Amiga.org
The "Not Quite Amiga but still computer related category" => Alternative Operating Systems => Topic started by: on December 01, 2004, 03:11:54 PM
-
Ok, I admit it. I know this isn't Amiga-related, but I'm stymied. I was looking at the Pirates thread and began wondering about what's available in video cards these days.
There seems to be a large divide in the video card realm between ATI and Nvidia. I know this isn't news to most, but I simply haven't kept up (owning a business-suitable FX 5200). Now, there are new games coming out that stretch my 5200 to it's limits and I'm wondering "if I can get a new video card, what should/would I need to buy?"
The weird thing is, I know everyone who uses a PC has a preference between ATI and NVidia, but the sites I've read all seem to vary based on their own personal preferences. One site says "the ATI x800 pro is the ultimate video card of 2004", while another says that "very clearly the Nvidia 6800 Ultra is the best you can buy for any money".
I own an nvidia-based (clone) FX5200 card. I like it. Others I've talked to swear by ATI cards and curse nvidia to death. Right now, I can't afford the x800 *or* the 6800 Ultra, (I'm more in the x700/6600 category) but I'm just wondering which YOU think is better (and please be clear about why)?
Wayne
-
we shall not know
I think a better question is:
wich card will be the best supported one.
I mean, how many games will really take advantage of the hardware?
If we take things back on topic:
look at the graphical difference of for instance: IK+ (International Karate) and Elfmania...
-
The X800 is definitely the fastest, but we're only talking about a few FPS' lead in Doom here.
Go for the cheaper one. You'll get a great card no matter what.
-
I have used Nvidias Geforce cards all the way back since the original Geforce 256, as it was called. I have never had any problems with them, drivers always a pleasure to install with the Detonator packs ( Now called Nforce, or something ) and never reflected that ATI might be better.
Now, with the purchase of my Dell computer, I have a ATI Radeon 9800 Pro and I found out it is just as userfriendly as the Geforce.. So I could swing either way if I was to get a new card.. :-)
Another thing to consider is that the high-end Geforce cards usually have such large fans that they occupy a PCI slot aswell, only to allow the heatsink/fan to fit, whereas the ATI don´t need as much cooling ( I figure )...
-
I wasn't really clear in my previous post.
ATI are known to have more intelligent sollutions to problems, rather than nVidia's brute-force approach.
-
Does it really matter ? Both top of the lines crank out avout the same FPS, depending on the benchmarks an ATI card outperforms an nVidia with 2 or 3 FPS and another benchmark shows the other way around. Meaning; both cards are fast, some games like nVidia, some like ATI, the difference is minor.
Not helpfull huh ?
It may also depends on the mobo tho...
-
It may also depends on the mobo tho...
True. I should probably point out that I also use an NForce2 based motherboard at the moment (MSI K7N2 with an Athlon 2800 and 512mb of DDR400). Probably makes a difference. :-)
Wayne
-
ATI are known to have more intelligent sollutions to problems, rather than nVidia's brute-force approach.
Yeah, I've heard that too. Reminds me of AMD vs. Intel somehow.
Also Nvidia killed 3dfx (which was a cool company imho) and they refuse to freely release information about their cards to developers. So I would go for an Ati card, but thats of course only my personal opinion.
-
I have an old TNT2 a Geforce2 and a Radeon9000... the ATI is obviously the most powerful card I own is is really good for modern games. I've found all the cards to be very good, especially my TNT2 which I expect would survive a nuclear war...
If I were to get a new card tomorrow, I would get the 6800, because It's had good reviews and it's a good price. Also I find the Nvidia numbering scheme easier to understand.
I would suggest getting the cheapest card that meets your spec.
-
rayt wrote:
ATI are known to have more intelligent sollutions to problems, rather than nVidia's brute-force approach.
Yeah, I've heard that too. Reminds me of AMD vs. Intel somehow.
Also Nvidia killed 3dfx (which was a cool company imho) and they refuse to freely release information about their cards to developers. So I would go for an Ati card, but thats of course only my personal opinion.
