J
johns
CNET just put out a report on a couple of SLI with dual core
cpu sytems running 2 nVidia 7800s. Claimed that even with
600 watt psupplies, they could not run Doom3 on its highest
settings. Seems the problem is they need at least a kilowatt
psupply to run the "action" 3D games. Hmmmm! I just
built a similar system with only 1 7800 and AMD X2 4800+
dual core. It ran Doom3 on high settings using an Antec
SLK1650B case with 350 watt psupply. I had no problems
.... except .. as usual the game did not know jack about the
nVidia video card. It could not detect what it was, nor could
it adjust settings to take advantage of its capabilities. As
a result, the game itself defaulted to incompatible settings,
and that resulted in corruption of the game. I've seen this
plenty with nVidia cards. You have to guess what settings
are compatible, and they are generally lower than top
settings in the game. Once you get that right, the nVidia
card will be able to use its driver, and internal settings
to maximize the 3D appearance of the game. For example:
in Far Cry on ANY nVidia card, you cannot put one of the
video settings on Very High because that will auto-start
HDR and SM3.0 both of which conflict with AA and AF
..... patch 1.4 coming soon to correct that. Instead, if you
put the game settings on just High with Particles and
Texture on Medium, and turn AA off. The nVidia card
will make Far Cry look really good with very high FPS,
and no AA is needed because you want to set screen
rez higher than 1024x768 to compensate. That greately
unloads the cpu and gpu from all the rendering, and
you still get very nice 3D effects and appearance. My
conclusion is: nVidia can't write a video card driver
to save its butt. As a result, nVidia cards are very difficult
to configure in games. ATI, on the other hand, writes
extremely efficient drivers, that the games understand.
Autodetection of compatible settings in most games
is easy, and works. I have an older system .. AMD
3000+ with ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128 that totally
outperforms the new X2 system in every respect.
In Far Cry, the graphics are far superior to the SLI
7800s. Example: the 9800 can display flickering
torch lights on the surrounding trees and grass.
The 7800 cannot. I have tried 6800s, and they
cannot. The 9800 does it easily and looks great.
I ran similar test using COD2. Again, the 7800 struggled
at the higher settings under dx9, and I had to reinstall
and compensate .. no AA, only 1024x768 .. and still
the 7800 dual core system had low FPS. On the
9800 system, COD2 would barely run at all ... until
I switched to dx7. Now it runs super good, and the
graphics look great. AA 4X, 1024x768, FPS in the
high 60s, so the movement is smooth and quick.
I am nearly through COD2 on the 9800, and I'm
really enjoying it. So, I conclude ... CNET is dead
wrong about the psupply being the problem with
nVidia cards. The drivers are a joke, and it takes
a lot of work to get the card settings compatible
with the game code. Even then, there is simply
not an nVidia card on the market that can compete
with even an older ATI 9800 Pro. No amount of
kludging is going to fix this, until the nVidia coders
clean up their act, and nVidia hardware becomes
game compatible, and stops weird autoenable
of hardware settings that are not compatible with
any of the games out there. I don't care what
pile of junk you build, you can't run crap code on
it, and just keep turning up the heat. CNET should
run down to the game store and get a nice ATI
video card, and learn from that. Finally, my
older system cost $850 to build, and the X2 cost
about $1700 .. but I'm going to toss that nVidia
7800 and get an ATI 850. I might even up the
psupply to 450 watts. Big deal.
johns ( pro computer tech )
cpu sytems running 2 nVidia 7800s. Claimed that even with
600 watt psupplies, they could not run Doom3 on its highest
settings. Seems the problem is they need at least a kilowatt
psupply to run the "action" 3D games. Hmmmm! I just
built a similar system with only 1 7800 and AMD X2 4800+
dual core. It ran Doom3 on high settings using an Antec
SLK1650B case with 350 watt psupply. I had no problems
.... except .. as usual the game did not know jack about the
nVidia video card. It could not detect what it was, nor could
it adjust settings to take advantage of its capabilities. As
a result, the game itself defaulted to incompatible settings,
and that resulted in corruption of the game. I've seen this
plenty with nVidia cards. You have to guess what settings
are compatible, and they are generally lower than top
settings in the game. Once you get that right, the nVidia
card will be able to use its driver, and internal settings
to maximize the 3D appearance of the game. For example:
in Far Cry on ANY nVidia card, you cannot put one of the
video settings on Very High because that will auto-start
HDR and SM3.0 both of which conflict with AA and AF
..... patch 1.4 coming soon to correct that. Instead, if you
put the game settings on just High with Particles and
Texture on Medium, and turn AA off. The nVidia card
will make Far Cry look really good with very high FPS,
and no AA is needed because you want to set screen
rez higher than 1024x768 to compensate. That greately
unloads the cpu and gpu from all the rendering, and
you still get very nice 3D effects and appearance. My
conclusion is: nVidia can't write a video card driver
to save its butt. As a result, nVidia cards are very difficult
to configure in games. ATI, on the other hand, writes
extremely efficient drivers, that the games understand.
Autodetection of compatible settings in most games
is easy, and works. I have an older system .. AMD
3000+ with ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128 that totally
outperforms the new X2 system in every respect.
In Far Cry, the graphics are far superior to the SLI
7800s. Example: the 9800 can display flickering
torch lights on the surrounding trees and grass.
The 7800 cannot. I have tried 6800s, and they
cannot. The 9800 does it easily and looks great.
I ran similar test using COD2. Again, the 7800 struggled
at the higher settings under dx9, and I had to reinstall
and compensate .. no AA, only 1024x768 .. and still
the 7800 dual core system had low FPS. On the
9800 system, COD2 would barely run at all ... until
I switched to dx7. Now it runs super good, and the
graphics look great. AA 4X, 1024x768, FPS in the
high 60s, so the movement is smooth and quick.
I am nearly through COD2 on the 9800, and I'm
really enjoying it. So, I conclude ... CNET is dead
wrong about the psupply being the problem with
nVidia cards. The drivers are a joke, and it takes
a lot of work to get the card settings compatible
with the game code. Even then, there is simply
not an nVidia card on the market that can compete
with even an older ATI 9800 Pro. No amount of
kludging is going to fix this, until the nVidia coders
clean up their act, and nVidia hardware becomes
game compatible, and stops weird autoenable
of hardware settings that are not compatible with
any of the games out there. I don't care what
pile of junk you build, you can't run crap code on
it, and just keep turning up the heat. CNET should
run down to the game store and get a nice ATI
video card, and learn from that. Finally, my
older system cost $850 to build, and the X2 cost
about $1700 .. but I'm going to toss that nVidia
7800 and get an ATI 850. I might even up the
psupply to 450 watts. Big deal.
johns ( pro computer tech )