The chipset itself is showing age, not necessarily your PC.
Early SLI offerings leave much to be desired in efficency and design. Furthermore, the NForce 4 series was innovative in features, but since so many of these features were new, they were buggy or weren't implemented horribly well.
Now I don't recall where I read it, but about an hour ago I read the breakdown on the 4 different chipsets in the NForce 500 series. Basically there is the uber-overclocker's SLI edition, the silent SLI edition, the baseline series, and the Crossfire series. Here you go. I think this was the article.
http://www.nforcershq.com/article6287.html
However, in every pure CPU-specific benchmark the 5000+ beat the FX-60 (not by much, but it did).
Re:Intel's roadmap to the Cornroe and beyond
on
Athlon Socket AM2 Review
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
It really isn't fair to compare the next-gen Intel offerings (just now coming out) against the three year old K8 core which is what people are doing. AMD's next gen processors are rolling out this summer. Let's try to compare apples to apples.
When we compare apples to apples (the P4 line to the K8 line) Intel actually uses more power, generates more heat, runs slower, and is more expensive.
I'm glad Intel stepped up and made a good processor. The Core Duo is a good processor, don't get me wrong. But for all the marketing buzz about Intel right now, AMD does in fact have a response.
AMD is not only rolling out Turion X2 series processors, but they've got the AM2 lineup such as the 5000+ X2, the quad core series, etc.
The thing that really got me was the conclusion page. For many people, that is all they read. In said conclusion they said the DDR2 support wasn't necessary that great because the FX-60 beat out the 5000+ in several test.
In all the CPU specific test, the 5000+ came out on top. In tests that benchmarked total system power, the FX-60 rig with 2 gigs running in dual channel mode came out on top.
If these guys don't know how to put together proper testing rigs, let alone extrapolate results, then AMD shouldn't be wasting test equipment on them. They can send processors to me, and I'll put up some serious benchmarks, including detailed overclocking, burn-in testing, temperature readings, etc.
Which is another reason I think BluRay will win out.
The standard is MPEG4 right now, but given the massive data the discs might hold in the future, I wouldn't be shocked if they changed standards again for even higher quality and forced you to buy new players yet again.
Actually I recently saw a study that said over 50% of gamers are over 40. They grew up spending big bucks on Atari systems, make good money, and are willing to spend it.
The gaming industry has grown over the years if you haven't noticed. Mature titles are more popular than ever.
Gamers aren't all 18 and under, despite what you may think. Quite the opposite. And I stand by my prediction. It is one thing to hear a buzz word about HDTV. It is another to see a Wal-Mart kiosk of hi def content. The one thing that will drive HDTV sales primarily will be video games until hi def movies and hi def TV becomes far more common.
You may not realize this, but if you go into Wal Mart to buy a HDTV set, you will see one on display, but the content on the TV likely won't be hi def.
If I want to see Pearl Jam in concert, I either go through TM or I don't see them. And mind you, Pearl Jam was one of the biggest artists who tried for years to boycott TM. Again, TM has exclusive contracts with all the venues.
And actually, if I want to see a play, in many places even that means going through TM. To see a sporting event? TM.
When they have exclusive contracts everywhere, and competition doesn't exist, it isn't a free market.
NVidia was talking about the NForce 5 chipsets ages ago, and I believe they were holding off for AM2. I'm pretty sure that we'll see new chipsets pretty soon.
The main difference with AM2 is the memory controller, which is built into the CPU, so the chipsets really don't have to be different, but there are some things that need improved/fixed from the NForce 4 series (such as the built in firewall, etc).
However, you can't take a 733 mhz PC with 64 megs of total memory between the system and GPU and attempt to run Half Life 2 period. My point is that console hardware is often more efficient with the same "stats". So given that the PS3 is claiming 2 teraflops of processing power that is purely dedicated to gaming, I really don't think a comparison to a $2,000 PC is unwarranted in the least. In anything I've understated the power of the PS3 (and 360).
They actually tested the 939 rigs with 2 gigs of memory, and the new rig with 1 gig of memory. They said they didn't have 2 sticks of DDR2 for the AM2 rig, but then they should have only used 1 stick in the 939 rig.
When benchmarking, you should try to keep all test systems as comparable as possible. I really am disappointed by what I consider a glaring oversight.
The 939 NForce 4 Ultra/SLI line is showing age so on one hand, I'm glad to see the new tech (and DDR2 support) finally.
However, I don't know that I can convince my wife to let me spend the money on such a large overhaul again. I'm fairly happy with my AMD 64 system at the moment.
Honestly, I just hope AMD maintains their lead long enough for people to start taking notice (like Dell using AMD in the server line).
Perhaps read the parent article in this very thread.
