Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Mainboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

Memory Prices

Shop



Sharky Extreme :


Latest News


- Logitech Mouse Works in Midair
- Gateway Consumer Notebooks Offer Spiffy Colors, HDMI Output
- New 20- and 22-Inch Widescreens Join NEC Display Line
- Pioneer Ships Blu-ray Combo Drive
- The Return of Commodore: From 64 To Hardcore
News Archives

Features

- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Microsoft's Dan Odell
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with ATI's Terry Makedon
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Seagate's Joni Clark
- Half-Life 2 Review
- DOOM 3 Review

Buyer's Guides

- June High-end Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- May Value Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- March Extreme Gaming PC Buyer's Guide

HARDWARE

  • CPUs

    - Athlon X2 BE-2350 Processor Review

  • Motherboards

    - Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 Motherboard Review

  • Video Cards

    - PNY GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB Review





  • SharkyForums.Com - Print: Wait for GeForce3?

    Wait for GeForce3?
    By ChronoTrigger March 19, 2001, 02:20 AM

    Alright guys...I want your honest opinion on this. Should I build my PC now, and get a GeForce2 Ultra, or wait until the prices come down to about $350-400 for the GeForce3? Don't forget to take into consideration that the GeForce3 is revolutionary...

    By ChronoTrigger March 19, 2001, 03:44 AM

    Note that I have modified my signature accordingly to accomodate the purchase of a GeForce3...

    By Vizer March 19, 2001, 04:08 AM

    i'd probably wait until the geforce 3 or radeon 2 come out and see the performance factors then check to see if u really need it. if u don't need one then get the, then, much cheaper Ultra or Radeon 64 mb. either way you'll get what u want and i have seen the geforce 3 from Hercules for $490US so it is not all that expensive compared to the Ultra when it came out. hope that i could helpP

    By tu2thepoo March 19, 2001, 06:05 AM

    it really depends on how long you're intending to keep the machine. if you can afford to upgrade the video card by, oh, the end of the year (or thereabouts, when dx8 features would probably become prevalent), then by all means build the machine now, with a gf2ultra or radeon64mb.

    but the best course would probably be to wait for price drops on the gf3 or radeon2, or wait for the budget versions (MX, VE, LE, etc). if you're intending to keep the setup for 2-3 years (like i did with my p2-350 + voodoo3), then that's what you should do.

    personally, i'm just going to buy a gf2 or radeon when the nex-gen cards come out - that way the prices will be rock-bottom. my voodoo3 can still run the most basic features of any game out right now - that's almost, what, a 3-year lifespan? a radeon would probably fit the minimum requirements for games for at least 2-3 years, i would think.

    By Uberon March 19, 2001, 09:56 AM

    I agree with the former post. If you're going to use the computer for 2-3 years without any mayor upgrade, you should wait for the GeForce3. Price drops are expected as well.

    I'm still using my Celeron 300@464 and upgraded my good old Riva TNT board just three days ago. I've had that computer for 2 and a half years and not even today did I have any problem with running any games (with the TNT). I couldn't run games at very high resolutions, true, but I could still run just about every game released today at 800x600 and max detail levels (often even higher resolution). I just replaced the video card with a GeForce2 MX, and now I can run games at 1024x768 and even 1152x864 without any problems. The secret is, don't use 32-bit in games, go for 16-bit. There isn't too much of a difference visually, but the performance gets way better. If you're using an old computer that is.

    I'm getting out of topic here I think. Anyway, a new good computer can love you long time without being a moneysink for years

    By yowolabi March 19, 2001, 03:19 PM

    Don't bother waiting, get a radeon 64mb card or something close now. Build your system and enjoy the super graphics. Then if for some crazy reason (you want to run a game at 1600 x 1800 at 32 bit, and max graphics) you can get a geforce 3 near the end of this year. Here are the reasons.