3Dfx killed themselves by being crap. Ati are just as lame about giving away technical information about their cards (there is a reason why only Nvidia cards are directly supported by AROS at the moment, other than via the VESA driver).
-
Probably makes a difference. :-)
Well, you would think it would favor a nVidia gfx card. But I recently read a review of an nForce4 (http://tech-report.com/reviews/2004q4/nforce4-ultra/index.x?pg=1) mobo (not persee because of the news item) and the differences with an ATI or nVidia based card were minor..
-
A couple of points:
- ATI cards use less power (generally. I'm not sure how it is with the latest offerings from either side)
- Nvidia make better drivers (for Linux too)
- Nvidia generally has better opengl performance (Like Quake-based games such as Call of Duty, Medal of Honor: Allied Assault), whereas ATI have the edge (I believe) on DirectX based graphics.
I could swing either way in the future, but for now it's Nvidia for me.
-
So we're doomed either way :-)
Pirates uses DX9, Doom3 uses primarily OpenGL.
Wayne
-
I currently have a BBA AIW 9800PRO and it has worked very well. Now, I have a 6600GT (PCX) coming for my new system. ATIs midrange x700/x600 are not competitive in their price range compared to the 6600GT. NVidia has really stepped it up after the FX failure.
So I'd say for now, NVidia...
-
Seems like the X800 and 6800 GT are pretty much identically priced. ($399 -- which is pretty much how much my current COMPUTER cost me). Too rich for my blood, but if I had the money, it'd be a video card that would last me several years until something of an equal speed jump (between the 5200 and x800/6800 GT) would be available.
Wayne
-
Wayne wrote:
So we're doomed either way :-) Pirates uses DX9, Doom3 uses primarily OpenGL.
That is a very brief summary of the current graphics market, but a completely true one, too. I had the good fortune to have a few decisive requirements: good OpenGL support under Linux, and no performance issues over 1024 x 768 as my TFT monitor maxes out there. Try very hard to find similar ones in your setup, and the card will usually follow. Although my guess is that your bank statement will do the chosing in the end :-).
Let us know what you bought, and why.
-
How about this deal. If you can find it instore still...
BFG GeForce 6800 OC 128M + Half Life 2 + Far Cry = $249.98 after mail in rebates
Aforementioned Bestbuy Rebate deal (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=pcmprd27200050016&skuId=999927100050016&productCategoryId=cat01151&type=product)
{edited by admin : corrected URL, but they're sold out now :-(}
-
Let me restate that I'm not really looking for a video card. I don't have the money to buy one quite frankly, nor do I really *need* one. The Pirates game (and the slowness of the duels -- which makes them annoying but very easy to win) is what got me on the subject.
Of course, if I can find a cheap one on e-bay, or perhaps Redrumloa's got one cheap, that's perhaps a different story.
Wayne
-
For Windows the difference is minor, some swear by ATI others NVidia. In the world outside of Windows there is no comparison NVidia has better drivers and they upgrade them cosistantly. ATI does not make good drivers for Linux (the only other OS they support is Mac and even here the driver does not seem as good as for Windows). I install both Linux x86 systems and Windows systems for end users and I find that I have the least compatablity problems with NVidia. So if you do not need the graphics card for a specific program go with the NVidia for Dual Boot systems and with the ATI for Windows or Mac only installs.
-
Well, here at work, one of the top graphics programmers tells me that the best card (from a programmer's point of view) is the top of the line nVidia GeForce 6800 cards. The reason is they support Shader Model 3.0 (and from what I understand, no ATI card currently does). From a gamer's point of view, few (if any, in fact, I don't think there are any) games use Shader 3.0, but if you've got your eye set on the next generation of games which will use shader 3.0, then this might be important to you.
But aside from that, both companies are very good. Only a few weeks ago I bought myself an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB card, which I felt was better then all nVidia cards below the GeForce series 6 cards. Before this, I had an nVidia GeForce 2 TI which was also very good for it's time (but it couldn't play Battlefield Vietnam (http://www.eagames.com/official/battlefield/vietnam/us/home.jsp), so I had to upgrade ;-) ). I personally wouldn't waste my time with any nVidia series 5 cards, except for perhaps the FX5900 & FX5950, but I find those lag behind in hi-res scenarios while the 9800's pull ahead.
