Snarkpit Forum Index » General Banter » Indecision 2004
Indecision 2004
« previous page 1
2
3
...
4 next page »
Post Reply
Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by 2-bits on Sat Jun 12th at 8:17pm 2004

In the benchmarks, nVidia did perform better. I'm kind of leaning towards nVidia myself... Mainly because until recently, ATI was known to make s**tty graphics cards. I was a victim of that.

My computer is pretty fast... in fact, I'll use my opportunity to bring up my stats AGAIN.

Intel p4 2.67 ghz overclocked to 3 ghz
768 megs ddr ram
ASUS P4PE motherboard (no PCI express though... )
GeForce Ti-4400

and so on...

Also, in Quake III, nVidia's card get superior performance with AF and AA on. By about 40 frames. The only thing that has me concerned was the FarCry thing.

I'm starting to think that I need to simplify this decision.

From here on, I'll make my graphics card buying decision by which company uses the hottest rendered girl in their ads. Right now, ATI is the clear winner in that category. I mean, what hads nVidia got, some bug fairy? I'll give them some time to prepare a new one, just to be fair, but I think they'll have a pretty hardtime outdoing ATI in THAT category.

I think this is the best policy, no? [addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by 7dk2h4md720ih on Sat Jun 12th at 8:24pm 2004

That's it, get wooed by the boobs and forget the specs, good boy. Do exactly what they want.




Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by 2-bits on Sat Jun 12th at 8:29pm 2004

They broke my fighting spirit. Just give in, my friends, it's so much easier.

Actually, the only reason I'm going this route is because the cards are so evenly matched that this seemed the best criteria to base my buying decisions on.

It just occured to me that "They broke my fighting spirit. Just give in, my friends, it 's so much easier." is awfully 1984esque.

edit: Could 1984 happen with boobs? I don't know. [addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by fishy on Sat Jun 12th at 8:40pm 2004

? posted by 2-bits
edit: Could 1984 happen with boobs? I don't know.

maggie





Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by 2-bits on Sat Jun 12th at 8:49pm 2004

...Wha? As in the former British Prime Minster? [addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by scary_jeff on Sat Jun 12th at 10:36pm 2004

Gorb, the ATI only does better because their drivers use optimisations that the ATI media review pack said should be turned off in the nvidia drivers, which have an option to use the optimisations or not since the whole 'driver cheat' thing. When they set a game to use coloured mipmaps, the ATI driver uses the 'full' AF, and the performance is basically the same as on the nvidia cards.

In addition, different sites had ATI or nvidia winning because ATI sent out different spec'd cards to each of the main review sites.



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by Biological Component on Sun Jun 13th at 12:31am 2004

? quote

This is exactly what they want us to do....

...Their devious plans are clearly bent on worldwide mayhem&confusion.

...and boobs.

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by SumhObo on Sun Jun 13th at 1:22am 2004

In the majority of reviews I have read, the NVidia card scored big on old games where all you need is a beasty card - their latest is little more than an overclocked FX, as their new RAM selection will make no difference until PCI-Express is released. The ATI, on the other hand, was the gamer's choice for the very latest games - those that make full use of DX 9's pixel shaders. If you want futureproof, this is the way I'd be looking. Plus then you factor in the cost of needing two separate 12-volt rails for the NVidia...




Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by G.Ballblue on Sun Jun 13th at 1:30am 2004

FLASH FROM THE PAST!!!

How do you make a sound card imulate "dos games". ???

An example would be... oh... let's say doom?

Yippie Ki Yay!

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by 2-bits on Sun Jun 13th at 1:52am 2004

Yes, but nVidia's card has built in DirectX 9.0c support, and is supposed to do better with games that use that versions Pixel Shader features. [addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by Biological Component on Sun Jun 13th at 2:20am 2004

? posted by G.Ballblue

FLASH FROM THE PAST!!!

How do you make a sound card imulate "dos games". ???

An example would be... oh... let's say doom?

Yippie Ki Yay!

Isn't this thread about videocards?

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by G.Ballblue on Sun Jun 13th at 4:54am 2004

Eh... hehheheh. Shh..

Yippie Ki Yay!

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by Yak_Fighter on Sun Jun 13th at 5:30am 2004

I've hated ATI ever since my first computer came with an ATI 3d Rage Pro soldered into the port. I got more frames running HL in software mode. Then I got burned by a GeForce2 which would overheat and crash my second computer if I ran it with the case on.

So I did what any smart consumer would do. I got myself a laptop and doomed myself to suffering slow graphics for probably the next 4 years.





Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by Crono on Sun Jun 13th at 7:41am 2004

? quote:
personally i think we all are overlooking something far more important here that if Nvidia or ATI's biggest card is best.

unless something has changed recently, bigger cards require bigger computers to take full advantage of them.. at least thats how it used to be, and how i read it then.

seems to me, if you don't own a powerful enuff PC, you are wasting your bigger card, and your money.

that topic crono posted recently about parts working in-conjunction to produce optimal power, also holds true for video cards..

IMO, most of us, don't need, or cannot utilize the newer cards, and this topic is more/less rubbing salt into that wound.

i am not happy with my ATI 9000, but i am more so than i was with my older cards.. the 9000 gave me about twice the performance it seems.. but still fell far short of my expectations prior to buying it.

BTW, it runs the *taboo* HL just fine, so there you go.. bigger isn't always the better route.


~slowly stands up clapping~

I'm glad to see my rambling isn't overlooked

Something else most people don't realize is that even your monitor limits your game performance, and I'm not talking about VSYNC.
In general, CRT monitors are 'faster' then LCD (Got a TFT/LCD here).

This should suggest that everything matters in your computer when regarding performance .

When I had that LAN awhile back, I was playing Far Cry, maxed settings, on a CRT (1280x1024, 21-22", Hitachi, they were made for SPARC machines, good thing Sun switched over to VGA ) monitor and it was smooth as silk. If I play it now on my TFT (1024x768) it's pretty laggy, not too bad though, playing for about five minutes clears it up (go cache).

Jeff has the best point of you all.
Who cares if a 99gillion ATI has a 2% faster frame rate then some NVIDIA card, the only way you know is because you looked for it and measured it, or read some liars 'benchmarks'. But do you honestly notice any of these performance 'increases' while playing the games? Unless you have a monitor from the year 2035, I doubt it.

Personally, I'm waiting for NVIDIA; I do prefer them, simply because they're cheaper and have bigger bundles here. But speaking about overall performance, they're the same, not to mention, your BUS and processor come into play as well . [addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jun 13th at 9:40am 2004

? posted by Crono
~slowly stands up clapping~

I'm glad to see my rambling isn't overlooked

you didn't really think that we thought you were always wrong did you?

seriously though, there had to be a time where you and i would stand on the same side of a discussion..

its nearly impossible for you to be wrong every time

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by scary_jeff on Sun Jun 13th at 10:05am 2004

? quote:
their latest is little more than an overclocked FX, [...] The ATI, on the other hand, was the gamer's choice for the very latest games - those that make full use of DX 9's pixel shaders. If you want futureproof, this is the way I'd be looking. Plus then you factor in the cost of needing two separate 12-volt rails for the NVidia...


I just don't understand where people get this kind of 'information'?:
o 6800 is a totally new arcitechture. How can it be an overclocked FX when it actually runs at a lower clock rate!?
o nvidia cards have 'better' DX9 support - when games use PS3, ATI cards won't be able to utilise it. OK PS3 doesn't look that different, but what it does do is look as good while running faster. So you can expect that 5% 'advantage' ATI has in some PS2 games to evaporate as soon as the PS3 patches/games come out.
o You don't need two power connectors on the nvidia any more. The second connector is only needed if you have the top end card and want to overclock it (pointless).

I'm not saying 'buy nvidia' or 'stay away from ATI', but please, make a decision that isn't based on information that is either outdated, or just plain wrong.



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jun 13th at 12:45pm 2004

i think what we really need is a thread thats realistic..

how about we post our machine specs, and those that truly understand cards look it over and recommend the top card for that pc??

i am an Nvidia fan, but my ATI card is fantastic, considering first and foremost "I HAVE NEVER OWNED BETTER" i have nothing concrete to compare it with so.... and also, i don't truly by into the benchmarks either cause when i see how poorly mine scored, and how pretty it looks on my monitor, i cannot really convince myself that they are getting 5000% better results with the newest cards out there (<--- points to exaggeration used to illustrate my point)

personally, i am considering an Nvidia 5200, i think its the best i can afford, and best my 2.6 celeron can utilize.. but i am open to suggestions.

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by scary_jeff on Sun Jun 13th at 12:49pm 2004

It's hard to know what the best card is for a particular processor unless you have actually tried different cards personally - not many websites are interesting in testing how well some new card does on a celeron 2.6.

What is your budget? It doesn't seem like a long time since you got the Radeon - why not save for a bit longer, then buy something when HL2 is out?



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Jun 13th at 1:01pm 2004

? posted by scary_jeff
It's hard to know what the best card is for a particular processor unless you have actually tried different cards personally - not many websites are interesting in testing how well some new card does on a celeron 2.6.

What is your budget? It doesn't seem like a long time since you got the Radeon - why not save for a bit longer, then buy something when HL2 is out?

my budget will be about $125.00
the 9000 card doesn't really like the *taboo* editor.. that is my only concern.. ATI might not like editing for HL2

and the celeron issue.. yeah a celeron is substandard, but its still fast as hell compared to my old 1.4 athlon T-Bird :/

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: Indecision 2004
Posted by 7dk2h4md720ih on Sun Jun 13th at 1:22pm 2004

I agree with Jeff, wait until hl2 is out and get the same card cheaper. You can't really expect a stolen version of an in development game to be compatible with everything.





« previous page 1
2
3
...
4 next page »
Post Reply