Geforce FX card?

[Guest BrownDog]

Does anyone know when we can expect to see these in the stores? Can we expect a drop in prices on some of the 128mb cards which are on the shelves at ther moment?Thanks

[Tabs 2,790]

Read some reviews before thinking about getting one - everything I've read shows it only neck and neck with the Radeon 9700 Pro and ATI is about to release a new card soon... Plus the GFFX has that ridiculously loud fan assembly on it.

[Guest Sabadin]

Actually only the Ultra has the fan, and it's only available to those who pre-ordered. Most stores are getting the non-ultra clocked at 400, which basically doesnt hold it's own against anything but a GF4Ti once you turn up FSAA + AF. Either way your looking at the FX coming out around the same time as the Radeon 9600 & 9800 so at least all the current cards are going to see nice price drops :).

[Arklight1 140]

Actually the FX card beat the 9700 Pro in almost every single test...maybe not by much but it still won. Not to mention it is going to be the same price as the Radeon 9700 Pro (the FX Non-Ultra is cheaper).And best of all...it isn't ATI!!!!! :) :) :)^^No sucky drivers to deal with!!! ;)Down side is the loud fan assembly.To answer the original question, the FX should be in stores on the 9th of March or a little later. HOWEVER, I have seen OEM versions of the FX online. Personally I don't buy anything OEM though.IMHO this is what it comes down to:1. The FX won almost every performance test.2. The FX Ultra is going to be the same price as the Radeon 9700 Pro.3. The FX is supported by Nvidia and not ATI.So if you break it down....The FX is faster, the same price and has MUCH better driver support.Seems like an easy decision to me :)Also, did I mention that the Radeon R350 is "supposedly" going to be the first card to break the $399.99 mark due to the increased cost in RAM for the video card?And when ATI releases their R350 the NV35 will be released around the same time ;)Shane

[Arklight1 140]

Sabadin, the new Radeon cards aren't expected till April sometime (R350).Around the same time as the NV35.Shane

[Guest]

WAY off-base with your ATI/driver comments sir, not to mention how you glorify the FX's 'not by much' improvement in performance. So what? The FX is 6 months behind the 9700 Pro and I myself expected it to surge pretty far ahead, but it barely gets by. Why is the FX such a great thing? Say what you like, but unless you're in a cave, the R300 chips make the most sense right now, and shortly the R350 I suspect...but who knows?Now let's see, how many driver releases have there been since September for the R300? Check it out yourself. The Radeon 9700 PRO gives absolutely superb graphics at essentially no cost in performance in FS2002, and with complete stablility.Whether the forthcoming FX will do this is still unknown, despite all the previews. cheers, Greg G

[Guest Sabadin]

So if the FX is so good why would they feel the need to release an even better card a month later? And as for the performance thing, it won only with all the features turned off. Once you turn FSAA + AF to max the 9700 walks all over it in terms of image quality and speed, that's shown in pretty much every preview on the net. Not what one would expect from a card that's had 6 months over it's competition. Hopefully the NV35 will put them back on stride.

[Guest Bigshot]

Here's how the GFFX Ultra beats the 9700 Pro. Only Nvidia would call this a win:Baseline Dungeon Siege: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 15% Dungeon Siege with FSAA & AF: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 80% Comanche 4, NASCAR 2002 and IL-2 Sturmovik Baseline Comanche 4: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 3% Comanche 4 with FSAA & AF: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 105% Baseline NASCAR 2002: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 26% NASCAR 2002 with FSAA & AF: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 44% Baseline IL-2 Sturmovik: GPUs are even IL-2 Sturmovik with FSAA & AF: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 48% Baseline Advanced Pixel Shader: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 46% Advanced Pixel Shader with FSAA & AF: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by 87% Baseline Pixel Shader: GeForceFX ahead by 39% Pixel Shader with FSAA & AF: Radeon 9700 Pro ahead by %134 And that was the Ultra. I can only imagine how the GFFX non-ultra which is what will be available retail will do.The R350 is due out in the next 30 days. That one is suppose to be 20 to 40 percent faster than the 9700 Pro. We'll just have to wait and see. The R400 is due out later this summer.