    1. With the current top cards out, you get graphics that won't leave you wanting anything. Current graphics cards run so well, that any improvement you got won't really be noticeable to the naked eye. Breaking the bank on a new geforce 3 will only give you faster benchmarks, a high price to pay for a bunch of numbers that don't mean anything in the real world.

    2. The price of a radeon now and a geforce 3 in a year will probably equal the price of getting a geforce 3 in the near future. And you won't have to wait to build your machine, you can start gaming on it now!

    3. Waiting for the future is an endless game in pc hardware. You could wait on the Geforce 3, pay a lot for it, get a significant but unnoticeable speed increase in a few games, and revel in having a system that cost $1500 more than your friend's, but is only 7% faster and plays almost exactly the same. Then six months later, when the geforce 4 comes out, your friend will get a geforce 3 for half as much as you bought it and his system will be just as fast. And you'll again pay too much for a product you don't need just to brag that you've got the fastest possible

    Never buy cutting edge technology for computers. It costs twice as much as it will in a couple of months. None of the current software will need that much power or even take advantage of it till it becomes cheap and mainstream enough that a lot of people buy it. You should wait to see if it catches on, what software is designed for it, and if those programs are even important to you first. The first pioneers to buy these things are like people who risk death crossing in a new and untested boat to settle a new place. Many of them die along the way or trying to build a settlement. Then the smart people come along after the boats have been perfected and the village up and running, and build themselves a nice little house without taking any risks. All because they could wait a few months before going to a place that was unlivable anyway!

    By Subnova March 19, 2001, 03:38 PM

    quote:Originally posted by yowolabi:
    Don't bother waiting, get a radeon 64mb card or something close now. Build your system and enjoy the super graphics. Then if for some crazy reason (you want to run a game at 1600 x 1800 at 32 bit, and max graphics) you can get a geforce 3 near the end of this year. Here are the reasons.

    1. With the current top cards out, you get graphics that won't leave you wanting anything. Current graphics cards run so well, that any improvement you got won't really be noticeable to the naked eye. Breaking the bank on a new geforce 3 will only give you faster benchmarks, a high price to pay for a bunch of numbers that don't mean anything in the real world.

    2. The price of a radeon now and a geforce 3 in a year will probably equal the price of getting a geforce 3 in the near future. And you won't have to wait to build your machine, you can start gaming on it now!

    3. Waiting for the future is an endless game in pc hardware. You could wait on the Geforce 3, pay a lot for it, get a significant but unnoticeable speed increase in a few games, and revel in having a system that cost $1500 more than your friend's, but is only 7% faster and plays almost exactly the same. Then six months later, when the geforce 4 comes out, your friend will get a geforce 3 for half as much as you bought it and his system will be just as fast. And you'll again pay too much for a product you don't need just to brag that you've got the fastest possible

    Never buy cutting edge technology for computers. It costs twice as much as it will in a couple of months. None of the current software will need that much power or even take advantage of it till it becomes cheap and mainstream enough that a lot of people buy it. You should wait to see if it catches on, what software is designed for it, and if those programs are even important to you first. The first pioneers to buy these things are like people who risk death crossing in a new and untested boat to settle a new place. Many of them die along the way or trying to build a settlement. Then the smart people come along after the boats have been perfected and the village up and running, and build themselves a nice little house without taking any risks. All because they could wait a few months before going to a place that was unlivable anyway!

    I agree. You can wait forever and never have anything. Either way your computer is going to get old and crappy...might as well get to gaming now, no?

    ~Share the knowledge~

    By kevin w March 19, 2001, 04:38 PM

    I look at it this way. Remember Geforce1 and all the talk about T&L? Well theres really only a handful of games that take advantage of T&L even today (i said games, not demos), and nVidia has already released what, atleast 7 other versions since #1, each with better T&L, and non as of yet have become a neccesity in the gaming community.

