A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Video Cards » Ati Videocards
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

I dont see that nvidia is "finished"...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 12th 03, 01:04 AM
Steven C \(Doktersteve\)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default I dont see that nvidia is "finished"...

And please dont get me wrong, i really dont want to upset the people in this
group after they spent so much time helping me with some issues i have had
in the past week with my hardware, and giving me some good info on radeon
cards.

i dont think that the current "scandal" with nvidia will kill that company,
and i think that nvidia saw this coming a mile away... it seems that nvidia
has done quite alot of diversification in the past, making chipsets for the
xbox, making motherboard chipsets, etc... it seems as though somewhere down
the line they said "enough with this high end gaming business, we can make
far more money by pandering to the middle range consumer". and that is what
they did.

Its like 3dfx and nvidia years ago.
3dfx decided to go after a certain market, while nvidia catered to a high
end market. in this case, you could compare call it nvidia going for that
middle range market and ati going for the high end.
The problem that 3dfx had was releasing way to many cards at the same time
in a desperate attempt to regain market share... a problem that nvidia
doesnt have.

years ago ati wasnt a contender for high end, then the radeon 7500 and
8500's changed all that, and nvidia was faced with competetion for the first
time ever.

If this is the result (these bad benchmarks with HL2) of nvidia having
competetion, then it marks a turning point for the company, and hopefully
they can stop and change direction and gt back on track, just like 3dfx was
NOT able to do.

Still, this doesnt spell out the end for nvidia. If they have cards that
cost less, and which run games, that is what about 80% of the market will
tolerate.
Admit it... 8/10 gamers could care less about what we here care about, and
that mass market is what keeps hardware and software companies in business.
It costs less to make Geforce4 cards than the new 5900 cards, and if nvidia
sold enough geforce4 cards to still turn a huge profit, they would never
complain.

they got themselves in trouble with behcnmarks, they should have shut up
about 3dmark, and i am sort of grinning at my own decision to get a 9600 pro
card now, but i dont want nvidia to die.

in fact, no one here should want nvidia to die.
Why did ati become so good in the 3d game? it was because they were trying
to compete with nvidia.
if one company has a monopoly for a market, its never a good thing.

still, i dont think nvidia is dying by any means, they are just at a point
where they have to decide if they want to go mass market only, or seriously
work on making great cards, and ignoring little squabbles like whether or
not someone optomizes cards for benchmarking.

thats my opinion. worth what you paid for it btw ;-)

thanks for reading.


  #2  
Old September 12th 03, 01:40 AM
SST
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I replaced a clients Ti4600 with a Radeon 9600Pro (the Ti4600 died just
after a year!) for allot less then the cost of the Ti4600 new and still less
after all this time.

Client reports back that the 9600p seems faster, feels smoother and looks
better in 3D. They are very happy with the switch. Apparently it 'benches'
less then it actually performs in the real world.

Cost of the 9600p was under $150 including S/H.

System is an XP2000+ on a VIA KT333 board with 512Mb DDR running WinXP Home.

I battled with a wide variety of NF2 boards and all were disappointing in
the end although I did get nice performance with them and a damn good
overclock. My current Intel based machine is a league or two beyond the
AMD/NForce2 stuff. Basically nVidia couldn't get a consistent yield of chips
and didn't get there ducks in line with the motherboard makers, leading to
lots of unhappy buyers.

I was happier with the nVidia of yesterday.


My two cents.



"Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
And please dont get me wrong, i really dont want to upset the people in

this
group after they spent so much time helping me with some issues i have had
in the past week with my hardware, and giving me some good info on radeon
cards.

i dont think that the current "scandal" with nvidia will kill that

company,
and i think that nvidia saw this coming a mile away... it seems that

nvidia
has done quite alot of diversification in the past, making chipsets for

the
xbox, making motherboard chipsets, etc... it seems as though somewhere

down
the line they said "enough with this high end gaming business, we can make
far more money by pandering to the middle range consumer". and that is

what
they did.

