Geforce FX Benchs

[H4deS]

I was reading the latest issue of PC Gamer today and they had ta little GF FX bench against the R9700 pro.

Quake 3: FX 209 fps 9700: 147 fps
UT2003(Asbestos Flyby): FX 140 fps 9700: 119 fps
3DMark2001SE(Game 4-Nature): FX 41 fps 9700 45 fps

*****All tests run at 1600x1200, 32-bit color, 2xAA enabled

[Some Guy]

This is off the subject a little bit but how much do you people think the geforceFX will cost?

[Evnas]

Originally posted by Some Guy
This is off the subject a little bit but how much do you people think the geforceFX will cost?

$500 at least

[timmyqwest]

Originally posted by Evnas


$500 at least

this comming from a person who swears by the 9700...

$350...

[Evnas]

Originally posted by timmyqwest


this comming from a person who swears by the 9700...

$350...

I dont swear by the 9700...i swear by my 9500 Pro thank you :D I can garauntee u that the top end GFFX wont be $350. The DDR2 ram alone costs nearly that. And if they go with 256m ram...well then it will be way to damn expensive. Also, the GFFX has a 10 layer PCB...VERY expensive to produce. It will be about $500...i can bet on that.

[Some Guy]

god dam, well if your right and its 500 my broke ass is gonna have to wait for it to come down... errg i was hoping to buy a Chaintech 7njs, xp 2100+, some memory and the GeforceFX all at the same time... guess the geforce will have to wait and ill bide my tiem with my ATI radeon 32 meg... grrr

[timmyqwest]

Originally posted by Evnas


I dont swear by the 9700...i swear by my 9500 Pro thank you :D I can garauntee u that the top end GFFX wont be $350. The DDR2 ram alone costs nearly that. And if they go with 256m ram...well then it will be way to damn expensive. Also, the GFFX has a 10 layer PCB...VERY expensive to produce. It will be about $500...i can bet on that.

well, it doesnt matter, mine will be free :D

[hitman85]

a $500 video card that cost more than what it took me to build my new pc;) ill buy it when my ti4200 is out dated

[raven]

Originally posted by H4deS
I was reading the latest issue of PC Gamer today and they had ta little GF FX bench against the R9700 pro.

Quake 3: FX 209 fps 9700: 147 fps
UT2003(Asbestos Flyby): FX 140 fps 9700: 119 fps
3DMark2001SE(Game 4-Nature): FX 41 fps 9700 45 fps

*****All tests run at 1600x1200, 32-bit color, 2xAA enabled

for some reason, i was thinking that the FX would edge out the 9700 pro on the nature..... meh.. maybe i was wrong... lets hope those arent real benchies and that the 9700 is actually better then that when compared to the FX =)

[SpoonMaN]

my guess about the whole GFX thing is that it will be like the old days
about the same as adding a 2nd voodoo2 card to your setup when compaired to the 4600
in that case my fps on a old ass celeron 450 in Q2 went from about 30fps @800x600 in crusher up to 50fps @ 800x600
thats what about 75%?
im gonna steer clear of saying what it will do to a 9700 card cuz im not like that (shame on all u guys who post things that nobody knows anything about yet)

[Karl04]

wow $500 dolars,
i am gona wait till my geforce 3 ti 200 runs out of fuel

and dies

or well going to college is going to have to cut the spending on PC hardware

Karl

[PreservedSwine]

How can you trust benchies that no one is allowed to see completed?.......Kind of silly of Nvidia to even release them, since they cannot be confirmed nor denied......We should know in less than a month, I hope...

I'm thinking $500 for the "Ultra 5800"
And $400 for the version that is slightly slower...

[Some Guy]

How you get it fo free?

[Emericana]

i HIGHLY doubt it will be $500. Nvidia has never charged that much. where are you getting that info on?

i am guessing right when it will be released the top of the line card will be $350-$400

[PreservedSwine]

Originally posted by Emericana
i HIGHLY doubt it will be $500. Nvidia has never charged that much. where are you getting that info on?

i am guessing right when it will be released the top of the line card will be $350-$400

Might want to check out this interview...

http://www.hardwarefusion.net/content/000116.php?page=3



And I thought the Geforce2ULTRA debuted at over $500 as well....:confused:

450-500 high end...

And maybe 350-400 for the low and middle end...

[Evnas]

Originally posted by Emericana
i HIGHLY doubt it will be $500. Nvidia has never charged that much. where are you getting that info on?

i am guessing right when it will be released the top of the line card will be $350-$400

Wrong...the GeForce2 Ultra was $500...that was also the last Ultra there was...so im also inclined to think the GFFX Ultra will cost just like the GeForce2 Ultra

*edit* From the Anandtech review of the GF2 Ultra...

With very fast memory, high yield chips, and a minimum of 64MB of SDRAM on the cards, how expensive do you think the new GeForce2 Ultra will be? It’s definitely not going to be at the $400 mark the 64MB GeForce2 GTS cards began selling at, nope, you’re looking at around $500 for a GeForce2 Ultra.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1298&p=3

**edit** Heres another part of that review if found very interesting, ,as it sounds very much like the GFFX...

At $500, it’s going to be very difficult to justify purchasing the GeForce2 Ultra; while it will obviously be the fastest thing available (as you will soon see by the benchmarks), the cost of that performance is, for most users, entirely too much. With a fairly well equipped PC falling in the $1500 - $2000 range, spending 1/3 or 1/4 of your total computer cost on a video card will be a stretch for most wallets.

[Wommalong]

$500.00 thats like R5000.00... that aint too bad cos the ATi 9700 cost around R6000.00. I guess the FX will cost more here in South Africa then most will be willing to pay:eek:

[Silversinksam]

Originally posted by Evnas


I dont swear by the 9700...i swear by my 9500 Pro thank you :D I can garauntee u that the top end GFFX wont be $350. The DDR2 ram alone costs nearly that. And if they go with 256m ram...well then it will be way to damn expensive. Also, the GFFX has a 10 layer PCB...VERY expensive to produce. It will be about $500...i can bet on that.

You can't be serious? You honestly believe 256mb of DDRII will cost Nvidia or Ati $350???

I think I read somewhere that it costs something like 30% more to manufacture, and as time goes by the cost will be reduced.

But the cost cant be even close to the figures you think ;)

Although i do believe the FX will sport a price of $399-$499 (at least initially)

PS heres a good read on DDRII
http://www.jedec.org/DOWNLOAD/pub21/HotDDR/DDR_II_evolution.pdf

[Evnas]

Originally posted by Silversinksam


You can't be serious? You honestly believe 256mb of DDRII will cost Nvidia or Ati $350???

I think I read somewhere that it costs something like 30% more to manufacture, and as time goes by the cost will be reduced.

But the cost cant be even close to the figures you think ;)

Although i do believe the FX will sport a price of $399-$499 (at least initially)

PS heres a good read on DDRII
http://www.jedec.org/DOWNLOAD/pub21/HotDDR/DDR_II_evolution.pdf

DDR2 right now is very expensive compaired to DDR1. Samsung is the only company making it atm, and thought its cheaper to make, its definatly not cheaper to buy. And though it may not cost ATi or nVidia as much as it would cost us, they do adjust their prices accordingly

[Silversinksam]

Originally posted by Evnas


DDR2 right now is very expensive compaired to DDR1. Samsung is the only company making it atm, and thought its cheaper to make, its definatly not cheaper to buy. And though it may not cost ATi or nVidia as much as it would cost us, they do adjust their prices accordingly

Yes I understand this but you claimed it would cost "nearly" $350 for 256 mb of 2ns ddrII (The FX will be using 2ns chips btw)

All I'm saying is that can't be right.

[funnyperson1]

imho, the FX will be 399$ or 300$ for regular version and 499$(like Geforce2 Ultra) for ultra version

[Silversinksam]

Originally posted by funnyperson1
imho, the FX will be 399$ or 300$ for regular version and 499$(like Geforce2 Ultra) for ultra version

Thats exactly what i was thinking along the lines of the prices ;)

[Elite]

Wow, if these are true the R350 is going to blow the FX out of the water. Why did nvidia make a card that ATI can beat so easily that i do not get.

[lchen66666]

After GeforceFX is released in few weeks, Nvidia just win the title of performace king in 3D area. It would be so expensive that Nvidia can not sell too many of them.

DDRII at least 2X price of regular DDR ram
Huge copper heatsink
TSM charge more for 0.13 process

I think ATI strategy is better. They will sell much more in terms of volumn, and gain market share.

