Tomb Raider AOD benches: Bad news for Nvidia

[who be dat?]

http://www.beyond3d.com/misc/traod_dx9perf/

This an article at Beyond 3d talking about using the game Tomb Raider: Angel
of Darkness as a benchmark. I haven't played the game or demo, but
supposedly the game itself sucks. However, the game engine is supposedly
the first DX9 title available and is state of the art. In the article, they
performed tests between the latest ATi and Nvidia boards. The Nvidia cards,
in this DX9 benchmark, did bad. Very bad. This article is a very good read
if you are interested.

Something interesting to add to this though. Supposedly, someone wrote a
letter to Valve asking them how they felt the DX9 performance of Half-Life 2
would be on the cards. The response they got back was that the performance
of HL2 on the ATi cards and Nvidia cards would be similar to the results
obtained in the Beyond3d article. You can read it at:

http://www.3dgpu.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=315

If this is true, this shows how bad Nvidia's new cards are. No wonder
Nvidia dropped out of the Futuremark program. Nvidia saw how bad their
cards were going to be at Dx9 and pulled out of their program to cover their
asses. "Benchmarks aren't important, it's the games that matter!!" Yeah,
whatever con artists. Congrats Nvidia, you were correct. The games are
comming out and they are indeed showing they matter, big time.

If this is an indication of how all Dx9 games will run on the FX line of vid
cards, I feel sorry for people who bought these cards. They were ripped
off. Bad.

I was looking to replace my Nvidia card not long ago. I was fed up with
Nvidia's driver "optimizations", saw how good the new ATi cards were, so I
bought a 9800 Pro. I'm feeling better and better about that decision
everyday.

Chris Smith

 

[Tea Nes]

What about the people that are stuck with Nvidia cause they got no cash.
Help me!

 

[« Les »]

<snip>

Read the reply to the post that is 4th off bottom

http://tinyurl.com/lhpp

remember, this is from HL2 dev team

 

[Andrew Stirling]

Well that may well be the case. But in my opinion if I can't get great
performance on my FX5900Ultra on my P4 3GHz running at 3.27 then the game
isn't worth buying.

 

[Strontium]

I guess there won't ever be a game worth buying, ever again then. Might as
well slap a Voodoo Banshee in your box.

-
Andrew Stirling stood up at show-n-tell, in
(e-mail address removed), and said:

 

[Andrew Stirling]

That statement makes no sense. Are you suggesting that it's acceptable to
release a game which does not produce good performance on a machine which
contains the fastest (or as near as makes no difference) cpu possible at the
time of release on the fastest (or 2nd fastest) graphics card available?
My guess is that it'll run on my system just fine.

 

[Strontium]

Game vendors will release whatever the Hell they want. Whether it's
accepable, or not, is up to the individual. All we, as consumers, can do is
decide what we want to play and make sure that our hardware is up to snuff.
Your statement that 'because that game will not perform greatly on the card
you have makes the game not worth buying' seems to make less sense than my
statement. If you don't want to play it, don't. Just don't go around
saying games suck, because you bought a shitty card based on hype.

-
Andrew Stirling stood up at show-n-tell, in
(e-mail address removed), and said:

 

[Andrew Stirling]

Didn't say it would suck... I said it wasn't worth buying - are you
suggesting that I should buy a game which doesn't perform well on my
system??. Like I said though...I fully expect it to perform very well on my
machine. Now kindly lay off the insults until you learn to read ...****face.

 

[Strontium]

I think you're the one that needs to learn reading comprehension, dillweed.
Stop getting your panties in a knot just because you have a $400 piece of
shit that sucks wrt FSAA and AF...but, your bitterness is understandable.
Cya shithead.

-
Andrew Stirling stood up at show-n-tell, in
(e-mail address removed), and said:

 

[who be dat?]

What a stupid comment. You spend all that money on your vid card (none of
the FX's are cheap as I recall) and you're going to place the blame on the
game and forfiet something?! Stupid...

Chris Smith

 

[who be dat?]

bwhahahaha Exactly...

Chris Smith

I think you're the one that needs to learn reading comprehension, dillweed.
Stop getting your panties in a knot just because you have a $400 piece of
shit that sucks wrt FSAA and AF...but, your bitterness is understandable.
Cya shithead.

-
Andrew Stirling stood up at show-n-tell, in
(e-mail address removed), and said:


--
Strontium

"It's no surprise, to me. I am my own worst enemy. `Cause every
now, and then, I kick the livin' shit `outta me." - Lit

 

[J.Clarke]

I didn't just buy the card for half life 2!!! It runs every game I
have and play fantastically well but I still spend most of my time
playing winning eleven 7 on my Playstation 2. If it's that bad for all
future games which i seriously doubt...I'll just punt my current card
on e-bay and buy a radeon. No big deal really. besides the point i was
trying to make was that although the 9800 will undoubtedly be faster
than the fx5900 for Half Life 2...I still expect good performance from
my FX5900 in Half Life2. As for my video card being expensive...it's
not. My car's expensive, my house is expensive. If I wanted to buy a
9800 tomorrow I could.

Do it now before you get the expensive wife to go with the house and car

 

[Andrew Stirling]

I didn't just buy the card for half life 2!!! It runs every game I have and
play fantastically well but I still spend most of my time playing winning
eleven 7 on my Playstation 2. If it's that bad for all future games which i
seriously doubt...I'll just punt my current card on e-bay and buy a radeon.
No big deal really. besides the point i was trying to make was that although
the 9800 will undoubtedly be faster than the fx5900 for Half Life 2...I
still expect good performance from my FX5900 in Half Life2. As for my video
card being expensive...it's not. My car's expensive, my house is expensive.
If I wanted to buy a 9800 tomorrow I could.

