So I got a GeForce 6800GT. Why the fuck.
- Thread starter Drinky Crow
- Start date
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
No, but played the damn game on a bigger rig than most benchmarks listed and the game still had some frame hiccups.Mooreberg said:
Also, I was privy to all of Dark10x's personal benching and tweaking. His 9700 Pro based system ran a perfect 60 on the aforementioned stress test, but the actual game didn't play near that smooth.
The point is, if everybody is going to get low-frame sections, and everybody is, I'm going to get fewer (likely far fewer) than the guy with a 9800 Pro. I don't understand why some people think that is negligible.
ArcadeStickMonk said:
It is pointless when you consider the big dogs coming this spring. It is pointless to get a 6800 GT since in about 3 to 4 months its going to have quite the nice drop in price when the R520 and NV48 hit. I mean, 400+ for a 6800 GT when in April you can use that to buy one of the R520 or NV48 lower higher end parts. ( X900 or what ever it is called "PRO"/"XT" or the 6900 or what ever they call it "GT". Or use it for the "X900 XT PE" or "6900 Ultra Extreme")
The video card was a gift which I did not know at the time I posted. (That post explaining that came afterward.) In this case, there is no reason to not enjoy the extra perks that came with this card.
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
There's always a big dog next spring. What some of the posters are hinting at is that if there isn't a game that takes advantage of that card in a new way, then the hardware is pointless. The next big dog will be pointless too, if FarCry 2: Balls Out Shaders doesn't get released by then.marsomega said:
Geez man, you were the one pimping the X800 not long ago, if I recall correctly. By your logic that card is fucking pointless too. You know the biggest advantage my 6800 has over your scheduled big dogs? My 6800 is installed right now and I got to enjoy Doom3 and Half-Life 2 with it as soon as those games were released! Fuck next spring! My rig is fast now. Ever heard of a bird in the hand?
Drinky got a fast card, for free, and he can't see any merit in the situation.
You can't be happy with want you have (or don't have?) now because of what you'll want to buy in four damn months.
I dropped $400 on a vid card a couple months ago and somehow I'm still the sanest out of the bunch.
ArcadeStickMonk said:
What are you smoking? "Buying" the cards "right now" isn't worth it. The 9800/9700 pros can still get you by till next spring. I was pimping my card and still am. If I still had my 9700 pro now, I wouldn't buy any of the cards now. I'd wait till they get cheaper next spring or get the new dogs. In fact the only reason I got my nice shiny elite card was because I got a deal too good to refuse and this was back in the first week of August. I never thought of doing away with my 9700 PRO this year. Tempted yes, was I enjoying my games with my 9700 PRO? Yes. Do I play anything above 1024X768? Nope. Easy to see why I would of been fine with my 9700 PRO till next Spring. Even though I'm thinking I should of just sold it on ebay for over twice what I paid it for (the new card).
But I sleep better at night knowing my 9700 PRO is bringing joy to someone else. Considering how old the card was and it would of done me good till next spring, makes me a firm believer that the 9700 PRO was the best investment ever. (Longer most likely, if I wasnt into tech demos, graphics etc...)
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
This is where we're going to disagree. You are advocating holding out on an upgrade for 5-6 more months, when all the best PC software we're gong to have for a while was all released in the last four months. Even if you are only pushing the price drop point, you're still advising not buying and enjoying what is all out now for at least three months. And in March, if somebody makes a "Gotta 6800GT for $250!" thread, aren't you going to come in there with "Idiot, you could have gotten a better card in only two months!"marsomega said:
Everyone else has already hammered home that there's nothing unique on the software side for this hardware, so the question is (if you've yet to upgrade): do you want to play Doom3\HL2 now or in five months? If the buyer is keen to wait, then more power to him; either his frames or his savings will be higher. But he's got to realize that in those same five months, ol' Mars'll have new hardware to hold out for.
Least you're still earning your tag.
G'night.
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
Well, it was worth $400 to me, so...
The question is, if you had gotten a GT fo' free, would you have complained about it?
The question is, if you had gotten a GT fo' free, would you have complained about it?
