. Torej ne razumem kako sem referenca lahko samo jaz.
PA ce nebi bil neinformiran clovek, bi vedel, da VSA (torej ne 90%) ampak vsa testerska srenja soglasa s tem ,da ma ATI pac boljso sliko.
Limam spodaj malo morje informacij.
Preden nadaljujem-zanimivo, da v VSEH!!! testih, ki so kjerkoli, pravijo, da ima ATI boljso sliko.
Ne le to, povsod pravijo kako se je Nvidia s cisto najnovejsimi karticami popravila, a je se vedno slabsa pri sliki. Da ne omenjam kaj to pomeni sele kaksna je razlika pri vsem kar ni cisto novo! Pa Nvidia ima boljsi-a po mnenju testerjev predvsem na papirju. anisotropic filtering, ki je manj pomemben od Antialiasinga, ATI pa Nvidio pri Antialiasingu prezveci in izpljune!
Pa povsod pravijo, da screenshot ne pove se nic, ceprav se ze tam vidi nekaj. Zato ne stekam kaj bi pameten-racunalniso razgledan clovek imel od tega, da proba videt najbolj nemerodajne podatke ampak ce ze vztrajate:
Preden linkam beri tole:
Overall, when judging image quality, we have to give the hat to the 9800 Pro. There isn’t a huge noticeable difference in the Anisotropic quality, even though ATI’s may not be filtering certain angles "correctly". Most games have straight 90 degree angles or long hallways or ceilings or walls, etc. At 16XAF the ATI 9800 Pro 256MB looks awesome in games like Medal of Honor or Battlefield 1942. On the 9800 Pro 256MB we did not notice as many jaggies whereas on the 5900 Ultra, aliasing is quite apparent when you are given a static screen shot to gaze at.Where it is really important is duing movement in gameplay . We are going to look further into this with some following subjective opinion articles. Given those facts, the 9800 Pro still holds the IQ crown, but NVIDIA is right behind them. If they can improve their AA to match the likes of gamma correction and rotating grid or jittered grid, then the tables would most likely turn...or rotate in this case.
Both cards offer exceptional performance, but if I have to place my finger on which card I would choose for my primary system that I play my games on, I would have to opt for the 256MB 9800 Pro. It has better AA quality, and can play at 6XAA on a 256MB card very easily. It has also proven to be very strong in shader operations. It is not an easy decision for sure now. NVIDIA has done a great job at sizing up the issues with the NV30 and fixing those issues and making the NV35 an incredibly competitive part.
TUKAJ
Glink, slike tuki se pol ne povejo.
Jih je pa na tej strani, kjer so prisli do tega zakljucka veliko:
MAs pa tukaj se en link kje bos bral recimo-ATi is the obvious choice according to the diagram. Of course, this also applies for image quality. ..
To po tem ko so spilali p najmanj pol ure v praksi,..
Tukaj
The Radeon gang rules merciless in Mafia. The slowest Radeon card is faster than the fastest GeForce card. What more could we say? What is interesting to see is that 5700 Ultra is over 40 per cent faster than its predecessor. Probably, the shader improvements in the 5700 chip has something to do with it. Mimogrede, to, da ni tako hudo pri Nvidiah pravi za stekanje in ne a kvaliteto slike
Subjective analysis: Comanche plays OK on all the cards down to GeForce FX 5700 Ultra. ATi has a superior overtake in AA quality since there is a high contrast at edges in the game (for example mountains that meet light blue sky).
Counter-Strike offers funny numbers. So far we have only tested real fast cards in CS where the performance has been more or less identical between all the cards, but here's a clear difference. One thing that really surprises is how much faster a 9600 XT is compared to a 9600 Pro. The three cards which are placed last stutter noticeably when there are smoke grenades on the screen with AA activated. Beyond that, CS is one of the few games where we can see that nVidia and ATi's respective cards are actually very similar.
The Radeon cards are a lot faster in Battlefield, there's no doubt about it. Playing BF with AA/AF using a 5700 Ultra or lower is something we would never recommend.
Subjective analysis: Ask grandpa what graphics card was being used in the battlefield of the '40s and he will of course reply that it was a Radeon. nVidia suffers from a quite horrible mouse lag in a couple of games when AA is enabled and this game is one of them.
