Fermi, 100% increase over GT200

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="TheDuffman26"]The 8800 ultra debuted at $800 while the gtx and gts debuted at $600 and $400 respectively. Nvidia has launched cards at ~$600 ever since the 7 series and has been successful every generation since. Fermi will be no different.TheDuffman26

Like I said, it wasn't worth it then, and it won't be worth it now FOR ME.

My statement was clearly an opinion. Most of what people post on here are opinions.. It's not necessary for you to jump in and assume to "correct" my post. I was a die-hard Nvidia customer from 2003-2009, until it was time for me to upgrade late last year, and they didn't have anything close to competitive in my view. The only thing they sell currently that has the performance of the 5870 is the GTX295, which was too expensive, too hot, and too power-hungry for me. Not to mention that I already had a DX10 card (8800gts 512), and I knew DX11 was just around the corner.

Nvidia is a little late to the game this round, and their higher prices are going to hurt them far more now, given the state of the economy. There aren't any games on the market that demand a more powerful product than ATI is currently offering, so there is very little reason for people to buy Nvidia this time around.

Too bad you don't respresent the majority of GPU buyers. Enthusiasts like you make up 1-5% of consumers. No way is Nvidia going to profit solely from such a small segment of the market.kaitanuvax

[QUOTE="kaitanuvax"]Too bad you don't respresent the majority of GPU buyers. Enthusiasts like you make up 1-5% of consumers. No way is Nvidia going to profit solely from such a small segment of the market.TheDuffman26

...What? We're talking about Nvidia's $500+ GPU solutions, not entire series. The term "Fermi" as of now is synonymous with GF100, the chip that's supposedly twice as fast as a GTX 285.

[QUOTE="TheDuffman26"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Like I said, it wasn't worth it then, and it won't be worth it now FOR ME.

hartsickdiscipl

My statement was clearly an opinion. Most of what people post on here are opinions.. It's not necessary for you to jump in and assume to "correct" my post. I was a die-hard Nvidia customer from 2003-2009, until it was time for me to upgrade late last year, and they didn't have anything close to competitive in my view. The only thing they sell currently that has the performance of the 5870 is the GTX295, which was too expensive, too hot, and too power-hungry for me. Not to mention that I already had a DX10 card (8800gts 512), and I knew DX11 was just around the corner.

Nvidia is a little late to the game this round, and their higher prices are going to hurt them far more now, given the state of the economy. There aren't any games on the market that demand a more powerful product than ATI is currently offering, so there is very little reason for people to buy Nvidia this time around.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]a quick question tho, why do we exactly need the 59xx series and Fermi's double the performance of GTX2xx? i play at 1920x1080 with my GTS 250, everything maxed out and i get a minimum of 40-50 fps...TheDuffman26

Actually, even the HD5970 can't max out Crysis at 1920x1200. They can get around 40-50fps with 8xAA 0xAF at Very High, but remember, Crysis looks significantly better at Ultra High (tweaked cfg), and even Ultra High isn't as good looking as the original tech demo videos. There's still some ways to go before a card can 'max' Crysis by itself.

[QUOTE="TheDuffman26"]* fixedkaitanuvax

Too bad you don't respresent the majority of GPU buyers. Enthusiasts like you make up 1-5% of consumers. No way is Nvidia going to profit solely from such a small segment of the market.

ooh a pie chart watch out ppl this hombre means buidness.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="TheDuffman26"]* fixedTheDuffman26

My statement was clearly an opinion. Most of what people post on here are opinions.. It's not necessary for you to jump in and assume to "correct" my post. I was a die-hard Nvidia customer from 2003-2009, until it was time for me to upgrade late last year, and they didn't have anything close to competitive in my view. The only thing they sell currently that has the performance of the 5870 is the GTX295, which was too expensive, too hot, and too power-hungry for me. Not to mention that I already had a DX10 card (8800gts 512), and I knew DX11 was just around the corner.

Nvidia is a little late to the game this round, and their higher prices are going to hurt them far more now, given the state of the economy. There aren't any games on the market that demand a more powerful product than ATI is currently offering, so there is very little reason for people to buy Nvidia this time around.

Crysis and Crysis Warhead demand more than GT200 can do, unless you get a GTX295. Like I said, the GTX295 is too hot, too power-hungry, and too expensive. The 5870 allows me to max Crysis and Warhead at 1680x1050 with AA (which is a very common resolution for gamers), and it plays like butter. Try that with a GTX275/285. Grabbing the top spot in the GPU market is all about timing, and I think ATI has the right timing this round.

[QUOTE="TheDuffman26"][QUOTE="GazaAli"]a quick question tho, why do we exactly need the 59xx series and Fermi's double the performance of GTX2xx? i play at 1920x1080 with my GTS 250, everything maxed out and i get a minimum of 40-50 fps...xionvalkyrie

Actually, even the HD5970 can't max out Crysis at 1920x1200. They can get around 40-50fps with 8xAA 0xAF at Very High, but remember, Crysis looks significantly better at Ultra High (tweaked cfg), and even Ultra High isn't as good looking as the original tech demo videos. There's still some ways to go before a card can 'max' Crysis by itself.

Most people consider running a game at the highest out-of-the-box settings available to be "maxing" a game out. Using custom configs doesn't count, that's a whole different ballgame. That being said, the 5870 can max the game out at 1920x1200 without AA and give a good gameplay experience, while you yourself just confirmed that the 5970 can do it with high levels of AA. Running the game at 1920x1200 at Very High with AA on and getting 40-50fps is ridiculous power.

I know it's called Fermi or codenamed that. To me that codename is incredibly crap lol sounds like a ferbie, or at least thats what comes to mind.jamesfffan

Nvidia cards, I will not lie, tend to be of higher quality kaitanuvax

Considering that all nVidia and ATi graphics cards are made by 3rd parties now I think we can all agree that statement is BS.

I guess nvidia did it all wrong w/ the 7 series, 8 series, 9 series, and gt200 then. All huge mistakes by nvidia ;)TheDuffman26

Well the GT200 series was a refresh of the 9k series and the 9K series was a refresh of the 8k series. I wouldn't say they were all wrong but they certainly weren't innovative in that period of 3 generations. Hopefully Fermi redeems them for their lack-luster development as of late.

[QUOTE="kaitanuvax"]Nvidia cards, I will not lie, tend to be of higher quality tequilasunriser

Considering that all nVidia and ATi graphics cards are made by 3rd parties now I think we can all agree that statement is BS.

Well, I was referring to stock cooling. You can't deny the stock ones on the GT200s are pretty damn good. But yeah, the 3rd party coolers are a different story - the Nvidia cards that use those instead of stock cooling are usually cheaper than usual.

Can't say the same about ATI stock cooling...(except for the batman design of the HD 5000 series)

I think the reference coolers for both companies work well. If you are refering to the quality of the coolers on ATi's mid grade cards like the 4850 such as this...

It is becasue the card only needs a modest cooler, anything larger is unnecessary. Other than that both companies have dual-slot reference coolers for their enthusiast cards.

Then there are the 3rd parties using Zalmans and what ever else they happen to have surpus of lying around in their warehouses.

tequilasunriser, apparently this new card is totally different than the previous cards, which as you stated were rehashes of the series before. the problem now is that if you play anything other than crysis at 1080p, these new cards, whether it be nvidia or ATI, are overkill. nothing uses that much power, or if it does isnt well optimized (gta4, DA:O for some reason doesnt like my gtx 260 very much). the fact that most cards now are overkill and because of the bad economy, people think price:performance, not like before where it was just performance and people would put down 600 bucks for a card that they are going to upgrade in one year. even if nvidia cards destroy ATI cards in terms of performance ATI will still win the price:performance contest and therefore be ontop for a while until the economic situation for many gets better.

