Overall: The GeForce 3 reference board provided to us by Nvidia
accomplishes some impressive things, but stunningly, lags in other
areas. The 2D and 3D picture quality is finally in the top tier --
something no other Nvidia card we've tested has been able to achieve
before. The hardware design is also top notch: The circuit board is
stiff and sturdy, and the layout is clean and efficient. The new
features are certainly forward thinking and bring the Nvidia line up to
snuff with the ATI Radeon in many areas. The bandwidth conserving
improvements made in their Lightspeed Memory Architecture, such as the
hidden surface removal and lossless buffer compression are well done and
match Hyper-Z stroke for stroke. The integrated support for a variety of
bump-mapping formats is also welcome and helps make the GeForce 3 more
competitive yet again.
One standout area we want to mention is in anti-aliasing. The new
Quincunx algorithm created by Nvidia is impressive to say the least, and
shows that in time, full screen anti-aliasing will be a very usable
feature even at high resolutions. Beyond that, it is the programmability
of the board that really shines. The ability to actually program
specific functionality into the graphics processor will be an incredibly
beneficial feature to those seeking to realize their own dynamic vision
on the PC platform or even port titles from other platforms. If a key
feature is not there, you can add it. The downside of this
programmability is that it will not benefit the current crop of PC
games, but will require that games be written specifically for it. Given
the number of Xbox titles being developed, we may see this feature
becoming commonly used if those titles are ported to the PC.
On the downside, the fact that Nvidia has introduced the GeForce 3 at a
speed slower than their Ultra card is somewhat puzzling. The Xbox
specification calls for 250mhz clock speeds for the NV20 chip, which is
the same as the Ultra, yet the initial PC release is clocked only at
200mhz, which is the same speed as the Pro. If you are going to release
a card in the neighborhood of $500, it would seem only logical that it
should perform better than its predecessor in all key areas: Yet the
GeForce 3 bafflingly does not. If the performance of the GeForce 3
bested the Pro and Ultra in all areas, it would be a much easier
purchase to justify, but as it is, it is very hard to recommend the
first iteration of this product. We recommend that Adrenaline Vault
readers hold on for a while; we will be keeping a close eye on upcoming
driver releases for performance improvements. Hopefully the speed that
gamers crave will not require a hardware refresh.
http://avault.com/hardware/getreview.asp?review=geforce3
--
"God is generally for the big squadrons
against the little ones."
- Roger, Comte de Bussy-Rabutin
Steve P<Inglo>
ICQ #65545522
"P<Inglo>" <speh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2fCz6.777$kG4.2...@news.pacbell.net...
Or so it is hoped.
"P<Inglo>" <speh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2fCz6.777$kG4.2...@news.pacbell.net...
http://www.gamestop.com/product-detail.jsp?origin=cmsnPC&sku=891245
http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/categories/products/product.asp?pf_id=199764&mscs
sid=&ref=1&PromoCode=
http://www.altima2000.com/cgi-bin/AltimaSolutions.storefront
http://www.shopelsa.com/
The GeForce3 GPU was delivered by TSMC to NVDA in late March
(headlines ran on 3/26) If NVDA can get it downline and on shelves in
3 more weeks, that's what i call great production to market
turnaround. Looking forward to trying it.
Since I'm short NVDA, I'll take that as good news :-)