Pri sledeci igri niso viodeli nekih razlik v kvaliteti slike:
We mentioned before that nVidia has fixed their pixel shaders a bit. In Tomb Raider it is obvious to us that they have done a really terrific job even if the raised clock frequences of course also contributes to the huge difference in performance. But, it isn't even close enough for nVidias card to be given a shot to challenge the Radeon when we notice that a 9600 XT is even faster than a 5900.
V Jedi academy je Nvidia hitrejsa od Atijev prilizno kot je bil ATI od Nvidie pri Mafiji, o kvaliteti slike pa niso povedali nic
After ATi humiliated nVidia two times in a row, it is now time for nVidia to flex their muscles in Jedi Academy. ATi are outperformed totally and nVidia squeezes them in every price level.
The pair of 5900-based cards from Albatron gets defeated by "ATi-chipped" cards in seven out of eleven tests. That is, with the same thing as between 9600XT and 5700 Ultra. We also notice that 5900 Turbo isn't any noticeably faster than 5900 PV even with the presence of its extra 256 MB and 10 MHz.
To je sicer nepomembno, ker niso povedali ali zaradi kvalitete slike ali hitrosti.
Na Gamersdepot TUKAJ pravijo:
I don’t know how anyone could objectively look at the performance we’ve seen in these benchmarks and conclude that a 5900 Ultra is a smarter buying decision than a 9800 Pro – even the 128MB 9800 Pro (as used in the tests here) trumps the lofty 256MB 5900 Ultra. If you’re still “stuck in the past” and think that ATI is plagued with driver issues, than go ahead and keep your head stuck in the sand like an ostrich, buy a 5900 Ultra and then start crying when your pals are smoking your ass in games like Half Life 2 and Halo because they’re running ATI hardware.
Drugace se malo testov glede hitrosti pa slike :
Tukaj
Se nekaj screenshotov :
Tukaj
Pol so tukaj prisli do takega zakljucka, ker je odlocitev med njima tezka:
I am on the fence here and I can't seem to fall off one way or the other. With the impressive frame rates of the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, I would have to lean that way, if and only if, NVIDIA can clean up their AA and take their Aniso performance up a notch. If not, I would lean the way of the Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB card or a 128MB version for that matter. The frame rates are right up there and the IQ is to die for.
PA NASPLOH JE ATI BOLJSI V 3D GRAFIKI IN 9X IN CE ZDAJ KUPUJES GRAFO JE ATI PREPROSTO BOLJSA IZBIRA-PRI OBSTOJECIH ZADEVAH JE ENAK IN BOLJSI, PRI STVAREH, KI PRIHAJAJO PA BOLJSI. PA BERITE MALO V ZGORNJIH TESTIH-NVIDINI FRAME RATI PRECEJ BOLJ NIHAJO-TO SMEM ZE JAZ OPAZIL-KO JIH NE RABIS JIH SOPA V NEBO, TAM KO MORA PA RES KAJ DELAT JO PA POBERE. SKRATKA DA SE IZ TEGA SKLEPAT, DA BO V SAMIH IGRAH HITREJE POSTALA OZKO GRLO KOT ATI. TEMU KO JE SITACIJA RES GRAFICNO ZAHTEVNA FRAMERATE NE PADE TKAO MOCNO. SKRATKA NVIDIA JE SE VEDNO NASTELANA TAKO, DA NABIJA FRAME ZA BENCHMARKE. TUDI BRAT JE RECIMO V SERIOUS SAMU PROBAVAL MALO Z NIDIO PA RADEONOM KOLK KAJ RISE PA KOLIKO FRAMOV DOBIVA CE GLEDA V STENO,... IN NVIDIA JE VEDNO NABIJALA FRAME SAMO TAM KJER JIH JE ZE TKO NEPOTREBNO PREVEC-PREKO 500,.. NA SEKUNDO,.. TAM KO SE PA KAJ RES DOGAJA PA PADE FAJN POD RADEONA,..
Pa pri Radeonu imas se nekaj izbire pri driverjih in gres lahko na Omego. Nvidia je za svoje izdelke to preprecila, ceprav je bilo znano, da so bili boljsi. Skratka debilno posiljevanje z svojimi ozkimi grli-sploh pa ker se bojijo, da bi kdo brskal po njihovih driverjih in pogruntal, da goljufajo.
Pa res-kaj vam ni jasno? A avto se ocenjuje na parkingu, ko ga kupujes, al mora zalaufat pa se dobro pelat?