tequilasunriser, apparently this new card is totally different than the previous cards, which as you stated were rehashes of the series before. the problem now is that if you play anything other than crysis at 1080p, these new cards, whether it be nvidia or ATI, are overkill. nothing uses that much power, or if it does isnt well optimized (gta4, DA:O for some reason doesnt like my gtx 260 very much). the fact that most cards now are overkill and because of the bad economy, people think price:performance, not like before where it was just performance and people would put down 600 bucks for a card that they are going to upgrade in one year. even if nvidia cards destroy ATI cards in terms of performance ATI will still win the price:performance contest and therefore be ontop for a while until the economic situation for many gets better.

ironman388

Definitely, I don't disagree with you there, but we need nVidia to win this one so the prices remain competitive. Not only that but if the technology doesn't get more advanced then neither do the games, though we do have consoles to blame for that as well.tequilasunriser

actually there is something good about consoles and it is that, because the hardware is so crappy, the makers of games have to work really hard to better optimize games so that they can run them. if pc game developers other than Valve and Blizzard took this mentally (those two already have it), we might not even need Fermi and the new cards.

[QUOTE="tequilasunriser"]

Definitely, I don't disagree with you there, but we need nVidia to win this one so the prices remain competitive. Not only that but if the technology doesn't get more advanced then neither do the games, though we do have consoles to blame for that as well.ironman388

actually there is something good about consoles and it is that, because the hardware is so crappy, the makers of games have to work really hard to better optimize games so that they can run them. if pc game developers other than Valve and Blizzard took this mentally (those two already have it), we might not even need Fermi and the new cards.

That is definitely true especially Valve and Bliz, but there is also the other side. The companies that develop around the console first mostly due to knowledge of SDKs (easy, fast, lazy development) and thwarting piracy, then we get the console port to PC. It isn't always bad but sometimes it is. Thinking about how poorly executed GTA IV and Modern Warfare 2 and how gimped Bioshock was makes me relish the days of PC exclusivity. tequilasunriser

At least Bioware didn't do us bad with a great specially-made DA:O PC version that was much better than the console in all respects.

You'll probably want to kill me but I don't like Bioware's RPGs. KOTOR, ME, and DA:O just didn't do it for me. I'll take your word for it though. :Dtequilasunriser

DA:O was my first Bioware game TBH. It actually was pretty decent.

Interesting stuff! Thanks for linking to these articles. The only thing I could see driving me to buy one of these (assuming a $500+ price tag) would be if another Crysis came out. Meaning another game that brings all current hardware to it's knees. I just don't see it happening though, and the 5870 eats Crysis alive for me. Looks like unless something totally unforseen happens, I'll be sticking with the Cypress for awhile.

Well, hopefully it is not saying Fermi GT399 = GT201 x 2.

magicalclick

That would be hilarious. But with 512 cores, I think it will be a beast. A very expensive, fashionably late beast.

I'm still holding off all judgement until someone actually reports their OWN tests.

I'm not going to think anything Nvidia says is true until I see 3rd party testing.

most of those links are broken. the physics water demo was neat but i really want to see some benchies.ferret-gamer

When I see benchmarks I'll believe it. More than just FC2.

well being fermi is coming out in march and my b-day is the 16th the dam thing better be affordable XD

well being fermi is coming out in march and my b-day is the 16th the dam thing better be affordable XD

Neo_revolution7

100% increase!!!!!!????

I'm tempted to sell the 5870 if that's true...

100% increase!!!!!!????

I'm tempted to sell the 5870 if that's true...

scoots9

For what reason? Just to have the best? The 5800 series should be eating all games alive for a couple of years.

[QUOTE="scoots9"]

100% increase!!!!!!????

I'm tempted to sell the 5870 if that's true...

hartsickdiscipl

For what reason? Just to have the best? The 5800 series should be eating all games alive for a couple of years.

Check out THIS article that Tom's just released.

As with any GPU, from either AMD or Nvidia, I'll have to wait for independent benchmarks. The real question is how well it will scale down to lower tiers, and how much those will cost. It's all about the price/perfomance ratios for me!