PDA

View Full Version : RAMDAC for Radeon 8500 IS 400MHz!



MartialArtist12
10-22-01, 12:30 AM
I just heard from ATI that the RAMDAC is 400MHz. Just a driver problem.

Ghosthunter
10-22-01, 05:12 AM
lol a driver problem? Sounds like ATI what else is new.

A_old
10-22-01, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by davy19
lol a driver problem? Sounds like ATI what else is new.


:D

terrancelam
10-22-01, 11:34 AM
Those who laugh now, will not laugh last.

MartialArtist12
10-22-01, 08:20 PM
ATI said that new drivers will come out on the 25th. It is supposed to fix the problems with Smoothvision but I don't expect much from that new driver set. I'm liking the idea they'll have a new driver set every three weeks fixing bugs on the way only for the new drivers to have new bugs.

A_old
10-22-01, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by terrancelam
Those who laugh now, will not laugh last.
i bet someone said that when the radeon one came out w/ the gf2 LOL

terrancelam
10-22-01, 09:11 PM
Although I'm not the most hardcore gamer, I still consider the Radeon 64mb DDR better then the Geforce 2 because of it's many other abilities, such as ViVo and better DvD playback, which are as important feature to me as gaming.

Brent
10-22-01, 09:20 PM
Originally posted by terrancelam
which are as important feature to me as gaming.

DING DING DING

that's the point i try to get across in all my reviews, it's whatever works best for YUO!

What works best for me may not work best for you

you need to buy hardware on YOUR needs and desires and what you look for in it

Joe
10-22-01, 09:37 PM
Originally posted by Brent


DING DING DING

that's the point i try to get across in all my reviews, it's whatever works best for YUO!

What works best for me may not work best for you

you need to buy hardware on YOUR needs and desires and what you look for in it

Wise words from a Wise man...

I am getting the 8500dv in probably 3 weeks because HOPEFULLY this friday I will order my comp... (last guy who was gonna order it for me fell through :( )

anyhow... Video editing, dual display, and super fast gaming is lots better than a Geforce 3 with video out IMHO :D

MartialArtist12
10-22-01, 10:29 PM
I like image quality and speed. Although I like to see 50+fps, I would like for the frames to look good. I would rather have 50fps of good quality than 60+fps of crap.

YARDofSTUF
10-23-01, 07:09 AM
damn i cant wait to get mine

colour
10-23-01, 07:45 AM
Originally posted by MartialArtist12
I like image quality and speed. Although I like to see 50+fps, I would like for the frames to look good. I would rather have 50fps of good quality than 60+fps of crap.

mind you i dont hold nvidia in the highest regard but that is a totally lame comment.

you make it out as if the gf3 or any card other then a radeon doesnt offer a quality image all be it not as good as the radeon. which is debatable, if i remember correctly the gf3 rendered GIANTS correctly and the radeon did not.

YARDofSTUF
10-23-01, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by colour


mind you i dont hold nvidia in the highest regard but that is a totally lame comment.

you make it out as if the gf3 or any card other then a radeon doesnt offer a quality image all be it not as good as the radeon. which is debatable, if i remember correctly the gf3 rendered GIANTS correctly and the radeon did not.

giants was a poorly made game but it did offer a patch for that problem and the radeon is a much better picture which is why i think ati will never beat nviadia's frame rates but also u do need them, and no nvidia's picture isnt bad, but ATIs is much better if u compare. i see ur point but i dont think his comment was lame just worded to fit his needs a bit.

colour
10-23-01, 10:21 AM
worded to fit his needs, no.


Originally posted by YARDofSTUF
giants was a poorly made game

bleh whatever...

Brent
10-23-01, 10:41 AM
first of all the geforce series does not render crap

i hate uninformed or bias people

getting whatever hardware to fit your needs is good and all, but for crying out loud make informed decisions!

i have now used 8 different geforce3's, and I have used every ATI product up through to the Radeon 7500 which I have also right now, and I have yet to see a major difference in image quality between them all.... the GF3 isn't BAD image quality, and whoever says it is needs to be shot :D

Yes there are SOME things about image quality that needs to be fixed, one thing I notice is the GF3's have a banding issue where in 16bit color and sometimes 32bit color like the sky and smoke appear banded, where the Radeon renders it smooth and dithered, and the Kyro 2 renders it perfectly..... However I think the banding issue is an issue in the latest Det. 4 drivers one of which NVIDIA is working on, they already have a new leaked driver out 21.88 that's suppose to fix it.... i haven't tried it yet though.....

In the past the ATI cards had a HORRIBLE diterhing problem in 16bit color, and it was a hardware problem, a driver fix never happend, I believe ATI finally got it right in the 8500 but even in the R64 there was a bit of this dithering problem

NO CARD is perfect, each has it's own unique problems, so get what works best for you, but make an INFORMED buying decision, don't be an ATI basher, and don't be an NVIDIA basher that is not the way.

This is the attitude I like to keep:

"I don't care WHO makes it as long as it's fast looks good and fits my wallet" :D

A_old
10-23-01, 10:52 AM
keep in mind also... that in most reviews the gf3 has equal render qual to the 8500 radeon....cept in 16x12. :D then again the idea of Vivo does sound nice---assuming the thing runs games too..and it IS cheaper than a gf3... i suppose if ati gets decent drivers i might consider it as i hate looking for simpsons eps on irc, might be nicer to just tv in and save it :)

Amro

MartialArtist12
10-23-01, 10:27 PM
I have a NVidia card of my own. A GeForce2. Not really bad for documents but you can really notice the difference when playing a game or watching a DVD. Yes, the GeForce3 has better image quality than the GeForce2, but it still doesn't match against a Radeon. Brent, shut yo mouth... I'm not the one who gets freaking every card that comes out you lucky bastard so I have to choose one card every year or so.

