9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

Just one piece of information out of many, but worth a brief look for those about to decide. www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_desktop/001.htm

I've been wanting to get a new card, but to be honest my current PNY Ti4400 works so damned well that it's hard to justify it. My main game is NR2003, and I have no frame-rate problems at all. If I did get a newer card it would be so I can turn on all the card-based goodies (FSAA, Anistropic, etc...) and stay at around the same frame rates/resolution (I run 1280X1024 on my 22" display). Right now, I'd have to go with a 9800 AIW, but I'm watching the ATI driver situation very, very carefully before I decide. -Larry "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bjc729$heuf1$[email hidden]... > Just one piece of information out of many, but worth a brief look forthose > about to decide. > > www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_desktop/001.htm > > >

From the article posted: " If you're still "stuck in the past" and think that ATI is plagued with driver issues, than go ahead and keep your head stuck in the sand like an ostrich, buy a 5900 Ultra and then start crying when your pals are smoking your ass in games like Half Life 2 and Halo because they're running ATI hardware. " Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:%Sn6b.31057$Go4.24144@lakeread01... > I've been wanting to get a new card, but to be honest my current PNYTi4400 > works so damned well that it's hard to justify it. My main game isNR2003,

Quoted text (18 lines)

> and I have no frame-rate problems at all. > > If I did get a newer card it would be so I can turn on all the card-based > goodies (FSAA, Anistropic, etc...) and stay at around the same frame > rates/resolution (I run 1280X1024 on my 22" display). > > Right now, I'd have to go with a 9800 AIW, but I'm watching the ATI driver > situation very, very carefully before I decide. > > -Larry > > "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:bjc729$heuf1$[email hidden]... > > Just one piece of information out of many, but worth a brief look for > those > > about to decide. > > > >

www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_desktop/001.htm > > > > > > > >

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 13:57:59 -0400, "Mike Beauchamp" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>From the article posted: > >" If you're still "stuck in the past" and think that ATI is plagued with >driver issues, than go ahead and keep your head stuck in the sand like an >ostrich, buy a 5900 Ultra and then start crying when your pals are smoking >your ass in games like Half Life 2 and Halo because they're running ATI >hardware. "

Yea, well, the person who posted that doesn't own every game on the planet. ATI drivers still have more issues than the Nvidia drivers. Strike Fighters and FS2004 are two games that I can name with issues off the top of my head. Still, I would like to get the Sapphire 9800 OEM and OC it to 9800pro speed.

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 12:32:26 -0400, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I've been wanting to get a new card, but to be honest my current PNY Ti4400 >works so damned well that it's hard to justify it. My main game is NR2003, >and I have no frame-rate problems at all. > >If I did get a newer card it would be so I can turn on all the card-based >goodies (FSAA, Anistropic, etc...) and stay at around the same frame >rates/resolution (I run 1280X1024 on my 22" display). >

I did the same thing by getting a 9700 Pro recently and am very glad I did. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

"Cyber Chum" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > ATI drivers still have more issues than the Nvidia drivers. I completely disagree. IMO, ATI has had much better drivers than nvidia since the Radeon 8500 when they switched to the catalyst program however nvidia, like they've always done, feeds bs to all who want to listen and have trained nvidiots to believe whatever they say. Review sites over the past year have only begun to resist their practice of strong arm tactics. Remember how nvidia downplayed the whole 3dfx FSAA abilities? Remember how nvidia reacted to the new 3dmark timedemos? Remember how it was ok once they started cheating? Like the article says, keep your head buried in the sand all you want and keep trying to defend your nvidia purchasing decisions because it provides great comedy to the rest of us! -Tim

Tim Miser wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > I completely disagree. IMO, ATI has had much better drivers than nvidia > since the Radeon 8500 when they switched to the catalyst program however > nvidia, like they've always done, feeds bs to all who want to listen and > have trained nvidiots to believe whatever they say. Review sites over the > past year have only begun to resist their practice of strong arm tactics. > Remember how nvidia downplayed the whole 3dfx FSAA abilities? Remember how > nvidia reacted to the new 3dmark timedemos? Remember how it was ok once > they started cheating? Like the article says, keep your head buried in the > sand all you want and keep trying to defend your nvidia purchasing decisions > because it provides great comedy to the rest of us!

