NVIDIA Unveils (And Tom's Reviews) The GeForce4

EconolineCrush writes: "NVIDIA has finally revealed its GeForce4 Titanium and MX graphics processors. Tom's Hardware has a some benchmarks comparing the new offerings to current products, and the results are pretty interesting. Meanwhile, The Tech Report does an excellent job cutting through the hype with an examination of each new chip's features. Both articles are well worth reading to get the full story on the latest from NVIDIA."

Comments

...

[lexcyber]

And to everyone's suprise. Geforce4 is faster then
the previous chipsets. Has more pipelines and
bigger memory bandwidth. When will someone try
the new and fresh marketing trick and announce
hardwarre that is slower then the old hardware.
(I hope MS didnt hear this and starts making hardware)

Re:Tom's is going downhill.

[mrphrtq]

You mean there are words on Tom's Hardware? Man, I thought it was just benchmark graphs. I heard a rumor that Playboy had "words," and now this.

Re:Can't stand it

[Tim Browse]

It's about like getting a 2D card and trying to run Quake with it - it simply doesn't have the guts needed to do it.

Um, IIRC, Quake was software only. Having a 3D card didn't help you any until GLQuake was released. In any case, Quake has always run fine on 2D-only cards - that was the target market, after all.

Don't get me wrong - the point you're making is partially correct (although I don't agree that pixel/vertex shaders are in such widespread use that not having hw support means all your games look bad) but at least get your back-up facts correct :-)

Tim

Re:Some respect, please

[hyoo]

I've noticed that /. uses the word 'interesting' when an article/review/benchmark doesn't show the community's favoured product (linux/AMD/ATI) as a superior one.

Most slashdotters see nVidia as an evil corporation because they don't open source their drivers for linux. This leaves ATI as the favourite. The benchmarking shows that in almost every test (except aniso) the GF4 smokes the 8500, therefore the results are summarized as 'interesting'.

If the ATI card actually did outperform the nVidia one, then the post would contain something like "ATI crushes the evil nVidia, we are 1337".

I'm not the one to look up previous articles, but I do recal some benchmarks (biased or not) where NT/2000 did something better than linux. The poster stated that the results were "interesting".

I think this is slashdot's attempt to hide the truth that it is possible for the 'evil' corporation to do something good.

On another note, who else thinks that it is pointless to use Q3 as a benchmark. Start using RTCW or another game that actually makes modern cards break a sweat.

So uhh. Who modded this guys post as "Interesting"

[PeelBoy]

;-)

Re:A new watershed in (c/g)pu history

[MoneyT]

You must be one of them wierd mac folk that seem to think that the latest and greatest and fastest isn't nessesarily useful for day to day life.

Didn't you know that playing Quake at anythign less than 120 FPS is dog slow, you can't twitch fast enough if it's less than that. GEEZE, I bet you don't even go out and splurge $200 every six months for a new processor and MB.

Wierdo.