I just wanted to say this: you <b>do</b> now the screenshot you're all bashing nVidia for (<a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/uploads//post-10-1091515728.jpg' target='_blank'>this one</a>) was taken on a <b>GF4 Ti4200</b>, alright?
Eek deviously posted it and pretended to it to be a proper nVidia screenshot in order to bash them. And I have to say you've all fell for it. <b>Ofcourse</b> Doom3 doesn't look that ugly on a GFFX or GF6, infact, there's <u>NO</u> IQ differences whatsoever with the latest generations nVidia and ATi.
<!--QuoteBegin-Quaunaut+Aug 19 2004, 06:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Quaunaut @ Aug 19 2004, 06:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Only thing I'm wondering about with both engines, is why in the hell don't they use Detailed textures? Their textures look like crap up close, UT2k4's don't. Maybe they should implement them? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Detail textures make everything look like papier mache. They work on some surfaces, but not on many. When the engine can support up to 2048x2048 textures, you don't need them.
<!--QuoteBegin-Travis Dane+Aug 20 2004, 07:02 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Travis Dane @ Aug 20 2004, 07:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I just wanted to say this: you <b>do</b> now the screenshot you're all bashing nVidia for (<a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/uploads//post-10-1091515728.jpg' target='_blank'>this one</a>) was taken on a <b>GF4 Ti4200</b>, alright?
Eek deviously posted it and pretended to it to be a proper nVidia screenshot in order to bash them. And I have to say you've all fell for it. <b>Ofcourse</b> Doom3 doesn't look that ugly on a GFFX or GF6, infact, there's <u>NO</u> IQ differences whatsoever with the latest generations nVidia and ATi.
Thank you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The 6800 is the only card I have seen recently from Nvidia that had comparable quality to a ATI card. However the FX line of video cards is notorious for <a href='http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040414/geforce_6800-46.html' target='_blank'>cutting corners</a> in the quality department.
Not to mention ATI's X800 is <a href='http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQyLDI=' target='_blank'>only 10-20 FPS slower</a> than the 6800 in Doom 3, as opposed to HL2 where the 6800 lags behind the X800 by <b>55 FPS</b> with the <i>lowest</i> settings (0af 0aa Max Detail).
<!--QuoteBegin-TenSix+Aug 20 2004, 06:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TenSix @ Aug 20 2004, 06:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The 6800 is the only card I have seen recently from Nvidia that had comparable quality to a ATI card. However the FX line of video cards is notorious for <a href='http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040414/geforce_6800-46.html' target='_blank'>cutting corners</a> in the quality department.
Not to mention ATI's X800 is <a href='http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQyLDI=' target='_blank'>only 10-20 FPS slower</a> than the 6800 in Doom 3, as opposed to HL2 where the 6800 lags behind the X800 by <b>55 FPS</b> with the <i>lowest</i> settings (0af 0aa Max Detail).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If you bothered to look into that a little further... you'd know that they've already fixed that in patch 1.2. Article located <a href='http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040705/farcry-02.html' target='_blank'>here</a>. Another myth bites the dust.
10-20 FPS in a 60FPS frame is certainly not something to take lightely, that's a nice 30% slower (Not to mention the GT easely outruns the X800 XTPE). And I would like to have the benchmark URL partaining to HL2, as it isn't even released yet, so it was performed on a nasty Beta, very nice I must say.
Comments
Eek deviously posted it and pretended to it to be a proper nVidia screenshot in order to bash them. And I have to say you've all fell for it. <b>Ofcourse</b> Doom3 doesn't look that ugly on a GFFX or GF6, infact, there's <u>NO</u> IQ differences whatsoever with the latest generations nVidia and ATi.
Thank you.
Detail textures make everything look like papier mache. They work on some surfaces, but not on many. When the engine can support up to 2048x2048 textures, you don't need them.
Eek deviously posted it and pretended to it to be a proper nVidia screenshot in order to bash them. And I have to say you've all fell for it. <b>Ofcourse</b> Doom3 doesn't look that ugly on a GFFX or GF6, infact, there's <u>NO</u> IQ differences whatsoever with the latest generations nVidia and ATi.
Thank you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The 6800 is the only card I have seen recently from Nvidia that had comparable quality to a ATI card. However the FX line of video cards is notorious for <a href='http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040414/geforce_6800-46.html' target='_blank'>cutting corners</a> in the quality department.
Not to mention ATI's X800 is <a href='http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQyLDI=' target='_blank'>only 10-20 FPS slower</a> than the 6800 in Doom 3, as opposed to HL2 where the 6800 lags behind the X800 by <b>55 FPS</b> with the <i>lowest</i> settings (0af 0aa Max Detail).
Not to mention ATI's X800 is <a href='http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQyLDI=' target='_blank'>only 10-20 FPS slower</a> than the 6800 in Doom 3, as opposed to HL2 where the 6800 lags behind the X800 by <b>55 FPS</b> with the <i>lowest</i> settings (0af 0aa Max Detail).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you bothered to look into that a little further... you'd know that they've already fixed that in patch 1.2. Article located <a href='http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040705/farcry-02.html' target='_blank'>here</a>. Another myth bites the dust.
10-20 FPS in a 60FPS frame is certainly not something to take lightely, that's a nice 30% slower (Not to mention the GT easely outruns the X800 XTPE). And I would like to have the benchmark URL partaining to HL2, as it isn't even released yet, so it was performed on a nasty Beta, very nice I must say.