At any rate, check out Tom's Hardware: VGA Charts IV (http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041004/index.html)
- Mike
-
Another thing to consider is that the high-end Geforce cards usually have such large fans that they occupy a PCI slot aswell, only to allow the heatsink/fan to fit, whereas the ATI don´t need as much cooling ( I figure )...
That's what I hear, or at least, that's what one of the 3D programmers here tells me. ATI seems to have always been better in the cooling department, and as a side-effect, don't require as big a fan. The nVidia FX series were the first mainstream GFX card to take up a PCI slot just for cooling - and they were loud. I know nVidia has come a long way since the initial release of the FX line, but ATI is still ahead of the game here. Just as an example, My GeForce 2 card (which is several generations old now) has a fan that was only marginally smaller then my Radeon 9800 Pro's fan (only one generation old).
- Mike
-
Also Nvidia killed 3dfx (which was a cool company imho) and they refuse to freely release information about their cards to developers. So I would go for an Ati card, but thats of course only my personal opinion.
3dfx was swallowed by nVidia. The old 3dFX team was assigned to make the GeForce 5 series of cards, formally known as the FX line. See the link? So 3dFX is still around in spirit. unfortunately, the FX line was considered a failure by many enthusiasts, and nVidia is trying to get away from the line as fast as possible. That may be the last "FX" series we'll see.
- Mike
-
ATI seems to have always been better in the cooling department, and as a side-effect, don't require as big a fan.
Perhaps true, but the latest/fastest ATI card x850 (http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/radeon-x850xt/index.x?pg=1) does.
-
Obviously one would get a Nvidia just so that they can use it with AROS :-D
-
ATI reeeeally, but nVidia for the reasons Bloodline stated.
AROS rules :-D
-
seer wrote:
ATI seems to have always been better in the cooling department, and as a side-effect, don't require as big a fan.
Perhaps true, but the latest/fastest ATI card x850 (http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/radeon-x850xt/index.x?pg=1) does.
They have Low-K Black Diamond(minimise leaks) added to their chips.
-
Glaucus wrote:
Also Nvidia killed 3dfx (which was a cool company imho) and they refuse to freely release information about their cards to developers. So I would go for an Ati card, but thats of course only my personal opinion.
3dfx was swallowed by nVidia. The old 3dFX team was assigned to make the GeForce 5 series of cards, formally known as the FX line. See the link? So 3dFX is still around in spirit. unfortunately, the FX line was considered a failure by many enthusiasts, and nVidia is trying to get away from the line as fast as possible. That may be the last "FX" series we'll see.
- Mike
GeforceFX has some bugs in handling odd number textures and its missing a 8x1 mode. In Doom3, FX59x0 operates as 8x0, while HL2 operates basically at 4x1 (4x2 is practically useless). FX doesn’t have FP24 only FP16 or FP32.
PS; FP16 spec is still part of DX9.
Issues was fixed with NV4x range...
-
Wayne
I'd go with maybe an ATI Radeon 9200 or 9600 agp on ebay. About $50 for the former and $80 for the later..
magnetic
-
Yeah, I've heard that too. Reminds me of AMD vs. Intel somehow.
It should be i.e. refer to http://news.cens.com/php/getnews.php?file=/news/2004/11/30/20041130013.htm&d
Graphics-chip supplier Nvida Corp. and microprocessor giant Intel Corp. recently entered into alliance while ATI Technologies Inc. and Advanced Micro Devices struck a similar deal.
To bring balance to Intel+NVIDIA alliance, ATI and AMD responded with their own alliance.
-
Hammer wrote:
Yeah, I've heard that too. Reminds me of AMD vs. Intel somehow.