I'm not sure I'd go quite that far, but I do agree that it's somewhat amusing that people talk about ATI's drivers as being worse than nVidia's, and while nVidia certainly has improved a lot in this regard, for one who used to run 3Dfx cards it was quite entertaining in selfish sort of way to read about the people doing the driver hop to get <insert fav game title here> running on their particular system However, it's no GPL Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

I could be wrong, but you sound like a (former) 3DFX owner that got very annoyed when nVidia smoked them. ;-)

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 04:13:45 GMT, "Tim Miser" <[email hidden]> wrote: p.s. Go play Strike Fighters on an R9700 or 9800, now go play it on a GF4 then get back to me.

> >I completely disagree. IMO, ATI has had much better drivers than nvidia > >since the Radeon 8500 > I emphatically dfisagree! I owned an R8500 and what you say is not true atall. Ok, let's make it "since the 9700". But that was a year ago, and Nvidia has spent all the time since then committing consumer fraud over the entire FX line with their cheating and lying, while ATI has been performing like gangbusters. There is currently no compelling reason to buy Nvidia cards, and won't be until NV40, and I expect R420 will upstage that as well. rms

"Roger Squires" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:VlM6b.5471$[email hidden]... > > >I completely disagree. IMO, ATI has had much better drivers thannvidia > > >since the Radeon 8500 > > I emphatically dfisagree! I owned an R8500 and what you say is not trueat > all. > > Ok, let's make it "since the 9700". But that was a year ago, andNvidia > has spent all the time since then committing consumer fraud over theentire > FX line with their cheating and lying, while ATI has been performing like > gangbusters. There is currently no compelling reason to buy Nvidia cards, > and won't be until NV40, and I expect R420 will upstage that as well. > > rms > Please expand upon this if you have the time since I still have time to cancel my FX5900 ultra order (building a new AMD 2800+ rig) and go with a 9800 pro (or non-pro for the best value). I'm looking to run mainly sims (flight/racing), sports (Madden 2004, NHL 2004) and a few "hot" shooters (Half-life 2). Why would ATI be the better choice? TIA. -- Joe M.

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 16:52:57 -0400, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote: >I'm looking to run mainly sims (flight/racing), sports (Madden 2004, NHL >2004) and a few "hot" shooters (Half-life 2). Why would ATI be the better >choice? >ATI should perform quite a bit better in HL2 based on the recent discussions of DX9 performance. Madden and NHL don't exactly push systems to their limits. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

"Joe M." wrote: > > Please expand upon this if you have the time since I still have time to > cancel my FX5900 ultra order (building a new AMD 2800+ rig) and go with a > 9800 pro (or non-pro for the best value). Don't know if this is the one Roger is talking about http://tech-report.com/etc/2003q2/3dmurk03/index.x?pg=1 There was an earlier one as well, which was talked down afterwards by both nVidia and 3DMark Personally I happen to think both cards are plenty fast enough and would have based my next purchase on image quality rather than raw speed, assuming both had somewhat similar performance, and most reputable sites these days give ATI the nod here As for my personal POV it's useless since I'll never buy an nVidia card again as long as there's a reasonable alternative :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

I like ATI's 3d-image quality better. Speed-wise the two top contenders shouldn't be too far apart, sometimes the 5900 Ultra winning, and sometimes the ATI 9800 Pro. But for all I know a new card from ATI is imminent within the next 3 weeks, so maybe you should wait for that car to be released? Apologies if I'm mistaken about this. Achim "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Why would ATI be the better choice?

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:15:49 GMT, "Roger Squires" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Ok, let's make it "since the 9700". But that was a year ago, and Nvidia >has spent all the time since then committing consumer fraud over the entire >FX line with their cheating and lying, while ATI has been performing like >gangbusters. There is currently no compelling reason to buy Nvidia cards, >and won't be until NV40, and I expect R420 will upstage that as well. > >rms >

And didn't I say I will probably buy a 9800 soon? Why yes, I did. My contention is that the ATI drivers are still not as robust as the Nvidia drivers, which is true beyond a shadow of doubt.

This one has a good overview of Nvidia's company policy of cheating and lying during the whole of 2003: http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTAz Hardocp has always backed Nvidia, and the fact that even they have had enough indicates the level of disgust in the industry that has built up over this company's actions. Looking ahead to newer games, there are many reports now that the FX series of cards performs extremely badly in DX9 pixel shaders, which are heavily used in the new Tombraider game, as well as HL2 and Doom3. The only solution for Nvidia seems to be in lowering image quality to compensate. There are several threads on http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=14 discussing this, including one from John Carmack. rms

"Cyber Chum" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On this day of our lord, Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:15:49 GMT, "Roger > Squires" <[email hidden]> quilled: > > > > Ok, let's make it "since the 9700". But that was a year ago, andNvidia > >has spent all the time since then committing consumer fraud over theentire > >FX line with their cheating and lying, while ATI has been performing like > >gangbusters. There is currently no compelling reason to buy Nvidiacards,

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >and won't be until NV40, and I expect R420 will upstage that as well. > > > >rms > > > > I can agree with that and that is why I am buying a 9800pro soon, even > though I know the drivers won't be as *compatible* with all my games > as the ATI drivers will be. But that is a sacrifice I am willing to > make to gain performance over my aging Ti4200. I'm not saying the card > is not good, I'm just saying the drivers are not as compatible as > Nvidia drivers. I know this from reading various news groups and web > forums. I play all genres of games so maybe your experience is not as > varied as mine is.

You are correct. Case in point: Madden 2004 doesn't have "shiny helmets" and based on the screen shots it looks terrible compared to an nvidia card (should be patched soon but still a problem for those playing now). I keep fence hopping on my video card purchase and I'm now on the nvidia side of the fence because I too play across too many genre to risk incompatibility (Madden looks too good for me to lose graphical quality with an "upgrade"). -- Joe M.

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:03:22 -0400, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote: >You are correct. Case in point: Madden 2004 doesn't have "shiny helmets" >and based on the screen shots it looks terrible compared to an nvidia card >(should be patched soon but still a problem for those playing now). I keep >fence hopping on my video card purchase and I'm now on the nvidia side of >the fence because I too play across too many genre to risk incompatibility >(Madden looks too good for me to lose graphical quality with an "upgrade"). Yea, I read an article that shows Falcon 4.0 SP3 is faster on a GF4 than a 9700pro even. Probably because SP3 is optimised for Nvidia cards and not ATI. But it's a tough choice to make when you play all kinds of games. But the Nvidia asking price for the 5900ultra is pathetic and I will never pay that much for any video card.

Joachim Trensz wrote: > > Just one piece of information out of many, but worth a brief look for those > about to decide. And here's another... http://www.techreport.com/etc/2003q3/valve/index.x?pg=1 Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

My friend, I have LIVED the ATI Driver Hell, so they have a LOT to prove to me. -Larry "Mike Beauchamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> From the article posted: > > " If you're still "stuck in the past" and think that ATI is plagued with > driver issues, than go ahead and keep your head stuck in the sand like an > ostrich, buy a 5900 Ultra and then start crying when your pals are smoking > your ass in games like Half Life 2 and Halo because they're running ATI > hardware. " > > Mike > http://mikebeauchamp.com > > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:%Sn6b.31057$Go4.24144@lakeread01... > > I've been wanting to get a new card, but to be honest my current PNY > Ti4400 > > works so damned well that it's hard to justify it. My main game is > NR2003, > > and I have no frame-rate problems at all. > > > > If I did get a newer card it would be so I can turn on all the

card-based > > goodies (FSAA, Anistropic, etc...) and stay at around the same frame > > rates/resolution (I run 1280X1024 on my 22" display). > > > > Right now, I'd have to go with a 9800 AIW, but I'm watching the ATIdriver

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > situation very, very carefully before I decide. > > > > -Larry > > > > "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:bjc729$heuf1$[email hidden]... > > > Just one piece of information out of many, but worth a brief look for > > those > > > about to decide. > > > > > > > www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_desktop/001.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Larry wrote: > > My friend, I have LIVED the ATI Driver Hell, so they have a LOT to prove to > me. And nVidia has always had stable and bug free drivers ? :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

> And nVidia has always had stable and bug free drivers ? :-) Actually, yeah, pretty much. I'm told that ATI's driver's are much improved though.

