NVIDIA have released a presentation to web sites revealing 'the truth' about ATI's CrossFire solution.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...CrossfireTruth
NVIDIA have released a presentation to web sites revealing 'the truth' about ATI's CrossFire solution.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...CrossfireTruth
E2160 @ 2.9 GHz ¦ ABIT IP35-E ¦ Geil Ultra 4x1 Gb ¦ 8800 GT ¦ Antec Sonata ¦ Logitech G5 ¦ Sennheiser PC150 ¦ Saitek Gamer Keyboard ¦ ViewSonic VA1912w
Owned
Well I could pick a few faults with that.
They Compare X850 crossfire to 7800 GTX SLI... X1800 anyone?
The talk of resolution limitations is interesting, but the vast majority of people will have TFTs that do 1280x1024 max, a few 1600x1200.
Still, I wanna wait and see.
They might have a point, but they haven't got a clue how to use powe****** . That has to be one of the ugliest presentations I've seen since secondary school - I thought these people worked on graphics for a living? Marketing eejits
Yeah I agree they're picking apart ATI's old tech. But until X1800 or whatever: those cards ARE ATI's top of the line.
We'll just have to see what happens
ATI really need to get a move on, I want a new graphics card and it still feels like Nvidia is going to be corporately kicking the crap out of ATI for a while to come. R520 better be better then expected and soon.
Well, the part i'm wondering is, if crossfire is so bad why did Nvidia even have to release such a document? Or is there some threat to Nv that they know about and we don't. Companies don't post a rebuttal to a competitors claims if it's already a dead horse, usually it's posted if there's some threat. ATi's real problem isnt that their cards are bad, they are just to expensive compared to Nv and unless they can dramatically slash prices I see a not so bright future for ATi.
ATi dug their own grave..and for the least part they should throw themselves into it instead of running away from it. I can almost hear screams from a lot of ATi fans having knighmares about converting to the dark "n" side
There's still alot of people with 19"+ CRTs where having a low refresh rate is actually painful on the eyesOriginally Posted by Steve
if those people will 19"+ crts can afford 2 graphics cards then they can afford a nice tft
also the vast majority of people who will be buying sli or crossfire set ups wont game above 1600*1200 imo (thats 20" tfts)
urmmmm..... THWAK!
ShMeE
Current: Shuttle SX58J3, i7 950, Corsair 16GB, 2x 1.5TB, XFX 6850 1GB, 3x Samsung 23" 1920x1080, 5760x1080 = AWESOME!
Laptop: Vaio Z (13.3")
Hexus Trust ¦ Shmee150.co.uk (Supercar Blog)
I remember AA on GF3 cards was useless due the performance hit. I was not impressed. Eventually turned the feature on when I got my ATI 9800.
I expect HDR lighting will be the same.
It looks over exposed and worse imo perhaps because todays displays are not well suited to the higher dynamic range.
Quote nVidia Guru David Kirk
"There are new HDR displays that can display a full 16-bit dynamic range, and I can tell you that the difference is stunning. When these displays become more affordable in the next year or two, I don't know how we'll ever go back to the old way."
HDR lighting is not a deciding factor right now. Nvidia marketing this feature now is misleading.
What if they don't want a "nice" TFT? My two worded opinion of TFT's is thus: they suck.if those people will 19"+ crts can afford 2 graphics cards then they can afford a nice tft
Of course in more words I'm not so harsh, but I still wouldn't trade my 21 and my 17 for a couple of TFT's. The quality of these things is just too good to give up, which I would be, since TFT's still dont have the same quality as a high end CRT.
but then you don't need a steel reinforced desk just to hold one upOriginally Posted by specofdust
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)