Slashdot Mirror
nVidia GeForce 2 Ultra Unveiled
Jacek Fedorynski was one of the folks who wrote in with a huge slew of reviews of the new GeForce 2 Ultra - starting with Hot Hardware, moving to RIVA 3D, heading to 3DGPU, and ending with FiringSquad, and nV news and probably all the other sites.
I dunno, I just question why people like nVidia so much...
Because they make good hardware at a good price with great Windows drivers.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
Yes I'm pissed at NVIDIA for Be thing. But given that the company does so much for it's users in a day where videocard companies are generally down the tube, I forgive them for it.
NVIDIA is still toe-ing the XFree86 market. But they're doing it whole-heartedly, and the drivers have improved quite a bit.
As for the time it took to release, remember this. The specs for XFree86 weren't really set that early in the game. The driver ABI changed up until right before it's release. Also, an OpenGL driver is a complete implementation of OpenGL. Not only does it bang interrupts, but totally implements the entire pipeline. Functionally, it does just as much as Mesa, but is slightly easier to code because most functions don't need emultors. It's a wonder they got it out in the time they did. As a preempt to any OSS comments, remember, this isn't just a driver, it's an OpenGL implementation. It's also the highest quality GL implemenation on a consumer level card. It is simply too much to ask them to OSS it. They'd be giving away all the tweeks to the GL pipeline, not just register level info. Matrox is really hurting for a good OpenGL ICD. Is it really fair to ask NVIDIA to give them one?
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Expensive, large toasters. That require their own 220V power outlet.
Wah!
Put blame where blame is due. Lambaste Linus and his desicion to not put in a stable driver API.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
At 64MB and 200MHz, my desktop PC is less powerful than this video card! Has anyone ported NetBSD to run on the GeForce2 yet?
Actually, it won't be 10x more powerful than the PS2. More like twice as powerful. That's nothing. In the same situation, the original Playstation whooped Nintendo's ass even though the N64 was more than 3X faster, and featured stuff like texture filtering and full screen anti-aliasing (which PSX doesn't support.) Of course, Nintendo actually knew the console industry, and knew how to deliver a simple, stable, easy to use product. Microsoft is bringing too much PC garbage into the XBox to be able to do that. XBox will not be simple, stable, nor easy to use. It will require updates, and upgrades, and patches. Nothing against MS, it's just that it doesn't understand the industry. None of this takes into account the fact that Playstation 2 is coming out more than a year earlier. As history shows us, that's a killer. PSX whopped Nintendo largely due to the fact that N64 came out more than a year later. Lastly, Sony is a lot bigger than Microsoft, and they have more developer support and consumer mindshare. MS is going to be eaten for lunch.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Disclamer: I work for Matrox
I don't know what you mean by Matrox not having a "full" ICD. Can you explain what isn't "full" about the one available on their web site?
Maybe I'm wrong, but...
If quality is what counts (you said they make quality products) then why is there a new card every 6
months or less? Also, why new drivers nearly every week?
There are two ways this could be viewed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Quality counts, but so does speed. Unlike most companies, NVIDIA manages to keep one from being exclusive of the other. NVIDIA cards are all high quality, but they are released often so that NVIDIA stays on top of the industry. Unlike 3DFx they are not resting on their asses waiting for everyone to catch up. As for new drivers, why is a new Linux kernel released every few weeks? Does that mean that the kernel isn't high quality? Of course not. NVIDIA continually improves the quality of their drivers. There are always tweeks you can implement, and NVIDIA is taking already high quality drivers and making them better. You're complaining about that?
It would seem to me that the wisest choice would be to release a solid card with solid drivers, rather
than a card plagued with incompatibility issues and drivers that constantly improve performance on
each release.
>>>>>>>>
Where is there any indication that NVIDIA's cards aren't solid? The NVIDIA drivers are rock solid. (Have you actually used the Windows ones?) They're all fast, stable, and very compatible. NVIDIA is one of the only cards a workstation 3D user could seriously consider using with apps like 3D Studio. As for compatiblity issues, they're in your head. There have always been problems with crappy hardware and NVIDIA's boards. There were problems with NVIDIA's boards and the early Super 7 ones. There were problems using them in lower-quality boards because of the large amount of current they use. The Via KX133 chip had problems with them. Of course, they were also incompatible with the Thunderbird Athlon's, so it seems that the fault lies with VIA. NVIDIA cards are big, and take a lot of current. If your motherboard manufactuer isn't building stuff to spec, then how can you possibly blame NVIDIA for compatiblity issues?