Steve Simpson wrote: > > I'm told that ATI's driver's are much improved though. I don't know too much about that, I only play a few games and they've all run pretty well on my various Radeons, except for Panzer General III which has some strange bugs in it, but since I only installed it to see if I missed something the first time around, I don't think I did, I didn't bother to see if I could fix it I'm not trying to tell people that Ati has better drivers than nVidia, but nVidia has a history of pretty buggy drivers themselves, so it's kinda amusing to see people talking about not going the Ati route because of buggy drivers, that's all Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

The choice is simple if you want DX9 performance. Half Life 2 has benchmarks today and Microsoft claims this is the game that DX9 is most utilized in, and what DX9 games of the future will be. NVIDIA made a fatal error by not putting enough oomph in their core and following DX9 architecture. This is why the FutureMark bench mark controversy. FutureMark was to look ahead to the latest in DX9 unlike other Benchmarks and NVIDIA had to manipulate their drivers to make a reasonable benchmark. If you are looking forward to Half Life 2 and want to spend as little as possible for performance in a GPU. I recommend the 100.00 ATI 9600 pro. Beats even the FX5900 Ultra 256 in Half life 2. NVIDIA claims this inequity can be addressed in future driver updates, however skeptics think rather in their next design of GPU. Read the articles easily found on the web and make an educated decision for yourself. "Cyber Chum" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... On this day of our lord, Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:15:49 GMT, "Roger Squires" <[email hidden]> quilled: > Ok, let's make it "since the 9700". But that was a year ago, andNvidia

Quoted text (7 lines)

>has spent all the time since then committing consumer fraud over the entire >FX line with their cheating and lying, while ATI has been performing like >gangbusters. There is currently no compelling reason to buy Nvidia cards, >and won't be until NV40, and I expect R420 will upstage that as well. > >rms >

I can agree with that and that is why I am buying a 9800pro soon, even though I know the drivers won't be as *compatible* with all my games as the ATI drivers will be. But that is a sacrifice I am willing to make to gain performance over my aging Ti4200. I'm not saying the card is not good, I'm just saying the drivers are not as compatible as Nvidia drivers. I know this from reading various news groups and web forums. I play all genres of games so maybe your experience is not as varied as mine is.

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:10:10 GMT, "Gamertilldeath" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>The choice is simple if you want DX9 performance. Half Life 2 has benchmarks >today and Microsoft claims this is the game that DX9 is most utilized in, >and what DX9 games of the future will be. NVIDIA made a fatal error by not >putting enough oomph in their core and following DX9 architecture. This is >why the FutureMark bench mark controversy. FutureMark was to look ahead to >the latest in DX9 unlike other Benchmarks and NVIDIA had to manipulate their >drivers to make a reasonable benchmark. If you are looking forward to Half >Life 2 and want to spend as little as possible for performance in a GPU. I >recommend the 100.00 ATI 9600 pro. Beats even the FX5900 Ultra 256 in Half >life 2. NVIDIA claims this inequity can be addressed in future driver >updates, however skeptics think rather in their next design of GPU. Read the >articles easily found on the web and make an educated decision for yourself.

I did play HL but I'm not a big fan of it so it doesn't affect my buyin decision. It's just another FPS jumping puzzle game with a couple of nice features IMO. Maybe Nvidia is right in saying that the PS2.0 performance will be where it should be in the 5x drivers, we will see. Also remember that both ATI and Nvidia have new cards coming out before Xmas so things could change yet.

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:00:47 +0200, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote: >And nVidia has always had stable and bug free drivers ? :-) Less bug free than ATI, that's for sure.

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:48:43 +0200, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>I don't know too much about that, I only play a few games and they've >all run pretty well on my various Radeons, except for Panzer General III >which has some strange bugs in it, but since I only installed it to see >if I missed something the first time around, I don't think I did, I >didn't bother to see if I could fix it > >I'm not trying to tell people that Ati has better drivers than nVidia, >but nVidia has a history of pretty buggy drivers themselves, so it's >kinda amusing to see people talking about not going the Ati route >because of buggy drivers, that's all

Because that is old information and not true for a long time. I remember the early days of the GF2 had buggy drivers and I returned the card for a Voodoo5 because of it. But about six months later I bought another GF2 and the drivers were stellar and have been ever since. Sure, a bug will creep in from time to time in the betas, but that is why they are called beta and comparing Nvidia beta drivers to ATI official drivers is not very smart. I honestly can't find one game I own that has any bug with the Nvidia drivers I am currently using. If I bought the 9800pro I already know there are three games I own that have bugs. FS2004 has font issue (well, I don't own this one yet, but I will), Strike Fighters has slow performance on ATI cards and radar bug, Jane's F15 can't even be played on the Radeon 9700/9800 due to some issue, Reb Baron3D alows me to paly in 3D with glide wrapper that won't work on ATI cards, Falcon 4.0 performs better on a GF4 than a 9700pro even. Here's one from when I owned the 8500, in Heavy Gear2 the radar display was not translucent as it was supposed to be, put in a GF4 and it was translucent, and that's a pretty old game that plays perfectly on Nvidia cards but not ATI. Anyway, even 3DFX cards had bugs in the drivers on occasion so no one company is perfect. But this guy who says people who think ATI drivers are still buggy have their heads up their ass is nothing but an ATI shrill that needs his ass kicked.

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:27:30 -0700, Bottom Feeder <[email hidden]> wrote: >I did play HL but I'm not a big fan of it so it doesn't affect my >buyin decision. It's just another FPS jumping puzzle game with a >couple of nice features IMO. You haven't seen the HL2 videos have you? I thought HL was very overrated, but I can't wait for HL2. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

"Gamertilldeath" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:mSo8b.77$[email hidden]:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> If you are looking forward to Half > Life 2 and want to spend as little as possible for performance in a > GPU. I recommend the 100.00 ATI 9600 pro. Beats even the FX5900 Ultra > 256 in Half life 2. NVIDIA claims this inequity can be addressed in > future driver updates, however skeptics think rather in their next > design of GPU. Read the articles easily found on the web and make an > educated decision for yourself

I have also seen reports that ATI based cards do work better in Half life 2. But Doom3 favors Nvidia products. So it's also more than just drivers and hardware, it's how developers access the graphic subsystem. I personally with my non pro ati 9000 still have holes(missing textures) in my cars despite searching for every old Nvidia file I can find. With both Nvidia cards and ATI cards I have seen some addon tracks have a display problem where the mountains are shrunk down into a rectanglular shape that just sits on top of the skyline. So instead of having the mountains fill the screen they are shown more like a very large billboard. dave henrie

"Steve Simpson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bjsh12$mfus0$[email hidden]... > > And nVidia has always had stable and bug free drivers ? :-) > > Actually, yeah, pretty much. > Uh, yeah, just keep thinking that it's "great drivers" when their new driver gives you a 20-30% improvement over the previous driver. So many nvidia disciples are so elated with that improvement that they never stop to think that it was actually crappy drivers in the first place they had been using that were holding back 20-30% of their hardware capabilites for the prior 6 months. Also, keep thinking that it's perfectly normal to use different drivers for different games...yep, I run the detonator 12.11 for NR3 but have to switch to Det 20.41 for SCGT and then over to 17.24 for Viper racing etc. This was the normal musical driver routine for years with nvidia up to as recently as the GF4. Yep, just keep thinking that glide isn't important, FSAA isn't important, 3dMark03 isn't important, visual quality isn't important, DX9/Half Life 2, driver cheating, .....someone please stop me!! The nvidia media (brainwashing) machine is very powerful and some are unable to resist it's great powers! -Tim

Read this dudettes. http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=62a48b8db793b295039ace5549e3594d&threadid=33705231 BTW, I just bought a 9800pro today so will know for sure just how great their drivers are in about half an hour.

Of course not, but the oddities have been minor in comparison. All you ATI guardians can put away your swords. Please :) Just because I said I want to keep an eye on the drivers, doesn't mean I don't like ATI or won't buy one. In fact, I probably will. nVidia has lost the bubble IMHO. Larry "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > Larry wrote: > > > > My friend, I have LIVED the ATI Driver Hell, so they have a LOT to proveto

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > me. > > And nVidia has always had stable and bug free drivers ? :-) > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > "goyl at nettx dot no" > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx--

I haven' regretted making the switch. Check the buglist in the rage3d forums though, to be sure. Achim "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:B_b9b.56012$Go4.55821@lakeread01... > Of course not, but the oddities have been minor in comparison. > > All you ATI guardians can put away your swords. Please :) Just because I > said I want to keep an eye on the drivers, doesn't mean I don't like ATIor > won't buy one. In fact, I probably will. nVidia has lost the bubbleIMHO.

Some preliminar tests of an early 5x Nvidia driver. VERY interesting reading IMO. Very curious where this will end.... http://www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_rel50/001.htm I also did this earlier: http://tempstuff.d2g.com/dator/FX5900ultra-vs-9800pro.jpg Cheers! /Magnus T - - - - GPL Track Database - - - http://magnust.d2g.com - - - - 364 tracks and counting. 209 real and 155 fantasy tracks. Soon you can drive one different track each day for a whole year ;-) Currently you'll have to take one day off, hehe.