I couldn't help but cringe at the link to the RV600 2900XT review with "lose" as the anchor text. I bought that card not long before discovering AnandTech and I remember the sinking feeling I had reading that exact review. The knot of realisation in your stomach that screams "you bought the wrong card!" Sad times.
Wow, remember when cards were struggling to hit 60fps at 1920x1200? Lots of todays cards are into the hundreds of FPS with todays games at higher resolutions than that. I guess console dominance is a blessing and curse in one.
1080p is still a difficult target to hit for most new games - especially if you want 4xAA and all manner of post processing. One thing I wish AT would do is offer benchmarks without AA enabled. When playing a game at 1:1 pixel ratio on and LCD or PDP, jaggies aren't as evident. IMO, AA in games is like DNR on Blu-ray titles - it just makes it blurrier. Give it to me crisp.
I also think targeting for 60fps is a mistake. Sure, the current dominant display technology is all connecting and running at 60Hz, but the time will come where true 120Hz displays will become the norm - likely 4K as well. Also, in order to get smooth 3-D at 60fps, you need to have the power to push double the frames in as much time. GPU makers are getting lazy. When we had CRTs, pushing above and beyond 60fps was extremely important, but that goal has been lacking both from the hardware and expectations.
I feel like we're being locked down by inferior display technology.
1920x1200 hasn't been "high end" for quiet a while. I bought my trusty 30'' back in 2007, and ATI introduced Eyefinity at about the same time. And then there is downsampling-AA.
Nevertheless, due to Codevelopment for consoles and PCs, this top-resolutions have basically been ignored by game developers and reviewers (not Anandtech, but many others) ever since.
This means that cards that are reviewed to "play modern games at FullHD and 60 fps" struggle to go beyond 25 FPS on my monitor, justifiying CrossFire/SLI setups. But if they include text, like MMOs, it's more often than not in almost unreadably small fonts. No good solution for that, since sadly my Dell isn't too good at scaling down, so playing 1920x1200 is not an option either.
I just wish reviewers would drop the 1680x1050 resolutions from their Desktop-Card-Reviews. People with that kind of monitor should not invest 500$ into new Graphics cards. Get a decent Full-HD monitor already, or better yet a High-Res 27'' or 30'', so that PC developers start taking these resolutions into consideration for their developments.
Seriously, font size scaling? It's not magic, my Amiga could do it in the early 90s.
I like my 1680x1050 resolution and the 22" 16:10 monitor that gives that resolution to me. In fact the top 3 resolutions on the steam hardware survey are:
1920 x 1080 27.54% +1.06% 1680 x 1050 18.04% -0.03% 1280 x 1024 11.20% +0.06%
So as you see, let 1680x1050 be in the reviews as there is a usage for that.
On a side note it's funny that all top resolutions have different aspect ratios :/
That is because most games today are still using engines like the Unreal Engine 3 and such. Only games that really matter when benchmarking high-end cards are the games with engines that utilize the many DX11 features available today. For example, games such as BF3 and Metro 2033 (The new Crysis IMO) are the ones that matter.
A big part of the argument has to be how well the game engine can put things on the screen. Resolution is only a small part of the picture for what drives performance. Many games today may include support for DX11, but they are not DESIGNED around DX11. CPU performance can even play a part in how many frames per second are pumped out.
The engine is a part of it, but it will take a while before we see an end to DX9 being the target, and that in part is because you still have far too many people running Windows XP.
I bought a GeForce FX 5900 for $590 when it was released. It was my first "top of the line" card and my last until the 580. If ATI's 2900XT was a loser, then nVidia's FX5900 was its retarded, sociopathic cousin.
Kepler launch day was like one of those good old days of PC history when you knew that something good to the industry was just happened. Great product NVIDIA and congratulations to you all for creating an outstanding product.
Thanks Anand for the introduction highlighting how much work a chip-design team puts in to get a product to market. Benchmarking final products and with people writing off products in the comments sections because they did not get a 'feature' they wanted, I think its important for everyone to realize how complex and time-consuming this whole process is.
However, I would also like to point out that not just the NVIDIA work cited here but nearly all big CPU/GPU design work takes about 3-4 years to get to market. And with technology nodes beyond 28nm, this has become an even longer affair. Not considering Intel, which does its own manufacturing, R&D, early engagement with foundries, test-chip tape outs etc., are a part of the product development cycle and all of this takes a full year before the actual product design work starts.
Are there any PC gamers left out there? Really? They need to catch up. There are no good computer games anymore. Gaming on a PC is ancient history.
So what's the point in a product like Kepler/whatever?
It's very much like the Android story. 4 core CPUs, powerful GPUs are advertised - but what are you going to do with all this hardware if there are no games, no apps that could take advantage of all this 'power'?
Heck, 99% of PC users don't need anything other that Intel's integrated HD Graphics. Kepler-Shmepler.
Another "PC Gaming is dead" declaration, alert the press. If it was dead why would companies like this keep pressing forward with new chips like this with costly R&D? Even if 7 in 10 games are console ports, PCs still can play them with higher resolution and detail, arguably better controls (and if you disagree, you can always use a 360 controller), etc etc. Alan wake on PC recouped its development costs in 24 hours, obviously its still in studios best interests not to ignore PC.
And I'm not a troll. I honestly can't comprehend why in this day and age they still, quote, 'keep pressing forward with new chips like this with costly R&D?'
If Nvidia thinks there are many people willing to pay hundreds of $ for something you can't use even if you wanted to (but who'd want to play modern 'games', really?), shame on them.
I guess it's amd fanboy rage days when the Nvidia card wins, suddenyl it's a tie, no one can tell, it's a personal choice, or it's silly for just Nvidia of course, to even make cards and for anyone to play games. I've never seen sorer losers than amd fans in my entire life.
And that POS recouped its losses in 24 hours, how good the game is is completely missing my point. They keep making these cards because people keep buying them, and people keep buying them in the face of console ports because they still find the experience superior. What's not to comprehend? You may not value higher resolution, better effects and details or better controls, some people do, I don't see the problem.
Yes, there are a lot of PC gamers left out there. I am one of them. We need to catch up? To what?
What’s the point of Kelper? What’s the point of making anything better? If everyone thought like you did we'd still be playing on the original Nintendo. Seriously.. I have a big problem with the notion where we are today is "good enough". All this talk of iPad games, mobile phone games, and the "casual" gamer market. So these devices are finally capable of running games that look/perform halfway decent, so now everyone and his brother has a video game "system" in their pocket. So what?
There are just as many gamers out there as before that demand a richer experience. It’s not like the core gamers have disappeared. We are still here. We still look forward to the next big innovation, the next amazing experience that blows us away. Bejeweled and Angry birds does not impress us. It doesn't deliver the kind of immersive entertainment core PC gamers demand.
Look back at history, look when 3dfx hit the scene. They had a piece of hardware with very little software support. But since their product delivered such an amazing experience it completely changed the gaming industry towards hardware accelerated "3d" graphics.
PC gaming has always helped push the entire gaming industry forward. You should be thanking Nvidia and PC gamers instead of criticizing.
Always happy when people work hard, invent something new, create something positive for the society and get wall payed for it! Not like the Wall Street freaks getting big bucks just for "moving" money and not inventing anything...
I agree and that goes for AMD as well. Really making something, a real economy and a real product that forwards growth in human potential and advancement and furthers modernization and gets us that much closer to realizing expansion beyond earth..
but i have to appreciate that he bothered with the email. a lot of ceos might not do it.
i kind of expect it from him though. i wandered into some nvidia event in san jose once when i was living int he bay area, and actaully hung out with jen hsun . and he was drunk and having a great time with his employees. he seems very, "one of the guys" compared to a lot of other big company ceos.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
31 Comments
Back to Article
jibberegg - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
I couldn't help but cringe at the link to the RV600 2900XT review with "lose" as the anchor text. I bought that card not long before discovering AnandTech and I remember the sinking feeling I had reading that exact review. The knot of realisation in your stomach that screams "you bought the wrong card!" Sad times.Well done NVIDIA though :)
TonyB - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
lol, you bought a 2900XTtipoo - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
Wow, remember when cards were struggling to hit 60fps at 1920x1200? Lots of todays cards are into the hundreds of FPS with todays games at higher resolutions than that. I guess console dominance is a blessing and curse in one.Impulses - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
The high end isn't 1920x1200 anymore tho... Sup 5760x1200, even Kepler isn't enough to drive that as a single card solution.nathanddrews - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
1080p is still a difficult target to hit for most new games - especially if you want 4xAA and all manner of post processing. One thing I wish AT would do is offer benchmarks without AA enabled. When playing a game at 1:1 pixel ratio on and LCD or PDP, jaggies aren't as evident. IMO, AA in games is like DNR on Blu-ray titles - it just makes it blurrier. Give it to me crisp.I also think targeting for 60fps is a mistake. Sure, the current dominant display technology is all connecting and running at 60Hz, but the time will come where true 120Hz displays will become the norm - likely 4K as well. Also, in order to get smooth 3-D at 60fps, you need to have the power to push double the frames in as much time. GPU makers are getting lazy. When we had CRTs, pushing above and beyond 60fps was extremely important, but that goal has been lacking both from the hardware and expectations.
I feel like we're being locked down by inferior display technology.
Dracusis - Friday, May 4, 2012 - link
You have some strange and very misguided ideas about technology.ShieTar - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
1920x1200 hasn't been "high end" for quiet a while. I bought my trusty 30'' back in 2007, and ATI introduced Eyefinity at about the same time. And then there is downsampling-AA.Nevertheless, due to Codevelopment for consoles and PCs, this top-resolutions have basically been ignored by game developers and reviewers (not Anandtech, but many others) ever since.
This means that cards that are reviewed to "play modern games at FullHD and 60 fps" struggle to go beyond 25 FPS on my monitor, justifiying CrossFire/SLI setups.
But if they include text, like MMOs, it's more often than not in almost unreadably small fonts. No good solution for that, since sadly my Dell isn't too good at scaling down, so playing 1920x1200 is not an option either.
I just wish reviewers would drop the 1680x1050 resolutions from their Desktop-Card-Reviews. People with that kind of monitor should not invest 500$ into new Graphics cards. Get a decent Full-HD monitor already, or better yet a High-Res 27'' or 30'', so that PC developers start taking these resolutions into consideration for their developments.
Seriously, font size scaling? It's not magic, my Amiga could do it in the early 90s.
setzer - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
I like my 1680x1050 resolution and the 22" 16:10 monitor that gives that resolution to me.In fact the top 3 resolutions on the steam hardware survey are:
1920 x 1080 27.54% +1.06%
1680 x 1050 18.04% -0.03%
1280 x 1024 11.20% +0.06%
So as you see, let 1680x1050 be in the reviews as there is a usage for that.
On a side note it's funny that all top resolutions have different aspect ratios :/
SolMiester - Sunday, March 25, 2012 - link
The high end isn't 1920x1200 anymore tho... Sup 5760x1200, even Kepler isn't enough to drive that as a single card solution.??, try reading the HardwareHeaven review, it has 57*10 results, which prove your statement incorrect!
serrationlol - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
That is because most games today are still using engines like the Unreal Engine 3 and such. Only games that really matter when benchmarking high-end cards are the games with engines that utilize the many DX11 features available today. For example, games such as BF3 and Metro 2033 (The new Crysis IMO) are the ones that matter.kn00tcn - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link
that's not the right way to think, engine is irrelevanti can dump all the art & effects i want into a dx9 game & it will be demanding & worthy of a benchmark
& UE3 has had dx11 for a year with those exact features that magically make something worthy of a benchmark
Targon - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
A big part of the argument has to be how well the game engine can put things on the screen. Resolution is only a small part of the picture for what drives performance. Many games today may include support for DX11, but they are not DESIGNED around DX11. CPU performance can even play a part in how many frames per second are pumped out.The engine is a part of it, but it will take a while before we see an end to DX9 being the target, and that in part is because you still have far too many people running Windows XP.
Sivar - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
I bought a GeForce FX 5900 for $590 when it was released. It was my first "top of the line" card and my last until the 580.If ATI's 2900XT was a loser, then nVidia's FX5900 was its retarded, sociopathic cousin.
piroroadkill - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
Ouch. FX series cards.. not exactly NVIDIA's brightest moment.The 680 is a fine beast though, so celebrations are in order at NVIDIA tonight!
SlyNine - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
At least you dodged the 5800 ultra. But yes both the 5900 and 5800 as well as the 2900XT were bastard cards that should have never been.But the 7970s and 680GTX cards are not the 9700 pros or 8800GTs of their days either
xytc - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
Kepler launch day was like one of those good old days of PC history when you knew that something good to the industry was just happened.Great product NVIDIA and congratulations to you all for creating an outstanding product.
Urbanos - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
this is great news and gets me really excited to see the breakthroughs that will be possible in new pcie3 tesla cards for HPC.saurabhr8here - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
Thanks Anand for the introduction highlighting how much work a chip-design team puts in to get a product to market. Benchmarking final products and with people writing off products in the comments sections because they did not get a 'feature' they wanted, I think its important for everyone to realize how complex and time-consuming this whole process is.However, I would also like to point out that not just the NVIDIA work cited here but nearly all big CPU/GPU design work takes about 3-4 years to get to market. And with technology nodes beyond 28nm, this has become an even longer affair. Not considering Intel, which does its own manufacturing, R&D, early engagement with foundries, test-chip tape outs etc., are a part of the product development cycle and all of this takes a full year before the actual product design work starts.