Both machines support full 1080p. The only difference is that without HDMI 1080p could be down-sampled if ICT tags were implemented. I shouldn't have to repeat that.
Not really. In pure processing power, the 360 claims 1 teraflop of power. The PS3 is claiming 2.1 teraflops of power.
On top of that, the 360 can put out one 720p image. The PS3 was talking (this may be in the past tense now because of HDMI issues and not power issues) two seperate 1080p pictures.
One thing that you have to realize, is that the XBox today can handle Half Life 2. We see a 733mhz processor, 64 megs of ram, and a 4 year old GPU and we think the hardware is weak. However, it is difficult to compare console hardware to a PC. It is in fact quite different.
Given that Oblivion is a launch title that barely utilizes the 360's capabilities, and comparing that to a PC, and then back to the PS3, I think it is a fair assessment to say the PS3 will be comparable to a $2,000 PC.
Historically consoles at launch trump gaming machines at that time. The fact that a console can compete with a gaming PC 4 years after its launch is pretty impressive.
So now, I don't believe those statements are overboard.
And for the record, I generally buy each console every generation, but am primarily a PC enthusiast.
There are something like 7,000 HD-DVD players on the market total. Not models, that is total units. Sony said they will have a million PS3's out each month when they launch.
I'd bet the cost of a PS3 that inclusion in the PS3 alone will make it the forwat winner. Does a studio want to release on a platform with 10,000 players, or 3 million players?
And given that Sony is a major movie studio in their own right with some decent clout, I don't see them shooting themselves in the foot. Maybe I am naive, but I believe they will hold to the agreement and implement the tag in 2010 (at the soonest). It makes for a good selling point in the near future. Retail stores will have time to push all new consumers to TVs with HDMI. I expect market penetration of HDTV to be pretty solid by then.
As far as games go, each generation is different. Sega was a giant, and then gone the next minute. All that being said, while I used to have very fond memories of Nintendo, I was greatly disappointed by both the N64 and Cube. Both had piss-poor third party support, and very few games in general. Multiplatform games often looked the worst on the Cube (save for RE4 and Soul Caliber 2).
I'm sure Nintendo will put out some solid first-party games for the Wii. Will third-party developers properly take advantage of the controller? Will they bother developing many titles in the first place?
The reality is that since the days of the NES, Nintendo has lost market share with each new generation (SNES, N64 and Cube). Furthermore, their business model for years has been to rehash sequels to the same properties, and rerelease games. Their big selling point on the Wii is that I can purchase old games YET AGAIN!
No thanks. I'll go the emulation route on my hacked XBox and PC. I bought NES games rereleased on the SNES, and then again on the GBA. At the moment, the Wii has one must-own title that I can see (Super Mario Galaxy). I will not buy a console for one title. I made that mistake with the Cube and Zelda. I am also a little bitter that the Cube never once got a proper Mario title in the entire life of the console.
Meanwhile, both Microsoft and Sony have arguably 5-10 must-own titles a piece that we've seen. I think Nintendo will regain some market share on price-point alone, but I don't know that I will buy one unless I see games that truly warrant it.
The funny thing is that when PCS technology first emerged, the same claims were made. It was encrypted, and each signal was overlaid with 19 other conversations to make it near-impossible to clone, or eavesdrop, unlike normal digital cell phones.
However, what most people don't know is that the Marine Corps invented PCS technology back in the Viet Nam era, and no doubt the government can listen in if they so decided.
Actually you had to pay an extra $150 for the linux kit on the PS2.
Spending $500 on the equivalent of a $2,000 PC and getting to run homebrew Linux apps on it, in addition to a BluRay drive, and oh yeah also getting a video game console that may be twice as powerful as the 360 suddenly sounds pretty reasonable.
Given that the $300 360 has no HDD, you really do have to compare the $400 360 to the $500 PS3. Is the BluRay player alone worth $100? What about the more powerful hardware, or the free online service, or Linux?
Again, it suddenly sounds considerably more reasonable.
Given that they are the only option in the marketplace, and that they set whatever prices they choose with both consumers and the artists whose tickets Ticketmaster sells have complained about price-gouging, I don't see this as a free-market situation.
Pearl Jam tried to boycott TM for years and the only thing that happened was fans couldn't see the band in concert. There simply weren't concert venues that didn't use TM for Pearl Jam to go to.
Free market implies the consumers have a choice. We don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe, maybe not. DVD was introduced in 1997. It took six years for the format to become relatively mainstream.
The rainbow effect was only present in first generation DLP chips. Every new TV is using second generation DLP chips now.
And the noticable lag happens on any TV that upscales, which is quite a few high-end TVs. The solution is to turn off upscaling for that input.
I read the article. I just don't trust the source. They said the bulk of that money will go to the artist. Again, I don't trust the source.