    Now look at Geforce3, it realisticaly has modestly better performace then its younger brother the Geforce2 Ultra running games that can be purchased right now. However, Geforce3 opens up a whole new world to developers in terms of being programable. Will games be supporting this new feature any time soon? Maybe..? By the time games do in fact take advantage of this feature, I believe nVidia will have already released newer graphic cards, who knows - maybe even an "MX" version that does the same thing as Geforce3 (revision 1) at a fraction of the cost.

    Bottom line, buy what you want right now. I myself still use a Voodoo3 3000, because the majority of games I play go through my television set, so, 640x480 with great fps works for what I want. Even if I did want to improve on that i'd need not only a new graphics card, i'd need a new TV, forget that $$$

    This is also comparable to the Pentium 4 / Pentium 3 issue. Pentium 4 wont shine until applications are built to make use of it. Applications wont be built very quickly until more of the market has a Pentium 4.

    It's just as ugly in the gaming market.
    Joe 6-pack game designer wants to 1) create a fun game and 2) make money (the order varies of course!). Joe 6-pack is going to design his game to work well based on the specifications of what the majority of people own in their homes. When Geforce3 ships its sales will be targeted to one group, computer graphic enthusiasts. Just a guess, but i'm gonna say there is 1 enthusiast in every 1,000 computer users. So do I build my game in attempts to utilize the full potential of a 400mhz, 64 megs ram, TNT or Voodoo3 or Geforce MX, etc.. machine giving me an opportunity to sell 1 million copies... Or do I design a game that requires the power of 900mhz, 128 megs ram, Geforce3, etc.. machine limiting me to sell only 1,000 copies.. And trust me, I dont care what amazing game is produced, that game will *not* make an impact on the decision of a consumer to invest $1,500+ in hardware capable of running that game. Now - have a bunch of developers with similar deadlines and you can create a pull..

    Anyhoo I'm going on to long, go buy yourself a Geforce2 GTS or a Raedon 32 or 64 meg DDR version. heh

    By Satan's Cheerleader March 19, 2001, 04:41 PM

    i'm waiting for the commodore 64 to come out before i buy a vic 20.

    By Momaw March 19, 2001, 07:36 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Satan's Cheerleader:
    i'm waiting for the commodore 64 to come out before i buy a vic 20.

    I can get you a good deal on an Osborne Exectuve or some unidentified portable that runs APL.

    By ChronoTrigger March 21, 2001, 01:05 AM

    quote:Originally posted by kevin w:
    Anyhoo I'm going on to long, go buy yourself a Geforce2 GTS or a Raedon 32 or 64 meg DDR version. heh

    Great suggestions, all of you. I tend to like this idea. The Radeon 32MB DDR is going for $179 at a CompUSA in my area, so I think I'm gonna pick me up one of those before they go out of stock. They aren't being manufactured anymore and they are the same core chip as the 64MB DDR (unlike the GeForce 2 MX), so that's the solution that I like. Besides, I think nVidia has the potential to become another Microsoft, and I'm all against that! I like harvesting competition...especially since I will be sitting high and dry if ATI goes down. I'll be the one saying, "Don't look at me! I did my part"

    By yowolabi March 21, 2001, 12:58 PM

    No, don't do it go to www.newegg.com....
    hold up here's the url..... http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?submit=manufactory&catalog=48&manufactory=1126
    you can get the retail version of the 64mb radeon for $184 including tax.

    By Captain Iglo March 21, 2001, 03:23 PM

    http://www.review-zone.com/hardware/video/geforce2_ultra/page6.shtml

    look at the Radeon 64DDR scores compared to the GF2 GTS64DDR ones! 32 bit, otherwise, a GF2 is always the faster solution, the Quaver is particularly interesting: only 3 fps between the Radeon 64DDR and a GF2Ultra, ~50fps at 1600*1200, 32bpp....


    Contact Us | www.SharkyForums.com

    Copyright © 1999, 2000 internet.com Corporation. All Rights Reserved.


    Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46

    previous page
    next page





    Copyright © 2002 INT Media Group, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. About INT Media Group | Press Releases | Privacy Policy | Career Opportunities