JackFrost2012
Banned
I just bought a 6600GT AGP ... I can't figure out why, but hey! It's just after Christmas! Buying things I don't need with gift money is what it's all about.
P.S. Hey Drinky, my Druaga came today! Too bad I don't have a PS2 with me, but.
P.S. Hey Drinky, my Druaga came today! Too bad I don't have a PS2 with me, but.
DaCocoBrova
Finally bought a new PSP, but then pushed the demon onto someone else. Jesus.
I have a 9800 Pro. Could never understand why you all rushed to get the next card that didn't render the 9800 obsolete.
As long as 95% of my games run @ or above 60fps, I can't justify the expense.
They're all DX9 anyway. *shrug*
As long as 95% of my games run @ or above 60fps, I can't justify the expense.
They're all DX9 anyway. *shrug*
tahrikmili
Member
Mooreberg said:
How ignorant.. you think the CS:S stress test is actually representative of Half Life 2 performance?
I own a 128MB 9800XT with an Athlon XP 3200+ 1GB RAM and I can tell you from first hand experience that at 1280x1024 0xAA 8xAF the game runs well below 60fps in outdoor areas or around bodies of water and just about 60fps otherwise. Stuttering due to video ram being flushed and reloaded is not uncommon (though not as common as the FX line). In the stress test, under same settings, I get 70+fps average.
I would be more than glad to play it on an X800/X850 card. If only to be able to use AA..
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
So simply outperforming it in every catogory isn't enough to render the 9800 obsolete?DaCocoBrova said:
You might also remember that my 9800 failed to play Doom3. I mean artifacts, straight heat crashes failed. I can bust out the classic pic again if you like...
My chief MO in getting the 6800 was to play Doom3, and play it well.
tahrikmili
Member
ArcadeStickMonk said:
Why didn't you RMA the card then? All users with heat issues in Doom 3 RMA'ed and got a replacement.
Your 9800 failed to play Doom 3, but ours didn't.
What mars is saying is simply that a 9800 pro with a reasonably decent accompanying set of components will play every game out right now fine. ~$400 for aa/af is what I'd call a good reason to wait for more graphically impressive games and more significant video card upgrades for the money.
What mars is saying is simply that a 9800 pro with a reasonably decent accompanying set of components will play every game out right now fine. ~$400 for aa/af is what I'd call a good reason to wait for more graphically impressive games and more significant video card upgrades for the money.
Drinky Crow
Banned
What EviLore said. My 9800 Pro played Doom 3 just fine on the medium-to-high settings at a solid 30-40 fps. Given that the game SUCKS ALL KINDA BADGER TESTES I'd say it's hardly a compelling reason to upgrade unto itself, regardless of the negligible gain in modern game engines from the next gen cards.
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
My card was a year-old Sapphire OEM from Newegg; and I was confident that I was stuck with it. My Doom3 performance with it was dicey enough that I wanted an upgrade anyway.
Look, there's two arguements going on here (at least to me). One is about looking a gift horse in the mouth, and the other is based around phrases like "my games run just fine."
I'm thinkin' that your "just fine" is my chop city. It was easier before I learned to count frames rates, I'll admit, but here I am. If 60fps is within my grasp, I'ma go for it.
Look, there's two arguements going on here (at least to me). One is about looking a gift horse in the mouth, and the other is based around phrases like "my games run just fine."
I'm thinkin' that your "just fine" is my chop city. It was easier before I learned to count frames rates, I'll admit, but here I am. If 60fps is within my grasp, I'ma go for it.
Drinky Crow
Banned
Ther's no such thing as a rock-solid 60 fps on the PC, so counting frames is a waste of time -- unlike consoles, it's all about averages. You may get a few more 60+ fps highs, but if the average is 45 fps versus 40 on the 9800, it really doesn't mean jack, unless you spend less time playing the game and more time waiting for the frame rate to bump up a notch. You get a few more highs with the 6800, but it's still gonna bottom out -- the tech just ain't there to turn HL2 and Doom 3 into glassy 85fps experiences that never drop into the chop range. Really, as an admitted frame counter, getting higher highs above 85 fps SHOULD be irrelevant to you, especially if the lows are still below refresh rate -- you'll get chop as long as the latter happens, and no card on the market can prevent THAT for modern game engines. A few seconds of extra lows here and there doesn't mean jack overall; hence, anything above a 9800 Pro is a waste of cash.