Pa Caqa upam, da si se zdaj bolje informiral lo doticni zadevi.
Se da ze z eno zadevo, ki se ji rece Google.
Nekateri smo pa tudi sami sebi referenca in smo vse opisano na lastne oci videli.
Pa ko ze toliko nabijate o nepristranosti-jaz si ne znam predstavljat kako bo moja ali vasa slika nepristrana. Oz kako, bi druga stran o tem lahko bila prepricana. Mene vase slike ne zanimajo, ker ste jih sposobni optimizirati,.. ker ce tolk nabijate o verodostojnosti neki mora bit narobe in jz zadjemu verjamem tistemu, ki skos hoce neke dokaze. Taki sami ponavadi lazejo, nategujejo,..
Poleg tega ima Nvidia sedaj uradno politiko optimizacije driverjev, ki pa je skrita javnosti. Odkrito priznavajo, da skusajo predvsem softwersko izpopolniti svoje izdelke in testerji opozarjajo, da se v vecini primerov to izkaze v taki in drugacni goljufiji. Oz da zrtvujejo kvaliteto za framerate,.. It sounds like ATI worries that optimizations in software (which may or may not impact image quality), may lead to shortcuts in hardware that inevitably damage the viability of the popular APIs. Then again, given NVIDIA’s public stance on driver optimizations, it will be interesting to see if ATI is able to stand firm on its higher ground and continue to put down competitive benchmark numbers. We sure hope so. On the other hand, NVIDIA’s Tony Tomasi is more optimistic about his company’s ability to make valid optimizations by not affecting image quality. According to Tomasi, software engineers were previously able to make judgment calls on their own optimizations, which is why the 3D Mark03 snafu went down. Through its new policy, however, driver optimizations have to be registered, published internally, and verified by a quality assurance team. Unfortunately, because optimizations are to remain confidential, the only way to uncover incompatibilities between optimizations and other applications is for NVIDIA to catch them, or for the end users to report them. If NVIDIA’s new initiative facilitates better performance and focuses more attention on image quality, then the policy will certainly prove a boon. Then again, it requires more effort than ever from impartial reviewers to ensure quality isn’t taking a back seat to simply winning benchmarks.
Hand-optimized code is only a part of what NVIDIA hopes to accomplish. After all, Tomasi points out that NVIDIA helps every willing developer optimize its code paths. It is also dedicating more resources than ever to developing a run-time compiler for efficient code execution. “Optimizations aren’t new,” Tomasi quips, “shaders simply provide an extra level of programmability with which to work.” It’s understandable NVIDIA would want its shaders to run as quickly as possible, we just hope it can do so without any other adverse effects
NA DRUGI STRANI PA SE JE ATI TEMU ODREKEL:
: Though ATI has been guilty of the same aggressive optimizations NVIDIA has recently taken flak for, its current position seems to be one of concern. Chris Evenden, ATI’s director of marketing, is quick to point out that hand-optimizing programmable shaders for improved performance in one application or another is a slippery slope. Not only does it open the door for fudging image quality, but it also takes time from the driver guys that could be better purposed for making holistic improvements. And once DirectX 9 games begin to proliferate, picking applications for the special “hand optimization” treatment will consist of rounded up all of the applications used to quantify performance. What about the other games, though? Many users may find that their “popular” games run particularly well, while others don’t. In such an environment, performance numbers gleaned from games (and especially synthetic tests) will mean less than ever. Perhaps that is why ATI committed to removing application detection code from its CATALYST driver when it was discovered that 3D Mark03 was special-cased. Chris’s statement, in full:
“Not doing what an application asks is a risky path to start down. It becomes a question of where you draw the line. Economize on shader accuracy here, only apply anisotropic filtering there, and pretty soon you're not giving the gamers the experiences that the developer wanted them to have. The software developers and artists already know that there is a trade off between image quality and frames per second - and they made those decisions as they put the game together. We really see our role to do exactly what they ask, and do it faster than anyone else.”
Skratka, mate pa zato slike s testov, mnenja in zakljucke testerjev, moje skromno mnenje,... zdej pa lepo vas prosim gobcajte kar hocete.
