And I told you, this article is out of date. Use the current drivers and you will see superior ATI image quality and equal frames for Q3.
ATI has nothing wrong with their drivers, both NVidia and ATI are right on track for performance, the difference between the two is that NVidia's default image quality settings are far lower than ATI's, leaving them ahead in many games. Thankfully ATI's superior hardware makes up for it.
This whole article is way too old anyway, new drivers are already out that cancel this whole thing.
People do buy ATI for performance, you are wrong there, since the 8500 easily beats a standard GF3, and is hovering in the GF3 Ti500 levels right now for a much lower price. The original radeon 64 meg card always performed right on par with the 64meg GTS GF2 card, at a lower price.
The real problem is that benchmarkers don't know how to do their job, they benchmark games at the default level of the driver, which isn't right. ATI's drivers have a very high level of quality, and NVidia's is poor at best. When you turn the quality up one notch for ATI, its the same as moving it up higher than the standard NVidia drivers let you, you actually have to modify them to get it to achieve anything close to ATI levels. At that point you get the 8500 losing 10 frames per second in a benchmark, and the Ti500 losing 80. ATI Q3 optimizations for that one driver set brought the quality of the images down to NVidia levels, and showed how much ass it can kick, and it did.
Optimizing drivers for a game isn't cheating, but lowering the image quality is, and they shouldn't have done that (thank god its fixed).
ATI is really finding it impossible to compete in this world of hypocrites, NVidia fans that yell at ATI because their performance isn't up to par, so they bring their performance up, then they get yelled at for image quality. Of course they never critize NVidia for its image quality, they just say they have amazing drivers.
All I can say is that the newest drivers make their card just as fast at NVidia's best, with a higher image quality, at equal images qualities ATI is faster
I love when posts that are wrong get marked as insightful. If you read the fine print, his package is not covered, any good shipping counter knows this.
after finally looking at his pic, both UPS and him are to blame.
The box was not packed properly, things were obviously able to move inside, but the box was also beaten pretty badly. Computers are tough to ship, and must be done carefully to avoid damage to the computer, but the box should never look like that.
I've seen binders and books that travel less than 100km been shreded, they couldn't even be recongized anymore.
I've seen a vase, packed by me extremely well turn into thousands of bits of ceramic waste.
I've seen numerous boxes ripped in half, punctured by forklifts, ran over.
UPS will not insurance used personal goods, only if its shipped from company to company. You can not win with their insurance.... the only way he screwed up was by using ups ground (cheaper than mail, what do you expect?)
I work part time for a Mail Boxes Etc here in Canada. I'm a student and have been working there for over 5 years.
As for couriers, this is how I see things.
UPS is the worst courier of all of them. They insure packages and take your money for the insurance, but if its the least bit breakable, they claim lack of packing and null the insurance. If its used personal goods, no insurance. If its precious, rare, or artwork, no insurance (they drove a forklift through a one of a kind artwork and refused to own up). If you ship them within Canada, they are usually fine, but they still get shreaded and lost randomly, nothing like sending something standard to the US though.
Sending UPS standard is the best way to make things end up in little pieces, its shipped all over the US, from depot to depot and often gets lost, or they lose the tracking on it (easily 1 in 5 packages gets lost or is untrackable by standard). If you send things express, or 2 day (expedited), they go directly to the location. UPS also have ridiculous custom fees (something like $40 canadian).
Fedex is great, never lost or damaged anything. So far, over 5 years, one package was late, it was supposed to be delivered saturday and they couldn't, so a supervisor went out and did it on sunday.
Even though UPS now owns MBE, I refuse to recommend them.
The mobile Radeon 7500 was announced some time ago, and it made the GF2 Go look like crap too (not that hard really).
Everyone gets hyped that this thing comes out, but ATI has already beat them to it, it offers similar features. I've heard that ATI's powersaving features are far more advanced too.
Its also funny that they say that NVidia offers unmatched DVD playback, because they've always been awful at that.
The benchmarks for the mobile 7500 were incredible, and NVidia is right out lying about their numbers, there is no way around that. It makes the Go look faster than the 7500, when the mobile 7500 was far far faster than a standard 64 meg radeon, and very close to a full blown Radeon7500.
I believe ATI is also packing 32 or 16 megs of DDR with their mobile chip, giving the laptop manufacturer the option to add more, making it more cost effective. So all these new features, aren't new.
cache is extremely expensive, and to add to it, it gets hot. The extra cost of adding the cache would not help performance a lot. The athlon doesn't have nearly as many cache misses as the p4, and it only have a tiny amount of cache on it. 8kb L1?
the fact that Tom ran an athlon on a cheap unstable motherboard shouldn't penalize the chip. Next time you quote someone, quote the whole thing, Tom said the motherboard wasn't stable, the chip is. I guess both intel and their fans lie to cover things up.
