Is your graphics card fast enough?

Re: Re: For JSR's continuing education

Glad you read it, perhaps you missed the margin of vicory, or has the point flown by you?

They are VERY close in nearly all benches. In most cases, we're talking just a few fps

Re: Re: Re: For JSR's continuing education

No, I read all the points, and if you look at all my previous posts you'll already be aware of that fact. My point is, that we should always be objective when posting, and we should always avoid stretching the truth, or misleading others by posting selective information, just to maintain our fanboy status. Something to be aware of in the future as I'm sure you'll agree.

Re: Re: Re: Re: For JSR's continuing education

I agree. I just re-read this thread, and we are discussing the trivial. I still, however, disagree about the FX5900U being the fastest card out there. Nearly all these benches don't even take into account any FSAA level higher than 4x. Not to mention the quality at equal settings in the FSAA dept @ 4x. Any FSAA setting over4x, and the Radeon wins ALL the benchmarks, period.

Something to think about. Still not sure why you continue to call me a fanboy. Have I posted anything that is indicititive of that? I would think anyone who thinks the FX5900U the undisputed fastest card out there across all benches to be the fanboy

And who in their right mind would ever play at anything above 4x AA? Also where is the proof that the 9800 Pro is faster under these conditions?

In fact, up to now most of us have been happy with no FSAA at all. What is more important is that when games getting even more demanding on graphics cards, at least you can get a big boost by disabling any FSAA.

And you're at it again, posting misleading info by not stating the basis of your claims. For example, your quote "... anyone who thinks the FX5900U the undisputed fastest card out there across all benches to be the fanboy ..." is directly implying that I am claiming this, yet when you look at my posts there is no basis for this.

On the otherhand, you have made several posts that show non-objective and very misleading views, which are only applicable under certain constrained conditions which you do not state, and which are not normal conditions that most of us tend to use. What is more to the point is that you fail to give nVidia any credit at all, except when backed into a corner that you cannot argue your way out of. This is classic fanboy behaviour. Now go take a look at my posts, and you'll find very balanced objective views that are always open to being changed by good debate and suitable evidence. Not something you can say for your own contributions.

And you are right, we are arguing about nothing, so lets just stop, and leave it at that. Please have a nice day, and be good to yourself, and others.

Ace's Hardware has stumbled accross something interesting while testing out 3Dmark03 on a PII 350 and a Radeon 9700 Pro.

While doing some research on an old 350 MHz Pentium II system, Johan came across some interesting results while benchmarking 3DMark03. When equipped with a high-end video card, like a Radeon 9700 Pro, the 350 MHz Pentium II was able to more than keep pace with a 1.4 GHz Pentium III Celeron and even a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 in several of the 3DMark03 game tests.

Perhaps this should not come as a suprise, since 3DMark03 is, after all, primarily a video card benchmark. But how much of one? Given the sheer magnitude of difference between the 350 MHz Pentium II and more modern hardware, we decided to investigate further to determine whether or not these 3DMark03 results would be mirrored in real-world gaming situations.


Goes to show you that benches are diddly squat poop. :-D

Rely on your own judgements and REAL performance not benches.

that just goes to show you

how much the cpu fits into this equation....... play games? .....want to win?......get the big gun :grinthumb

Exactly. I think, if I understood what you just said, lol. It says a lot to prove that you don't need a very fast processor to run a benchmark and get a high score, but to actually play a game with high quality graphics you need very fast processor. It really goes to show how useless benchmarks can be. I've used 3D Mark 2003 but only for testing purposes. I didn't let it brainwash me into thinking that my computer was going to be able to handle a certain game.