Its like 3dfx and nvidia years ago.
3dfx decided to go after a certain market, while nvidia catered to a high
end market. in this case, you could compare call it nvidia going for that
middle range market and ati going for the high end.
The problem that 3dfx had was releasing way to many cards at the same time
in a desperate attempt to regain market share... a problem that nvidia
doesnt have.

years ago ati wasnt a contender for high end, then the radeon 7500 and
8500's changed all that, and nvidia was faced with competetion for the

first
time ever.

If this is the result (these bad benchmarks with HL2) of nvidia having
competetion, then it marks a turning point for the company, and hopefully
they can stop and change direction and gt back on track, just like 3dfx

was
NOT able to do.

Still, this doesnt spell out the end for nvidia. If they have cards that
cost less, and which run games, that is what about 80% of the market will
tolerate.
Admit it... 8/10 gamers could care less about what we here care about, and
that mass market is what keeps hardware and software companies in

business.
It costs less to make Geforce4 cards than the new 5900 cards, and if

nvidia
sold enough geforce4 cards to still turn a huge profit, they would never
complain.

they got themselves in trouble with behcnmarks, they should have shut up
about 3dmark, and i am sort of grinning at my own decision to get a 9600

pro
card now, but i dont want nvidia to die.

in fact, no one here should want nvidia to die.
Why did ati become so good in the 3d game? it was because they were trying
to compete with nvidia.
if one company has a monopoly for a market, its never a good thing.

still, i dont think nvidia is dying by any means, they are just at a point
where they have to decide if they want to go mass market only, or

seriously
work on making great cards, and ignoring little squabbles like whether or
not someone optomizes cards for benchmarking.

thats my opinion. worth what you paid for it btw ;-)

thanks for reading.





  #3  
Old September 12th 03, 02:09 AM
methylenedioxy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
And please dont get me wrong, i really dont want to upset the people in

this
group after they spent so much time helping me with some issues i have had
in the past week with my hardware, and giving me some good info on radeon
cards.

i dont think that the current "scandal" with nvidia will kill that

company,
and i think that nvidia saw this coming a mile away... it seems that

nvidia
has done quite alot of diversification in the past, making chipsets for

the
xbox, making motherboard chipsets, etc... it seems as though somewhere

down
the line they said "enough with this high end gaming business, we can make
far more money by pandering to the middle range consumer". and that is

what
they did.

No-one is suggesting it will "kill" the company, it's just a scandal that
the customers are going to suffer. Those middle ranging customers are going
to get a shock when they try to use their brand new Nvidia cards on new
games it is supposed to handle well and doesn't, they will end up having to
upgrade even sooner than before, especially if devwelopers just say no to
optimising their coding to allow geforce cards to run due to time
constraints etc. Then Nvidia could well just say that the games are just
poorly made, great news for a new developer no? :s

Its like 3dfx and nvidia years ago.
3dfx decided to go after a certain market, while nvidia catered to a high
end market. in this case, you could compare call it nvidia going for that
middle range market and ati going for the high end.
The problem that 3dfx had was releasing way to many cards at the same time
in a desperate attempt to regain market share... a problem that nvidia
doesnt have.


It's nothing like 3dfx and nvidia years ago, 3dfx produced decent cards, in
fact superb cards, they just made a mistake with the voodoo 5 (and note,
there are rumours that this new fx range was based on the plans of the
voodoo 6, so not sure if this is true or not, but the curse lives on)


years ago ati wasnt a contender for high end, then the radeon 7500 and
8500's changed all that, and nvidia was faced with competetion for the

first
time ever.


No, the Radeon DDR changed it, before the 7500...


If this is the result (these bad benchmarks with HL2) of nvidia having
competetion, then it marks a turning point for the company, and hopefully
they can stop and change direction and gt back on track, just like 3dfx

was
NOT able to do.


