ATI or NVIDIA? Which is Better?

VFM Addict · 7 Oct 2010 at 13:46

I guess the simple answer as to which is better Ati/AMD or Nvidia is simply down to at what point in time you ask the question. Its always been a game of leapfrog and I hope it stays that way 'cos it results both in continual performance improvements and price reductions....

GJ02 · 7 Oct 2010 at 13:47

I suggest that you wait

Leviathan · 7 Oct 2010 at 13:54

I stick with what i know so went with a 470. both cards are probably fine aslong as you get support when and if there are any problems

If you want to hear the fan boy arguments of the typical bad things fan boys say about cards is
ATi
Flicking Gfx (mainly lnk to sli and some minitors)
Bad compatablity
Bad drivers

Nv
Runs Hot
Runs noisey
High power consumption
Abit behind in the R&D of making something thats actully new.

Basicly ignore all that as lots of that is rubbish just pick a card and a budget if your not fully sure pic ether mid or lower range of the cards and wait for something new in a year or 2 as DX11 is quite new still and not used fully yet so im sure there will be big changes soon anyway

. Just hope that they dont make Dx12 cards in half a year and we get in a repetative need a new card to get latist instead of just realising Dx12 or such that can work on cards you already have so all it is is a update not a new card needed.

Stanners · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:01

Are Nvidia really behind in making something new, What is fermi?

I have had a 5850 and a 470 this generation and tbh i can not tell much between them. Drivers are/were fine with both.

Biffa · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:28

Stanners said:
Are Nvidia really behind in making something new, What is fermi?

I have had a 5850 and a 470 this generation and tbh i can not tell much between them. Drivers are/were fine with both.

470 = Fermi

Rroff · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:32

Stanners said:
Are Nvidia really behind in making something new, What is fermi?

I have had a 5850 and a 470 this generation and tbh i can not tell much between them. Drivers are/were fine with both.

Fermi (400 Series) is technically a generation ahead of Evergreen (ATI 5 Series).

robgmun · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:34

Final8y said:
You didn't have to install CCC at all so that's down to you.

for a while (about a year) you're right, but then they stopped you choosing

Mr Krugga · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:37

Rroff said:
Fermi (400 Series) is technically a generation ahead of Evergreen (ATI 5 Series).

Nerusy · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:42

Rroff said:
Fermi (400 Series) is technically a generation ahead of Evergreen (ATI 5 Series).

^mega lols at pic

Ironically, realistically ati is a generation ahead of nvidia

Stanners · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:47

Rroff said:
Fermi (400 Series) is technically a generation ahead of Evergreen (ATI 5 Series).

I know it is ahead, i was asking the poster what he thought fermi was

dmxdex2020 · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:50

This thread is ready to turn into war.

Final8y · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:52

robgmun said:
for a while (about a year) you're right, but then they stopped you choosing

I have always seen the download option for just the driver.

Stanners · 7 Oct 2010 at 14:57

Final8y said:
I have always seen the download option for just the driver.

Yeah i am sure i remember the option to just download the driver.

An Exception · 7 Oct 2010 at 15:50

Rroff said:
Fermi (400 Series) is technically a generation ahead of Evergreen (ATI 5 Series).

No it's not, that's like saying if AMD release an architecture this month that they were planning to do in 10 years time they are 'technically' 10 generations ahead, saying that would just be idiotic, so simply put, they are both current gen end of story!

I would even go so far to say, that Fermi as an 'architecture' performs worse compared to Nvidia's previous GT200 architecture where gaming is concerned, so if you look at it that way you could argue Fermi was a step backwards, so therefore 3 generations behind at the end of this month.

Performance and power usage per mm2 is just horrendous with Fermi, which is unfortunate as the 6XXX series looks to do to Fermi what the 5000 series did to GT200...

That's why Nvidia has moved in to direct retail, in the hopes to be able to squeeze out as much margin as possible in order to stand a chance of being competitive, what Nvidia doesn't realise is it's actually eating it's own tail...

Rroff · 7 Oct 2010 at 16:08

Ejizz said:
No it's not, that's like saying if AMD release an architecture this month that they were planning to do in 10 years time they are 'technically' 10 generations ahead, saying that would just be idiotic, so simply put, they are both current gen end of story!

Technically it is a generation ahead... Theres significant changes to the geometry engine, compute abilities, shared memory/caching compared to evergreen and the 200 series, even
the SM design is a step ahead of anything currently out there. For example can your ATI card do proper 32x AA? (none of this blurry 16x wide tent "32x" nonsense).

You actually make nonsense of your own argument as well... if AMD released an architecture this month that was 10 years ahead of the current one it would technically be a next generation architecture and a step ahead of their current one... idiotic huh.

robgmun · 7 Oct 2010 at 16:13

Even through i prefer Nvidia, surely no one here can tell anything above 8X AA? I certainly can't!! And i play at 1920x1200 on a 24" screen

uv · 7 Oct 2010 at 16:15

robgmun said:
Even through i prefer Nvidia, surely no one here can tell anything above 8X AA? I certainly can't!! And i play at 1920x1200 on a 24" screen

Yes, I can, though it's game dependant.

TF2, I definitely can. Alien Swarm, not so much.

Rroff · 7 Oct 2010 at 16:21

Depends on various factors...

Once I hit 4x AA I can't really tell the difference between 4x, 8x and 16x - however 32x does seem to result in a cleaner, sharper image I can definitely tell the difference from 4x AA. At the end of the day tho it doesn't make much odds I'm just using it as one point to illustrate the fact that the Fermi architecture isn't really the same generation as evergreen or anything before it.

An Exception · 7 Oct 2010 at 16:23

Rroff said:
Technically it is a generation ahead... Theres significant changes to the geometry engine, compute abilities, shared memory/caching compared to evergreen and the 200 series, even
the SM design is a step ahead of anything currently out there. For example can your ATI card do proper 32x AA? (none of this blurry 16x wide tent "32x" nonsense).

It's currently available, it's current gen.
Listing a feature that AMD hasn't implemented yet is of no consequence to your flawed argument, and some of the features you listed put Fermi at a distinct disadvantage.
On a side note, you should really list the features that AMD have that Nv hasn't implemented yet to remain impartial.

Rroff said:
You actually make nonsense of your own argument as well... if AMD released an architecture this month that was 10 years ahead of the current one it would technically be a next generation architecture and a step ahead of their current one... idiotic huh.

Lol, I was highlighting your flawed logic, as that's what you were basically saying.

An Exception · 7 Oct 2010 at 16:25

Rroff said:
Depends on various factors...

Once I hit 4x AA I can't really tell the difference between 4x, 8x and 16x - however 32x does seem to result in a cleaner, sharper image I can definitely tell the difference from 4x AA. At the end of the day tho it doesn't make much odds I'm just using it as one point to illustrate the fact that the Fermi architecture isn't really the same generation as evergreen or anything before it.

It is the same generation, just has a different feature.
Honestly your logic has failed you...