Pa meni je vse to vseeno. Men Nvidia se vedno ni nic bolj dalec kot ATI. Sam v tem primeru sm meu razliko moznost videt sam doma na dveh compih in je Nvidia sla v posvojitev. Ni pa noben rekel, da moja naslednja kartica ne bo Nvidia.
Trenutno je ATI ob enakih cenah boljsi nakup.
Z racionalnega stalisca. Nenajnovejse kartice imajo pa po mnenju teterjev sploh pri ATIju boljso sliko.
Pa linke, ki so te stvari potrjevali ste ze meli pa se piskate.
IN pol bi frajer z screenshotom rad primerjal. CAR.
CaqKa ::
ja.. daj naredi skrinšot one scene z oblaki z nvidio.. vse nastavitve na default.
caligula: tvoji linki ki si jih podal.. vsepovsod samo lapajo.. nikjer kakih konkretnih skrinšotov, razn en sajt ki si ga podal.. vendar na tistem sajtu primerjajo samo slike iz tombraiderja... hmm a se ti ne zdi to malo za lase privlečeno? res je da se na tistih slikah vidi zelo slabša kvaliteta slike pri nvidii, to pa zaradi tega ker so pri nvidia skrinšotih imelo vkloplen AA pri atiju pa ni bilo vklopljenega AAja. to vidš takoj po tem kak so atijevi robovi nazobčani.
ti podam link do konkretnega testa z slikami?
http://www.doom9.org/codecs-103-2.htm evo tukaj si poglej. to je konkretn test kjer točno piše kje kaj na sliki ni vredu. test kot se šika... tele linke kar si pa ti podal so pa tak brezvezni testi da jim ne verjamem.. tipi ki so delali te teste so strokovno premalo podkovani. verjetno so tudi podkupljeni. nevem kdo bi šel za primerjavo kvalitete slike uporabit igro tombraider? halo?
tombraider že ima vrsto let en in isti 3d engine...
vzamem gugla v roke, vtipkam nvidia vs ati quality, ter pogledam na firingsquad linke
dobim sledeči dve sliki:
nvidia AA disabled
ATI AA disabled
kdor ima tabbed browsing naj vsako sliko ofna v svojem tabu ter nato med taboma preklaplja... pa vsi prosim opazujte oblake...
opazujete oblake?
kaj vidite oblake?
so plastični kateri od njih?
se razlikujejo?
smo še vedno pri oblakih?
kaj sem že vprašal če se razlikujejo?
ok.. gremo dalje
nascar.. nič kaj bleščeča igerca, pa če so se odločli da bodo ravno v njej testirali.. pač.. poglejmo skrinšite side by side:
nvidia AA disabled
ati aa disabled
oglejte si spet obe sliki... preklapljajte med njima.. pa povejte razlike.
il sturmovik:
ati aa disabled
nvidia aa disabled
spet imamo oblačke...
caligula ti praviš da je nvidia vzela plastelin ter svoje oblačke zmodelirala iz plastelina.. daj pokaži.
maš oblačkov polno na slikah.
iii glej glej.. unreal tournament.
nvdia aa disabled
ati aa disabled
razlik SKORAJDA ni.. torej odličen špil.. odlično 3d srce.. slikci se razlikujeta le na par mestih. žal ni oblačkov zate caligula.
na koncu testa so naredili zaključek v katerem so zapisali da je AA od atija na mnogo višjem in kvalitetnejšem nivoju kot od nvidie... žal se mi tukaj pogovarjamo o default sliki zato sem dal tudi SSje z disejblanim AAjem.
tudi anandtech ima zelo lep comparision, sicer je outdated ampak za prvo silo pokaže dejstvo da referenčna slika je enaka. na katerikoli kartici.
stran na www.anandtech.com
takole.. sedaj si mi ukradel uro časa... z dobrim namenom.. sam sebe si prikizal kot nekaj kar nekateri tukaj itak že vemo da si...
ko boš potreboval vzporedni test za plenice in dude se oglasi...