I doubt they will get back to the same as before, you realise how much money
Nvidia have lost in last 8 months? First the 5800 embarassment and now this,
there is no turning back....And it isn't just Half Life 2 mate, it's any DX9
game with pixel shaders, nothing to do with half life 2, if it was, Nvidia
could easily squeeze out of this hole they are in by saying that it's all a
concoction by Ati and Valve seeing as they are both promoting each other,
but it isn't, Doom 3, 3d Mark 03 and the last Lara Croft all brought these
issues to light, no doubt we will see far more as more and more dx9 coded
games come out.


Still, this doesnt spell out the end for nvidia. If they have cards that
cost less, and which run games, that is what about 80% of the market will
tolerate.
Admit it... 8/10 gamers could care less about what we here care about, and
that mass market is what keeps hardware and software companies in

business.
It costs less to make Geforce4 cards than the new 5900 cards, and if

nvidia
sold enough geforce4 cards to still turn a huge profit, they would never
complain.


Of course gamers care about this, they have just shelled out 100+ for a new
card, you think everyone is made of money? Do you think people shell out
money for 3d cards if they won't use them? Don't be mad. The only reason it
costs more to produce the 5900 is because of the marketing costs.....I'm
sure they have made enough of them now to rectify any problems with
production, and they have the 5600 and 5200 cards, any bad cards are turned
into these anyway.



they got themselves in trouble with behcnmarks, they should have shut up
about 3dmark, and i am sort of grinning at my own decision to get a 9600

pro
card now, but i dont want nvidia to die.

No-one thinks they will die, as above they have just hit a bad spot and one
I doubt they will really get back to the "old" days over. Times have now
changed for Nvidia.

in fact, no one here should want nvidia to die.
Why did ati become so good in the 3d game? it was because they were trying
to compete with nvidia.
if one company has a monopoly for a market, its never a good thing.

There are other makers out there, don't forget about them, S3 for instance
have been on the OEM and onboard gfx for years, they are due a big boost and
it could be time, they have a couple of chipsets that are looking good.

still, i dont think nvidia is dying by any means, they are just at a point
where they have to decide if they want to go mass market only, or

seriously
work on making great cards, and ignoring little squabbles like whether or
not someone optomizes cards for benchmarking.


Nothing to do with their positioning in the market, they are a gfx chip
maker and always have been, they have just produced 4 bad chips on the trot
and 2 of those are high end cards.


thats my opinion. worth what you paid for it btw ;-)

thanks for reading.

No worries


  #4  
Old September 12th 03, 04:16 AM
Splitskull
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thank GOD I got a ATI and didn't continue with nVidia......(nvidia was good
too)

--

Splitskull

"methylenedioxy" wrote in message
...

"Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
And please dont get me wrong, i really dont want to upset the people in

this
group after they spent so much time helping me with some issues i have

had
in the past week with my hardware, and giving me some good info on

radeon
cards.

i dont think that the current "scandal" with nvidia will kill that

company,
and i think that nvidia saw this coming a mile away... it seems that

nvidia
has done quite alot of diversification in the past, making chipsets for

the
xbox, making motherboard chipsets, etc... it seems as though somewhere

down
the line they said "enough with this high end gaming business, we can

make
far more money by pandering to the middle range consumer". and that is

what
they did.

No-one is suggesting it will "kill" the company, it's just a scandal that
the customers are going to suffer. Those middle ranging customers are

going
to get a shock when they try to use their brand new Nvidia cards on new
games it is supposed to handle well and doesn't, they will end up having

to
upgrade even sooner than before, especially if devwelopers just say no to
optimising their coding to allow geforce cards to run due to time
constraints etc. Then Nvidia could well just say that the games are just
poorly made, great news for a new developer no? :s

Its like 3dfx and nvidia years ago.
3dfx decided to go after a certain market, while nvidia catered to a

high
end market. in this case, you could compare call it nvidia going for

that
middle range market and ati going for the high end.
The problem that 3dfx had was releasing way to many cards at the same

time
in a desperate attempt to regain market share... a problem that nvidia
doesnt have.


