Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 50
  1. #1
    Member Z3l20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Near Chicago
    Posts
    153

    Choose between ATI and NIVIDA?

    Im having a hard time decideing between an X800 and a 6800GT... I get both are good. Some people say the X800 will bet better ratings at 1280x1024 hands down... Advice?

  2. #2
    Disabled
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,165
    x800 will have better performace at higher res with AA and AF turned up, of course it varies from game to game, also the x800 has better IQ

  3. #3
    mjw21a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Australia, Brisbane
    Posts
    5,204
    I must admit that I've been an ATI fan ever since the Radeon 9700 was released. I've never purchased one of their cards though. I'm still using my overclocked GeForce4 440MX!
    CPU & HSF: AMD FX-8120 & Noctua NH-D14
    Mobo: Asus M5A97-EVO
    RAM: 16GB (4Gx4) DDR3 2133 G.Skill RipjawZ F3-17000CL11Q-16GBZL
    Storage: 1x 120GB OCZ Vertex II SSD, 1x 250GB Samsung 830 SSD, 1x 1.5TB Samsung Silencer Series HDD
    GFX: 4GB Gigabyte ATI R9 270X OC Edition + Yamakasi Catleap Q270 SE 27" IPS LED LCD
    Audio: Asus Xonar DX, Senheiser CX270 earbuds + BM800 Condenser Microphone
    Case & Lighting: Silverstone Temjin TJ04-E w/ Side Window + Red CCFL's
    PSU: 550W Antec EarthWatts Platinum
    My rig piccies & links

    "Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right." H.L. MENCKEN

  4. #4
    Member Z3l20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Near Chicago
    Posts
    153
    Kk thanks I think im going with an x800 then probably...

  5. #5
    Member fatguy's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    522
    IMO X800 has much better image quality. I was a hard-core nVidia guy before the 9700 series, which switched me over to ATI forever. Comparing IQ from a Ti4600 to an 9800Pro was *hardly* a fair comparison!

    But alas, each camp has their own arguements

  6. #6
    Member sevendevilhell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    BRLA
    Posts
    288
    nvidia is like the AMD of the video card market: slightly better architecture, better overclockers, and better innovation on the technology. but the company just isn't quite as organized as its competitor, so they fall behind in the business race.

  7. #7
    Member Nephewkp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Champaign, Illinois
    Posts
    413
    Perhaps you could wait til the x850 is released. I am sure an ati card with 16 pipelines will kill nvidia in terms of performance.

  8. #8
    All round good guy Jognt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,299
    Quote Originally Posted by sevendevilhell
    nvidia is like the AMD of the video card market: slightly better architecture, better overclockers, and better innovation on the technology. but the company just isn't quite as organized as its competitor, so they fall behind in the business race.
    i'd say ATI is the AMD of the GFX market... nvidia just made a huge mistake with the FX line and lost followers.. look at when presscot was released.. suddenly there were loads of AMD people..

    Takes time, but balance does exist, and will be restored.

    go for the x800 by all means!
    Are you new? Introduce yourself!

    Current rig:

    Fractal Design Define R4
    Asus P8Z77-V
    i5 3570k @ 4.3 offset OC w/ TR HR-02 Macho rev.A
    2 * 4GB Crucal DDRIII-1866 @ XMP 9-9-9-27-47-2T
    2x Asus GTX670 (SLI)
    Crucial M4 256GB SSD | 4x Seagate 2TB in RAID10
    BeQuiet Dark Power Pro 600W (Yes, that is enough power)

    Remove your fangrills!

  9. #9
    Member sevendevilhell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    BRLA
    Posts
    288
    haha. i guess you're kind of right... the really high-end FX cards were really good, but the mid-range cards were beat by the ati boards hands down.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    3,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Nephewkp
    Perhaps you could wait til the x850 is released. I am sure an ati card with 16 pipelines will kill nvidia in terms of performance.
    x850 lineup is a joke both in terms of price and performance. In the end, it still is not as attractive as an x800 XT PE or 6800 GT.

    deception``

  11. #11
    Contributing Member Sentential's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Midland, Texas
    Posts
    13,872
    Heatware Profile
    Its really your call. ATi and nV both have their stregnths and weaknesses. Example:

    -nV-
    (Pros)
    *Better chip yeild, ie better overclocker
    *The most balanced GPU on the market
    *Best drivers on the planet
    *Most stable / free of graphical glitches
    *"TWIMTBP" "The Way its meant to be played" (game company agreements that optimized for nV hardware)
    *Fantastic OpenGL support
    *Digital Vibrace (colors look sharp and fantastic...almost surreal)
    * Ultra-shadow II (helps in games with high number of shadows)
    *Pixel Shader 3.0