The chipset itself is showing age, not necessarily your PC.
Early SLI offerings leave much to be desired in efficency and design. Furthermore, the NForce 4 series was innovative in features, but since so many of these features were new, they were buggy or weren't implemented horribly well.
We're due for a more stable NForce 5 series.
http://www.planetx64.com/index.php?option=com_cont ent&task=view&id=215&Itemid=14
There you go.
Now I don't recall where I read it, but about an hour ago I read the breakdown on the 4 different chipsets in the NForce 500 series. Basically there is the uber-overclocker's SLI edition, the silent SLI edition, the baseline series, and the Crossfire series. Here you go. I think this was the article. http://www.nforcershq.com/article6287.html
However, in every pure CPU-specific benchmark the 5000+ beat the FX-60 (not by much, but it did).
It really isn't fair to compare the next-gen Intel offerings (just now coming out) against the three year old K8 core which is what people are doing. AMD's next gen processors are rolling out this summer. Let's try to compare apples to apples.
When we compare apples to apples (the P4 line to the K8 line) Intel actually uses more power, generates more heat, runs slower, and is more expensive.
I'm glad Intel stepped up and made a good processor. The Core Duo is a good processor, don't get me wrong. But for all the marketing buzz about Intel right now, AMD does in fact have a response.
AMD is not only rolling out Turion X2 series processors, but they've got the AM2 lineup such as the 5000+ X2, the quad core series, etc.
The thing that really got me was the conclusion page. For many people, that is all they read. In said conclusion they said the DDR2 support wasn't necessary that great because the FX-60 beat out the 5000+ in several test.
In all the CPU specific test, the 5000+ came out on top. In tests that benchmarked total system power, the FX-60 rig with 2 gigs running in dual channel mode came out on top.
If these guys don't know how to put together proper testing rigs, let alone extrapolate results, then AMD shouldn't be wasting test equipment on them. They can send processors to me, and I'll put up some serious benchmarks, including detailed overclocking, burn-in testing, temperature readings, etc.
Which is another reason I think BluRay will win out. The standard is MPEG4 right now, but given the massive data the discs might hold in the future, I wouldn't be shocked if they changed standards again for even higher quality and forced you to buy new players yet again.
Actually I recently saw a study that said over 50% of gamers are over 40. They grew up spending big bucks on Atari systems, make good money, and are willing to spend it.
The gaming industry has grown over the years if you haven't noticed. Mature titles are more popular than ever.
Gamers aren't all 18 and under, despite what you may think. Quite the opposite. And I stand by my prediction. It is one thing to hear a buzz word about HDTV. It is another to see a Wal-Mart kiosk of hi def content. The one thing that will drive HDTV sales primarily will be video games until hi def movies and hi def TV becomes far more common.
You may not realize this, but if you go into Wal Mart to buy a HDTV set, you will see one on display, but the content on the TV likely won't be hi def.
If I want to see Pearl Jam in concert, I either go through TM or I don't see them. And mind you, Pearl Jam was one of the biggest artists who tried for years to boycott TM. Again, TM has exclusive contracts with all the venues.
And actually, if I want to see a play, in many places even that means going through TM. To see a sporting event? TM.
When they have exclusive contracts everywhere, and competition doesn't exist, it isn't a free market.
NVidia was talking about the NForce 5 chipsets ages ago, and I believe they were holding off for AM2. I'm pretty sure that we'll see new chipsets pretty soon. The main difference with AM2 is the memory controller, which is built into the CPU, so the chipsets really don't have to be different, but there are some things that need improved/fixed from the NForce 4 series (such as the built in firewall, etc).
However, you can't take a 733 mhz PC with 64 megs of total memory between the system and GPU and attempt to run Half Life 2 period. My point is that console hardware is often more efficient with the same "stats". So given that the PS3 is claiming 2 teraflops of processing power that is purely dedicated to gaming, I really don't think a comparison to a $2,000 PC is unwarranted in the least. In anything I've understated the power of the PS3 (and 360).
They actually tested the 939 rigs with 2 gigs of memory, and the new rig with 1 gig of memory. They said they didn't have 2 sticks of DDR2 for the AM2 rig, but then they should have only used 1 stick in the 939 rig.
When benchmarking, you should try to keep all test systems as comparable as possible. I really am disappointed by what I consider a glaring oversight.
Seriously, for shame.
The 939 NForce 4 Ultra/SLI line is showing age so on one hand, I'm glad to see the new tech (and DDR2 support) finally.
However, I don't know that I can convince my wife to let me spend the money on such a large overhaul again. I'm fairly happy with my AMD 64 system at the moment.
Honestly, I just hope AMD maintains their lead long enough for people to start taking notice (like Dell using AMD in the server line).
