GeForce FX

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 28, 2003, 4:00 pm

Saw these pictures on a news site. Pretty funny. The FX will need some serious cooling:

For Women!

masteen · Post by **masteen** » January 28, 2003, 5:25 pm

So I guess I'm gonna need a bigger case...

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » January 28, 2003, 6:09 pm

Nah masteen, just two slots, it takes the slot for the AGP card and the slot for the PCI next to it for the cooling system. Most reviews have it ranging from 5 to 20% better than the 9700Pro depending on the benchmark. I have mine preordered

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 28, 2003, 6:14 pm

I'll stick with ATI for now : ) 9700 is an excellent product. nVidia has fallen behind which happens a lot in the graphics card business.

I'm on the ATI card cycle. I can wait till next version with 9700 currently.

cid · Post by **cid** » January 28, 2003, 6:14 pm

Kylere wrote:Nah masteen, just two slots, it takes the slot for the AGP card and the slot for the PCI next to it for the cooling system. Most reviews have it ranging from 5 to 20% better than the 9700Pro depending on the benchmark. I have mine preordered

From where? Link PLZ

Vailex Darkfury · Post by **Vailex Darkfury** » January 28, 2003, 6:36 pm

Its pretty early to tell on Directx9 benchmarks. So far im not impressed with the current benchmarks. The whole Cg thing has yet to mature as well. Its a cool idea but we will see who actually uses it. EQ2 might. Im going to hold off on buying this card until they get heat issues and driver maturity problems out of the way. I dont like ATI that much but your best bet is to buy the 9700 for now and wait for the smoke to settle on Nvidia.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 28, 2003, 6:45 pm

Vailex Darkfury wrote:Its pretty early to tell on Directx9 benchmarks. So far im not impressed with the current benchmarks. The whole Cg thing has yet to mature as well. Its a cool idea but we will see who actually uses it. EQ2 might. Im going to hold off on buying this card until they get heat issues and driver maturity problems out of the way. I dont like ATI that much but your best bet is to buy the 9700 for now and wait for the smoke to settle on Nvidia.

ATI's past driver problems are mostly gone. My original Radeon card drivers had many issues. My first 9700 drivers worked great and there have been many updates continuing to fine tune them.

As for product cycle, ATI is killing nVidia atm with the 9700 having been the top dog for so long. GeForce FX's reign will most likely be very short if it's even substantially faster to begin with before the next ATI card tops it.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » January 28, 2003, 9:07 pm

Bullshit, GeForceFX will reign supreme for a long time. viva CG!

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » January 28, 2003, 9:54 pm

Kylere wrote:Nah masteen, just two slots, it takes the slot for the AGP card and the slot for the PCI next to it for the cooling system. Most reviews have it ranging from 5 to 20% better than the 9700Pro depending on the benchmark. I have mine preordered

How much are you paying?

Tantolar · Post by **Tantolar** » January 29, 2003, 12:18 am

The GeforceFX 5800 Ultra preorder price is $400. Considering that at the moment it would appear that its lead is a few percentage points at best, the Radeon 9700 pro would be a better value. Most of the major hardware sites have their reviews up now, Anandtech, HardOCP, Tom's Hardware, etc.

Another thing to note is that supposedly ATI will have cards based on the the newer revision of the Radeon 9700 core ready about a month after the GeforceFX ships. Looks like nVidia's hold at the top may be very short lived indeed.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » January 29, 2003, 11:36 am

I think it is crazy to spend $400 on a video card personally.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · January 29, 2003, 11:37 am

Tantolar? GOV's Tantolar?

Vailex Darkfury · Post by **Vailex Darkfury** » January 29, 2003, 12:52 pm

Voronwë wrote:I think it is crazy to spend $400 on a video card personally.

I totally agree Voro. Thats a fucking car payment.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » January 29, 2003, 12:53 pm

a nice car

Kargyle · Post by **Kargyle** » January 29, 2003, 2:12 pm

Here's a link to a decent review of the GF FX. It looks like nVidia is going to have to do a lot of driver optimizations before the NV30 will be able to live up to the hype.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1779&p=1

Imster · Post by **Imster** » January 29, 2003, 5:39 pm

Welcome Jackass!

Kargyle · Post by **Kargyle** » January 29, 2003, 6:14 pm

I'll remember that when you work for me!!

Fash · Post by **Fash** » January 29, 2003, 7:10 pm

That Anandtech Article was very thorough in comparing them on common features...

but to have an article about the GeForceFX and not mention cinematic computing once is a fucking joke. This card is not just another polygon pusher. This card is not the symbolic geforce3.

One of these cards is not like the others, georgie girl.

The GeForce FX was built to "do the job of an entire room full of rendering servers on one chip". It has programmable shaders and can use "Materials" instead of polygons. EQ2 and Worlds of Warcraft are possibly going to require it.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 29, 2003, 8:25 pm

Fash wrote:
The GeForce FX was built to "do the job of an entire room full of rendering servers on one chip". It has programmable shaders and can use "Materials" instead of polygons. EQ2 and Worlds of Warcraft are possibly going to require it.

There's no way EQ2 or WoW will require a card that's only been in existence less than year. It's all about the masses and their money. Maybe a GeForce4 will be required. Of course for smooth no lag play and full effects, a 9700 or higher will probably be the ticket.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » January 29, 2003, 10:22 pm

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=feature_cinefx
http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=demo_dawn

I think the point being missed in this thread and the anandtech review is that it's not a matter of speed, its features.

You can say ATI runs the OLD features just as fast, that's fine.. but the FX is much more about NEW features.

EQ2/WoW could very well require that card, or there will be a HUGE quality/feature loss without it. EQ2/WoW are being built with features not supported by GF4/Radeon9700.

Tantolar · Post by **Tantolar** » January 29, 2003, 11:48 pm

Fash, Cinematic Computing is a marketing term if I've ever heard one. I assume they are talking about the pixel shader capabilities of the GeforceFX. Both the GeforceFX and the Radeon 9700 have DirectX 9.0 compliant pixel shaders.

If you look at the Anandtech article they do have the code creatures benchmark, which may have been stressing the pixel shading capabilities of the cards. However, trying to base your buying decision on a game that isn't out yet or an engine that doesn't have any games based on it doesn't make sense to me. If you want to take the gamble that new games are going to perform better on the GeforceFX and shell out the extra $70+ for it, go for it. There is no doubt that the GeforceFX is a very fast video card for any game you could play today.

Btw, yes Midnyte, this is Tantolar from GoV

Fash · Post by **Fash** » January 29, 2003, 11:53 pm

However, trying to base your buying decision on a game that isn't out yet or an engine that doesn't have any games based on it doesn't make sense to me.

One has nothing to do with the other. The technology has to be available before something can be based on it. I'm not going to run out and buy it the first day, but it is going to be the card to have soon.