238 réponses à ce sujet

[MrFish]

Worth a thought. Haven't had time to actually play the game through so I've not come across some decent throttle points yet. I'll keep an eye out and maybe come up with some tests to check performance. I must admit I did notice some reasonable level of threading on my system at a brief look. I'll go log it and see what I get.



By the way, side note for those looking at this threat for graphics cards: the card which fills the spot of "5870x2" I believe is being called the 5970 but its essentially an x2 card for the range.



Seems the whole crossfire and sli stuff is being slipped off the naming systems now by cutting away the X2 (though nvidia did it a few months back with the sneaky 295 naming). Anyway no benches up for this card yet but those with money will get one as usual. Personally I prefer single gpu solutions over doubles, as there tend to be less driver problems, but the card will no doubt be a beast as usual.

[ZootCadillac]

I'm bumping this until it's either sticky or kept alive.

This hierarchy is not known by many and will help many with GPU confusion.

[dragoaskani]

ZootCadillac wrote...

I'm bumping this until it's either sticky or kept alive.
This hierarchy is not known by many and will help many with GPU confusion.

Anyone who wants to play pc games properly should already know how this hierarchy works. Especially the Nvidia users since they don't use such a retarded numbering system as ATI.

[JironGhrad]

dragoaskani wrote...

ZootCadillac wrote...

I'm bumping this until it's either sticky or kept alive.
This hierarchy is not known by many and will help many with GPU confusion.

Anyone who wants to play pc games properly should already know how this hierarchy works. Especially the Nvidia users since they don't use such a retarded numbering system as ATI.

NVidia is just as bad; try comparing an 8800 card to a 9300 card...

[dragoaskani]

yeah, but at least it makes sense in a way since the 9300 comes out after the 8800. even if its not an indication of power. Ati's numbering confuses the crap outta me.

[JironGhrad]

hehe, ATI makes sense now, HD (anything) is better than X(anything) and the older cards numbered the way the NVidia does it now (Radeon 9800GT for example) are so far out of date hardware-wise that you won't even see them much any more...

[ZootCadillac]

I'm pretty much ok with the numbering. The first number equals the generation and usually applies to a company's output for that year( year being for projected output and not calendar year )

and the last nubers are the card specification with specific models being denoted by suffixes.



so a 9/300/gt is a newer generation but far inferior card to an 8/800/gts



I think what people need to take from this thread is the numbers after the generation number. Sure Nvidia have switched to 2/60 etc but it still counts. Generation 2/ spec 60/70/80/90 specific model gt/gts/xt etc.

ATI works along similar lines and it's easy to work out. It's harder to compare like for like with the numbering but it soon becomes clear.

[Molly25]

I am unable to play the game because it says it does not detect my video card.

I have an ATI Radeon 9600/9550/x1050. Do you know if this is supported or not?

[Gorath Alpha]

Molly25 wrote...

I am unable to play the game because it says it does not detect my video card.

I have an ATI Radeon 9600/9550/x1050. Do you know if this is supported or not?

No, it is not. it's too old, too slow, and has an older shader engine. 

(hey, Molly, I was already preparing the long treatise in response to a comment(s) about numbering schemes when you asked the question, and i tucked your part in at the top!) 

The performance number scheme that ATI still uses was born at ATI, but not applied rationally when first used.  The Radeon 9600s were newer than the 9500s, but slower.  The 9800s were both faster and newer than the 9700s, and the 9200s were leftovers from the previous 8500/9000 generation. 

The next year, nVIDIA had a full range from 5200 (crap) through 5800 (dustbuster fan), in progressive performance increments.  They were pretty awful when released.  Their Dx8 was much worse than the GF4 Ti-4000 cards' Dx8. 

The 5800 was retired, and the 5600 was down-ranked, then brand new 5700 and 5900 cards were created that literally had twinned (siamesed) cores with Dx8 handled by a Ti-4000 segment, and an advanced shader engine for higher levels, but not at all good at Dx9.  It didn't handle Dx9 natively, so was very slow.  From then through the 9000s, they had n600 as Mainline game territory, and n800 as high end game territory.  The original 6600 however, actually split the boundary, with the Vanilla card being more like a "6400" if such had been named that year. 

ATI also missed the mark that year, with the X600 being too weak for its number.  That continued for the X1000s, when the X1600 Pro was totally outclassed by the geforce 7600 GT, and the X1600 XT also trailing somewhat behind.  It took the X1650 XT to counterbalance the 7600 GT. 

In case you folks have missed it, nVIDIA is preparing to exit the end user market before competitive advantage embarrasses them.  AMD and ATI will sell chips that combine the CPU and GPU together in a few short years, and nVIDIA cannot reply to that threat.  They are moving in an entirely new direction for their future livelihood

Intel will attempt to ambush the AMD combo with its own GPU plus CPU, but we all know they will screw up the GPU part at first.  It remains to be seen if they can catch up in the second round.  The Intel response will head off into virgin territory compared to AMD's plans. 

The Geforce GTX 200s were nVIDIA's last half-generation based in the old competive arena.  Next February, the follow up chips will be dual purpose.  They will be usable for GPUs, but also for massively multi-CPU super computer applications (for which they will be prioritized). 

Gorath
-

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 14 novembre 2009 - 09:39 .

[warmaku]

this list should exclude the 3870 since no one with the card can even play due to the ostagar crash

[ZootCadillac]

warmaku wrote...

this list should exclude the 3870 since no one with the card can even play due to the ostagar crash

The list is a hierarchy list to let you know where your card lies in the big scheme. It's for reference and is in no way indicative of this game running on your card ( but denotes the suggested cut off point )

Also the 3870HD is working fine for many people so your issue can not be placed at the feet of the card so dismissively.

Modifié par ZootCadillac, 14 novembre 2009 - 09:34 .

[Molly25]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Molly25 wrote...

I am unable to play the game because it says it does not detect my video card.

I have an ATI Radeon 9600/9550/x1050. Do you know if this is supported or not?

No, it is not. it's too old, too slow, and has an older shader engine. 

The performance number scheme that ATI still uses was born at ATI, but not applied rationally when first used.  The Radeon 9600s were newer than the 9500s, but slower.  The 9800s were both faster and newer than the 9700s, and the 9200s were leftovers from the previous 8500/9000 generation. 

The next year, nVIDIA had a full range from 5200 (crap) through 5800 (dustbuster fan), in progressive performance increments.  They were pretty awful when released.  Their Dx8 was much worse than the GF4 Ti-4000 cards' Dx8. 

The 5800 was retired, and the 5600 was down-ranked, then brand new 5700 and 5900 cards were created that literally had twinned (siamesed) cores with Dx8 handled by a Ti-4000 segment, and an advanced shader engine for higher levels, but not at all good at Dx9.  It didn't handle Dx9 natively, so was very slow.  From then through the 9000s, they had n600 as Mainline game territory, and n800 as high end game territory.  The original 6600 however, actually split the boundary, with the Vanilla card being more like a "6400" if such had been named that year. 

ATI also missed the mark that year, with the X600 being too weak for its number.  That continued for the X1000s, when the X1600 Pro was totally outclassed by the geforce 7600 GT, and the X1600 XT also trailing somewhat behind.  It took the X1650 XT to counterbalance the 7600 GT. 

In case you folks have missed it, nVIDIA is preparing to exit the end user market before competitive advantage embarrasses them.  AMD and ATI will sell chips that combine the CPU and GPU together in a few short years, and nVIDIA cannot reply to that threat.  They are moving in an entirely new direction for their future livelihood

Intel will attempt to ambush the AMD combo with its own GPU plus CPU, but we all know they will screw up the GPU part at first.  It remains to be seen if they can catch up in the second round.  The Intel response will head off into virgin territory compared to AMD's plans. 

The Geforce GTX 200s were nVIDIA's last half-generation based in the old competive arena.  Next February, the follow up chips will be dual purpose.  They will be usable for GPUs, but also for massively multi-CPU super computer applications (for which they will be prioritized). 

Gorath
-

I'm sorry to hear that but I appreciate your prompt and informed response - thank you! I'll be sure to make a list of the cards you recommend to bring to the store tomorrow.

[Gorath Alpha]

Hi, Molly! 

If you can possibly wait two days, you can save a bundle.  Instaed of only adding enough to cover the difference in permanent structure expense (not a large amount), almost all storefront operators charge close to TWICE as much as the online retailers do! 

AGP card useful for games are also very RARE at the brick & mortar places.  I'm guessing that's what you need:

Here's an HD 4650 for $75 after rebate:

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814150433

These people are reliable, have good support, etc.

P. S. If you happened to have the X1050 PCIe cripple, they have the same 4650 for that video bus, for about $25 less, after rebate.

Gorath
-

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 14 novembre 2009 - 09:59 .

[Molly25]

For savings, I can easily wait a couple of days! Unfortunately they aren't in the UK but I will find an equivalent online store. Thanks again for the suggestion, Gorath.

Modifié par Molly25, 14 novembre 2009 - 10:14 .

[ZootCadillac]

Molly25 wrote...

For savings, I can easily wait a couple of days! Unfortunately they aren't in the UK but I will find an equivalent online store. Thanks again for the suggestion, Gorath.

Molly, message me with your budget and I'll mail you tomorrow with your options and my recommendations.
I'll also find you a trade deal from one of my suppliers if I can.

But tomorrow, seriously, It's Saturday night and I'm sure you know I'm quite drunk by now

[Molly25]

Wow, you are all very friendly and helpful - thank you very much ZootCadillac! Enjoy your evening!  

Modifié par Molly25, 14 novembre 2009 - 10:43 .

[SweXShadow]

clearly ATI is way above Nvidia.



from the 3870 with maxed out everything all of my games run fine except for empire total war when there are X thousands troops on map.



honestly Nvidia 9000 series is crap.

[ZootCadillac]

SweXShadow wrote...

clearly ATI is way above Nvidia.

from the 3870 with maxed out everything all of my games run fine except for empire total war when there are X thousands troops on map.

honestly Nvidia 9000 series is crap.

How is that clear?
What benchmarks are you basing that upon?

I'm pretty sure I'm running my dual 8800gts SLI xfx system higher and faster than most ATI systems right now. (on all but the latest DX.10.1 demands).
And here's the deal, I'm a big ATI fanboi, have been for 15 years but I'm clever enough not to make claims I can't back up with fact.

As for empire total war I can run that on full at 60fps constant on my 9800gt let alone my 2x8880gts sli system

[dragoaskani]

SweXShadow wrote...

clearly ATI is way above Nvidia.

from the 3870 with maxed out everything all of my games run fine except for empire total war when there are X thousands troops on map.

honestly Nvidia 9000 series is crap.

Right wheres your bench marks to prove it, champ? Exactly, do we need to start linking the benchmarks that prove the superiority? This is like the AMD fan boys who think their crappy Phenomx4 black edition 3.2s are more powerful then Intels entry level I7 & I5 2.66ghz. (big hint they kicks the phenoms ass)

[Gorath Alpha]

SweXShadow wrote...

clearly ATI is way above Nvidia.

from the 3870 with maxed out everything all of my games run fine except for empire total war when there are X thousands troops on map.

honestly Nvidia 9000 series is crap.

The two companies' products each shine in slightly different ways, but the HD 3870 wasn't across the board on a par with the 8800s (all-same, 9800, just renamed), nor does the HD 4870 manage to outshine the GTX260-upward.  For that, it takes the HD 5000s, just as I suspect we'll soon be able to document. 

Meanwhile, the purpose of this thread is not to argue the strengths and weaknesses of Red or Green.  I have made some alterations to NTK's original sequences, but I also lumped a lot of higher-end cards together, on purpose.   What I wanted to do was demonstrate how the names progress through the generatons, slowly pushing the 3 and 4 generations-old high end and medium cards downward in relation to newer ones, but not in blocks of generations'.members, not at all.   

Please take any fanboy type stuff to PMs! 

Gorath
-

[MrFish]

Mm I was never particularly impressed with the G92 renaming that nvidia did. Read: (hey look these 9800s are all new and awsome, they're not rebranded 8800GTs Honest!) which is..what a GTX1xx? now last time I checked. Oh yay.. I'd rather if something was branded, it retained its name and brand until end of life. If it changes every year it just confuses the consumer.



A 4870 may not outshine a 260 but on pricepoint (especially at release) ATi gave nvidia the biggest kicking they've had in a few years. The 260s at the time were marketed for about £350-400 and the 4870s landed at £200. Crying ensues.



I still stand by a 4870 over a 260. Maybe not a 280 but they have some nice AA advantages and tend (though that may not be the case today) to have a slightly lower sale value.



As ever, the rule of thumb should still be: If in doubt, ask. And by ask, I don't mean the moron at PC world.



One thing that I'm Not a fan of, is ATi and Nvidia's new marketeering idea to hide their crossfire/SLi multi-gpu cards under a single gpu "sounding" name. I tend to find multi-gpu solutions are more a waste of money than anything and prefer it to be a tad more obvious what I'm about to look at without needing to check it further. Or rather, it used to be "If it ended in X2, avoid". Sigh. [Yes 7950GX2 I'm looking at you!]

[Gorath Alpha]

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Meanwhile, the purpose of this thread is not to argue the strengths and weaknesses of Red or Green.  I have made some alterations to NTK's original sequences, but I also lumped a lot of higher-end cards together, on purpose.   What I wanted to do was demonstrate how the names progress through the generatons, slowly pushing the 3 and 4 generations-old high end and medium cards downward in relation to newer ones, but not in blocks of generations'.members, not at all.   

The idea is to show both the relative weaknesses of older model cards as they age, but also how relatively slowly the high end cards have been slipping the last few generations.  I chose not to include obvious business class junk such as HD 4350s and Geforce 8400s, since their low n400 performance codes give them away so easily.

Time for a bump on this one.

Gorath
-

Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 22 novembre 2009 - 12:04 .

[lordmangafee]

It's my understanding that the dx11 capable nVidia cards still aren't out on the market due to a conflict of interest with Intel, is that correct? The new ATI card (http://www.amd.com/u...on-hd-5000.aspx) looks interesting. It has the dual processors as well.



I personaly like nVidia cards over ATI, however, I won't wait a year if I think I need a new one.



btw running 2 260's sli and I love em.

[Gorath Alpha]

The delay for whatever follows the 8000s and 200s has another cause, already referred to below.

Gorath Alpha wrote...

Molly25 wrote...

I am unable to play the game because it says it does not detect my video card.

I have an ATI Radeon 9600/9550/x1050. Do you know if this is supported or not?

No, it is not. it's too old, too slow, and has an older shader engine. 

(hey, Molly, I was already preparing the long treatise in response to a comment(s) about numbering schemes when you asked the question, and i tucked your part in at the top!) 

The performance number scheme that ATI still uses was born at ATI, but not applied rationally when first used.  The Radeon 9600s were newer than the 9500s, but slower.  The 9800s were both faster and newer than the 9700s, and the 9200s were leftovers from the previous 8500/9000 generation. 

The next year, nVIDIA had a full range from 5200 (crap) through 5800 (dustbuster fan), in progressive performance increments.  They were pretty awful when released.  Their Dx8 was much worse than the GF4 Ti-4000 cards' Dx8. 

The 5800 was retired, and the 5600 was down-ranked, then brand new 5700 and 5900 cards were created that literally had twinned (siamesed) cores with Dx8 handled by a Ti-4000 segment, and an advanced shader engine for higher levels, but not at all good at Dx9.  It didn't handle Dx9 natively, so was very slow.  From then through the 9000s, they had n600 as Mainline game territory, and n800 as high end game territory.  The original 6600 however, actually split the boundary, with the Vanilla card being more like a "6400" if such had been named that year. 

ATI also missed the mark that year, with the X600 being too weak for its number.  That continued for the X1000s, when the X1600 Pro was totally outclassed by the geforce 7600 GT, and the X1600 XT also trailing somewhat behind.  It took the X1650 XT to counterbalance the 7600 GT. 

In case you folks have missed it, nVIDIA is preparing to exit the end user market before competitive advantage embarrasses them.  AMD and ATI will sell chips that combine the CPU and GPU together in a few short years, and nVIDIA cannot reply to that threat.  They are moving in an entirely new direction for their future livelihood

Intel will attempt to ambush the AMD combo with its own GPU plus CPU, but we all know they will screw up the GPU part at first.  It remains to be seen if they can catch up in the second round.  The Intel response will head off into virgin territory compared to AMD's plans. 

The Geforce GTX 200s were nVIDIA's last half-generation based in the old competive arena.  Next February, the follow up chips will be dual purpose.  They will be usable for GPUs, but also for massively multi-CPU super computer applications (for which they will be prioritized). 

The Intel conflict involves nForce Chipsets for motherboards, not GPUs as stand-alone products. 

Gorath
-

[nubScotty]

Thanks for the post I was assuming my Geforce 8500GT was fairly good as it ran Bishock/Oblivion with fairly high graphics without issue but this game I have to run on absolute lowest settings to play smoothly.  Playing at 1680x1050, guess I need a new graphics card any recomendations for mid-top line graphics card?