Curse

Res Surection · Mar 16, 2006, 09:37 PM // 21:37

why does everyone,EVERYONE, want a Nvidia over an Ati??

Narada · Mar 16, 2006, 09:46 PM // 21:46

It's a matter of personal preference, I wouldn't say that everyone prefers NVIDIA. I've always run ATI myself, but I'll say that if I ever upgrade my mobo to one with PCI-E, I'll almost definately go with NVIDIA. From reviews and such, to me at least, it seems that NVIDIA tends to own the PCI world at this time while ATI leads in AGP. (Though ATI has also been producing high-end PCI-E cards, I'm just not as familiar with them so my opinion is obviously biased.)

Zaxan Razor · Mar 16, 2006, 09:48 PM // 21:48

I dunno..the last two cards i bought were both ATI..they've worked sooooo much better than any Nvidia card id had before..less bugs..less problems with texturing in games etc.

Never ever buying Nvidia again.

Teklord · Mar 16, 2006, 10:14 PM // 22:14

Last nVidia card I had was Viper V770 Ultra TNT2. Nothing wrong with it either. Next I went to the Radeon 9600 Pro, and then most recently I acquired the X1800XL. Probably this summer I'll go Crossfire. No particular reason I have I chosen one side over the other, save I'm Canadian I suppose.

Josh · Mar 16, 2006, 10:16 PM // 22:16

I prefer ATI over nVidia...

Just to be honest, I'm waiting for ATI to release there new CrossFire without the silly cable and better performance and without using a 'master card', which is coming out soon before I upgrade.

Tachyon · Mar 16, 2006, 10:22 PM // 22:22

I prefer Nvidia myself. One of the main reasons is that I fly a lot of FS2004 and for some reason the reflective textures on the aircraft go all icky with ATI.

OneArmedScissor · Mar 16, 2006, 10:27 PM // 22:27

Well... The Nvidia 6 serious owned anything ATI put up against it...
The new 1900s are the new dominating cards, even though Nvidia just released the 7900s and 7600s. But ATI has one amazing card that beats all of the Nvidia cards, but all of Nvidia's cards beat everything else besides the 1900. The 1900 is also like $500+... Which one would you buy?
My eVGa 6800GS is a beast. Comes stock with 450MHz core, but I've got it overclocked to 520MHz core...

The 6800GS is one hell of a card to try and beat. Especially since it's around $170-$150 and you can overclock the piss out of it.

Res Surection · Mar 16, 2006, 11:48 PM // 23:48

i just had that card, now im sending it bak to get a SAPPHIRE 100131 Radeon X800GTO 256MB 256-bit GDDR3 AGP 4X/8X Video Card, but mine was a gt not gs

Ghozer · Mar 17, 2006, 12:50 AM // 00:50

Thats a bad statement "why does EVERYONE prefer...??" I dont, I prefer ATI, 99% of my friends and family prefer ATI, most of the people i speak to on line prefer ATI

so yeah...

Quote:

OneArmedScissor
eVGa 6800GS is a beast. Comes stock with 450MHz core, but I've got it overclocked to 520MHz core...

hmm, odd, cause my low-end, budget x1600 has a 520Mhz core stock, and a 500ram clock, (its slow cause its AGP not PCI-e)

lord_shar · Mar 17, 2006, 12:57 AM // 00:57

At the moment, both NVidia and ATI's high end cards are pretty evenly matched, with one company being faster than the other in some games and slower in other apps. You really can't go wrong with either.

If I had to choose between the two, I'd go NVidia for several reasons:

1) NVidia unified detonator drivers seem to run more stable on the PC's I've worked with (not always true of all PC's... just personal experience)

2) When NVidia launches a new product, the items are immediately available upon announcement at most online e-tailers like NewEgg, Zip Zoom Fly, etc... With ATI, product launches are almost always 2-5 months ahead of actual product availability. VAPOR-LAUNCHES ALWAYS DRIVE ME INSANE.

3) Quad-SLI is already available for the UBER-loaded PC-gamer. ATI has no equivalent solution yet, but then again, quad-SLI the bragging rights will cost you a vital organ.

ATI Crossfire should be more cost-effective down the road since you don't have to keep the video card hardware spec's matched.

I'm still holding off on commiting to either platform, only because my current NVidia 6800-Ultra seems good enough for GW. Once GW's requirements start exceeding my system's ability to handle it smoothly, then I'll purchase whatever card gives me the most perfomance and stability regardless of cost.

twangansta · Mar 17, 2006, 01:20 AM // 01:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghozer

Thats a bad statement "why does EVERYONE prefer...??" I dont, I prefer ATI, 99% of my friends and family prefer ATI, most of the people i speak to on line prefer ATI

so yeah...

hmm, odd, cause my low-end, budget x1600 has a 520Mhz core stock, and a 500ram clock, (its slow cause its AGP not PCI-e)

You can't compare two different cards core clocks and memory speeds, it doesn't work that way. It all boils down to the internal workings of the GPU, what specificiations it has (SM 3.0, HDR support, etc).

Res Surection · Mar 17, 2006, 01:22 AM // 01:22

so, twangangsta wat card would u preffer for me for under 200$?

volsungxiii · Mar 17, 2006, 01:32 AM // 01:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Res Surection

so, twangangsta wat card would u preffer for me for under 200$?

As of recent, 256 Mb video cards, from both manufacturers, can be found under 200 dollars. Theser are lower end ones (slower internal clock speed, etc) than the more expensive ones, but will still work very well, especially for guild wars.

In fact, I'm still running an ATI Radeon 9200, 128 mb. Works great, even with high video settings.

If you really don't understand the technical aspects of it, then it really doesn't matter. It's not like you'll tell the difference ^_^

volsungxiii · Mar 17, 2006, 01:34 AM // 01:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghozer

...hmm, odd, cause my low-end, budget x1600 has a 520Mhz core stock, and a 500ram clock, (its slow cause its AGP not PCI-e)

I thought APG was faster than PCI?

Res Surection · Mar 17, 2006, 01:37 AM // 01:37

i wish

lord_shar · Mar 17, 2006, 01:51 AM // 01:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by volsungxiii

I thought APG was faster than PCI?

PCI-e > AGP > PCI

A PCIe x16 lane can move 3.7gig/sec bidirectionally, but most video cards don't take advangate of the extra bandwidth yet, so we won't see dramatic improvements over AGP yet just because of the slot change. However, PCIe does allow SLI to once again become a reality since PCIe system boards can have 2+ PCIe x16 slots, while most older sytems only have a single AGP slot.

PCI is the oldest of the slot formats (ISA and EISA don't count), and is a fossilized dinosaur when it comes to performance graphics applications.

MMSDome · Mar 17, 2006, 01:53 AM // 01:53

i use a Ati the 9800 pro. I have no problem with either. My view is that Nvidia isnt as great performance as ati but it will last your a hell of a lot lnoger then a ati card. Ati is great for a spurr of the moment card if you dont mind having to get a new one every 1 or 2 years.

Shukrut · Mar 17, 2006, 02:52 AM // 02:52

Cost efficiency should be what drives your buy my friend...

Check what games you play, how good you want them to run and how much money you're ready to spend... Once you have all this in mind, shake your little head and check out the outcome.
Before I buy something I'll always check www.tomshardware.com They usually have good reviews, charts and comparison.
I personnaly own a 6600GT 128MB PCI-e (together with AMD Athlon64 3000+ and 1GB DDR400). Works perfectly with GW @ max res and max AA.

Res Surection · Mar 17, 2006, 02:59 AM // 02:59

well i play GW i want unreal tounament play area51, games along those lines, War games also such as battlefield

u cant forget the sims

twangansta · Mar 17, 2006, 03:54 AM // 03:54

I haven't been keeping up to date on prices and the performance of various computer hardware, and I'm only more informed on Nvidia cards.

I would say the 6800 GS is a great buy, I've seen as low las 149.99 on Newegg (maybe lower). For something a bit more, the 7600 GT seems right around $200, but I haven't read enough reviews on it to get a full knowledge of its performance.