• 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.

Nvidia or ATI? does it matter?

ashatron

ashatron

ashatron

Associate
Joined
15 Sep 2009
Posts
659
Location
Sheffield
Hi,

i imagine this topic has been covered, but i cant find much on it, if it has been covered a very short and sweet answer would be much appreciated!

What are the differences?
Does matter which card family you use?
You dont have to use AMD cpus with ATI gpus, and intel cpus with Nvidia gpus do you? I think they are interchangeable, but would like confirmation.

As far as i can see the only differences between the two is the nvidia CUDA -
IIRC this allows programs which are CUDA enabled to use the GPU for processing. But as far as i know there are very few of these programs (Premiere CS5 is the only one i know of), so i dont think it really matters.

(im putting together a spec and deciding on a GPU for around £130-£200 you see).

Hope you can help :)

HOPE YOU HAD AN AMAZING CHRISTMAS!!! :D
 
As above, unless you have a real problem or there's a compatibility issue you're aware of, just go for the fastest for your cash at the time.

Both sides have games that occasionally dont work, both get driver issues etc, there's no real point in being a fanboy!
<Unless your PCB colour matching the inside of your PC, and lighting etc...then ok I guess there might be a reason to go on colour :p>
 
ashatron said:
haha, i like that!
thanks buddy :)

So you'd say all that PsyX and CUDA is not worth thinking about too much?
Click to expand...

PhysX is nice in the tiny number of games that use it, but no where near essential. Framerates are what matter for gaming. I have a GTX 460, because when I was looking to upgrade theat was the fastest card for the money, not for PhysX or anything else. My previous card was ATI, and I was very happy with that as well.
 
CUDA is more use if you're a developer or use a professional programme that supports it; most won't need it. Phsyx...well, this hasn't really gone anywhere since before Nvidia bought it; there are hardly any games using it (and I'll be honest it likely wont take off on a large scale beyond a CPU variant whilst its only available to about 40% of the market [remembering Intel don't use it either].
 
The only real difference would be if you wanted to get into folding, then you would have to go Nvidia. Otherwise, your in the same boat as the rest of us with decisions based on what you want/need/price etc.
 
Nvidia have a much larger driver team resource than ATI & have done for many years now. They apparently have 250 engineers who work on driver development & beta testing PC games so there are less issues with Nvidia cards on PC games as they simply put a lot of resource into it every year as that is their major contribution to PC gaming (apart from making the graphic cards).

This sometimes means you also get Nvidia technology only on their cards:

Batman Arkham Asylum- PhysX + AA= Smoke,debris,ingame ovjects affected by PhysX look better. Run through a cloud of smoke/steam & watch the nice graphical effect swirl around Batman. Blow something up & see a better effect etc etc

Just Cause 2 - Physx + Cuda= Water looks awesome due to Cuda coding.

Go here & have a look around there is a lot of info on NVidia cards & the associated technology they bring to PC gaming.

http://www.geforce.com/#/News
 
Physx as a software implementation will stick around, but as a hardware implementation? Batman and perhaps Mafia are the only recent bigger titles that made any real use of it
 
The next major update for Eve online is looking likely to use Apex cloth simulation and AFAIK they are planning on using GPU features too as well as more limited features for when only CPU PhysX is available.

But yeah not many games use PhysX and even less specifically use CUDA. Which in a way is a shame, tho I'd rather see something like directcompute used for gaming, as the massively parallel nature of GPU compute would be great for advancing things like AI programming and the CPU atm just isn't upto more advanced cloth, softbody and fluid effects.
 
Whilst physx and other Nvidia closed source technology remains propriatory, we will always be saying ' its a shame its not used more widely'.

Developers also go for the 'best bang for buck' solution.

Usually that means using open source alternatives...

Its only when Nvidia pay a development studio to use their technology that you get physx in games..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom