More bad news for nvidia if true.

[Nivek]

I must admit after reading the Semi Accurate site, That it does leave me worried and confused in the GPU market. As I've placed a pre-order for a GTX470 card I'm also debating if I made the wrong call and should have stuck with ATI and got 5850 as it is tried and tested hardware.

Or I keep mine pre-order and get a waterblock for it ?

Charlie has been mis-treated in some way in the past by nVidia, he has some sort of vendetta against them. In a way thats not too healthy either.

His articles are designed in such a way that if he makes you doubt your purchase/order then his work is done. Isnt it clear that he doesnt want you buying nvidia ? Look at an ATI article, it will glow compared to an nVidia one.

Your also asking wither you should keep your nVidia order on a site thats full of ATI ? You will not get one single person telling you to keep your nvidia order, this is not the place to ask for unbias information.

 

[unknownsock]

Charlie has been mis-treated in some way in the past by nVidia, he has some sort of vendetta against them. In a way thats not too healthy either.

His articles are designed in such a way that if he makes you doubt your purchase/order then his work is done. Isnt it clear that he doesnt want you buying nvidia ? Look at an ATI article, it will glow compared to an nVidia one.

Your also asking wither you should keep your nVidia order on a site thats full of ATI ? You will not get one single person telling you to keep your nvidia order, this is not the place to ask for unbias information.

Oh god...
Fact, Nvidia is not good value for money AT ALL atm, that is why people will not reccomend one, unless you require CUDA, which most people dontm need.

Why is it that, if we dont agree with Nvidia fanboys were ATI fanboys?

 

[Nivek]

Oh god...
Fact, Nvidia is not good value for money AT ALL atm, that is why people will not reccomend one, unless you require CUDA, which most people dontm need.

Why is it that, if we dont agree with Nvidia fanboys were ATI fanboys?

You forgot these other facts, 280MB more memory, physx, stereo 3d, cuda, 32AA, TRSAA and better tessellation.

Thats why no-one should ask for advice here, because all you mentioned was CUDA.

 

[unknownsock]

You forgot these other facts, 280MB more memory, physx, stereo 3d, cuda, 32AA, TRSAA and better tessellation.

Thats why no-one should ask for advice here, because all you mentioned was CUDA.

I shouldnt have even needed to mention 3D, if you want it get Nvidia, simple.

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html
So you want to reccomend a Nvidia card solely for 13 games?
And can i add bar 1 or 2 there all crap.

280MB extra isnt enough for the price. With minimal impact.
32AA is utterly pointless.

And better tessellation is arguable.

 

[Greebo]

You forgot these other facts, 280MB more memory, physx, stereo 3d, cuda, 32AA, TRSAA and better tessellation.

Thats why no-one should ask for advice here, because all you mentioned was CUDA.

280mb more memory does not always equal better. ATI has always had better algorithms and use less memory in the same game as the Nvidia cards.

Physx - I am still waiting to be impressed by this but since £40 will get you a card to go with your ATI card to handle the physx and it will still be cheaper, then this doesn't count.

Stereo 3d - Okay, that is a valid one but ATI now have stereo as well so all depends on how it compares now.

Cuda - This is a given.

32xaa - Well not "true" 32xaa but 8 x multisamples plus 24 coverage samples. Net result is something that looks slightly better than 8x MSAA but doesn't have the performance hit. In fact at max quality 32x CSAA and 8xTSSAA on the gtx480 still doesn't look as good as 8x SGSSAA + Edge-Detect-Downfilter (24x ED-SGSSAA) on the 5 series.

TRSAA - I presume you mean TSSAA? It is an improvement but see my point above.

Tessallation - better "performance" in synthetic benchmark but no gain in dx11 tessallation games over the 5870. Perhaps later games will show a difference.

Of course downsides are you need two gtx cards to have multi screen support.

 

[Nivek]

I shouldnt have even needed to mention 3D, if you want it get Nvidia, simple.

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html
So you want to reccomend a Nvidia card solely for 13 games?
And can i add bar 1 or 2 there all crap.

280MB extra isnt enough for the price. With minimal impact.
32AA is utterly pointless.

And better tessellation is arguable.

It's not really up to you wither you think the extra you get with nVidia is worth it or wither you think they are utterly pointless. If your making the choice, then of course it is. But its the OP that is making a choice, so you have to be fair and list why your paying the extra for nVidia and what extra features it does over the competition then let the OP make the choice. Saying, all it does is CUDA is a joke really and saying there's only 13 Physx games when there's nearly 200, yes most are crap but thats not the point, 32AA may well be utterly pointless but its a feature thats being left out and most of the time conveniently left out like other stuff the Fermi's can do. Thats where the extra cost comes in, wither its worth it is up to potential buyers but its only fair that they know what they are buying rather than being told, it only does CUDA.

 

[Nivek]

280mb more memory does not always equal better. ATI has always had better algorithms and use less memory in the same game as the Nvidia cards.

Physx - I am still waiting to be impressed by this but since £40 will get you a card to go with your ATI card to handle the physx and it will still be cheaper, then this doesn't count.

Stereo 3d - Okay, that is a valid one but ATI now have stereo as well so all depends on how it compares now.

Cuda - This is a given.

32xaa - Well not "true" 32xaa but 8 x multisamples plus 24 coverage samples. Net result is something that looks slightly better than 8x MSAA but doesn't have the performance hit. In fact at max quality 32x CSAA and 8xTSSAA on the gtx480 still doesn't look as good as 8x SGSSAA + Edge-Detect-Downfilter (24x ED-SGSSAA) on the 5 series.

TRSAA - I presume you mean TSSAA? It is an improvement but see my point above.

Tessallation - better "performance" in synthetic benchmark but no gain in dx11 tessallation games over the 5870. Perhaps later games will show a difference.

Of course downsides are you need two gtx cards to have multi screen support.

Sorry, tssaa (typo)

I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but thats my point. Everything has to be discussed for a descision to be made. What you have said and what I have been saying is a darn sight better than saying, its too hot or its too expensive.

 

[londonbairn]

It's not really up to you wither you think the extra you get with nVidia is worth it or wither you think they are utterly pointless. If your making the choice, then of course it is. But its the OP that is making a choice, so you have to be fair and list why your paying the extra for nVidia and what extra features it does over the competition then let the OP make the choice. Saying, all it does is CUDA is a joke really and saying there's only 13 Physx games when there's nearly 200, yes most are crap but thats not the point, 32AA may well be utterly pointless but its a feature thats being left out and most of the time conveniently left out like other stuff the Fermi's can do. Thats where the extra cost comes in, wither its worth it is up to potential buyers but its only fair that they know what they are buying rather than being told, it only does CUDA.

Do all of those 200 games utilise GPU PhysX effects? Of the ones that do, which actually warrant the extra?

The NV CEO would be proud of you, if things go well, you'll be promoted to one of his right hand men.

 

[Nivek]

Do all of those 200 games utilise GPU PhysX effects? Of the ones that do, which actually warrant the extra?

The NV CEO would be proud of you, if things go well, you'll be promoted to one of his right hand men.

Not all are GPU, some are at the CPU software level. Like borderlands, dragon age etc but it doesnt make Physx any less valid. ATI simply cant do it. I get the feeling you dont think Physx is worth it, but many people might disagree, thats called having the choice to decide rather than having it rammed down your throat that its a waste.

The CEO response ? Thats the typical reply from here, and its nothing but trolling.

 

[deuse]

I shouldnt have even needed to mention 3D, if you want it get Nvidia, simple.

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html
So you want to reccomend a Nvidia card solely for 13 games?
And can i add bar 1 or 2 there all crap.

280MB extra isnt enough for the price. With minimal impact.
32AA is utterly pointless.

And better tessellation is arguable.

Looks like you never seen Oblivion in 3D
Any game or film can turned into 3D in windows 7.

 

[unknownsock]

x32 AA is left out because its useless, also Greebo has a valid point.

PhysX has over 200 games that uses the "CPU" yes, You do not need a Nvidia GPU for this...Did you even look at my link, that is the list that requires GPU accelerated PhysX, aka a Nvidia card, which is currently THIRTEEN games.

32AA may well be utterly pointless but its a feature thats being left out and most of the time conveniently left out like other stuff the Fermi's can do. Thats where the extra cost comes in

So because Nvidia strap stuff on the cover it means its worth more now, please read above...

Looks like you never seen Oblivion in 3D
Any game or film can turned into 3D in windows 7.

I never said anything bad about it

Not all are GPU, some are at the CPU software level. Like borderlands, dragon age etc but it doesnt make Physx any less valid. ATI simply cant do it. I get the feeling you dont think Physx is worth it, but many people might disagree, thats called having the choice to decide rather than having it rammed down your throat that its a waste.

I get the feeling you dont truely don't know what your on about...
Ofc it makes a Nvida card less valid, if its done on the CPU.

 

[kylew]

x32 AA is left out because its useless, also Greebo has a valid point.

PhysX has over 200 games that uses the "CPU" yes, You do not need a Nvidia GPU for this...Did you even look at my link, that is the list that requires GPU accelerated PhysX, aka a Nvidia card, which is currently THIRTEEN games

Something I find really funny about nVidia and PhysX is that they've resorted to lying about what games actually use PhysX.

Take this list for example, on nVidia's own website:

http://developer.nvidia.com/object/physx_good_company.html

There's a good portion of games there that don't use PhysX at all, but rather Havok.

 

[Nivek]

PhysX has over 200 games that uses the "CPU" yes, You do not need a Nvidia GPU for this...Did you even look at my link, that is the list that requires GPU accelerated PhysX, aka a Nvidia card, which is currently THIRTEEN games.


I get the feeling you dont truely don't know what your on about...

Is Metro 2033 on your list ? Why, no its not. Why dont you look at the correct list.

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_all.html

After that nonsense about not needing an nVidia card for Physx CPU effects and for posting a list with only THIRTEEN games when there is clearly more, I dont get the same feeling as you, I know you dont know what your talking about lol.

 

[Rroff]

On a side note - I wouldn't call 32x AA entirely pointless. It is actually a lot nicer looking - and noticeably so than even 16x AA - my GTX260 SLI setup can use it at playable performance in most games too. That said I'm quite happy with 4x for MP games and don't play SP enough to bother changing it.

 

[jigger]

Nvidia will be desperate for a card that's manufacturable and can turn a profit, maybe they have pushed through another lemon in a panic.

 

[Nivek]

On a side note - I wouldn't call 32x AA entirely pointless. It is actually a lot nicer looking - and noticeably so than even 16x AA - my GTX260 SLI setup can use it at playable performance in most games too. That said I'm quite happy with 4x for MP games and don't play SP enough to bother changing it.

It is pointless though Rroff, its an extra feature that ATI cant do, so you must discredit it and not mention it when giving advice to someone chosing between 5xxx and Fermi. I would have thought you of all people would know that. Basically, anything ATI cant do is not worth it.

 

[unknownsock]

Is Metro 2033 on your list ? Why, no its not. Why dont you look at the correct list.

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_all.html

After that nonsense about not needing an nVidia card for Physx CPU effects and for posting a list with only THIRTEEN games when there is clearly more, I dont get the same feeling as you, I know you dont know what your talking about lol.

Well maybe its missing Metro 2033.
But look at these awesome screenies. Each circled bit(link) takes you back and forth between these pages. Feel free to study them.

Most games use PhysX which does the work on the CPU, hence not needing a Nvidia GPU. I dont understand how you dont understand?
There is only a few titles that actually require a hardware accellerated physics.

It is pointless though Rroff, its an extra feature that ATI cant do, so you must discredit it and not mention it when giving advice to someone chosing between 5xxx and Fermi. I would have thought you of all people would know that. Basically, anything ATI cant do is not worth it.

But you can barely tell the difference.

I run with max x4 AA, i dont need anymore.

 

[Nivek]

Nvidia will be desperate for a card that's manufacturable and can turn a profit, maybe they have pushed through another lemon in a panic.

You might be right Charlie, I mean jigger.

 

[jigger]

If the card is fermi cut in half it will still suffer the high failure rate its just they would have more chips per wafer.

 

[wolvers]

Well maybe its missing Metro 2033.
But look at these awesome screenies. Each circled bit(link) takes you back and forth between these pages. Feel free to study them.

^^^^