    (Cons)
    *High power draw
    *High heat
    *IQ is inferior to ATI unless modified with drivers
    * Too Balanced to the point where it hurts peformance. (never is much faster or slower than ATi)
    * IQ issues with shadows (also fixable)
    * Slower when used with AA / AINSO (another IQ issue)

    ATi
    (Pros)
    *Best IQ...hands down
    *Blistering fast even with high levels of AA / AINSO
    *Temporal Anti-alaising (doubles AA with no peformance loss, *ie removes jaggies)
    *Low power and heat
    *Extrodinarly fast in DirectX

    (Cons)
    *Poor driver stability
    *Extremely bad yeilds and poor overclockers (especially bad on RAM)
    *More Expensive
    *Horrible OpenGL support (1/2 as fast as nV in games like Quake4 and Doom3 and KOTR2)
    *No pixel or vertex 3.0 support whatsoever
    *Poor stock cooling

  12. #12
    Contributing Member Sentential's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Midland, Texas
    Posts
    13,872
    Heatware Profile
    In summary for those too lazy to read:

    ATi trades stability for IQ and raw speed in DirectX. However that is their *only* focus and suffer tremendously in OpenGL. They have numorous stability issues in quite a few games. (crashes / lockups).

    nV really isnt as fast as ATi in any DirectX game, it wins some cases but rarely. They trade speed and IQ for overall stability and wide-ranging support. This is esspecially apparent in OpenGL. nV romps ATi in all catagories by a factor of 2 fold in OpenGL games.

    .Your call

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    the other side of the fence!
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentential
    in OpenGL. nV romps ATi in all catagories by a factor of 2 fold in OpenGL games.

    .Your call

    thats 2 times in back to back posts that you claim Nvidia is 100% faster yet the tests show about 20% or less advantage.



    /me thinks i smell something.

    can anybody guess?

  14. #14
    Member Kenshiro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentential
    Its really your call. ATi and nV both have their stregnths and weaknesses. Example:

    -nV-
    (Pros)
    *Better chip yeild, ie better overclocker
    *The most balanced GPU on the market
    *Best drivers on the planet
    *Most stable / free of graphical glitches
    *"TWIMTBP" "The Way its meant to be played" (game company agreements that optimized for nV hardware)
    *Fantastic OpenGL support
    *Digital Vibrace (colors look sharp and fantastic...almost surreal)
    * Ultra-shadow II (helps in games with high number of shadows)
    *Pixel Shader 3.0

    (Cons)
    *High power draw
    *High heat
    *IQ is inferior to ATI unless modified with drivers
    * Too Balanced to the point where it hurts peformance. (never is much faster or slower than ATi)
    * IQ issues with shadows (also fixable)
    * Slower when used with AA / AINSO (another IQ issue)

    ATi
    (Pros)
    *Best IQ...hands down
    *Blistering fast even with high levels of AA / AINSO
    *Temporal Anti-alaising (doubles AA with no peformance loss, *ie removes jaggies)
    *Low power and heat
    *Extrodinarly fast in DirectX

    (Cons)
    *Poor driver stability
    *Extremely bad yeilds and poor overclockers (especially bad on RAM)
    *More Expensive
    *Horrible OpenGL support (1/2 as fast as nV in games like Quake4 and Doom3 and KOTR2)
    *No pixel or vertex 3.0 support whatsoever
    *Poor stock cooling

    This is a very good summary.....

    Personally, I will go with the 6800GT. Also, how long do you intend to keep the card. Do you plan to upgrade once a year, twice a year, or everytime a new GPU comes out? To my understanding, ATI uses FP24, while Nvidia uses FP16 and FP32. HL2 was design to use FP24, and so it "forces" Nvidia to use FP32 while running the game. This is why Nvidia is crippled in HL2. SM3 will require FP32. When that time comes, ATI could be at a disadvantage. Nvidia rocks with OpenGL games, like Doom 3, and in the near future, Quake 4.

    This is just my preference. I just feel that the 6800GT is slightly more "futureproof" than the X800 pro.
    Sager NP9170
    17.3” Full HD (1920x1080) Matte LED-Backlit Display
    AMD Radeon HD 680M 256bit w/4GB GDDR5
    Intel® Core™ i7-3720QM (2.6~3.6GHz) w/6M L3 Cache - 4 Cores - 8 Threads
    16GB (4x4GB) DDR3/1600 Dual Channel Memory
    Crucial 128GB SSD (M4) SATA III Solid-State Drive 500GB SATA II 3GB/s 7,200 RPM Hard Drive

  15. #15
    Member CalsonicGTR's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    913
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentential
    (Cons) *Poor driver stability
    How many years ago was this? ATI has had top notch drivers for their products for some time. nVidia's drivers havent been WHQL approved for some time now, so I fail to see how they are that much superior to ATI's (at least in the Windows world)
    If you want to build something that’s never been built before, you may have to knock down a wall or two.

    Main System:
    ---------------------
    Core i5 2500K @ 4.2GHz - AsRock Z68 Pro3-M - 8GB Corsair XMS3 - Procolor 6950 2GB - Corsair HX520 PSU - Crucial M4 128GB/WD Black 750GB

    HTPC:
    ---------------------
    Core i3 2100 - Gigabyte Z68MA-D2H-B3 - 8GB Corsair XMS3 - Corsair CX430 PSU - Crucial M4 64GB/Seagate Green 2TB - Ceton Quad Cablecard Tuner

    My Heatware

  16. #16
    Member micamica1217's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    4,874
    I was going to stay out of this one, but I'm truly puzzeled by a few things that were memtioned here.

    please Sentenal, back up a few things that I've listed below.
    some of them seem to conflict with eachother...so maybe some clarification is needed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sentential
    Its really your call. ATi and nV both have their stregnths and weaknesses. Example:

    -nV-
    (Pros)
    *Better chip yeild, ie better overclocker please clarify.

    *Best drivers on the planet
    *Most stable / free of graphical glitches

    *"TWIMTBP" "The Way its meant to be played" (game company agreements that optimized for nV hardware)yet in many cases, ATI cards beat the NV cards in TWIMTBP games...including UT2004

    (Cons)
    *High power draw
    *High heat
    *IQ is inferior to ATI unless modified with drivers please clarify.

    * IQ issues with shadows (also fixable) please clarify....I mean, you say that nVidia drivers are the best, and are free of graphical glitchs, are you now saying they need work?


    ATi
    (Pros)
    *Best IQ...hands down
    *Blistering fast even with high levels of AA / AINSO
    *Temporal Anti-alaising (doubles AA with no peformance loss, *ie removes jaggies)
    *Low power and heat
    *Extrodinarly fast in DirectX

    (Cons)
    *Poor driver stability please clarify...how can ATI have the best IQ, yet poor driver stability? are you saying the drivers don't alow the games to run?

    *Extremely bad yeilds and poor overclockers (especially bad on RAM) please clarify.

    *More Expensive again, please clarify. don't just make false claims. I'm watching this one closely.

    *Horrible OpenGL support (1/2 as fast as nV in games like Quake4 and Doom3 and KOTR2) first off, only the x800 cards have "tripple buffering" in OpenGL, the 6800's do not. thier is no way your going to tell me that my in game framerate with Doom3 was 100% slower then yours. you know what I was getting, I know what you were. please clarify, or give examples.

    *Poor stock cooling please clarify.
    I'm going to wait for your reply...then I might make a few claims myself.

    mica
    Q6600 @ 3.0 (3.2 max OC), MSI P6N SLI plat, 4gigs corsair xms2, 2x 9800gtx KO in SLI, X-Fi XGamer, 2x Seagate Barracuda 250gb, Light-on 20x DVD, Thermaltake 750w PSU, air cooled with Ultama-90 and Antec 900 case....Soyo (24D6) 24" wide 14139 vantage

    " Comparing the technical relevance of The Inquirer to Beyond3D is like comparing the technical prowess of Paris Hilton to John Carmack." -Albuquerque


    [OCG] Fraging at it's finest.

  17. #17
    Contributing Member Sentential's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Midland, Texas
    Posts
    13,872
    Heatware Profile
    Quote Originally Posted by wanab
    thats 2 times in back to back posts that you claim Nvidia is 100% faster yet the tests show about 20% or less advantage.



    /me thinks i smell something.

    can anybody guess?
    As I said before.....OpenGL and DirectX are completely different engines. nVidia is FAR faster in OpenGL games like Doom, and KOTR, and Neverwinternights. ATi is faster in DirectX, its as simple as that

    Quote Originally Posted by CalsonicGTR
    How many years ago was this? ATI has had top notch drivers for their products for some time. nVidia's drivers havent been WHQL approved for some time now, so I fail to see how they are that much superior to ATI's (at least in the Windows world)
    ...try 6 months ago. My 9800PRO had all sorts of stability problems playing games like America's Army, Call of Duty, and Farcry. All went away once I got my 6800GT

    Its really your call. ATi and nV both have their stregnths and weaknesses. Example:

    -nV-
    (Pros)
    *Better chip yeild 90% of all GTs go past Ultra clocks without mods. 60% of All NUs flash to GT and can obtain those speeds on occasion. I dont see *any* x800PROs besides the VIVOs (which are more than the GTs anyway) that can successfully flash to XT and stay that way witout dying. And with 16 pipes they overclock like ****.
    Example:
    Vrykryl
    Batboy

    *Best drivers on the planet More a personal preference but from my experince with ATi thus far, I stand by this.
    *Most stable / free of graphical glitches meaning game conflicts. They may have IQ issues but never stability issues (to my knowledge). Ie you never see nV releasing drivers to fix "game stability" like ATi does.

    *"TWIMTBP" "The Way its meant to be played" (game company agreements that optimized for nV hardware)yet in many cases, ATI cards beat the NV cards in TWIMTBP games...including UT2004

    (Cons)
    *High power draw
    *High heat
    *IQ is inferior to ATI unless modified with drivers they fixed the shimmering issue with the "null LOD BIAS" fix

    * IQ issues with shadows (also fixable) Ideed, I meant stability / OS issues, not visual ones

    ATi
    (Pros)
    *Best IQ...hands down
    *Blistering fast even with high levels of AA / AINSO
    *Temporal Anti-alaising (doubles AA with no peformance loss, *ie removes jaggies)
    *Low power and heat
    *Extrodinarly fast in DirectX

    (Cons)
    *Poor driver stability
    Quote Originally Posted by mica
    are you saying the drivers don't alow the games to run?
    . Yes thats what Im saying. ATi drivers from my expericne are buggy as hell.


    *Extremely bad yeilds and poor overclockers (especially bad on RAM) batboy's x800XT coudlnt even do PE speeds

    *More Expensive GameVE and newegg have the prices of GTs significantally lower than the x800PROs. I have yet to see 5 PROs that cost under $380. Ive seen almost a dozen GTs taht do

    *Horrible OpenGL support (1/2 as fast as nV in games like Quake4 and Doom3 and KOTR2) I am refering to purely stock without *any* mods. Under these conditions the 6800NU was beating the x800XT, especially with AA / AINSO applied.

    *Poor stock cooling Look at how wimpy their cooling is! ATi has *never* been know for their excelent stock cooling solutions. Come on lol . The only decent HSF ive seen ATi put out is the one they have on the x850XT, and it needs it

  18. #18
    Contributing Member Sentential's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Midland, Texas
    Posts
    13,872
    Heatware Profile
    on the issue of price:

    Cheapest GT= http://www.gameve.com/gve/Store/Prod...sku=VC-PNY-005

    Cheapest x800? = http://www.gameve.com/gve/Store/Prod...ku=VC-GIGA-020

    newegg cheapest x800 = http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduc...142-027&depa=0

    newegg cheapest 6800GT = http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduc...150-069&depa=0

    This isnt even taking into consideration that the only x800s that flash to XT are VIVOs which are almost $450, when a sub $400 6800GT can do ultra without issue

  19. #19
    Member fatguy's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    522
    Just some thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentential
    ...try 6 months ago. My 9800PRO had all sorts of stability problems playing games like America's Army, Call of Duty, and Farcry. All went away once I got my 6800GT
    I believe you are making a generalization based on a unique experience. I had (still have) a 9800PRO and have no problems with any of these games. You could've bought a new ATI card and had the problems go way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sentential
    *Extremely bad yeilds and poor overclockers (especially bad on RAM) batboy's x800XT coudlnt even do PE speeds
    Again, another generalization based on 1 person's experience. I was able to get a very good overclock on every single one of my ATI cards.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentential
    *More Expensive GameVE and newegg have the prices of GTs significantally lower than the x800PROs. I have yet to see 5 PROs that cost under $380. Ive seen almost a dozen GTs taht do
    Supply and Demand maybe?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentential
    *Poor stock cooling Look at how wimpy their cooling is! ATi has *never* been know for their excelent stock cooling solutions. Come on lol . The only decent HSF ive seen ATi put out is the one they have on the x850XT, and it needs it
    Your statement addresses itself. ATI cards don't have large HSF's because they don't need it. The last 2 generations of nVidia cards have been so top-heavy with coolers because it was the only possible way they could keep their GPU cool enough to run at the rated speeds. Personally, I think this is a point for ATI.

    Good ATI vs. nVidia discussions are healthy, lets just keep it clean

  20. #20
    Member fatguy's Avatar
    10 Year Badge
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    522
    Oh and when I get home from work, my X800XT (not PE) will be waiting for me. I'm sure this discussion will continue past the point where I can add my performance experiences with yet another ATI card.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •