ShoobieRat
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,932
Well...
1. I was noting that I wasn't going to pay $500 for the x800 (like you noted) but that I had found them for $400
2. After doing a lot of research on various benchmarks, I found that the test results could be very misleading. I'm not saying the x800 is the leader (as ATI claims), but it certainly ain't bad. Plus I ain't pay'n $100 extra for a card that pumps out a few extra frames at a resolution I don't use.
3. NVIDIA will have to work VERY hard, and produce a card that grossly outdoes the competition, before I consider another one. My last NVIDIA card (GeForce3) was a severe disappointment. Not to mention that NVIDIA's compatability with certain chipsets is a pain in the ass.
4. As for fearing change, I don't fear change. I have changed to NVIDIA. I went back to ATI. That should say something. I was unimpressed by NVIDIA's service, support, capatability, and usability. I don't have linux, so I don't care about that. I don't care if they don't have open-source drivers, as long as the card functions as they specify. And I got sick of ATI always being the one leading the technology, while NVIDIA was constantly doing the catch-up dance.
So come on. Impress me. I've read at least a dozen benchmarks since yesterday, including these two:
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/action/printarticle/1710/
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.html?i=2044
that tell me I really shouldn't be that worried about the latest-greatest NVIDIA card. So, with both cards rather neck-and-neck, the only question becomes how much has NVIDIA improved since the Geforce3 line, to get my business back?
The Geforce3 benchmarked great back in its day. Course it didn't really hold up to much. I even had to wait months and months before NVIDIA decided they would support the VIA chipsets again (which was an absolute pain).
1. I was noting that I wasn't going to pay $500 for the x800 (like you noted) but that I had found them for $400
2. After doing a lot of research on various benchmarks, I found that the test results could be very misleading. I'm not saying the x800 is the leader (as ATI claims), but it certainly ain't bad. Plus I ain't pay'n $100 extra for a card that pumps out a few extra frames at a resolution I don't use.
3. NVIDIA will have to work VERY hard, and produce a card that grossly outdoes the competition, before I consider another one. My last NVIDIA card (GeForce3) was a severe disappointment. Not to mention that NVIDIA's compatability with certain chipsets is a pain in the ass.
4. As for fearing change, I don't fear change. I have changed to NVIDIA. I went back to ATI. That should say something. I was unimpressed by NVIDIA's service, support, capatability, and usability. I don't have linux, so I don't care about that. I don't care if they don't have open-source drivers, as long as the card functions as they specify. And I got sick of ATI always being the one leading the technology, while NVIDIA was constantly doing the catch-up dance.
So come on. Impress me. I've read at least a dozen benchmarks since yesterday, including these two:
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/action/printarticle/1710/
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.html?i=2044
that tell me I really shouldn't be that worried about the latest-greatest NVIDIA card. So, with both cards rather neck-and-neck, the only question becomes how much has NVIDIA improved since the Geforce3 line, to get my business back?
The Geforce3 benchmarked great back in its day. Course it didn't really hold up to much. I even had to wait months and months before NVIDIA decided they would support the VIA chipsets again (which was an absolute pain).
