GeForce 6800 Ultra

[Smith|]

And if some people think that pixel shader 3.0 is a pushover and doesn't increase image quality very much (like from 1.3 to 2.0) then look at this:

Pixel Shader 2.0:

Pixel Shader 3.0:

 

[Devion]

Future Mark just stated that the driver that nVidia used with 6800 has no cheats ~_~.

But I'm also waiting on the ATI radeon new video card, which will be released on 4th on may.

5950 is better with price/quality.

Its not much slower then 9800XT and the prize is 70 euro cheaper.

Sapphire / Sapphire Radeon 9800 XT 256MB 453 euro
Asus / Asus GeForce FX5950 Ultra 256MB, V9980 (Vivo DVI) 383 euro

So take your pick....>_> GeForce FX5950 Ultra 256MB <_<

 

[Kurt`]

New pixel shaders = pwn.

As far as cards go, 5-10 FPS more in 1600x1200 with 8x FSHAA and anistrophic filtering wouldn't sway my decision.

 

[Smith|]

Did a little research, those shader pictures were made by nvidia fans. The top has NO pixel shading, the bottom has 3.0. It's been proven that there's hardly any difference in 2.0 to 3.0.

 

[Kurt`]

Their must have been some change if they jumped up a whole version number... Did they drastically increase the rendering speed or something?

 

[Smith|]

They increased the amount of operations that could be done before it was rendered, that's basically it. There's also displacement mapping, which is like a vamped bump mapping which can make things, even when you're looking at the texture from the side, actually bump out without using more polygons.

 

[Ché]

Last time I heared one of Tom's proud sponsers was infact nvidia itself...
I just hope that the new Ati and nvidia won't differ that much so the price can go nicely low

 

[Tassadar]

Che you have to be joking, even if Tom's Hardware had nVidia as a sponsor it dosn't mean that they would ever prefer them over ATi especially when ATi gets higher benchmark scores and they have seen that and been giving ATi cards rave reviews. It's the exact same as it is with TechTV's Screensavers, every LAN party is sponsored by nVidia, but they always say on the show that ATi scores the highest. Sponsorship dosn't change anything, you're still free to say what you want, when you want, at least in nVidia's case.

 

[Smith|]

Tassadar, Tom's hardware is full of a bunch of liars who sway a benchmark based on how much they're payed.

 

[Anty]

Well... From what I've heard is that the 'new' cards need a psu above 400 watts to support those cards, that's just crazy, but maybe necessary otherwise they would run unstable...

It's a sweet score they have made there with the 'new' card (I wish I had a new card.. still stuck with my GeForce 2 GTS 64MB DDR. It still works mightily fine thank you... :] )<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
Tom's Hardware Guide is good, don't know about the wrong statistics that they gave, but frankly.... I don't care about that...

Almost EVERY so called 'new' card is better and faster and has more this and that then the previous, but that's not true. Those 'new' cards are maybe better, but most of the time unstable and so it just depends on the other things that you have in your pc to make it run smooth... So the statistics are NEVER correct.

If the rivaling companies make new cards, it takes time.... just wait a while and we'll see who's better.<o></o>
And IMO they are rushing a lot lately with their cards, so none of them are REALLY good.



(Most of the time I DO make sence.... )

 

[Tassadar]

Tassadar, Tom's hardware is full of a bunch of liars who sway a benchmark based on how much they're payed.

So who exactly do you say they are supporting here, because they've given great reviews to most ATi cards, and on nVidia cards they always point out the fact a lot of ATi cards are capable of beating them, and also show benchmarks comparing them.

From what I see on THG, ATi was the favorite for about a year, and now their suprised at nVidia's big push for a card that gives a dramatic boost over previous cards. I never saw it being biased on either side of the field, that's just me I guess.