ATI vs. Nvidia

[t3ch]

I feel like I've made my points and have validated them, so I refuse to argue your rediculous points anymore, chickeneater.

happy card shopping skd_tech

[Enchanter]

chickeneater,

I have made my points as t3ch did and have even gone further by validating them with valid links to various respected sites.

You, on the other hand, continue with your unfounded arguments and so thus threaten to confuse the uninformed and also SKD_Tech. This untiring fanboy act of yours has reached the point of being ridiculous.

I will shoot down those misconceptions once and for all.

If you continue to argue with me with those silly "wishful" thoughts, know that I will not bother with you at all.

_________________________________________________

And regarding your $300 nVidia GeforceFX 5800 card vs. $1000 ATI Radeon 9800 card, care to give me a site that can possibly have this kind of contrasting price?

Q: can you find the gf fx 5800 for $1000?
A: no

I asked for a site that can possibly sell an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro for $1000, while at the same time selling the nVidia GeforceFX 5800 FX for $300. You could not produce an acceptable answer.

And you confused and unwittingly increased the australian price of the ATI card (AU$800+) to US$1,000 (while maintaining your price of US$300 for the nVidia card).

Do your maths carefully next time, kid.

now would you pay $1000 for a card just slightly better than a $300 card that works the best compared to all the other cards out there except for that ati card...?

The Radeon 9800 Pro is substantially better than the GeforceFX 5800. This is especially true at Quality settings with Anisotropic Filtering and Anti-aliasing settings in full use.

ATI cards have optimised memory pathways that enable them to run at these settings without much performance hit. This is the area where the Radeon plows far ahead of its nVidia nemesis, leaving it choking in the dust.

Their implementations are also better and hence image quality is ahead with ATI cards.

They are also faster at these high-quality profile.

Similar trends have applied to ATI and nVidia cards since the invention of the first-generation Radeon (think 16-bit and 32-bit colour depths). If you claim yourself an nVidia fan, you would be aware of this one fact that has been annoying nVidia all along.

Or were you that ignorant?

it must be expensive because it is big...

I gave you pictures of the Radeon 9800 and 9700 cards that come fitted with a decent-sized HSF unit.

If you claim that ATI cards are big, then the GeforceFX 5800 card must be smaller than any of these.

Find me one.

Or consider your argument pure bull$hit.

[admin]

Now now people, no need to argue over whether ATI or NVIDIA is the best - everyone knows that SiS makes the best graphics chips

SiS Xabre 600 - nearly 9000 3D Marks and almost 40 fps in UT 2003

[t3ch]

I was gonna stay out of this thread, but couldn't resist Admin. Here's a few lines from an IRC place I hang out.

Smart> I decided not to use nVidia or ATI. I'm using KASER now.
Village> More power than legally allowed.
Smart> It's the best value of price and performance. Best of all, it runs the original Diablo great.
Pabs> will a voodoo3 3000 run warcraft3 you think??
Smart> Yup. I like Kaser. http://www.outpost.com/product/3266101
Smart> "For enhanced 3D performance, the SIS315 chipset is used." You see, I desire enhanced 3D performance.
Village> Good job Smart..can't get more enhanced than the SIS315
Smart> So you guys use your nVidia and ATI. At least my benchmarks are REAL.

edit >> oops, forum picked up names as HTML

[Comberman]

To SKD_Tech

I thought this thread was on its last legs but it seems to be dragging tediously on like a Stallone movie. I imagine by this time you are either totally confused, bemused or amused (probably all three together!) I've come to the conclusion that your original post held a fatal flaw - you did not specify what you wanted a new video card for. But then maybe that was a deliberate ploy - like throwing a fish into a pen full of cats - just to watch the fur fly.

All the best from the Emeral Isle.

[SKD_Tech]

Well actually I am amazed on how much controversy is on the topic!

What card to buy? Still don't know all the way yet...

[admin]

Just the usual amount of controversy you get with a thread like this, or threads like :

Apple vs PCs
Intel vs AMD
Windows vs Linux

[chickeneater]

get the geforce 3 ti200 128 MB. I have it and like it. I don't wish that I have another one because it is nice. it is really cheap too, better than the geforce 4 MX series too. about $50.

edit: Linux will win
edit^2: Intel will win
edit^3: PC will win

[Enchanter]

I am not a die-hard ATI fan at all, though I like every one of their products. I highly recommend ATI products and I have given the reasons why. Chickeneater likes his Geforce3 Ti200 and spreads his words about it. However, unlike me, he has many wrong assumptions on many things and is unable to back his words up. That calls for a corrective response, which I have done.

My advice to SKD_Tech, once again, is to consider your budget and needs. Round up all the cards that fulfill your criteria (budget and needs) and choose one of them. Try to take into account reliability and name-brand. They may be more expensive, but may save you from problems down the road.

Good luck with your purchases.

[SKD_Tech]

I'll tell ya what I consider and finally choose.

[hacker_on_fire]

Has anyone purchased the new computeractive (issue 138) as it has a good comparison of graphics cards (how convienient).
Here are some quotes:

We've looked carefully at the poshest graphics cards available and the latest nVidia cards aren't really at the races. Cards based on the latest GeForce FX chipset are a mixed bag but the flagsghip model is very hard to recommend. It takes up lots of space, is noisy and struggles to outperform the gprahics cards based on ATI's Radeon 9700 Pro chip.

The nVidia card is really not worth the money and is actually quite hard to track down. That leaves the top of the market open to ATI, whose Radeon 9800 Pro looks amazing - both in terms of cost and performance. With 256Mb of memory, out test showed the 9800 to be an incredible performer.

The test the mag done showed the difference between scores of the ATI Radeon 9800 Pro and the nVidia GeForce 5800 FX Ultra are smaller then the difference between the scores of the nVidia GeForce 5800 FX Ultra and the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro. The scores are from a 3D Mark 2001 test.

Basically is said the nVidia GeForce 5800 FX Ultra is not worth buying and if you want a card that has the best costerfomance ratio then the ATI's Radeon 9700 Pro is the best option. However if you want one just for performance disregarding price then the ATI Radeon 9800 Pro is the best one.

[chickeneater]

people can say whatever they want. but it is true that Nvidia is better than ATI

[Enchanter]

Hardware reviewers have clearly found the GeforceFX 5800 not worth the money, especially considering the then-current Radeon 9700 Pro still owned (aka. beat) it. The release of the newer Radeon 9800 further increased that performance gap.

ATI has always had excellent reputation with its crisp and line-free display and vibrant colours in 2D, unlike nVidia with its 'nBlur' (pun intended) features. Heck! That's why I upgraded from a GeforceMX to my current Radeon 8500. The GeforceMX now resides on my secondary system and soom enough it will be relegated to the 'refuse bin' with a Radeon 9000. I have had enough of its piss-poor harsh display.

As for 3D, there is not much to say here. The R300 (Radeon 9700) is faster, especially at high-resolutions and high-quality picture setting. ATI's Smoothvision technology (FSAA) gives it the definitive edge in image quality as well. The GeforceFX 5800 does not compare to the Radeon9700, LET ALONE the Radeon 9800 Pro.

hacker_on_fire, we shouldn't put too much care into a synthetic benchmark like 3DMark. It is in the games that we should be interested, which was what many tests were done on. Besides, you have heard of nVidia 'optimising' their newest drivers so that their 3DMarks score is substantially increased, didn't you? Talk about cheating. Read here and here for more details.

Chickeneater, what is your basis for saying that nVidia is better than ATI? For all I care, your words might as well be bull$hit without anything to back them up.

[chickeneater]

oh... so I don't have proof to back me up??? maybe it is time to bring out the big guns.

here:

http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/S&V/r9800256mb_gffx5900upd(4).shtml

another chart...


...more to come

[Enchanter]

Good.

Other bench results will help as well.

Get ones for 3DMarks (2001SE and 2003) at default settings and at Quality setting (with 2-4X AA and 8-16X Aniso). Results at various resolutions from 1024x768 to 1600x1200 will help put things in perspective as well.

Unreal Tournament will provide a suitable benchmark as well. Get results for default settings as well as Quality settings (as per above).

If you can show us here that nVidia's card has what it takes to beat ATI's flagship product at high resolutions and high Quality, then that will take things on a different level.

Until then, this first bench result of yours shows only what each card is capable of at the relatively low-resolution of 1024x768 and at default quality setting (most likely no AA and Aniso).

p.s. Sorry, if we both hijacked your thread, SKD_Tech. The quest for truth can be a dauntingly long task.

edit:
Your link is not working, chickeneater.