It should be i.e. refer to http://news.cens.com/php/getnews.php?file=/news/2004/11/30/20041130013.htm&d
Graphics-chip supplier Nvida Corp. and microprocessor giant Intel Corp. recently entered into alliance while ATI Technologies Inc. and Advanced Micro Devices struck a similar deal.
To bring balance to Intel+NVIDIA alliance, ATI and AMD responded with their own alliance.
You gotta admit it seems rather backwards. AMD has always been considered the gamer's choice (especially today with their amazing 64bit chips), and nVidia's nForce have also been the number one chipset amungst gamers (which as far as I know, is not offered on Petium motherboards). Why would nVidia want to partner up with a CPU and associated chipsets which are not considered number 1 in the gaming market?
- Mike
-
I know which one Im hoping to purchase in the future,(assuming the price drops),the Parhelia PH-A8X256
Already have an nvidia card for gaming, now need to get a card for "productivity"
-
A few months back I also purchased a R9800P, mainly because I only had a maximum budget of $200 to spend on both a card and cooler, and the Radeon was simply the best option in my price range. Plus, I'm building a new A64 rig next year, so no need to go wild on another AGP card when PCI-E will be "mainstream"..
Doom3 and FarCry will choke this card if I crank the settings to the max and jack the resolution up past
1024x768, but thaaaaaat's about it.. not bad for $150 (Sapphire refurb from newegg).
-
You gotta admit it seems rather backwards. AMD has always been considered the gamer's choice (especially today with their amazing 64bit chips), and nVidia's nForce have also been the number one chipset amungst gamers (which as far as I know, is not offered on Petium motherboards).
Factor in XBOX1(P6 + nForce IGP).
It’s probable that the AMD64’s PCI-Ex motherboard market maybe too competitive for NVIDIA i.e. early release of ATI’s Xpress motherboard has potential dethrone NVIDIA and resurgent VIA (K8T890) can be dangerous. VIA doesn't have to handled memory controller issues in the AMD64 market.
There are at least six core logic builders in AMD64 and performance deltas doesn’t vary much due to common AMD NB. These are SIS, ULI, VIA, NVIDIA, ATI and AMD.
-
@Wayne
There’s an interesting article from http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=838630
about for Valve's HL-2/HL-CS and reasons why FX has “issues” with it.
As a side note...
It seems that somebody has imported HL2’s near photo realistic textures into DOOM3 RT shadow and lighting engine...
-
Hardware is so close it doesn't really matter. ATI's coolers are large, but still less noisy than nVidia, IMO.
My beef is driver quality. nVidia used to have top-flite drivers but after the FX fiasco, their drivers have turned to cheese as they tried to ramp up the speed. My dad has a GeForce 4 and no matter what version of the drivers he uses, it's BSOD's all day with an nVidia DLL as the culprit. Once he goes back to ancient drivers released a couple years ago, all the problems disappear.
ATI's drivers are very, very colid, save for a minor screwup in 4.9 that gave me lots of screen garbage in Photoshop and Explorer.
What ticks me off, though, is ATI's new Control Center. It adds a context item to EVERY menu in the system, which is an enormous pain, and you can't get rid of it. It keeps thousands of records in the registry -- a complete calalog of everything installed on your system from programs to DLLs. That may be useful for diagnostics, but I don't like programs keeping a database of my machine -- especially in the registry, as if it wasn't bloated enough.
If you do go ATI, get the drivers with the Control Panels, not the Control Center. Trust me.
-
But Control Center is needed to turn ON the TV OUT. Do you know better way?
BTW, I hate registry :pissed: :pissed: :pissed:
There ought to be some program that could COMPARE two registries. For instance it should give a list of all entries that are not essential (that didn't exist after clean install + drivers) so that it would be easy to remove !@#?remains. Yes, I know there are trackers and uninstallers, but they all make just even bigger mess :-(
-
Yeah, nVidia had issues with their drivers as well. The latest version of their drivers caused Battlefield 1942 to display all water lime green. It was kinda weird always swimming around in a large lake of battery acid. :-) That was fixed when I upgraded to my R9800Pro. :-D
- Mike