[Arklight1 140]

Uhhh, Mhawk...I didn't say the FX was "such a great thing". I was comparing it to the 9700 Pro......And my ATI driver comments are NOWHERE NEAR off base. ATI has been know for years for having terrible drivers, if you didn't know that then you need to get out more.And Sabadin, if they release the FX in a few weeks...and ATI has the pro out which is very similar....how are they not already keeping stride?? because they don't have anything out right now except for the TI4600? My CO in my IL-2 squad had a Radeon 9700 Pro for 1 week and returned it and re-installed his GF4 TI4600. In his words, "I'm not paying $400 for 5 FPS and better FSAA". To each his own I guess. (Personally, I'd spend $400 for that LOLOLOL).I didn't buy an ATI 9700 Pro when it came out because I have too many friends with ATI cards and I always have to hear them complain about them. Seriously, posting on the Rage3d site that the best way to install the new Radeon is with a REFORMAT....give me a break!!!!I'll stick with Nvidia thanks. I never have problems, I never have to worry about drivers, and I don't have to worry about going to an Nvidia tech site and having them recommend to me that I reformat my HD to install a silly video card.The majority don't have to reformat but cetainly enough for me to stay away from their products.If you have one, good for you. If it works for you, great. I personally have had WAY to many good experiences with Nvidia to switch over to ATI. And I'll be honest, I was [-] close to buying a 9700 PRO but I decided against it and I'm happy. If I want to get the FX later no big deal...I still have the money that I would have otherwise (IMHO) thrown away on ATI.When I was working at CompUSA and BestBuy you would have been amazed at how many ATI cards we had returned and/or brought in for service (warranty plan/replacement). WAY to many to get me to spend over $300!!To each his own :)Shane

[Arklight1 140]

Bigshot it was already stated above that the FX beat the 9700 Pro by a small margin. Hence Nvidias decision for a limited release of the NV30 in favor of working on the NV35.:)ShaneP.S. Whether you win a race by a second or an hour....it is still a win.

[Guest Bigshot]

The GFFX will do better than the Ti4600 for $400. That's about all. It's not even in the same league as the ATI9700 Pro. BTW; the release date for the NV35 is late summer from what I understand. Nvidia is not even done with the engineering on that card yet. No way we'll see it till late this year unless they got some magic up their sleeves. ATI will rule 2003. Let's hope Nvidia gets their act together for competition in 2004. Also, there's nothing wrong with the ATI drivers. Matter of fact, ATI has been working very closely with the various gamers adding tweaks here and their for popular games that had a few problems in the beginning and also been working to cure some problems with motherboards that wasn't their problem in the first place. Everything is in pretty good shape right now. Now, that takes a pretty special company to have their trouble shooters out cruising the forums looking to help out folks. Yes, ATI had problems in the past. They've corrected them. Time to move on. I'm not brand loyal. I've always used Nvidia cards. Just bought one for my wife's computer this week. For gaming, I'll use the best and fastest. Right now, that's ATI.

[Guest]

<<<< I'm not brand loyal. I've always used Nvidia cards. Just bought one for my wife's computer this week. For gaming, I'll use the best and fastest. Right now, that's ATI. >>>Well put BigshotFranklin

[michal 44]

>For gaming, >I'll use the best and fastest. Right now, that's ATI. Absolutely. I preach the same mantra. And what Alienware or Falcon-NW recommend nowadays in their fastest gaming computers - 9700 Pro. They know their business very well and if this card was troublesome in any respect they would not put it in their systems and give you 3 years warranty. Shane is way off base. I understand one may love Nvidia but at least he should not spread anti-ATI 'propaganda'.Michael J.

[Guest Rob]

Someone pass me the R400 .. out in July. Expected to be 40% faster than the 9700 Pro. nVidia .. well .. just what the heck happened to nVidia?

[Tabs 2,790]

The ATI driver comments *are* waaay off base - yes they've had crappy drivers in the past, but as soon as they made a commitment to really compete with Nvidia, the assembled a whole new driver team and the result was the Catalyst driver, which by all accounts I've read is equal if not superior to the Detonator in its quality. My next vid card (for FS9) is gonna be an R350...