As for "looking a gift horse in the mouth", I ain't taking the card back, and nor do I think it's inferior to the 9800 in any way, shape, or form. The whole point is that for modern games, it really *is* a waste of money -- hence my question.
As for "looking a gift horse in the mouth", I ain't taking the card back, and nor do I think it's inferior to the 9800 in any way, shape, or form. The whole point is that for modern games, it really *is* a waste of money -- hence my question.
JackFrost2012
Banned
Well I had like an four year old ATI All in Wonder back before the Radeon line even started, so all this comparing to the 9800 is moot in my case. woo woo new card
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
Drinky, I agree with everything you said except for two related points.
1. My 6800 performance jump was a lot better than a 40 frame average to a 45 frame average. Yes I have my drops, but now I drop to 40 instead of from it.
2. Obviously I don't feel that the 68 was a waste of money. But I also have several $200+ game controllers, so that's where I'm comin' from.
1. My 6800 performance jump was a lot better than a 40 frame average to a 45 frame average. Yes I have my drops, but now I drop to 40 instead of from it.
2. Obviously I don't feel that the 68 was a waste of money. But I also have several $200+ game controllers, so that's where I'm comin' from.
DaCocoBrova
Finally bought a new PSP, but then pushed the demon onto someone else. Jesus.
CPU plays a huge role in game performance. Reading threads like these makes me think that some of you don't know that.
Again, these are all DX9 cards. They offer nothing new, only negligible (IMO) performance gains.
Again, these are all DX9 cards. They offer nothing new, only negligible (IMO) performance gains.
CrimsonSkies
Member
Rome Total War looks great on it with everything in high resolution.
Drinky Crow
Banned
I should mention that the leap from my GF4 ti4600 to the 9800 Pro was like night and day last year under games from that period, and I was expecting a similar leap in performance with the 6800GT. This is more a commentary on the stagnation of graphic development and the Law of Diminishing Returns than it is any sort of lameduck ATi vs. nVidia propaganda.
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
I avoiding using the phrase "negligible gains" last night because I thought it sounded like an oxymoron. Now I've seen it twice on this page.
You think a P4 HT 2.6 is a bottleneck to a 9800 Pro? That's what I had it paired with.
You think a P4 HT 2.6 is a bottleneck to a 9800 Pro? That's what I had it paired with.
why don't developers at least try and get consistent frame rates on games? Are PC developers mostly about image quality and hang the framerate?
Looking at issues where a 256MB card with 1GB of main RAM is still pausing to load/swap textures etc is insane. As 256MB is the absolute max right now, why not make a game where one levels graphics fit in the memory? Is that so crazy?
Looking at issues where a 256MB card with 1GB of main RAM is still pausing to load/swap textures etc is insane. As 256MB is the absolute max right now, why not make a game where one levels graphics fit in the memory? Is that so crazy?
Drinky Crow
Banned
I had it paired with a 2.8HT, too, and it's absolutely ludicrous to think that the utterly negligible .2 MHz difference had ANYTHING to do with the perf differences between our two machines. I doubt ASM skimped on quality RAM, either, or a decent disk, so I suspect he simply had a 9800 Pro of dubious quality -- especially if Doom 3 killed it.
Drinky Crow
Banned
klaw: what sort of baseline would they use? They'd need to develop SPECIFICALLY for a standard platform, and given all of the possible PC configurations out there -- hell, even the same videocard may be different across OEMS and let's NOT venture into the differences between motherboards and memory speed -- it's well-nigh IMPOSSIBLE.
Fuck, look what happens when devs develop the same game for two different platforms -- Xbox and PS2 -- do we commonly get rock-solid framerates? Now try that for the number of possible PC configurations out there. It's no wonder we get games that efficiently utilize maybe 20% of a high-end PC's potential.
Fuck, look what happens when devs develop the same game for two different platforms -- Xbox and PS2 -- do we commonly get rock-solid framerates? Now try that for the number of possible PC configurations out there. It's no wonder we get games that efficiently utilize maybe 20% of a high-end PC's potential.
Drinky Crow
Banned
How about I trade YOU in for a smarter junior member?
I know the whole lowest-common-denominator stuff for PC, but it seems that with the currnet crop of video cards practically running the game on themselves, it is more doable than in the past.
eg, you aim for a 256MB 6800GT. You should certainly be able to do your graphics to fit within that memory per level, and swap in main RAM if you have a smaller card. Then work the polys so that the GPU in a 6800GT/X800 doesn't need help from the CPU.
They almost need to turn it around so its highest-common-denominator. Punish people with crap PCs, and make sure that if you have a good one (=good graphics card), you get a great experience. Lets face it, devs use high end cards to showcase their games, and ATI/NVidia etc use the high end to sell to early adopters. But if they keep doing 'ok' updates, eventually the early adopter will get pissed off (like Drinky) and just hold out until the next gen, or a price drop.
eg, you aim for a 256MB 6800GT. You should certainly be able to do your graphics to fit within that memory per level, and swap in main RAM if you have a smaller card. Then work the polys so that the GPU in a 6800GT/X800 doesn't need help from the CPU.
They almost need to turn it around so its highest-common-denominator. Punish people with crap PCs, and make sure that if you have a good one (=good graphics card), you get a great experience. Lets face it, devs use high end cards to showcase their games, and ATI/NVidia etc use the high end to sell to early adopters. But if they keep doing 'ok' updates, eventually the early adopter will get pissed off (like Drinky) and just hold out until the next gen, or a price drop.
ArcadeStickMonk
Member
Not true, note DCB's comment above.mrklaw said:
Did you know that all the outdoor sections in Far Cry are heavily CPU based? I can throw the resolution to either extreme and the frame rate will stay the same. Conversly, the indoor sections get a huge boost from your vid card's fill rate (upwards of a 80 frame difference compared to outside), but it can't do it alone.
Biff Hardbody
Member
I think ASM is right on. I agree with the points his making. PC gaming is always coming out with something bleeeding edge, and I know in sometime my system will be "obsolete". Right now though, the GT absolutely dominates any other card I've had. Its fucking great. Not just fps either, I noticed slighty better image quality in Doom and in Tribes 2 I remember the neon greens being distinctly more vibrant. Nothing shocking, but a cool little detail.
As far as it just being faster, well I think that's awesome. I love playing Huge settings on Rome without a chug and everything maxed.
I'm also unsure about WOW not pushing the graphics card. My friend has a 9800XT and an A64 3000+ and he still gets frame rates that dip into the teens at times. My GT/A64 combo never dips down in combat, granted I have a stronger cpu (3800), but his is very solid. We're talking high rates of 70-90 fps with the drops coming in at the 50s in the lowest in certain enviroments (Not necessarily big ones, just certain places).
Anyhow, I'm not getting into an argument over this or trying to convince anyone to think a different way. I just wanted to give my experience with the GT and say that I think its a truly stellar card. BTW, for anyone who owns a GT you might want to check out the drivers from Valancestudios-
http://valancestudios.com/modules.php?name=Downloads
I'm using the 67.03's, and I got about 15 more fps in the CSS demo and actual game playing seems noticably smoother on a whole. I searched for these drivers when the 61's I was using from Nvidias site gave me slight graphical errors in Rome. Best drivers I've found for the GT so far. His newest ones, the 70 something are supposed to be great too. I haven't tried them yet.
As far as it just being faster, well I think that's awesome. I love playing Huge settings on Rome without a chug and everything maxed.
I'm also unsure about WOW not pushing the graphics card. My friend has a 9800XT and an A64 3000+ and he still gets frame rates that dip into the teens at times. My GT/A64 combo never dips down in combat, granted I have a stronger cpu (3800), but his is very solid. We're talking high rates of 70-90 fps with the drops coming in at the 50s in the lowest in certain enviroments (Not necessarily big ones, just certain places).
Anyhow, I'm not getting into an argument over this or trying to convince anyone to think a different way. I just wanted to give my experience with the GT and say that I think its a truly stellar card. BTW, for anyone who owns a GT you might want to check out the drivers from Valancestudios-
http://valancestudios.com/modules.php?name=Downloads
I'm using the 67.03's, and I got about 15 more fps in the CSS demo and actual game playing seems noticably smoother on a whole. I searched for these drivers when the 61's I was using from Nvidias site gave me slight graphical errors in Rome. Best drivers I've found for the GT so far. His newest ones, the 70 something are supposed to be great too. I haven't tried them yet.
ArcadeStickMonk said:
Are you implying that anyone with a 9700 PRO/ 9800 PRO can't enjoy any game out there unless they own a 6800 GT? Selective reading and understand aren't two things that go into preparing anything close to a good argument. I definitely enjoyed everything including doom 3 with my 9700 PRO and apparently, Drinky Crow agrees. Last I heard your defective 9800 PRO doesn't speak for everyone with a 9700/9800 PRO.
That all depends on where you want to be on the PC graphics spectrum and quite frankly I don't remember forcing it down anyone's throat that they have to be on the ultra enthusiast side.ArcadeStickMonk said:
In addition, the whole damn point of buying a 400+ video card now is to be on the elitist side of PC graphics. Why pay for it now when in about 3 to 4 months you can just wait and get the next best thing from launch so you can be a gritty pc graphics school girl whore for a longer period of time?
Playing everything at a 60+ frame rate at everything max and a nose bleeding high resolution is not for everyone. Some people do just want a moderate solution to last them as long as possible to play moderately. Then I say wait some more time with their 9700/9800 PROs and get a 6800 GT for 250 in March. It will serve them better then a 600GT/X700 PRO and last them longer too. (As if I haven't driven this point any deeper, 9700/9800 PROs are far from obsolete. ) I'd say "good job great investment!" Or perhaps I'd point to them and call them an idiot; then again I'm not as friendly (jaded) as you.
While I don't have a 6800GT, I just received my new laptop with a 6800go built in (and a 3.6 GHz P4 Prescott). If you OC it, the performance approaches the GT...but it's not quite there. Regardless, I'm shocked at how much faster it is than my 9700 Pro.
I just started up HL2 on the laptop and decided to get crazy and run it at 1680x1050 (the native LCD resolution). I also used 8x AF and 4x AA. The results? GREAT framerates all around! This things runs HL2 better at those settings than my 9700 Pro does at 1024x768 with no AA and only 4x AF (and I already thought it ran just fine).
Performance boost + better image quality == good
Isn't that one of the main reasons to purchase a new videocard?
I just started up HL2 on the laptop and decided to get crazy and run it at 1680x1050 (the native LCD resolution). I also used 8x AF and 4x AA. The results? GREAT framerates all around! This things runs HL2 better at those settings than my 9700 Pro does at 1024x768 with no AA and only 4x AF (and I already thought it ran just fine).
Performance boost + better image quality == good
Isn't that one of the main reasons to purchase a new videocard?
tahrikmili
Member
Shompola said:
Mobility 9800 has all 8 pipelines functional and Mobility X800 has all 12 pipelines functional.. I agree that it was kind of stupid to name a 4 pipeline gpu Mobility 9700. It was also rather misleading. But then, chip naming is a misleading marketing gimmick for all companies these days.
tahrikmili
Member
Shompola said:
Yeah, that's right, I was updating my post above when you posted this..
Unfortunately, my 128MB ATI 9800 Pro (stock) started giving me corrupt screen output, so I had to find a replacement. I got the XFX 6600GT (the only one at the time with the AGP bridge chip), and it's an entirely suitable replacement that gives me (supposedly) slightly better framerates for slightly less cash (paid $225).
There's no point to my post but to make a recommendation for a dead 9800 Pro. Had it not given up the ghost, it probably would have stayed in my rig for at least another year or so.
There's no point to my post but to make a recommendation for a dead 9800 Pro. Had it not given up the ghost, it probably would have stayed in my rig for at least another year or so.