Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, morphine, SecretSquirrel
I agree although paul probably is trying to rub nVidiots' noses in it, technically it is very true. Anything can happen in this game but as said Rad9700PRO has been out a long time and even the 'budget' Rad9500PRO easily kicks anything nVidia currently have on sale.
Chances are just as good that Rad9800 will be out before anyone actually gets hold of a final production GF-FX and even then the Ultras are going to be very hard to come by and not really worth it at all even if they were the same price as Rad9700PRO. I can't rem how GF-FX nonUltra perf, close to Rad9500PRO? For one thing I bet the pricing won't reflect that! It seems ATI will be comfortable leaders in 2003, they have been since the end of 2002 ... but who can tell what 2004 might bring? Perhaps Matrox will release a card worth paying their huge price premium for 
Austin wrote:so few games use openGL anymore that can't be run on an ATI card extremely.... and so few will in the future that it doesn't matter.:-? One thing that still stands for nVidia is OpenGL speed, nVidia cards are equally fast in both but Radeon cards tend to perform slightly slower in OpenGL although nothing anywhere near that would make a GF4TI4600 preferable over a Rad9500PRO.
We've been given ETA & Pricing for the first GeForceFX cards - the Albatron FX5800 with 400mhz core/800mhz memory will be here 2nd week of March - $600 for non-Ultra to $850 for Ultra cards looks like initial pricing - just a little more than the R9700Pro. Only 20 are allocated to NSW, see here to preorder. Other cards from Prolink and Abit are expected to arrive in the week following.
Geforce fx performance is not as good as expected but is negligable compared to the ATI counterpart. 
One thing that still stands for nVidia is OpenGL speed, nVidia cards are equally fast in both but Radeon cards tend to perform slightly slower in OpenGL although nothing anywhere near that would make a GF4TI4600 preferable over a Rad9500PRO.