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
The really cool thing is that this will "force" everyone else to improve their graphics cards, which means that in another year's time, by the time that XFree86 4.x drivers are available:
The one thing I'd be concerned about, a year from now, is that you might be buying graphics cards with 256MB of RAM, which is more than the amount of "regular RAM."
(I can remember the "good 'ol days" when we upgraded an Alpha 4600 system to 256MB of RAM to help it to better support 40 online users with the ludicrously-wasteful SAP R/3 ERP system. I can now imagine someone putting that much RAM on a video card, for use by one user. Unbelievable...)
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
$500 bucks for this thing? My Geforce 256 isn't being pushed at all yet, I'm not gonna throw 500 into a card that won't reach its limits for another 2 years. Well, maybe if halo and tf2 would look better :)
I think some people are critical of NVIDIA because the company can't quite seem to figure out what to do. It said it supports Linux, but couldn't seem to release decent drivers until pressured by a handful of articles on Slashdot, Linuxgames, and other sites. It was caught using GPL'd code in the driver, but removed it faster than it said it could. It uses a unified driver architecture so that improvements to the Windows driver show up in the Linux driver, but a marketing manager goes on the record as saying "The only reason anyone would open source something is because they can't do a good job of it on their own."
It get "caught" strongarming volunteer sites by sending out review hardware and then calling in the chips to get rid of information about competitors -- then explains it away by claiming it hires temporary workers with the authority to make those deals but not the oversight not to.
Personally, I think it's a normal company with good hardware that needs to get rid of the marketing department and give the technical people more control.
Read more at my NVIDIA history or analysis pages. I don't really understand what the company's doing, but at least my video card works.
--
how to invest, a novice's guide
Think about it:
Combine that with all the stuff be-fan said (which I agree with 100%), and you have one really cool company. Sorry, they aren't open source, but you'll notice that none of the open source drivers available compare anywhere near as favorably to their Windows counterparts as NVidia's drivers do. Where I come from, we judge our software on quality.
------
About the Microsoft thing. What is wrong with writing code, protecting it, and making a profit? It is those kinds of feelings that get people to think of OSS people as communist. Not that YOU release your software for free, but don't want to give other people THEIR freedom to release THEIR software how THEY choose.
How are they screwing over the OSS community? The used some code. I'm sure a lot of people have used some code. They keep their drivers closed. I've actuall gained new insight into that one. An OpenGL driver is a full implementation of OpenGL. Not just a driver that bangs interrupts, but something that handles everything from glVertex on down. NVIDIA has THE highest quality OpenGL ICD in consumer space. In Windows-land Matrox and ATI are both struggling to get high quality OpenGL drivers. (Read the interview with Matrox's OpenGL guy in this month's MaximumPC.) Asking someone to give that away is simply too much.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Things like "Detonator" and "Firing Squad" and "Ultra..."
Like American and Japanese cars. American cards have names like "Mustang" and "Camaro" and "Viper" whilst Japanese cars have more tranquil names like "Elantra" and "Mirage" and such.
I don't know why there are so many people against NVIDIA. It seems that everytime news about NVIDIA comes out, people go out of their way to lambaste them. They release OpenGL drivers for Linux, people bitch about them not being OpenSource. It is found that they used a small amount of GPL code, people act as if they closed up the Linux kernel and released their own OS. They get some support for Microsoft, people act as if they are in a secret plot with MS to take over 3D, switch everyone to D3D, and help MS steal GPL code to boot.
Cool off. NVIDIA is a company that has a lot of class. Not only do they make quality products, but they go out of their way to make the user experience better. For example, they continually improve their drivers. Even though the current Detenator 2 drivers are already really high quality, the GeForce2 Ultra comes with the Detenator 3 drivers, which increase the speed by another 10-15% Best of all, you can use these new drivers on all cards dating back to the original TNT. Most companies don't even keep drivers for older cards on their website, much less continually improve them. The performance of the TNT must have improved 30 or 40% from the original 3.x drivers, and those weren't exactly shabby. Wheres Matrox get's major upps for doing OpenGL (badly at that) nobody ever points out that NVIDIA was a poineer in doing OpenGL on consumer cards. Back when everybody was doing "mini-GL" drivers, NVIDIA put a full OpenGL ICD in the box with the TNT. And not just any ICD either, NVIDIA's ICD has full support for everything from Quake to Softimage. Meanwhile, Matrox STILL doesn't have a full ICD. ATI's drivers are still flaky. Yet, everyone is saying "Is there an alternative to NVIDIA?" Hello, this comany releases fast prodcuts, excellent drivers with great OpenGL support, and goes out of it's way to support older users. In a market where good companies like Diamond have dissapeard, and bad companies like ATI abound, NVIDIA really does deserve some credit.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...