MartialArtist12
10-23-01, 10:39 PM
Here are some screen shots... Anyone with a GeForce3 Ti post some screen shots? No, it doesn't give you all the information about image quality as they're not the best quality pictures... But it does give you an idea.


http://www.newbieoverclocker.homestead.com/files/slasherpage7.jpg


http://www.newbieoverclocker.homestead.com/files/Q31024X7684XFSAA.jpg

Radeon 64MB DDR VIVO

http://sweb.uky.edu/~jkeli0/q3dm7-8500.jpg

http://www.ixbt.com/video/images/r8500/r8500-ss-anis128.jpg

Radeon 8500

Brent
10-23-01, 10:43 PM
Ok, i'll post some shots once i get done with the shootout here....

i'll find those exact places you did and take a shot of them to compare

just for notes did you use any Anisotropy? Any AA'ing? What resolution and color depth? any other tweaks i should know about?

also what demo or place is that in Serious Sam so i can find it

Ghosthunter
10-24-01, 09:27 AM
I looked at those screenshosts for quake 3, and to be honest I currently have the Geforce 256(waiting for the GF3 TI 500), I dont see a huge difference, I am not saying there isnt one in image quality. I just dont see it?

When I am playing Quake 3 I am more concerned with FPS, then a little better image quailty because if you want to be the top fragger, FPS is way more important.

Brent
10-24-01, 10:44 AM
Here is the first 2 from Quake 3 you can look at, they are very big like 800KB, I didn't want JPEG compression to hinder their appearance

This is done with NO TWEAKS, I just fired up Quake3 set the resolution to 1024x768x32 with 32bit textures and max texture quality, and Trilinear filtering, basically max settings in Q3 at 1024x768 this is with 2X AA in each shot which STILL made the game very playable and smooth, Degree of Anisotropy Level 8 in OGL, This is on my Asus GeForce3 on my main system with driver version 21.88

Keep in mind with these high settings the game is still VERY playable and smooth with no jerkiness or slow downs

http://members.home.com/brentj5/shot1.jpg

http://members.home.com/brentj5/shot3.jpg

http://members.home.com/brentj5/shot2.jpg

Brent
10-25-01, 12:00 AM
^

Qwijib0
10-25-01, 12:05 AM
What are the bottom ones with? the 8500? looking at the 1st pic in each, I like the top one better.... looks smoother, especially the color blending around the launcher.

Brent
10-25-01, 12:19 AM
huh

Martials was with the 8500 mine were with a GF3

Brent
10-25-01, 09:23 PM
martial still with us?

hehe

Qwijib0
10-25-01, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by Brent
huh

Martials was with the 8500 mine were with a GF3

I see. So ATi's do have a bit more quality...

But looking at it objectively, are you gonna miss those blends at 100fps?

MartialArtist12
10-25-01, 11:22 PM
Yeah, I'm here. That's kinda my argument too. If you miss that at 100fps, then how would you tell the difference between 100fps and 110fps? Even if you have 2000 fps, you can't tell the difference between that and 100. By the time your video card can't play games anymore in the future, you'd already have 20 cards from this period on. I'm still using a Rage Pro and a TNTII. You can notice some instances of image quality. An analogy is with movies. If you have a movie encoded at 300k, and another one at 400k, and have the same amount of frames, you could still tell which one is better.

MartialArtist12
10-25-01, 11:25 PM
The top one was done with a regular Radeon 64MB DDR VIVO. The other two were the 8500. I personally like the 8500 better in games though, more clear and vivid in games like CS. In RTS or other types of games, you really won't notice the difference between the two.

Brent
10-25-01, 11:41 PM
coolio

when i get my radeon 8500 i'll do some direct quality shots, i do agree the 8500 has MUCH better filtering/dithering compared to the gf3's banded look

MartialArtist12
10-26-01, 01:28 AM
I hate you... I had to work for my card while you got it for free. Oops, I'm sorry, you did have to do some work playing around with the card.

Brent
10-26-01, 01:42 AM
hehehe, it is actually a lot of work reviewing em and making graphs and actually thinking up words to write without looking like an idiot or babling on about nothing lol

and making speeling and gramma mistakes lol

but it's fun to at the same time playing with all this cool hardware hands on, you get to really see the differences between these things and get to see what's cool and what's not

Qwijib0
10-26-01, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by Brent
hehehe, it is actually a lot of work reviewing em and making graphs and actually thinking up words to write without looking like an idiot or babling on about nothing lol

and making speeling and gramma mistakes lol

but it's fun to at the same time playing with all this cool hardware hands on, you get to really see the differences between these things and get to see what's cool and what's not

I'm sure the benefits FAR outweigh the gains... *cough* being on visiontek's shipping list *cough* ;)

so where are thoses extra gf3's I heard about? :D

Epyon
10-26-01, 06:17 AM
Originally posted by Brent
coolio

when i get my radeon 8500 i'll do some direct quality shots, i do agree the 8500 has MUCH better filtering/dithering compared to the gf3's banded look When you say th gf3 has a banded look is it safe to say a new driver could fix that? And the same for the color blending issues?

MartialArtist12
10-26-01, 10:51 PM
I don't know, but hardware also plays a big role in image quality. The Radeons from the 32MB SDR to the newest 8500's and the Matrox cards have hardware that make it look good. Drivers I know for a fact, can't fix anything. You can have Radeon looks with a TNT Pro, even if the Radeon had really crappy drivers (preference) and if the TNT Pro had the best drivers in the world and was without a flaw.