Perhaps read the parent article in this very thread.
Both machines support full 1080p. The only difference is that without HDMI 1080p could be down-sampled if ICT tags were implemented. I shouldn't have to repeat that.
Not really. In pure processing power, the 360 claims 1 teraflop of power. The PS3 is claiming 2.1 teraflops of power.
On top of that, the 360 can put out one 720p image. The PS3 was talking (this may be in the past tense now because of HDMI issues and not power issues) two seperate 1080p pictures.
One thing that you have to realize, is that the XBox today can handle Half Life 2. We see a 733mhz processor, 64 megs of ram, and a 4 year old GPU and we think the hardware is weak. However, it is difficult to compare console hardware to a PC. It is in fact quite different.
Given that Oblivion is a launch title that barely utilizes the 360's capabilities, and comparing that to a PC, and then back to the PS3, I think it is a fair assessment to say the PS3 will be comparable to a $2,000 PC.
Historically consoles at launch trump gaming machines at that time. The fact that a console can compete with a gaming PC 4 years after its launch is pretty impressive.
So now, I don't believe those statements are overboard.
And for the record, I generally buy each console every generation, but am primarily a PC enthusiast.
There are something like 7,000 HD-DVD players on the market total. Not models, that is total units. Sony said they will have a million PS3's out each month when they launch.
I'd bet the cost of a PS3 that inclusion in the PS3 alone will make it the forwat winner. Does a studio want to release on a platform with 10,000 players, or 3 million players?
And given that Sony is a major movie studio in their own right with some decent clout, I don't see them shooting themselves in the foot. Maybe I am naive, but I believe they will hold to the agreement and implement the tag in 2010 (at the soonest). It makes for a good selling point in the near future. Retail stores will have time to push all new consumers to TVs with HDMI. I expect market penetration of HDTV to be pretty solid by then.
As far as games go, each generation is different. Sega was a giant, and then gone the next minute. All that being said, while I used to have very fond memories of Nintendo, I was greatly disappointed by both the N64 and Cube. Both had piss-poor third party support, and very few games in general. Multiplatform games often looked the worst on the Cube (save for RE4 and Soul Caliber 2).
I'm sure Nintendo will put out some solid first-party games for the Wii. Will third-party developers properly take advantage of the controller? Will they bother developing many titles in the first place?
The reality is that since the days of the NES, Nintendo has lost market share with each new generation (SNES, N64 and Cube). Furthermore, their business model for years has been to rehash sequels to the same properties, and rerelease games. Their big selling point on the Wii is that I can purchase old games YET AGAIN!
No thanks. I'll go the emulation route on my hacked XBox and PC. I bought NES games rereleased on the SNES, and then again on the GBA. At the moment, the Wii has one must-own title that I can see (Super Mario Galaxy). I will not buy a console for one title. I made that mistake with the Cube and Zelda. I am also a little bitter that the Cube never once got a proper Mario title in the entire life of the console.
Meanwhile, both Microsoft and Sony have arguably 5-10 must-own titles a piece that we've seen. I think Nintendo will regain some market share on price-point alone, but I don't know that I will buy one unless I see games that truly warrant it.
...will be an A/S/L text.
For all the Sony hate on /. it should be noted that Sony has said they won't do region encoding with Blu-Ray.
The funny thing is that when PCS technology first emerged, the same claims were made. It was encrypted, and each signal was overlaid with 19 other conversations to make it near-impossible to clone, or eavesdrop, unlike normal digital cell phones.
However, what most people don't know is that the Marine Corps invented PCS technology back in the Viet Nam era, and no doubt the government can listen in if they so decided.
Please check your facts.
The GPU is no different between the two units. Sony said flat out both models support full 1080p.
http://ps3scene.com/
Even the parent article mentions this. And I just discovered that the PS3 will ship with a web-browser. Nifty!
Spending $500 on the equivalent of a $2,000 PC and getting to run homebrew Linux apps on it, in addition to a BluRay drive, and oh yeah also getting a video game console that may be twice as powerful as the 360 suddenly sounds pretty reasonable.
Given that the $300 360 has no HDD, you really do have to compare the $400 360 to the $500 PS3. Is the BluRay player alone worth $100? What about the more powerful hardware, or the free online service, or Linux?
Again, it suddenly sounds considerably more reasonable.
Given that they are the only option in the marketplace, and that they set whatever prices they choose with both consumers and the artists whose tickets Ticketmaster sells have complained about price-gouging, I don't see this as a free-market situation.
Pearl Jam tried to boycott TM for years and the only thing that happened was fans couldn't see the band in concert. There simply weren't concert venues that didn't use TM for Pearl Jam to go to.
Free market implies the consumers have a choice. We don't.