|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
The Boneshaker
|
Doom 3 in bed w/ Nvidia
what the!?!? look at this article:
http://pc.ign.com/articles/495/495987p1.html I think they should only put that sticker on the FX5950's lol.
__________________
Leave it to me as I find a way to be Consider me a satellite, forever orbiting I knew all the rules, but the rules did not know me Guaranteed ---Eddie Vedder, “Guaranteed”. Rest in Peace, Evan. 2.11.71 - 9.8.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member (9 bit)
|
Yeah, I'm also recalling a time when they said that the GeForce 3 would run Doom 3. High end ATI cards will probably work with the game to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,965
|
remember that ATi and Valve did something similar a while ago, it's all about business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
The Boneshaker
|
Lol geforce 3 good one, seems like its been delayed that long.
Seems like Nvidia got Doom 3 and ATi got Half-Life 2. P.S. I bet they didnt even play Doom 3 on a FX card yet. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 110
|
Im sure they have played it on the FX card or they wouldnt be recomemding it.
The FX and radeon series are bot good ranges of cards. visually they are basically the same and at the same speeds, there is always money involved in these announcements im sure ATI payed big bucks for Valve to say ATI cards run the best on Half life 2. That comment destroyed Nvidia's reputation, if Nvidia payed Valve to say the same thing about ATI i bet alot of people would be recomending Nvidia over ATI |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
The Boneshaker
|
I was just joking about the havent played it on an FX card yet because they performed so poorly on half-life 2, something about them not being fully dx9 supported or something. Yea i bet your right, its just a money, reputation, marketing issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Kickin' it
Staff
Premium Member
|
It's all marketing. I still chuckle when I boot up Unreal Tournament 2003 and the "NVIDIA: The way its meant to be played" comes up. I know my 9700Pro is pumping more pixels then most Geforces would
__________________
Fold for PCMech: Team 13761 |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Lest we forget
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,870
|
By nvidia card are recomended they mean nvidia gave us lots and lots of cash
Im sticking with ATI and half-life 2 though
__________________
redqueen: Antec Sonata, Pentium-D 2.5GHz, MSI G31M3-L, 2GB ram, 320 GB HDD, OpenBSD hal9000: Lenovo T61, 2GB ram, 120 GB HDD, FreeBSD |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
The Boneshaker
|
Yea I play Deus Ex 2:IW all the time and it has the Nvidia logo at startup, it sure brings a smile to my face when the graphics are cranked up and running on my 9800 Pro and thinking no Nvidia card could look this good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
snowboarder
|
*cough*
bothered
__________________
Antec Sonata - Abit IS7-E - P4 2.4/800 @ 3.0 - 1GB OCZ Gold DDR500 - FX5950 Ultra 256MB - Audigy 2 - WD JB 80GB - XP Pro |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
The Boneshaker
|
*clears throat*
except i mean for the Nvidia 5950 Ultra 256mb cards. lol |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: FL
Posts: 357
|
I'm suprised how choppy my demo of Need for Speed: Underground ran on my 9800pro with mediocre settings for quality and performance...
System specs; P4 2.4 800mhz fsb 512 pc3200 360w enlight psu 80gb wd hd |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Member (10 bit)
|
Quote:
bawb
__________________
3.40 AMD Phenom II X4 965--4G OCZ DDR3---Asus 5770 ATI Radeon----INTEL 78G SSD drive |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Stereo junkie
|
Doom 3 runs better on nvida cards because its openGL based. nvidia owns ATI in the openGL department. half-life 2 on the other hand, is pure DX9, hence the reason why FX cards perform poorly and the ATI handing the FX an ass kicking. dont worry though...doom 3 will be capped at 60FPS upon its final release. at anandtech.com, they benched a preliminary version of Doom 3 with the 5700U beating out the 9800pro by 4FPS. 9800pro ran at 68.8FPS and the 5700U ran at 73.1FPS.
__________________
Join the 1%, use Linux
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: England the centre of the world
Posts: 676
|
it is impossible for the Human eye to see a difference between 68.8 and 73.1 FPS so that doesnt realy matter.
also i heard the human eye cant see faster than 47FPS so anything over is top Notch |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,965
|
check out this:
http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_1.html Bottom line: human eye can't see more that 24 fps, but when it comes to computer monitors and games, human eye can't tell the difference if the refresh rate is higher than 60fps. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|