The choice of hardware when building a server really shouldn't be based around stablity. If you pick good, non cheap parts, it will be stable. The operating system is the least stable part, many people will go out and put something like IIS on it and blame the hardware as being unstable.
For a big server, the most important part is performance, and that usually doesn't include AMD or intel.
basically you need to go to abits website and look for a new bios update. If there is one thats new, and says support for athlon xp then you can upgrade. Note that @ about 1.2Ghz the SD RAM on older systems becomes saturated and upgrading past 1.2Ghz is really pointless.
Getting a 1.2 will increase performance massively though, as your FSB will increase 33%
actually, the AMD 760 chipset was out before the ALi chipset, performed much much better, overclocked a lot better, and had no bugs like the ALi one does. Thats your reason as to why it didn't get any attention.
The person that put this machine together really didn't know too much about building a computer... other than the fact he had a lot of money. 68C for a CPU temp is ridiculously high, even 1.4s don't get that high. That system will be unstable, no question about it. He should have taken an epox 8k7a+ board.
you should stay an a anonymous coward if you were dumb enough to have your RAM seated when the socket is extremely close to it. Not to mentioning burning a cpu three times in a row.
Since both videos are talking about the Athlon XPs which have thermal protection, and not the durons, which don't, your claim is meaningless.
being a strategy freak myself, and having stopped playing online for the reason mentioned above.
You can do lots to force people to use strategy, but most people really aren't capable of that level of thought, and you might lose your income from that.
You can either force the people to start with certain assests, and forces, this way there is no real early rush, just the pure war strategy. This eliminates the ability to use your resources properly and cuts out on the strategy of the overall game, just not the war aspect.
You can also try and chance the way the AI work, because I have yet to see a game where it works really well. Most of the time the AI will take over a certain group and just blindly attack something and become slaughter. An example, if you had troops in an elevate position they have the advantage, but the AI would never think to use it, or wait for a proper time to attack. What really needs to be done is have proper, smart AI for the game that you are running, but just a generic AI everyone seems to include. Or, you could give complete control over your people to the player, which reduces the size of the battle that you can control.
What I'd love to see is the combination of a smart AI, and the ablity for the player to use their pieces strategicly, most of the time a player can only give general attack commands and such.
The last part would have to include something to do with the balance of units and methods. This is often the worst designed part of the game, and its also the main part of it. There always seems to be a way for one unit to have superiority over all the other units, which needs to be stopped.
I played in the beta of Allegiance, it had the potential of being an amazing game, but everytime they tweaked it they screwed up, at one point I took out half the enemy fleet with a bomber, and crippled their defenses which made us win within 5 minutes. The option to play as the interceptor technology was always available, but all the newbies liked stealth, because it was easy to fly.
If you were a good pilot, an interceptor was completely dominate to a stealth, but MS didn't consider that most people are bad pilots.
I'd really love to see another game like Alegiance, done properly. The strategy of your human commander, combined with the skill of your pilots and captial ship captains could have made it the best game ever... but it really ended up as a poor game that grew tiresome after 2-3weeks.
If the forces had been reworked, it still could be awesome, but there are some major flaws still, having to do with finding resources, and their location compared to your base, as an enemy might have those same resources closer, giving him an early edge, which is crucial.
in an area with no expertise their whole life. Its called an Operating System, but people still seem to buy them up, so I guess people will be drones and buy Office too.... oh wait, they already do.
Intel has a massive hold on the market, especially the market of ignorant computer people. It is extremely easy to charge those prices with the monopoly they have and bring in lots of money. Much like MS.
Intel makes the p4 and charge 5x for the same performing Athlon. The P3s were reasonably priced, but intel had competition then. Now that the p4 is out, there is no Mhz competition so they jack the prices up.
AMD boards have previously been able to take a die shrink (The k6s went from.26 to.18 (mobile)), and didn't require a new board. I'm using one right now.
There is no real reason why intel couldn't have made the chip so it works with the old boards.
If the new P3s would have worked... it would have had the same performance of a 1.7 p4, and that would hurt P4 sales... intel doesn't want that. They are doing everything to make the P4 look like a great chip.
They drain every last dollar from you they can.
They want you to use Rambus, crippling their SD RAM chipset horribly by making the latency even higher than RD RAM.
Slashdot Mirror
they'd build a massive secret ultra secure network then run IIS on it.
And I told you, this article is out of date. Use the current drivers and you will see superior ATI image quality and equal frames for Q3.
ATI has nothing wrong with their drivers, both NVidia and ATI are right on track for performance, the difference between the two is that NVidia's default image quality settings are far lower than ATI's, leaving them ahead in many games. Thankfully ATI's superior hardware makes up for it.
