ATI vs. Nvidia

[chickeneater]

ok...I may be wrong with the geforce 4's, but I am pretty sure about the geforce 3's...I have a nice GeForce 3ti200 128MB DDR and it is yay small compared to an ATI. and I was talking about new cards that are smaller (8MB) and the latency thing... Bigger components always have more length in wiring, and each BOP is about 6 inches of standard wire. It is kind of like the old computers that took up the whole room. if they could be compacted onto a server or standard ATX computer, it would be lots faster.

[t3ch]

I doubt you, or anyone else, can spot such tiny differences in the frame rate.

Oh come on enchanter... what do you think the " " was for on the end?

And no, ATi cards aren't any bigger than the gf3's.

[heartlesslova]

by geforce 5 ... do u mean the FX?

If by the Geforce5 u mean the FX, the card that supports the DX9 feature set and consequently Doom 3 and Half Life2, then basically that card has flopped. Until about a year and a bit ago, Nvidia lead the race with its Geforce, 2, 3, and 4 soundly kicking ATi's ass. Until, that is, ATi came out with the Radeon 9700 pro (this card is also a next-gen model, and supports the DX9 feature set). From then until about a few weeks from now, ATi has lead/is leading the race. Nvidia DID release its Geforce FX, but a) the card could not beat the 9700 pro, let alone the 9800 pro, it got a firm whupping in high resolution, high-detail settings with anti aliasing and anisotropic filtering enabled, and b) the card consisted of a weird cooling setup that created noise and heated up the computer unnecessarily, and c) the card was waaaay too big. They lost on all counts, and combined with its stellar lineup and current king-of-the-hill status, ATi is unofficially, and officially (statistically) on top by a wide margin. Just recently, Nvidia has passed around samples of the Geforce FX 5900. This card has been improved to better compete, and finally does beat the 9700 and 9800 pro cards, by a decent margin too, but does it at a much higher price, and waaaaaaaaay too late in the game. Ati will soon be launching the successor to the R350 (9800) core, and will again lead. Nvidia has fallen out of the cycle and hasn't been able to play catch-up.
Oh yeah, and according to Tom's Hardware, the Ati cards still have better image quality.

[Enchanter]

Originally posted by t3ch
Oh come on enchanter... what do you think the " " was for on the end?

Ah, sorry 'bout that. I am not good in spotting those kinds of hints.

That would put us on the same opinion that at such high frame rates (where minor differences will not be noticable to the eye at all), image quality would be the one that really matters, right?

[chickeneater]

acutally, my card that I have is the smallest G card that I have seen, plus it is really good. it is about 3x5 or less in depth x length. it is pretty sweet.

[t3ch]

haha enchanter

chickeneater: my voodoo5 is pretty small

[techno]

I only read this just now, thanks hacker on fire, I am touched but ur kind words hehe *blushes*

u too have knowledge in this

I prefer Nvidia:

1) Drivers are easy to install and just the best
2) no fiddling about
3) no crashes (unless faulty card)
4) generic drivers meaning that the drivers u download can work with just about any nvidia card of the same model or type
5) easy to install
6) reliable

ATI suck. I had HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL with them ever since day one, and I still do! I thought they would have improved over 5 years but no! gone worse

they are expensive, drivers don't work half of the time, crashes, unstable, too hot (the chipboard when in usage and after usage, unlike nvidia!) and u have to fiddle about all the time to make it work right...if it ever does!

[chickeneater]

You go Techno!!!

I'm all there with you.

[Enchanter]

Originally posted by techno

1) Drivers are easy to install and just the best
2) no fiddling about
3) no crashes (unless faulty card)
4) generic drivers meaning that the drivers u download can work with just about any nvidia card of the same model or type
5) easy to install
6) reliable

Strange.

All 6 points apply very well to my Radeon 8500 as well.

[Batman]

Originally posted by chickeneater
acutally, my card that I have is the smallest G card that I have seen, plus it is really good. it is about 3x5 or less in depth x length. it is pretty sweet.

At least the cards from Nvidia taste good.......sorry I can't say the same about ATI

I haven't experienced installation issues/glitches with the ATI graphics card. It works very well with my laptop. I have heard equal amounts of complaints about both ATI and NVIDIA drivers and cards.

[t3ch]

All 6 points apply very well to my Radeon 8500 as well.

I was about to say the same thing.

techno: how long ago was this? If you're referring to their crap drivers from 3 years ago, your argument is m00t. And yeah, Nvidia has neeeverrr had crappy drivers... I mean, it's not like they ever had any major problems like refresh rate fixes or anything...

they are expensive, drivers don't work half of the time, crashes, unstable, too hot (the chipboard when in usage and after usage, unlike nvidia!) and u have to fiddle about all the time to make it work right...if it ever does!

Funny because right now, ATi is cheaper, have been said by many people to have excellent drivers, and don't have a cooling system as big as arizona. And I tell ya what, moving the sliders on the catalyst drivers make for some hardcore tweaking difficulties.

Let me apologize ahead of time for being such a smartass.

[techno]

Originally posted by t3ch
I was about to say the same thing.

techno: how long ago was this?

This was about 4 years ago and also NOW..at the present still haven't improved to be honest.

Funny because right now, ATi is cheaper,

Nope :lol:

not from where i get my stuff from anyway and even so, just looking at locals here, ATI EXPENSIVE than nvidia

Let me apologize ahead of time for being such a smartass.

ur not smart, ur dumb

PMSL

oj

[Enchanter]

Originally posted by techno
This was about 4 years ago and also NOW..at the present still haven't improved to be honest.

Which model do you own and in what senses have the drivers not improved yet? I personally find it hard to take your words. ATI have patched up dramatically in their acts and I do hope you are not letting past grudges cloud your judgement.

Originally posted by techno

not from where i get my stuff from anyway and even so, just looking at locals here, ATI EXPENSIVE than nvidia

Again, which model are you referring to?

At the high-end, we have the Radeon 9700 Pro competing with the GeforceFX 5800. In case you do not know yet, the Radeon is faster in most of the benchmarks and tests, while selling at a fraction of the price (not to mention being much quieter as well).

At the middle, we have the radeon 9500 Pro competing with the then curent Ti4200. Though nothing as contrasting as the high-end, the Radeon, again, is faster than the Geforce, though at a slightly higher price. This is perfectly acceptable. If you are tinkerer, you can modify it into a Radeon 9700, which would be a steal for that price.

At the low-end, we have the Radeon 9000 series competing with the Geforce4 MX series. The Geforce4 MX only partially support DirectX 8, whereas the Radeon fully support it.

All Radeon cards generally have better 2D quality as well as solid drivers.

So what is wrong with ATI?

[techno]

i am referring to almost ALL models.

and I am not really a gamer so

even just for basic operations i can't get the damn thng to work.

got a BASIC ATI card right, RIVA 128, with TV OUT.

if u try and play a DVD on it thru TV OUT using powerdvd..it won't work. complains about something needing enabled and ATI didn't even mention it in the manual at all, not even on their site!

however

take ANY Nvidia card with TV OUT..bang straight in...can watch DVD's.

frankily, just wth my personal experience...I like geforce..it's never let me down

i bought a gforce 2 mx 32MB AGP for £30 UK and was new at the time this was like about 3-4 years ago, never let me down

[Enchanter]

got a BASIC ATI card right

So which model is that? If it happens to be a first-generation Radeon or, worse, an ancient Rage chipset, you are being totally irrelevant here.

Some time ago, I made a comparison between the TV-out ports of my Radeon 8500 and my older Geforce2 MX cards. The test samples I sed were basically DVD (PAL) and DVD rips in DivX.

The Geforce, after having to tweak a few settings to get the display up and running, did not deliver quality picture at all on my TV. Picture was not full screen (boxed in). It was noticably flickering. Sharpness was worse than even normal TV station. In short, it hurt my eyes.

The Radeon, on the other hand, displayed working picture on the TV straight after connection. Its picture was full-screen, non-flickery and sharp (for TV). I had a few friends at that time and none could deny the Radeon's much better image quality, both on TV and computer monitor, and how much it made the TV display look better than any one of us expected it capable of.

Both cards delivered well in terms of functionality, but the Geforce fell in the quality department. I was very impressed with the Radeon and am planning to get myself a Radeon 9000 to replace the Geforce2 MX for the purpose of TV-out alone (so I can convert the system into a full-blown HTPC).