Booster - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link
Are there any PC gamers left out there? Really? They need to catch up. There are no good computer games anymore. Gaming on a PC is ancient history.So what's the point in a product like Kepler/whatever?
It's very much like the Android story. 4 core CPUs, powerful GPUs are advertised - but what are you going to do with all this hardware if there are no games, no apps that could take advantage of all this 'power'?
Heck, 99% of PC users don't need anything other that Intel's integrated HD Graphics. Kepler-Shmepler.
SlyNine - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
Other then the games looking much better on PC... I'm sorry but everything you said is just wrong.You're only remotly close in that, there are to many ports and no PC exclusives.
tipoo - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
Another "PC Gaming is dead" declaration, alert the press. If it was dead why would companies like this keep pressing forward with new chips like this with costly R&D? Even if 7 in 10 games are console ports, PCs still can play them with higher resolution and detail, arguably better controls (and if you disagree, you can always use a 360 controller), etc etc. Alan wake on PC recouped its development costs in 24 hours, obviously its still in studios best interests not to ignore PC.Booster - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
You call that POS 'a game'?And I'm not a troll. I honestly can't comprehend why in this day and age they still, quote, 'keep pressing forward with new chips like this with costly R&D?'
If Nvidia thinks there are many people willing to pay hundreds of $ for something you can't use even if you wanted to (but who'd want to play modern 'games', really?), shame on them.
CeriseCogburn - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
I guess it's amd fanboy rage days when the Nvidia card wins, suddenyl it's a tie, no one can tell, it's a personal choice, or it's silly for just Nvidia of course, to even make cards and for anyone to play games.I've never seen sorer losers than amd fans in my entire life.
tipoo - Monday, March 26, 2012 - link
And that POS recouped its losses in 24 hours, how good the game is is completely missing my point. They keep making these cards because people keep buying them, and people keep buying them in the face of console ports because they still find the experience superior. What's not to comprehend? You may not value higher resolution, better effects and details or better controls, some people do, I don't see the problem.iamezza - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
Can someone delete this useless troll / flame-bait comment please?coolkev99 - Friday, March 30, 2012 - link
Yes, there are a lot of PC gamers left out there. I am one of them. We need to catch up? To what?What’s the point of Kelper? What’s the point of making anything better? If everyone thought like you did we'd still be playing on the original Nintendo. Seriously.. I have a big problem with the notion where we are today is "good enough". All this talk of iPad games, mobile phone games, and the "casual" gamer market. So these devices are finally capable of running games that look/perform halfway decent, so now everyone and his brother has a video game "system" in their pocket. So what?
There are just as many gamers out there as before that demand a richer experience. It’s not like the core gamers have disappeared. We are still here. We still look forward to the next big innovation, the next amazing experience that blows us away. Bejeweled and Angry birds does not impress us. It doesn't deliver the kind of immersive entertainment core PC gamers demand.
Look back at history, look when 3dfx hit the scene. They had a piece of hardware with very little software support. But since their product delivered such an amazing experience it completely changed the gaming industry towards hardware accelerated "3d" graphics.
PC gaming has always helped push the entire gaming industry forward. You should be thanking Nvidia and PC gamers instead of criticizing.
XSCounter - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
Always happy when people work hard, invent something new, create something positive for the society and get wall payed for it! Not like the Wall Street freaks getting big bucks just for "moving" money and not inventing anything...Good job, NVIDIA! Congratz!
CeriseCogburn - Saturday, March 24, 2012 - link
I agree and that goes for AMD as well.Really making something, a real economy and a real product that forwards growth in human potential and advancement and furthers modernization and gets us that much closer to realizing expansion beyond earth..
havoti97 - Sunday, March 25, 2012 - link
How about sharing some of that company profit with the thousands of people who helped accomplish it, rather than keeping a fat CEO bonushans007 - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link
but i have to appreciate that he bothered with the email. a lot of ceos might not do it.i kind of expect it from him though. i wandered into some nvidia event in san jose once when i was living int he bay area, and actaully hung out with jen hsun . and he was drunk and having a great time with his employees. he seems very, "one of the guys" compared to a lot of other big company ceos.
tipoo - Friday, March 30, 2012 - link
He also has bigger biceps than any CEO I've seen.