Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Modern Games and Modern GPUs: The Grand Clash

Started by: Fottemberg | Date 12/08/05 04:17:48 PM
Comments: 46 | Last Comment:  08/25/06 08:08:36 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-7]

1. 
very nice effort would like to get these point into
consideration:
- The 4000+ is some kind of weak processor for
The most of the GPU ,right now we can by
3000+ overclock it to around 2.5-2.6 and get
faster processor than the 2.4/1mb cache So
please Upgrade.(2.6/1mb cache) at least.
why not dual core?
-The board either is not the fastest one (not looking for the fastest) ,even the MSI K8n neo 4-F
can match its performance.
-The driver I love and would Thank you from the buttom of my hear if in an Excellent and very important review like this with the huge effrort and time that have been spent to use the latest drivers THE GPU Guys always optimize why not consider the latest like the
81.94\95 even if its a beta one.after all My buying decision will be in 60% realy on your effort.
Thanx.Thanx .
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/09/05 06:05:41 AM]
Reply

2. 
From the bottom of my heart ..For give me for the typo.;)
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/09/05 06:17:31 AM]
Reply

3. 
Also you tried to explain something about the 81.89 drivers here, "(please bear in mind that according to NVIDIA the 81.89 driver only differs from WHQL-passed 81.85 driver with a new .inf file)". I don't know if you were talking about the 81.95 drivers or is that a typo?
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/09/05 06:48:32 PM]
Reply

4. 
I would like to see driving games and simulators in these tests. Specially Richard Burns Rally, because it's both, pure racingsim. Simulators would be interesting, because they are really cpu hungry. Driving games, because they need fast, solid framerates.

Those "beautifull" games like in this test, are made for gpus, so we don't get any info about symbios between cpu and gpu.

Also older cards to tests, because we are comparing our old cards to new ones.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/10/05 12:38:10 PM]
Reply

5. 
Did x-bit rename the FEAR exe for the ATI cards to fix the performance bug?
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/11/05 08:25:49 AM]
Reply

6. 
the review is unrealistic:
i have 6600gt , 1gb ddr 400 dual , 3200 64bit amd

i can't play :
aoe 3 at max 1024
bf 2 max 1024
fear beta max 1024
all demos
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/11/05 08:40:15 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
I dont get why the heck you guys used the latest ATI drivers but not the latest Nvidia drivers. The 81.95 drivers have been out since november 18. I know for a fact that these nvidia drivers were out before the new ATI cat 5.12 drivers, so there is no reason not to use them. By not using the latest drivers from each company you are definitely sliding this articles bias in ATI's favor in a big way. Re run those same tests with the 5.11 cats and see how crappy the x1800xt perform when they dont have drivers that are compatible. The 81.94 add support for the 6800GS and the 81.95 add support for the 7800GTX 512mb, so how the hell can you guys do tests with an incompatible driver and call things fair?

From what i see by this manuver your article has no meaning what so ever since not every single card is on the same playing field since not every card had the correct driver support. You guys wait for the 5.12 cats so the new ATI cards will work properly, but dont do the same for the nvidia cards. You just lost my trust and xbit will not be a site i recommend anymore cause of this blatent bias towards one company. You go out to present a massive review of cards and dileberatly put the nvidia cards at a disadvantage by using drivers that were months old rather than the newest ones that were out weeks before the ATI 5.12 cats were. This is a major issue and this article should be taken down until the tests can be run with the proper drivers like they should have been the first time.

0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/11/05 09:10:54 PM]
Reply

7. 
To Anton about the drivers:

Um let me see the 81.94 was released mid november, and the 81.95 soon after for some fixes to the 81.94. In both of the release notes on those drivers they are the ONLY DRIVERS THAT SUPPORT THE 6800GS AND 7800GTX 512MB. Hello do you not see that 2 count them 2 cards are not supported by older nvidia drivers? Now you used drivers from ATI that supported the newest ATI cards and you got those drivers a few days before you began testing. The 81.95 have been out longer than the damn 5.12cats. That is a major incident that clearly shows xbit labs ATI bias.

The 5.12 were much better than the older drivers and provided some enhancement for opengl games. The 81.95 are a good step up from the 81.89 drivers for the newer games, and not using them just makes xbits review totally worthless. You strive to make a good article that compares just about every card out there, yet you choose to use an almost 2 month old driver for nvidia cards and a 3 day old driver for ATI cards. THat doesnt make sence unless you are stacking everything in favor of ATI just so that they dont get beat so bad.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/12/05 07:28:49 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
We do not usually explain the reasons for our decisions.

We used ForceWare 81.89 drivers, why are you talking about 81.85?

Description from NVIDIA: “ForceWare Release 80 Driver for GeForce 7800 GTX 512.
This is a Release 80 driver, build version 81.89.”

Here are the enhancements of the ForceWare 81.95 drivers, in case you manage to find anything that may mean "performance enhancements across the board for all graphics cards", then you should probably continue accusing us of bias.

“Single GPU Issues Resolved

- There is a possible incompatibility between the ForceWare graphics driver and the current WDM driver.
- GeForce 7 Series: Modifying any Performance and Quality Setting using the system tray icon turns off Gamma and Transparency Antialiasing.
- GeForce 6800 Ultra: Textures are corrupted upon the first time entering a zone in Guild Wars.

SLI-Related Issues Resolved

- GeForce 6 and 7 series, SLI: Updated F.E.A.R. SLI profile to achieve better SLI performance and compatibility.
- GeForce 6600, SLI: Blue-screen crash occurs when starting a new game in Civilization 4 with antialiasing enabled in the NVIDIA control panel.”

http://download.nvidia.com/Windows/81.95/81.95_ForceWare_Release_Notes.pdf

For your information: OpenGL enhancements for the RADEON X1600 and RADEON X1800 graphics cards have been in place with Catalyst 5.10a, which use was limited to the Quake 4 and Doom III at X-bit labs and Catalyst 5.11, which we did not use at all.

By the way, I will appreciate you read the reviews at X-bit labs more carefully and/or compare X-bit labs’ results obtained on Catalyst 5.9 drivers (in other reviews) and Catalyst 5.12 (in this review) before you are talking about across-the-board performance enhancements for the Catalyst 5.12 over predecessors.

“Regrettably, but the aforementioned memory management flaw in the Catalyst driver that was there back in the version 5.9 remained in the 5.12 as well.”

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/games-2005_18.html
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 12/13/05 01:05:26 AM]
Reply

[1-7]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment