Geforce fx didn't live up to the hype

How did it not live up to the hype? It beat the 9700 Pro in almost all benchmarks at Tomshardware, and when did a Ti 4800 come out?
 
From what I have read, it is faster than the ATI. The only problem is that it came out late and the ATI card is cheaper now. Nvidia still owns.
 
For the less heat, less wattage, less noise, less moeny I'd get the 9700Pro over the FX
 
Toms Hardware isn't the best source, imho.  Check anandtech.com, hardocp.com, and arstechnica.com.  Everyone thinks it was a big disappointment.  They did beat the 9700 pro, but they didn't crush it, and they didn't even beat it in all the benchmarks!  The cards are actually pretty even, with the GFX only a little bit ahead of the Radeon.  Besides, the thing is noisier than heck apparantly.

Also, for a card that is about 4 months late, I would have expected much more.  For something that is only a little faster in synthetic benchmarks after that long, and not always as good in a real gaming situation, that's pretty bad.  nVIDIA should have cranked out a card going at least 30% faster, maybe even 40%......
 
it beat ATi by only 100 points or so in every category. now, if they were down in the 500's range, that would be a lot. but they're competing up in the 15000's, and 100 points isn't much.

for $150 extra? no way.

GeFlopFX 5800 Ultra... heh.
 
It was supposed to be smoking the 9700, but it only just beat it, and didn't even beat it in all cases!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top