This whole article is way too old anyway, new drivers are already out that cancel this whole thing.
People do buy ATI for performance, you are wrong there, since the 8500 easily beats a standard GF3, and is hovering in the GF3 Ti500 levels right now for a much lower price. The original radeon 64 meg card always performed right on par with the 64meg GTS GF2 card, at a lower price.
The real problem is that benchmarkers don't know how to do their job, they benchmark games at the default level of the driver, which isn't right. ATI's drivers have a very high level of quality, and NVidia's is poor at best. When you turn the quality up one notch for ATI, its the same as moving it up higher than the standard NVidia drivers let you, you actually have to modify them to get it to achieve anything close to ATI levels. At that point you get the 8500 losing 10 frames per second in a benchmark, and the Ti500 losing 80. ATI Q3 optimizations for that one driver set brought the quality of the images down to NVidia levels, and showed how much ass it can kick, and it did.
Optimizing drivers for a game isn't cheating, but lowering the image quality is, and they shouldn't have done that (thank god its fixed).
ATI is really finding it impossible to compete in this world of hypocrites, NVidia fans that yell at ATI because their performance isn't up to par, so they bring their performance up, then they get yelled at for image quality. Of course they never critize NVidia for its image quality, they just say they have amazing drivers.
All I can say is that the newest drivers make their card just as fast at NVidia's best, with a higher image quality, at equal images qualities ATI is faster
I love when posts that are wrong get marked as insightful. If you read the fine print, his package is not covered, any good shipping counter knows this.
dropped 4 feet? that is easily within ups standards, they have to drop it quite a bit more before they declare it mishandled (seriously)
after finally looking at his pic, both UPS and him are to blame.
The box was not packed properly, things were obviously able to move inside, but the box was also beaten pretty badly. Computers are tough to ship, and must be done carefully to avoid damage to the computer, but the box should never look like that.
I've seen binders and books that travel less than 100km been shreded, they couldn't even be recongized anymore.
I've seen a vase, packed by me extremely well turn into thousands of bits of ceramic waste.
I've seen numerous boxes ripped in half, punctured by forklifts, ran over.
UPS will not insurance used personal goods, only if its shipped from company to company. You can not win with their insurance.... the only way he screwed up was by using ups ground (cheaper than mail, what do you expect?)
I work part time for a Mail Boxes Etc here in Canada. I'm a student and have been working there for over 5 years.
As for couriers, this is how I see things.
UPS is the worst courier of all of them. They insure packages and take your money for the insurance, but if its the least bit breakable, they claim lack of packing and null the insurance. If its used personal goods, no insurance. If its precious, rare, or artwork, no insurance (they drove a forklift through a one of a kind artwork and refused to own up). If you ship them within Canada, they are usually fine, but they still get shreaded and lost randomly, nothing like sending something standard to the US though.
Sending UPS standard is the best way to make things end up in little pieces, its shipped all over the US, from depot to depot and often gets lost, or they lose the tracking on it (easily 1 in 5 packages gets lost or is untrackable by standard). If you send things express, or 2 day (expedited), they go directly to the location. UPS also have ridiculous custom fees (something like $40 canadian).
Fedex is great, never lost or damaged anything. So far, over 5 years, one package was late, it was supposed to be delivered saturday and they couldn't, so a supervisor went out and did it on sunday.
Even though UPS now owns MBE, I refuse to recommend them.
The mobile Radeon 7500 was announced some time ago, and it made the GF2 Go look like crap too (not that hard really).
Everyone gets hyped that this thing comes out, but ATI has already beat them to it, it offers similar features. I've heard that ATI's powersaving features are far more advanced too.
Its also funny that they say that NVidia offers unmatched DVD playback, because they've always been awful at that.
The benchmarks for the mobile 7500 were incredible, and NVidia is right out lying about their numbers, there is no way around that. It makes the Go look faster than the 7500, when the mobile 7500 was far far faster than a standard 64 meg radeon, and very close to a full blown Radeon7500.
I believe ATI is also packing 32 or 16 megs of DDR with their mobile chip, giving the laptop manufacturer the option to add more, making it more cost effective. So all these new features, aren't new.
cache is extremely expensive, and to add to it, it gets hot. The extra cost of adding the cache would not help performance a lot. The athlon doesn't have nearly as many cache misses as the p4, and it only have a tiny amount of cache on it. 8kb L1?
the fact that Tom ran an athlon on a cheap unstable motherboard shouldn't penalize the chip. Next time you quote someone, quote the whole thing, Tom said the motherboard wasn't stable, the chip is. I guess both intel and their fans lie to cover things up.
