Ati strikes back

[TrinireturnofGamez]

no i'm saying that the next few models of Radeon X series will reach that performance .......

the 6800 ultra is a giant , power hungry monster. Its just a 5950 on steroids and with Shader 3.0 support, ATi's chips are refined, and they are on a newer process than their last set of chips, unlike nvidia.

and the main reason i dislike nvidia, is cause they lie and strecht the truth.
 They advertise their cards as having more features than ATi cards.. which is a blasted lie..

in the past ATi has ALWAYS had the same thing or better...., ATi , like intel, is the pioneering one.. introducing new technologies in early models and gradually improve and finds ways to improve and use the technologies....

if Nvidia had adpoted TRuform before, we would have had higher poly models and faster games... instead of having to move a high poly model through the entire process, truform will allow to carry a lower poly model, and at the final steps in rendering, increase the poly count. Using truform like this would save on memory bandwidth alot... but because only ATi has truform, it is only used, rarely, just to beef up poly counts...
 
 Fullstream is another goodie only ATi has, it filters out the artifacts from video streams and DVDs giving a cleaner movie....

 ATi has up to 16x anisotropic filtering.... and though it is only a tiny bit better than Nvidias 8x, it is faster than Nvidias 8x...

 the only reason nvidia has managed to do so well is their control of the press and their use of stupid catch phrases.... When the 5800 came out, Nvidia blinded people by saying that it had such a higher clock speed than the 9700, and more memory bandwidth.. when the 9700 could pwn it totally at everything ..

i'm sure that this time around they will use AMD's strategy "clock doesn't matter" it doesn't, but nvidia cards are STILL slower..                    

[Rampage]

Using truform like this would save on memory bandwidth alot... but because only ATi has truform, it is only used, rarely, just to beef up poly counts...

the reason for games not really using truform is because of the code pal. some of those games, if truform is forced into the code, there are model deformations. to fix that going to require reviewing all the code again. but is not only that...the only card to use truform in hardware mode is the radeon 8500, the rest of the radeons use truform via software. enabling truform and running a game = a great drop in performance. especially new end games. some games however do run nice with truform and not eat much performance like ut2k3 ( i never try it with ut2k4). the girl hair looks much better an thing. to have truform rendered by hardware going to require more power, bigger board, more money.                    

[SUPR3M3]

I use that truform thing once and was getting what looked like 10FPS. Never tried it again, but it just made everything look like I was high on crystal meth or something. What's the purpose of this feature?                    

[TrinireturnofGamez]

truform is in the code of most of the new games :
 unreal tournament 2003/04
unreal 2
serious sam
need for speed.
but instead of , like in wolfenstein, processing truform in software using vetrex shader, they do it in hardware  using ATi's built in support.

Radeons use alot less power and yet still have truform in hardware.. it barely touches the performance on most cards , [ there are different degrees of truform , up to 7 doesn't take out much performance,  ].

unless you have a radeon card, truform takes out ALOT of performance... but with some driver versions truform makes the models look "buff"..

 Radeons are much better built than Geforces
 Geforces have much more stable drivers, less bugs.                    

[Rampage]

truform is in the code of most of the new games :
 unreal tournament 2003/04
unreal 2
serious sam
need for speed.
but instead of , like in wolfenstein, processing truform in software using vetrex shader, they do it in hardware  using ATi's built in support.

Radeons use alot less power and yet still have truform in hardware.. it barely touches the performance on most cards , [ there are different degrees of truform , up to 7 doesn't take out much performance,  ].

unless you have a radeon card, truform takes out ALOT of performance... but with some driver versions truform makes the models look \"buff\"..

 Radeons are much better built than Geforces
 Geforces have much more stable drivers, less bugs.

hoss, truform in ut2k3 and ut2k4 has barely any effect. you call serious sam and unreal2 new games? truform not in nfsu. rtcw uses truform but rtcw et doesnt. and you said "radeons", only the radeon 8500 can do truform in hardware. the rest of the radeons do it in software. then secondly, truform takes up alot of performance on all cards as its done via software instead of hardware.                    

[Rampage]

truform eh make sense. when using the npatch it doesnt work out too right, developers doh want to put out more money to go fix the code.

truform not highly supported by games, most new games do not use truform, and games in the future do not intend to.

truform is basically dead, if truform was really kicking , ati woulda make all radeons do truform in hardware.

truform drops performance in games and will also make some objects deformed.

truform is hardly used with people who own ATI cards. to enable truform in ut2k3 an thing you hadda go open up file and all kinda madness. then you wont even be able to tell the difference unless you look at one of the female models hair. makes no sense at all.

if you want stuff to look enhanced, nicer bright colours, more alive looking, forget truform, go with nvidia DVC (Digital vibrance control). no need to worry about games supporting this !                    

[SUPR3M3]

My mistake, I was talking about SmartShader. heh heh
I never used Truform, but I'll try it soon.                    

[TrinireturnofGamez]

smartshader FX are supposed to make everything look like your high... and if your using older drivers it will give you 10fps.                    

[SUPR3M3]

Yeah well I used the drivers the card came with when I tried it, so that's the reason for the poor FPS. I tried it again yesterday with these new Catalyst drivers and it ran much better, but still looked like I was going off on crack. Don't really see the purpose of that feature so whatever.                    

[Anonymous]

i'm sure both the new radeon cards will be able to overclock real nice..

no they wont
runnin on old technology

ATI next gen cards will oc nice, look out for that later this year/early next year

ATi's CURRANT process used in their X-800 chips is THE most advanced process in use for ALL GRAPHICS CHIPS. SHADER 2.0/3.0 DO NOT FRIGGIN MATTER NOW! no games support 3.0, ATi's 2.0 is better than nvidias 3.0 for quality........

read the WHOLE review before you say something like that...

steups, i did fool

....
And how about the clockspeed both these graphics processors run at? ATi used to have a lower clockspeed than Nvidia, yet offering better performance. Things seem to have reversed now, ATi needs a 520MHz graphics processor to keep pace with Nvidia’s 450MHz processor, this means that Nvidia’s new architecture is faster and more efficient. Both use a 0.13-micron process to manufacture their processors, Nvidia talked to IBM and cut a deal with them, whereas ATi turned to TSMC for their silicon. Both these manufacturers have what it takes, but neither will be able to go around the clockspeed limits imposed by the process used. About 600MHz is as far as you’ll be able to clock a >150 million transistor 0.13-micron part. This means that ATi is already giving itself very little headroom, Nvidia however has got some room to play, a good 150 MHz, double that of what ATi has got left.
...

...I'm not saying they have indentical chips or pipeline architectures. Fact remains that a processor with >150 million transistors manufactured at 0.13-micron will have a certain die size. That results in a certain time needed, measured in nano seconds, for the signal to propagate from one end of the chip to the other. This time simply limits the maximum clockspeed which can be calculated to be around 600MHz.

As for overclocking results, I already hinted about that in our article, our ATi sample managed a mere 5MHz overclock, whereas the Nvidia sample was able to handle 20MHz. I'm quite sure that's not what you'll see with actual shipping products, results should be better as the process matues, but you can definitely see that there's more headroom for Nvidia simply because of their higher IPC, every MHz gives them more relative performance, whereas with ATi you'll need bigger leaps to get the same net result....

[/i]                    

[TrinireturnofGamez]

your point rumbelly?

 we may ALL be wrong.. maybe the mass produced cards will be unable to overclock at all                    

[TriniXaeno]

either way we getting faster cards, cheaper...that is always a good thing.

Happy days iwmc.