Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
nVidia has been a little slow to bring out their new GeForce FX cards, so ATI has posted some info on their next card already, the Radeon 9800.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>From ARS Technica:
The A98 and A98P both feature 400MHz RAMDAC, 8 pipeline architecture, 256 bit data width, 512Kb of serial flash ROM, AGP 8X/4X/2X compatibility, TV-out, support for simultaneous dual displays and DirectX 9.0/OpenGL support. In addition, the A98 will support 128MB of DDR memory and a core/memory clock speed of 325/310MHz. The A98P will support up to 256MB of DDR memory and has a core/memory clock speed of 400/460MHz.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is all windows news at the moment, but you can probably bet on seeing the Radeon 9800 on a Mac near you sooner or later.

--PB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
PosterBoy wrote:
nVidia has been a little slow to bring out their new GeForce FX cards...

nVidia's had a number of problems with the GeForce FX, including problems actually producing the chips in any sort of volume. Even though some companies are claiming to have shipped GeForce FX cards, the quantities are very limited.

If nVidia keeps having these sort of problems, ATi might end up with a considerable lead when it comes to 3D hardware. A pity, really, considering that ATi drivers don't hold a candle to nVidia drivers (on Windows, anyway, which is where I still do the majority of my gaming).
 

·
Vorlon Ambassador
Joined
·
5,295 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jfpoole:

If nVidia keeps having these sort of problems, ATi might end up with a considerable lead when it comes to 3D hardware. A pity, really, considering that ATi drivers don't hold a candle to nVidia drivers (on Windows, anyway, which is where I still do the majority of my gaming).
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, ATI already has the lead. The Radeon 9700 is faster than the Geforce 4 Ti and better than the Geforce FX. The Geforce FX isn't significantly faster than the Radeon 9700 and the Geforce FX is noisier (it has a loud fan and a large air scoop which take up the PCI slot beside the AGP slot) and more power hungry than the Radeon 9700. All-in-all the ATI Radeon 9700 is the better card. It looks like Nvidia is getting left in the dust.

As for ATI drivers, ATI is reportedly building the Radeon 9700's drivers from scratch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Kosh wrote:
Actually, ATI already has the lead.

Hence my mention of a "considerable lead". The Radeon 9700 is faster than the GeForce 4 Ti, but the GeForce 4 Ti has been out for a while longer than the Radeon 9700, so that's not surprising. What's surprising (at least to me) is that the GeForce FX isn't across-the-board faster than the Radeon 9700.

All-in-all the ATI Radeon 9700 is the better card. It looks like Nvidia is getting left in the dust.

I'm still convinced that the GeForce FX has a better implementation of, say, pixel and vertex shaders (which are increasingly important these days when it comes to producing high-quality images).

As for ATI drivers, ATI is reportedly building the Radeon 9700's drivers from scratch.

ATi hasn't been able to write good drivers for years. I'll be surprised if they suddenly start now.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I am going to side with jfpoole on this one, as ATI's Drivers for windows suck very hard. They do their best (I suppose), but nVidia will kick their butt around the block when it comes to driver support.

The GeForce FX wont be an across the board win for nVidia, but over the first couple months its out, they will probably eek more performance out of it.

--PB
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top