The choice of hardware when building a server really shouldn't be based around stablity. If you pick good, non cheap parts, it will be stable. The operating system is the least stable part, many people will go out and put something like IIS on it and blame the hardware as being unstable.
For a big server, the most important part is performance, and that usually doesn't include AMD or intel.
"Appaloosa, a discount version of Thoroughbred."
they must have been smoking something really heavy when they named that.
its smaller, faster, and doesn't use active X
If people just designed sites properly, everything would look great with the browser, sites I've done have.
It behaved like water, but it was non conductive?
since when was water conductive?
put enough crap in the water, and the particles/ions inside it will conduct electricity, but water itself won't.
basically you need to go to abits website and look for a new bios update. If there is one thats new, and says support for athlon xp then you can upgrade. Note that @ about 1.2Ghz the SD RAM on older systems becomes saturated and upgrading past 1.2Ghz is really pointless.
Getting a 1.2 will increase performance massively though, as your FSB will increase 33%
actually, the AMD 760 chipset was out before the ALi chipset, performed much much better, overclocked a lot better, and had no bugs like the ALi one does. Thats your reason as to why it didn't get any attention.
The person that put this machine together really didn't know too much about building a computer... other than the fact he had a lot of money. 68C for a CPU temp is ridiculously high, even 1.4s don't get that high. That system will be unstable, no question about it. He should have taken an epox 8k7a+ board.
we create a new internet and not allow microsoft to use it!
Utopia does exist.
you should stay an a anonymous coward if you were dumb enough to have your RAM seated when the socket is extremely close to it. Not to mentioning burning a cpu three times in a row.
Since both videos are talking about the Athlon XPs which have thermal protection, and not the durons, which don't, your claim is meaningless.
being a strategy freak myself, and having stopped playing online for the reason mentioned above.
You can do lots to force people to use strategy, but most people really aren't capable of that level of thought, and you might lose your income from that.
You can either force the people to start with certain assests, and forces, this way there is no real early rush, just the pure war strategy. This eliminates the ability to use your resources properly and cuts out on the strategy of the overall game, just not the war aspect.
You can also try and chance the way the AI work, because I have yet to see a game where it works really well. Most of the time the AI will take over a certain group and just blindly attack something and become slaughter. An example, if you had troops in an elevate position they have the advantage, but the AI would never think to use it, or wait for a proper time to attack. What really needs to be done is have proper, smart AI for the game that you are running, but just a generic AI everyone seems to include. Or, you could give complete control over your people to the player, which reduces the size of the battle that you can control.
What I'd love to see is the combination of a smart AI, and the ablity for the player to use their pieces strategicly, most of the time a player can only give general attack commands and such.
The last part would have to include something to do with the balance of units and methods. This is often the worst designed part of the game, and its also the main part of it. There always seems to be a way for one unit to have superiority over all the other units, which needs to be stopped.
I played in the beta of Allegiance, it had the potential of being an amazing game, but everytime they tweaked it they screwed up, at one point I took out half the enemy fleet with a bomber, and crippled their defenses which made us win within 5 minutes. The option to play as the interceptor technology was always available, but all the newbies liked stealth, because it was easy to fly.
If you were a good pilot, an interceptor was completely dominate to a stealth, but MS didn't consider that most people are bad pilots.
I'd really love to see another game like Alegiance, done properly. The strategy of your human commander, combined with the skill of your pilots and captial ship captains could have made it the best game ever... but it really ended up as a poor game that grew tiresome after 2-3weeks.
If the forces had been reworked, it still could be awesome, but there are some major flaws still, having to do with finding resources, and their location compared to your base, as an enemy might have those same resources closer, giving him an early edge, which is crucial.
in an area with no expertise their whole life. Its called an Operating System, but people still seem to buy them up, so I guess people will be drones and buy Office too.... oh wait, they already do.
Its really nothing compared to the S@H bandwidth cost alone for 3 million members.
Intel has a massive hold on the market, especially the market of ignorant computer people. It is extremely easy to charge those prices with the monopoly they have and bring in lots of money. Much like MS.
accidently hit submit.
.26 to .18 (mobile)), and didn't require a new board. I'm using one right now.
Intel makes the p4 and charge 5x for the same performing Athlon. The P3s were reasonably priced, but intel had competition then. Now that the p4 is out, there is no Mhz competition so they jack the prices up.
AMD boards have previously been able to take a die shrink (The k6s went from
There is no real reason why intel couldn't have made the chip so it works with the old boards.
If the new P3s would have worked... it would have had the same performance of a 1.7 p4, and that would hurt P4 sales... intel doesn't want that. They are doing everything to make the P4 look like a great chip.
They are ripping you off, plain and simple.
They drain every last dollar from you they can.
They want you to use Rambus, crippling their SD RAM chipset horribly by making the latency even higher than RD RAM.