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 on Article:
ATI Radeon HD 6800: Generation Next?
Strange reply. Specially when there is no remarks suggesting that you would provide IQ comparisons in current released games. If you are going to reduce IQ for nvidia control panel I think it's only appropriate to show IQ comparisons as to why.
In any case, I'm not sure who would consider any future reviews valid when you enable default settings thus enabling all optimizations from the nv control panel while reducing them on CCC. It's really that simple.
Oh and BTW, the review linked earlier had "Enabled Surface Optimizations" still checked. This made the videos invalid.
-AA differently (CSAA vs MLAA)
-profiles in general differently
I as well as others would simply like to see control panel settings equitable between cards.
MLAA on other hand is IDEAL for games that don't have AA implementation, like Metro, Batman, GTAIV, etc. But I will NEVER prefer MLAA over 4xAA if it's possible.
Over the years, following review sites, I have observed an inflation of benchmarks settings. As videocards improve, settings and resolutions are being pushed higher and higher to be able to see practical performance differences between GPU's.
The fact remains that on a 22 inch monitor, a 1280x800 resolution with max quality settings will provide a very enjoyable gaming experience. And a monster card is not required to achieve this.
The findamental question is: Do we want to play game or to engage in an arms race to the ultimate absolute performance?
For example, despite its flashy effects and high hardware requirements, many people soon find that Crysis can become boring.
Edit: This was supposed to be a response to BernardP
Also isn't it funny that an almost 2 yr old NVIDIA card (GTX 295) is still the 2nd fastest card in the world?
"at first sight... a step backwards"
"The reduced number of ALUs and texture-mapping units and the lower fillrate parameters may lead an inexperienced user to this conclusion."
"Superficially, the Radeon HD 6800 only seems to have but one advantage over the previous series. Its clock rate is 900 MHz"
"Well, of course this superficial approach to evaluating the new series is incorrect."
you are being condescending and maybe even demeaning to the reader. first, you point out the facts about the 68xx vs 58xx and then say that this is a simplified, superficial and inexperienced point on view. that is a load of crap.
i am not arguing with 64-bit being next to useless in games but you are going to detail out the whole plethora of differences in the following pages - it is the exact same architecture with the following changes:
1. dropped 64-bit calculations
2. added tessellator.
that is it.
performance-wise 68x0 cards fall on either side of the 5850 and generally won't be able to touch 5870. granted, they are not supposed to, but then naming them 68x0 was quite a bad move from amd.
by the way, morphological antialiasing is not so much a hardware feature as a software one. it is perfectly usable (with modified drivers to enable the feature) with 58xx cards.
Add your Comment
Enter your username and e-mail address. Password will be sent to you.