It's nothing like 3dfx and nvidia years ago, 3dfx produced decent cards,

in
fact superb cards, they just made a mistake with the voodoo 5 (and note,
there are rumours that this new fx range was based on the plans of the
voodoo 6, so not sure if this is true or not, but the curse lives on)


years ago ati wasnt a contender for high end, then the radeon 7500 and
8500's changed all that, and nvidia was faced with competetion for the

first
time ever.


No, the Radeon DDR changed it, before the 7500...


If this is the result (these bad benchmarks with HL2) of nvidia having
competetion, then it marks a turning point for the company, and

hopefully
they can stop and change direction and gt back on track, just like 3dfx

was
NOT able to do.


I doubt they will get back to the same as before, you realise how much

money
Nvidia have lost in last 8 months? First the 5800 embarassment and now

this,
there is no turning back....And it isn't just Half Life 2 mate, it's any

DX9
game with pixel shaders, nothing to do with half life 2, if it was, Nvidia
could easily squeeze out of this hole they are in by saying that it's all

a
concoction by Ati and Valve seeing as they are both promoting each other,
but it isn't, Doom 3, 3d Mark 03 and the last Lara Croft all brought these
issues to light, no doubt we will see far more as more and more dx9 coded
games come out.


Still, this doesnt spell out the end for nvidia. If they have cards that
cost less, and which run games, that is what about 80% of the market

will
tolerate.
Admit it... 8/10 gamers could care less about what we here care about,

and
that mass market is what keeps hardware and software companies in

business.
It costs less to make Geforce4 cards than the new 5900 cards, and if

nvidia
sold enough geforce4 cards to still turn a huge profit, they would never
complain.


Of course gamers care about this, they have just shelled out 100+ for a

new
card, you think everyone is made of money? Do you think people shell out
money for 3d cards if they won't use them? Don't be mad. The only reason

it
costs more to produce the 5900 is because of the marketing costs.....I'm
sure they have made enough of them now to rectify any problems with
production, and they have the 5600 and 5200 cards, any bad cards are

turned
into these anyway.



they got themselves in trouble with behcnmarks, they should have shut up
about 3dmark, and i am sort of grinning at my own decision to get a 9600

pro
card now, but i dont want nvidia to die.

No-one thinks they will die, as above they have just hit a bad spot and

one
I doubt they will really get back to the "old" days over. Times have now
changed for Nvidia.

in fact, no one here should want nvidia to die.
Why did ati become so good in the 3d game? it was because they were

trying
to compete with nvidia.
if one company has a monopoly for a market, its never a good thing.

There are other makers out there, don't forget about them, S3 for instance
have been on the OEM and onboard gfx for years, they are due a big boost

and
it could be time, they have a couple of chipsets that are looking good.

still, i dont think nvidia is dying by any means, they are just at a

point
where they have to decide if they want to go mass market only, or

seriously
work on making great cards, and ignoring little squabbles like whether

or
not someone optomizes cards for benchmarking.


Nothing to do with their positioning in the market, they are a gfx chip
maker and always have been, they have just produced 4 bad chips on the

trot
and 2 of those are high end cards.


thats my opinion. worth what you paid for it btw ;-)

thanks for reading.

No worries




  #5  
Old September 12th 03, 05:05 AM
Crash7
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:40:38 GMT, "SST" wrote:

I replaced a clients Ti4600 with a Radeon 9600Pro (the Ti4600 died just
after a year!) for allot less then the cost of the Ti4600 new and still less
after all this time.

Client reports back that the 9600p seems faster, feels smoother and looks
better in 3D. They are very happy with the switch. Apparently it 'benches'
less then it actually performs in the real world.


Actually, I think you've got this reversed. It's not that the 9600p
benches less than it performs. It's that the Nvidia cards do the
opposite. There's a reason for that.


Crash7
remove x's from address to email
  #6  
Old September 12th 03, 01:38 PM
SST
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In looking at reviews of current games, The Ti4200 actually beats the 9600p
in many places. It also seems to get beat out by many of the other
competitive cards.
However, in reality this is quite opposite!! (so reports the users)
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...n_9600-07.html

Also, in new DX9 games like HF2 the 9600p outperforms nVidias $500
5900ultra, what's that all about? Their is going to be very many unhappy
nVidia owners by years end. Get your ATI now before the demand goes up



"Crash7" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:40:38 GMT, "SST" wrote:

I replaced a clients Ti4600 with a Radeon 9600Pro (the Ti4600 died just
after a year!) for allot less then the cost of the Ti4600 new and still

less
after all this time.

Client reports back that the 9600p seems faster, feels smoother and looks
better in 3D. They are very happy with the switch. Apparently it

'benches'
less then it actually performs in the real world.


Actually, I think you've got this reversed. It's not that the 9600p
benches less than it performs. It's that the Nvidia cards do the
opposite. There's a reason for that.


Crash7
remove x's from address to email



  #7  
Old September 12th 03, 01:39 PM
SST
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

FWIW: Doom3 is OpenGL and is said to perform as well or better then any ATI
card.

Problem is with DX9 video rendering, no?



"methylenedioxy" wrote in message
...

"Steven C (Doktersteve)" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
And please dont get me wrong, i really dont want to upset the people in

this
group after they spent so much time helping me with some issues i have

had
in the past week with my hardware, and giving me some good info on

radeon
cards.

i dont think that the current "scandal" with nvidia will kill that

company,
and i think that nvidia saw this coming a mile away... it seems that

nvidia
has done quite alot of diversification in the past, making chipsets for

the
xbox, making motherboard chipsets, etc... it seems as though somewhere

down
the line they said "enough with this high end gaming business, we can

make
far more money by pandering to the middle range consumer". and that is

what
they did.

No-one is suggesting it will "kill" the company, it's just a scandal that
the customers are going to suffer. Those middle ranging customers are

going
to get a shock when they try to use their brand new Nvidia cards on new
games it is supposed to handle well and doesn't, they will end up having

to
upgrade even sooner than before, especially if devwelopers just say no to
optimising their coding to allow geforce cards to run due to time
constraints etc. Then Nvidia could well just say that the games are just
poorly made, great news for a new developer no? :s

Its like 3dfx and nvidia years ago.
3dfx decided to go after a certain market, while nvidia catered to a

high
end market. in this case, you could compare call it nvidia going for

that
middle range market and ati going for the high end.
The problem that 3dfx had was releasing way to many cards at the same

time
in a desperate attempt to regain market share... a problem that nvidia
doesnt have.


It's nothing like 3dfx and nvidia years ago, 3dfx produced decent cards,

in
fact superb cards, they just made a mistake with the voodoo 5 (and note,
there are rumours that this new fx range was based on the plans of the
voodoo 6, so not sure if this is true or not, but the curse lives on)


years ago ati wasnt a contender for high end, then the radeon 7500 and
8500's changed all that, and nvidia was faced with competetion for the

first
time ever.


No, the Radeon DDR changed it, before the 7500...


If this is the result (these bad benchmarks with HL2) of nvidia having
competetion, then it marks a turning point for the company, and

hopefully
they can stop and change direction and gt back on track, just like 3dfx

was
NOT able to do.


I doubt they will get back to the same as before, you realise how much

money
Nvidia have lost in last 8 months? First the 5800 embarassment and now

this,
there is no turning back....And it isn't just Half Life 2 mate, it's any

DX9
game with pixel shaders, nothing to do with half life 2, if it was, Nvidia
could easily squeeze out of this hole they are in by saying that it's all

a
concoction by Ati and Valve seeing as they are both promoting each other,
but it isn't, Doom 3, 3d Mark 03 and the last Lara Croft all brought these
issues to light, no doubt we will see far more as more and more dx9 coded
games come out.


Still, this doesnt spell out the end for nvidia. If they have cards that
cost less, and which run games, that is what about 80% of the market

will
tolerate.
Admit it... 8/10 gamers could care less about what we here care about,

and
that mass market is what keeps hardware and software companies in

business.
It costs less to make Geforce4 cards than the new 5900 cards, and if

nvidia
sold enough geforce4 cards to still turn a huge profit, they would never
complain.


Of course gamers care about this, they have just shelled out 100+ for a

new
card, you think everyone is made of money? Do you think people shell out
money for 3d cards if they won't use them? Don't be mad. The only reason

it
costs more to produce the 5900 is because of the marketing costs.....I'm
sure they have made enough of them now to rectify any problems with
production, and they have the 5600 and 5200 cards, any bad cards are

turned
into these anyway.



they got themselves in trouble with behcnmarks, they should have shut up
about 3dmark, and i am sort of grinning at my own decision to get a 9600

pro
card now, but i dont want nvidia to die.

No-one thinks they will die, as above they have just hit a bad spot and

one
I doubt they will really get back to the "old" days over. Times have now
changed for Nvidia.

in fact, no one here should want nvidia to die.
Why did ati become so good in the 3d game? it was because they were

trying
to compete with nvidia.
if one company has a monopoly for a market, its never a good thing.

There are other makers out there, don't forget about them, S3 for instance
have been on the OEM and onboard gfx for years, they are due a big boost

and
it could be time, they have a couple of chipsets that are looking good.

still, i dont think nvidia is dying by any means, they are just at a

point
where they have to decide if they want to go mass market only, or

seriously
work on making great cards, and ignoring little squabbles like whether

or
not someone optomizes cards for benchmarking.


Nothing to do with their positioning in the market, they are a gfx chip
maker and always have been, they have just produced 4 bad chips on the

trot
and 2 of those are high end cards.


thats my opinion. worth what you paid for it btw ;-)

thanks for reading.

No worries




  #8  
Old September 12th 03, 05:00 PM
Gamer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I own an ATI card, but if NVIDIA goes belly up over this it would bad for
consumers and gamers in general. I'm happy that I made the right choice this
time around with my 9700PRO--but we can only hope that the .50 det drivers
for the NVIDIA cards can make up for the half-life2 performance gap somehow.
In a few years or possibly less, when we are all starting to crave something
to replace our current hardware, ATI's solutions will just be that much
better(and cheaper) if they feel like NVIDIA is right on their heels. So, if
you own an ATI card and are a half-life fan, breathe a sigh of relief but
don't forget that competition in this market is what is best for GAMERS over
the long haul.

-G


  #9  
Old September 12th 03, 06:57 PM
methylenedioxy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Gamer" wrote in message
et...
I own an ATI card, but if NVIDIA goes belly up over this it would bad for
consumers and gamers in general. I'm happy that I made the right choice

this
time around with my 9700PRO--but we can only hope that the .50 det drivers
for the NVIDIA cards can make up for the half-life2 performance gap

somehow.
In a few years or possibly less, when we are all starting to crave

something
to replace our current hardware, ATI's solutions will just be that much
better(and cheaper) if they feel like NVIDIA is right on their heels. So,

if
you own an ATI card and are a half-life fan, breathe a sigh of relief but
don't forget that competition in this market is what is best for GAMERS

over
the long haul.

-G

That argument is ********. If there was only Ati cards then Ati would be
cheaper anyway, more people buying them then.....Supply and demand.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
pc problems after g card upgrade + sp2 ben reed Homebuilt PC's 9 November 30th 04 01:04 AM
can someone look at this? steve General 3 March 1st 04 11:11 PM
help?? steve General 11 February 11th 04 05:08 PM
Tomb Raider AOD benches: Bad news for Nvidia who be dat? Ati Videocards 33 September 4th 03 10:35 AM
Kyle Bennett (HardOCP) blasts NVIDIA Radeon350 Ati Videocards 12 August 13th 03 09:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.