We will see $200 level NV31 or NV35 based video card for at least another 3 months.

[Darkseid]

Originally posted by Emericana
i HIGHLY doubt it will be $500. Nvidia has never charged that much. where are you getting that info on?

i am guessing right when it will be released the top of the line card will be $350-$400

Ed made once an article about how nvidia release a card and charge 700$ fot it, i don´t remember wich one was but if you look in the overclockers archive you´ll find it

[highacker]

nvidia's fancy pricing can get close to 550 dollers for a top of the line gffx, (nvidia.......... those pricey freaks)
(ATI...............those driver and compatibility freaks)

but i go 100% nvidia just because it's great driver support

[funnyperson1]

Originally posted by Silversinksam


Thats exactly what i was thinking along the lines of the prices ;)

yup Nvidia always demands top dollar for a new card, but with the heat Ati is bringing they would be incredibly stupid to sell it for more than 500$

[Cisco Kid]

the price of the FX is gonna be high unfortunately as funnyperson1 said nvidia always charged premium on first release cards.

I have set a limit for myself, I will never buy a video card over the $180 US mark it just does not make good sense. I paid exactly that with my 9500 Pro and I do not plan tyo buy anything else for a while.

Cisco KId

[donny_paycheck]

Originally posted by Elite
Wow, if these are true the R350 is going to blow the FX out of the water. Why did nvidia make a card that ATI can beat so easily that i do not get.

Link/proof?


I'm eager to see how a 130nm chip can overclock. If the NV30 core overclocks like the 130nm shift in the Northwood Pentium 4, we have a winner. If it's crappy, like the 130nm shift in the Thoroughbred Athlon XP, I'll stick with my 9700 for longer.

Actually I'll stick with it for a while anyway considering that it's still pretty new (for me) and it'll play any game for some time (do NOT be fooled by crappy performance of Doom 3, it's an alpha, remember).

[Evnas]

I dont think the GFFX Ultra card will overclock good at all. I was talking to Brent at HardOCP, the guy who does all the video card reviews, and he was talking to an nVidia rep and said that massive OTES style cooler is required for operating at 500MHz...which means it run extremely hot, and without watercooling, and even with, u wont be getting to far with it.

[PreservedSwine]

Originally posted by donny_paycheck


Link/proof?


I'm eager to see how a 130nm chip can overclock. If the NV30 core overclocks like the 130nm shift in the Northwood Pentium 4, we have a winner. If it's crappy, like the 130nm shift in the Thoroughbred Athlon XP, I'll stick with my 9700 for longer.

Actually I'll stick with it for a while anyway considering that it's still pretty new (for me) and it'll play any game for some time (do NOT be fooled by crappy performance of Doom 3, it's an alpha, remember).

Until they use low-k dialetrics, the NV30 may not overclock well. Considering the cooling sloution that is standard on the NV30, I wouldn't expect a whole lot of headroom....

[H4deS]

Originally posted by donny_paycheck


Link/proof?



I looked around the PC Gamer website and didnt find the article online but I know there has to be someone else on these forums that gets this mag. Its in the February issue on page 90.

EDIT: Link http://www.maximumpc.com/features/feature_2003-01-03.html (PC Gamer's sister company)

[Darkseid]

nVidia initially refused to let us benchmark it at all, and relented only when we agreed to limit our tests to pre-approved benchmarks running at stipulated resolutions and AA settings


WTF, that sux!! that`s it, there are no more un-biased benchies around in new cards releases... :mad:

pre-approved my a**

EDIT: that is the worst article i ever read, i`m mad!! :mad: :mad:
that is NOT a benchmark, that is the best scenario where the gffx could shine, maybe they won`t let them use 1600x1200 and 4x (or more) AA because there the gffx loses against the radeon 256 bit, just a thought

EDIT2: don`t miss the best part, in the title says in small letters minimun bs. ha, maybe they forgot to read that when they do that pos article, i`m going to bed now... this is too much

[Some Guy]

What a jacked article.... i can understand what there doing by trying to give a preveiw but why would they release sheer crap. When the drivers are not ready (they say so in the article), why release anything reflecting what could turn out to be completely wrong when they release it? Ohh wellz...

[PreservedSwine]

Still, it's better than nothing...

Up until this, the silence surrounding the NV30 has been, deafening....especially for a card the supposed to be available in 2 weeks....

[gordon]

Originally posted by PreservedSwine


Might want to check out this interview...

http://www.hardwarefusion.net/content/000116.php?page=3



And I thought the Geforce2ULTRA debuted at over $500 as well....:confused:

450-500 high end...

And maybe 350-400 for the low and middle end...

Hehe I was just about to note that to him when I read his post. Geforce 2 Ultra started selling at over $400, though not $500. Nvidia knows their userbase and people WILL buy it at that price so it doesnt make sense for them to sell it lower, especially if they forsee a supply issue.

[Darkseid]

Originally posted by PreservedSwine
Still, it's better than nothing...

Up until this, the silence surrounding the NV30 has been, deafening....especially for a card the supposed to be available in 2 weeks....

disagree, i prefer nothing, if we start buyng this crap of reviews we will never have again unbiased benchies, i can`t find the contact of the one that wrote this one, if anyone finds it please post it so we can tell them how we fell, at least i`m gonna do that

[Evnas]

Originally posted by gordon


Hehe I was just about to note that to him when I read his post. Geforce 2 Ultra started selling at over $400, though not $500. Nvidia knows their userbase and people WILL buy it at that price so it doesnt make sense for them to sell it lower, especially if they forsee a supply issue.

Actually the GF2 Ultra was $500 (the Pro was $400)...i can dig up some old articles if u really want me to :)

[Genocide]

Yea the GeForce2 Ultra did start at $500 initially, but it didnt stay there long at all, it dropped to $350 in just a month or so, which might happen with the G-FX, who knows, only 2 weeks until we find out.

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/guides/nvidia_geforce2_ultra/22.shtml

[mbentley]

the only way that i will be convinced of anything is when i personally have a geforce fx in my hands and i am the one doing the testing... for all we know, nvidia is giving us a load of crap... i don't care to speculate either because so many people have made things up about "what they heard" that you can't tell what is true or not... just wait until the release...

[DaddyB]

Originally posted by Evnas
I dont think the GFFX Ultra card will overclock good at all... massive OTES style cooler is required for operating at 500MHz...which means it runs extremely hot...

I'd have to agree with that and add that as SSS said it is supposed to be using 2ns RAM running at 500mhz which is what the RAM is rated for, so don't expect it to OC too much either (most cards' RAM gives a little bit of OCing space).

I have also read that it will be $500 (somewhere fairly reputable, I think the inquirer but I'm not sure) but I expect that is MSRP and you should be able to find it a bit cheaper online... I would hope.

[Darkseid]

well, no one thought that the r300 would overclock much and look now...
some people didn´t even think that 325mhz with .15microns was even possible

but yes, seen that uber ugly cooling of the gffx makes you think that they have a heat problem

[Evnas]

Originally posted by Darkseid
well, no one thought that the r300 would overclock much and look now...
some people didn´t even think that 325mhz with .15microns was even possible


U mean ppl who actually bought into nVidia's BS that the .15u process reached its limit just because nVidia didnt know how to design an efficient chip? ;) hehe

[mirko_3]

i think it'll cost less than 500 but more than 350... 500 wouldn't really sell that much and 350 would mean bankruptcy for nvidia :)
as for the overclock part, well, it may be 13u, but it also is 500Mhz, so I seriously doubt it'll go over 540...
Also, since the price is so high, why don't you just go for a r9500 and hack it with a simple software hack into a 9700 almost pro (mem frequency would be a bit lower..); that would mean you spend about 150$ and get a r9700... your choiche..

[Wildfire]

Just to add my two cents.

I reckon it'll be around the $500 mark and even more expensive in the UK. Just look at the starting price of the Ti4600 when it came out.

Whether Nvidia will produce it along the same lines as the GF4 serise will be interesting to see. I mean releasing a standard version and an ultra version, before eventually releaseing a budget version which can keep up with the standard (Ti4200).

Whichever company, ATI or Nvidia, the release of a new chip always means high prices. If the prices about DDR 2 being so expensive are true the consumer will bear the consequences of that. Also just imagine how expensive a Quadro verion of this card will be!!

Anyway I reckon it's going to be expensive, really expensive and I'm an Nvidia fan. Whether this price is going to affect Nvidia's share of the market remains to be seen.