.. seveda v loži.
caligula: tvoji linki ki si jih podal.. vsepovsod samo lapajo.. nikjer kakih konkretnih skrinšotov, razn en sajt ki si ga podal.. vendar na tistem sajtu primerjajo samo slike iz tombraiderja... hmm a se ti ne zdi to malo za lase privlečeno? res je da se na tistih slikah vidi zelo slabša kvaliteta slike pri nvidii, to pa zaradi tega ker so pri nvidia skrinšotih imelo vkloplen AA pri atiju pa ni bilo vklopljenega AAja. to vidš takoj po tem kak so atijevi robovi nazobčani.
ti podam link do konkretnega testa z slikami?
http://www.doom9.org/codecs-103-2.htm evo tukaj si poglej. to je konkretn test kjer točno piše kje kaj na sliki ni vredu. test kot se šika... tele linke kar si pa ti podal so pa tak brezvezni testi da jim ne verjamem.. tipi ki so delali te teste so strokovno premalo podkovani. verjetno so tudi podkupljeni. nevem kdo bi šel za primerjavo kvalitete slike uporabit igro tombraider? halo?
tombraider že ima vrsto let en in isti 3d engine...
vzamem gugla v roke, vtipkam nvidia vs ati quality, ter pogledam na firingsquad linke
dobim sledeči dve sliki:
nvidia AA disabled
ATI AA disabled
kdor ima tabbed browsing naj vsako sliko ofna v svojem tabu ter nato med taboma preklaplja... pa vsi prosim opazujte oblake...
opazujete oblake?
kaj vidite oblake?
so plastični kateri od njih?
se razlikujejo?
smo še vedno pri oblakih?
kaj sem že vprašal če se razlikujejo?
ok.. gremo dalje
nascar.. nič kaj bleščeča igerca, pa če so se odločli da bodo ravno v njej testirali.. pač.. poglejmo skrinšite side by side:
nvidia AA disabled
ati aa disabled
oglejte si spet obe sliki... preklapljajte med njima.. pa povejte razlike.
il sturmovik:
ati aa disabled
nvidia aa disabled
spet imamo oblačke...
caligula ti praviš da je nvidia vzela plastelin ter svoje oblačke zmodelirala iz plastelina.. daj pokaži.
maš oblačkov polno na slikah.
iii glej glej.. unreal tournament.
nvdia aa disabled
ati aa disabled
razlik SKORAJDA ni.. torej odličen špil.. odlično 3d srce.. slikci se razlikujeta le na par mestih. žal ni oblačkov zate caligula.
na koncu testa so naredili zaključek v katerem so zapisali da je AA od atija na mnogo višjem in kvalitetnejšem nivoju kot od nvidie... žal se mi tukaj pogovarjamo o default sliki zato sem dal tudi SSje z disejblanim AAjem.
tudi anandtech ima zelo lep comparision, sicer je outdated ampak za prvo silo pokaže dejstvo da referenčna slika je enaka. na katerikoli kartici.
stran na www.anandtech.com
takole.. sedaj si mi ukradel uro časa... z dobrim namenom.. sam sebe si prikizal kot nekaj kar nekateri tukaj itak že vemo da si...
ko boš potreboval vzporedni test za plenice in dude se oglasi...
.. seveda v loži.
Zgodovina sprememb…
- spremenil: CaqKa ()
Senitel ::
Kot je že CaqKa omenil kje v teh linkih je omenjena kakšna "plastičnost"??
Priznam Radeon-i imajo v večini primerov boljšo 2D sliko (ker moraš pri GeForce-ih malo pazit na proizvajalca). Priznam tudi, da ima Radeon boljši AA, predvsem zato ker je AA gamma corrected (in ja razlike v AA so dosti bolj vide ko se stvari premikajo, kot pa na screen shotih).
Če pa ena kartica izriše en objekt bistveno (kar koli razen razlik, ki nastanejo pri AA in AF) drugače, kot druga pri identičnih nastavitvah; potem ali uporablja ena kartica drug "code path" ali je pa enostavno rendering error (bodisi goljufanje bodisi bug).
Ne AA in ne AF ne vplivata na neko "plastičnost" niti ne vplivata na kvaliteto oblakov (spet odvisno od tega na kakšen način igra renderira oblake)...
Priznam Radeon-i imajo v večini primerov boljšo 2D sliko (ker moraš pri GeForce-ih malo pazit na proizvajalca). Priznam tudi, da ima Radeon boljši AA, predvsem zato ker je AA gamma corrected (in ja razlike v AA so dosti bolj vide ko se stvari premikajo, kot pa na screen shotih).
Če pa ena kartica izriše en objekt bistveno (kar koli razen razlik, ki nastanejo pri AA in AF) drugače, kot druga pri identičnih nastavitvah; potem ali uporablja ena kartica drug "code path" ali je pa enostavno rendering error (bodisi goljufanje bodisi bug).
Ne AA in ne AF ne vplivata na neko "plastičnost" niti ne vplivata na kvaliteto oblakov (spet odvisno od tega na kakšen način igra renderira oblake)...
BluPhenix ::
Bravo CaqKa, excellent work.
Opazne razlike ni, nekje je ati bolj kontrasten (3dmark) nekje nvidia (il strumovik). Oblaki so povsod enaki, cesta pri nascar je skoraj identicna, radeon nekje rise vec svetlejsih pikslov, nekje manj. Torej slika je enaka.
Me pa zanima kaksen odgovor bo zdej. Sigurno je clovek non stop mislil na vkljucen AA in vse ostale dodatne stvari.
Opazne razlike ni, nekje je ati bolj kontrasten (3dmark) nekje nvidia (il strumovik). Oblaki so povsod enaki, cesta pri nascar je skoraj identicna, radeon nekje rise vec svetlejsih pikslov, nekje manj. Torej slika je enaka.
Me pa zanima kaksen odgovor bo zdej. Sigurno je clovek non stop mislil na vkljucen AA in vse ostale dodatne stvari.
glinik ::
Za mene je ta test vic, saj sliko vidimo posredno "preko" monitorja in grafične kartice.
Meni se več ni, zmagali ste.
Lp
Meni se več ni, zmagali ste.
Lp
CaqKa ::
glinik.. žeže ampak ko boš primerjal en sc z drugim (ali preko menjave tabov ali pa preko alt+tab kombinacije) boš oba gledal na istem monitorju.. slika pa je izrisana enkrat iz ati grafične drugič iz nvidia... tako da bo monitor in pri enem in pri drugem prinesel ali odnesel enako kvaliteto slike....
sicer pa če si tak pikolovski lahko greš te sc gledat k enemu ko ima boljši monitor, v kolikor meniš da na tvojem monitorju neboš opazil razlike na kakšnem boljšem pa jo boš ;)
sicer pa če si tak pikolovski lahko greš te sc gledat k enemu ko ima boljši monitor, v kolikor meniš da na tvojem monitorju neboš opazil razlike na kakšnem boljšem pa jo boš ;)
glinik ::
Ti kr zajebavaj
Mislim, da je malo monitorjev ki bi se lahko kosali z mojim.Iiiii, zdaj se bo pa sprožil plaz )(/&%$#"
No, o nečem se moramo kregat, da je forun bol zanimiv.
Lp
Mislim, da je malo monitorjev ki bi se lahko kosali z mojim.Iiiii, zdaj se bo pa sprožil plaz )(/&%$#"
No, o nečem se moramo kregat, da je forun bol zanimiv. Lp
link_up ::
hmmm...jaz imam pa novo radeon 9600 pro in se mi zdi slika bistveno slabsa, kot pa pri nvidii mx400. no sej verjamem, da ne znam cesa ampak recimo nonactive text je tako cudno osivel, da se ga sploh ne vidi...se da to kje nastimat?
pa se nekaj... zakaj mi lcd monitor na vga izhodu deluje cudno... na 3-5 sec mi cez ekran pribrnijo crte...res cudno... ima kdo kaksno resitev?
pa se nekaj... zakaj mi lcd monitor na vga izhodu deluje cudno... na 3-5 sec mi cez ekran pribrnijo crte...res cudno... ima kdo kaksno resitev?
Vredno ogleda ...
| Tema | Ogledi | Zadnje sporočilo | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tema | Ogledi | Zadnje sporočilo | |
| ⊘ | Nvidia vs AMD,Gtx 470/570 vs 6970/50HD+Novice (strani: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 )Oddelek: Strojna oprema | 81681 (75996) | bluefish |
| » | Radeon 3870 VS GeForce 8800GT (strani: 1 2 3 )Oddelek: Kaj kupiti | 8051 (7138) | JamesBond |
| » | Pogled na NV40 (strani: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 )Oddelek: Strojna oprema | 18505 (10673) | MrX |
| ⊘ | Se pripogneš, ATI te pa nategne (strani: 1 2 )Oddelek: Strojna oprema | 4839 (3284) | Caligula |
| » | leadtek 5900 LX ali Hercules 9800 seOddelek: Kaj kupiti | 1810 (1299) | vudy |