 

[Thomas]

My car's expensive, my house is expensive. If I
wanted to buy a 9800 tomorrow I could.

Congratulations, hahahahaha ;-P

Thomas
(Radeon 9500 np 128 MB, modded to 9700, faster than a 400 dollar GF FX 5900
;-) )

 

[Crash7]

That statement makes no sense. Are you suggesting that it's acceptable to
release a game which does not produce good performance on a machine which
contains the fastest (or as near as makes no difference) cpu possible at the
time of release on the fastest (or 2nd fastest) graphics card available?
My guess is that it'll run on my system just fine.

Not to get between you two guys, but the point is it appears that any
game that is going to use DX9 ps2.0 effects is probably going to
suffer a bit on Nvidia cards. I imagine developers will put in DX8
fallbacks, but of course those might not look as good. And you'll
probably be able to disable those effects entirely, but if you're
shelling out $400 for a videocard, you shouldn't have to do that.


Crash7
remove x's from address to email

 

[Andrew Stirling]

Not to get between you two guys, but the point is it appears that any
game that is going to use DX9 ps2.0 effects is probably going to
suffer a bit on Nvidia cards. I imagine developers will put in DX8
fallbacks, but of course those might not look as good. And you'll
probably be able to disable those effects entirely, but if you're
shelling out $400 for a videocard, you shouldn't have to do that.


Crash7
remove x's from address to email

Well maybe...but the tomb raider game which is supposed to be the hard and
fast evidence of how awful DX9 games are on the FX5900 actually runs pretty
damn good.

 

[McGrandpa]

Well maybe...but the tomb raider game which is supposed to be the
hard and fast evidence of how awful DX9 games are on the FX5900
actually runs pretty damn good.

I agree. I have just seen the impact going from Det. 44.03 to 45.23
has, and
I went back to 44.03 for now. AoD runs fine with everything on with my
FX5900-128.
But then, everything seems to run fine with R9800 and Cat 3.6 too.
I've learned to take all the talk, and even some of the benchmarks, with
a grain of salt. Especially when it's fanboys talking. Hardware is
hardware. Both are damn good.
And they're quiet too They also cost the same. XP Pro likes both of
em.
Right now, it appears both ATI and Nvidia are both in flux with their
hardware, both are steadily coming out with new versions and better
results. It's a great time to be in the market for a new vid card!
Prices for NEW technology are the same as three years ago! And the
prices are dropping faster, we don't have to wait a year to see $100
shaved off.
And both are excellent for 2D work too
Nvidia has the habit of 'fix one, break another' several times before
the drivers really get to both fast and stable. ATI has been taking
longer between releases, but tries hard to deliver fast and stable at
one time. If anything, I think ATI is beginning to keep an edge on
drivers now. That's quite a big deal, considering their history with
drivers.
Can't wait for HL2!
McG.

 

[Andrew Stirling]

I agree. I have just seen the impact going from Det. 44.03 to 45.23
has, and
I went back to 44.03 for now. AoD runs fine with everything on with my
FX5900-128.
But then, everything seems to run fine with R9800 and Cat 3.6 too.
I've learned to take all the talk, and even some of the benchmarks, with
a grain of salt. Especially when it's fanboys talking. Hardware is
hardware. Both are damn good.
And they're quiet too They also cost the same. XP Pro likes both of
em.
Right now, it appears both ATI and Nvidia are both in flux with their
hardware, both are steadily coming out with new versions and better
results. It's a great time to be in the market for a new vid card!
Prices for NEW technology are the same as three years ago! And the
prices are dropping faster, we don't have to wait a year to see $100
shaved off.
And both are excellent for 2D work too
Nvidia has the habit of 'fix one, break another' several times before
the drivers really get to both fast and stable. ATI has been taking
longer between releases, but tries hard to deliver fast and stable at
one time. If anything, I think ATI is beginning to keep an edge on
drivers now. That's quite a big deal, considering their history with
drivers.
Can't wait for HL2!
McG.

good post. i've nothing but respect for the ati team for coming up with such
a great card. after nvidia murdered 3dfx i feared they'd control everything.
good to see such healthy competition and i'm glad to be in a position where
i can choose between the two cards.

 

[Andrew Stirling]

I didn't just buy the card for half life 2!!! It runs every game I
have and play fantastically well but I still spend most of my time
playing winning eleven 7 on my Playstation 2. If it's that bad for all
future games which i seriously doubt...I'll just punt my current card
on e-bay and buy a radeon. No big deal really. besides the point i was
trying to make was that although the 9800 will undoubtedly be faster
than the fx5900 for Half Life 2...I still expect good performance from
my FX5900 in Half Life2. As for my video card being expensive...it's
not. My car's expensive, my house is expensive. If I wanted to buy a
9800 tomorrow I could.

Do it now before you get the expensive wife to go with the house and car
<eg>.


lol!

 

[Who Me?]

Game vendors will release whatever the Hell they want. Whether it's
accepable, or not, is up to the individual. All we, as consumers, can do is
decide what we want to play and make sure that our hardware is up to snuff.
Your statement that 'because that game will not perform greatly on the card
you have makes the game not worth buying' seems to make less sense than my
statement. >

I don't know your age, but I can tell you never worked in a marketing
department or ever will if you repeat that above statement in a
interview.

Maybe it hasn't occurred to you, but game vendors are in it to make
profits. They don't make profits selling to hard core gamers. They
make profits by selling to casual gamers. People who may only play
2-3 games and own a mid performance card (at best, more probably under
$100) and have no intention in buying a $160 card to play a $40 game.
Remember even the Radeon 9500 plays that game in the low 20s frame
rates, most people don't even own that level of card. They'll move on
to a new game that will play efficiently with their present day card.