• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

WHO WILL WIN? NVIDIA? or ATI?

Never really thought of that (i.e. CrossFireX HD 4850) - it would only cost £440 which looks like it will be cheaper than the GTX 480 and as you said it will definitely be faster... are there actually any disadvantages to doing this? What about power consumption in comparison?
 
Call me when a single gfx card isn't costing more than a brand new current gen console
Click to expand...

is this possibly the answer?

i know gpus have plenty other uses, however,

simply looking at gaming, the average gamer is gonna look at prices/bench result comparisons and all that hoo ha and and think 'why oh spend so much or rack my brain as too which is best-when i can simply say sod it i can pick up ps3/xbox 360 and jump str8 into pretty much all the latest game releases'

microsoft and sony to win for me :p

i'm gonna get abused now aint i!!??!! or at the very least told to remove this post!!

sorry in advance
 
Last edited:
ATI have the lead at the moment and in absolute terms even with Fermi now out they will keep it.
 
theron said:
i guess now the question is "who won?"
Click to expand...
Well, I know in the desktop graphics market, ATI have won, hands down. But not so in the mobile market (and we have to include this when we're generalising like this). NVIDIA have Optimus technology, and it's forcing a lot of laptop manufacturers to choose NVIDIA. People want the option of a powerful graphics card on tap but the option of reverting to integrated when increased battery life is required.

Yes, traditional switchable graphics is an option for both but due to increased costs and complexity (it requires extra mulitplexers/routing on the mainboard) many mobile manufacturers have opted not to go down the "traditional route" and choose NVIDIA instead. It was also proved that with traditional SG, users rarely manually switched and left discrete GPU on all the time, drastically reducing battery life.

So, it would be unfair to say that ATI have won completely. The majority of Asus's new machines utilitse Optimus (w/ NVIDIA discrete GPU's) and the new MacBooks are also rumoured to use Optimus also. With no real mention of NVIDIA releasing DX11 mobile GPU's anytime soon, and if ATI can develop a software similar to Optimus over the next couple of months, then I would say without a doubt, that they have completely conquered the computer graphics market.
 
well my bet is with ATI, i m disappointed tbh if i could win a fermi i will probable enter but saying that no I won't, too hot, and take too much power plus the fact I need two for what I want to do (have 3 screens)
 
rpg said:
Well, I know in the desktop graphics market, ATI have won, hands down. But not so in the mobile market (and we have to include this when we're generalising like this). NVIDIA have Optimus technology, and it's forcing a lot of laptop manufacturers to choose NVIDIA. People want the option of a powerful graphics card on tap but the option of reverting to integrated when increased battery life is required.

Yes, traditional switchable graphics is an option for both but due to increased costs and complexity (it requires extra mulitplexers/routing on the mainboard) many mobile manufacturers have opted not to go down the "traditional route" and choose NVIDIA instead. It was also proved that with traditional SG, users rarely manually switched and left discrete GPU on all the time, drastically reducing battery life.

So, it would be unfair to say that ATI have won completely. The majority of Asus's new machines utilitse Optimus (w/ NVIDIA discrete GPU's) and the new MacBooks are also rumoured to use Optimus also. With no real mention of NVIDIA releasing DX11 mobile GPU's anytime soon, and if ATI can develop a software similar to Optimus over the next couple of months, then I would say without a doubt, that they have completely conquered the computer graphics market.
Click to expand...

Erm OK... thats one way of looking at things.,,, jigger gets nervous and backs away smiling.
 
rpg said:
Well, I know in the desktop graphics market, ATI have won, hands down. But not so in the mobile market (and we have to include this when we're generalising like this). NVIDIA have Optimus technology, and it's forcing a lot of laptop manufacturers to choose NVIDIA. People want the option of a powerful graphics card on tap but the option of reverting to integrated when increased battery life is required.

Yes, traditional switchable graphics is an option for both but due to increased costs and complexity (it requires extra mulitplexers/routing on the mainboard) many mobile manufacturers have opted not to go down the "traditional route" and choose NVIDIA instead. It was also proved that with traditional SG, users rarely manually switched and left discrete GPU on all the time, drastically reducing battery life.

So, it would be unfair to say that ATI have won completely. The majority of Asus's new machines utilitse Optimus (w/ NVIDIA discrete GPU's) and the new MacBooks are also rumoured to use Optimus also. With no real mention of NVIDIA releasing DX11 mobile GPU's anytime soon, and if ATI can develop a software similar to Optimus over the next couple of months, then I would say without a doubt, that they have completely conquered the computer graphics market.
Click to expand...

Are you REALLY sure about all that? Remember the horrible fiasco with nVidia mobile gpus having a failure rate in to the 90s? I'm pretty sure most manufacturers who used those chips are going to be reluctant using nVidia's chips again.

Didn't you wonder why Apple bought up nearly all the surplus 4850s and 4870s as well?
 
Jotunkaiser said:
Nvidia just because ATI sucks in BFBC2 for load times haha and tbh everyone I speak to who has an ATI card has problems with drivers -still-
Click to expand...

Apparently the BFBC2 problem has been confirmed to have a fix coming very soon.

As for drivers, I don't have problems with them, from an X1600pro to 2900XT to a 3870X2 to 4850 Crossfire then 2900XT Crossfire in another PC (they were free).

Not everyone does have driver issues, most of the time it's a case of PEBKAC or something perpetuated about idiots that is only considered a problem because so many people "Heard from my mate like" that loads of people have problems with ATI drivers.
 
Jotunkaiser said:
Nvidia just because ATI sucks in BFBC2 for load times haha and tbh everyone I speak to who has an ATI card has problems with drivers -still-
Click to expand...

I call BS.

vistacrash1.jpg
 
Jotunkaiser said:
Nvidia just because ATI sucks in BFBC2 for load times haha and tbh everyone I speak to who has an ATI card has problems with drivers -still-
Click to expand...

Ive had a few crashes, i just backed the O/C down a couple of notches, getting 60fps average with 4xaf 4xaa
 
5870 does seems to load BFBC2 slower than my gtx260...... not sure about whether its due to Dx11 or not, but he's right in that part.
 
Hulahoops said:
Technically ATI don't have as much of the market as NV however.
Click to expand...

As it was described before, Intel actually have the largest market, and Nvidia is even worse then them.

ATI still do have a significant amount of the market, and I dont believe that the numbers from Nvidia can be justified by market size.
 
If you followed logic then larger market share would = increase resources therefore increased development and less crashes, unless you wasted the money other places. Intell seem to follow this, nvidia doesn't, ati is somewhere in the middle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom