Hardware Nvidea and ATI Framerate

[TheWingless]

What I'm not understanding is why are Nvidea cards better even though their specs are lower than an ATI card? Nvidea cards get a better framerate when you compare an 8800 GT 512MB to an ATI 3870 HD with 512MB. Is it just because ATI's drivers are just terrible? The ATI 3870 HD has higher clocks and memory speeds and everything. Or is it simply because the benchmarks don't specifically tell which card they used, just the model? I'm thinking it's just the drivers.

 

[Westside]

Actually, ATI makes excellent drivers. The problem is: 1. Efficiency of the architecture 2. ATI has better image quality then Nvidia, therefore it takes more to render the frames.

 

[754boy]

Actually, ATI makes excellent drivers. The problem is: 1. Efficiency of the architecture 2. ATI has better image quality then Nvidia, therefore it takes more to render the frames.

That image quality is negligible considering you can barely tell the difference, especially while playing a game lol. I'm sticking with Nvidia for life!!!

 

[Neko]

@Westside :
Since when did ATIcarts have better imagequality ?
Last time I checked their AA and AF wasn't all that great...
Last time was x1900 and stuff though... xD

@Topic:
NVidias drivers are brilliant , they often bring more FPS after a update. Also you need to compare the full specs. The NVIDIA carts probably got more shaderpipelines or something.

 

[Westside]

Actually, ATI makes excellent drivers. The problem is: 1. Efficiency of the architecture 2. ATI has better image quality then Nvidia, therefore it takes more to render the frames.

That image quality is negligible considering you can barely tell the difference, especially while playing a game lol. I'm sticking with Nvidia for life!!!

Lol, actually I currently have an Nvidia card and never have been so impressed before, I just didn't want to sound like an Nvidia fanboy...

 

[Shuny]

The ATI 3870 HD has higher clocks and memory speeds and everything. Or is it simply because the benchmarks don't specifically tell which card they used, just the model?

There is a lot of parameters to consider, not only megahertz : Texturing units, ROP, ...

 

[Commander]

As Shuny said speed and VRAM only play a part in what goes into rendering, architecture plays an equally large role, a card can be extremely fast but is limited in how much data it can process because the terrible design it will be useless.
ATI in the past had pretty bad architecture, however now they are spanking Nvidia and on top of that Nvidia is being screwed by Intel over the new Nehalem CPUs.

~ Commander

 

[Westside]

As Shuny said speed and VRAM only play a part in what goes into rendering, architecture plays an equally large role, a card can be extremely fast but is limited in how much data it can process because the terrible design it will be useless.
ATI in the past had pretty bad architecture, however now they are spanking Nvidia and on top of that Nvidia is being screwed by Intel over the new Nehalem CPUs.

~ Commander

Depends on how far back. The Radeon 9800 was miles better than the competition Nvidia 5 series. After that, they started to suck... Also the whole Nehalem not supporting Nvidia thing is a dick move on Intel's part, because Nvidia is known for making best bang for buck VGAs, what else are you going to support? Intel 3d Graphics? Don't make me laugh...

 

[Suranwrap]

my last 4 cards were Ati's. But i just built a new PC last weekend with a 9800GX2, that card is so nice, and so fast. I want to grab another one to SLI it.

 

[Commander]

As Shuny said speed and VRAM only play a part in what goes into rendering, architecture plays an equally large role, a card can be extremely fast but is limited in how much data it can process because the terrible design it will be useless.
ATI in the past had pretty bad architecture, however now they are spanking Nvidia and on top of that Nvidia is being screwed by Intel over the new Nehalem CPUs.

~ Commander

Depends on how far back. The Radeon 9800 was miles better than the competition Nvidia 5 series. After that, they started to suck... Also the whole Nehalem not supporting Nvidia thing is a dick move on Intel's part, because Nvidia is known for making best bang for buck VGAs, what else are you going to support? Intel 3d Graphics? Don't make me laugh...

Whats with the "you" part? Are you aiming it at me or just generally to anyone who reads it?

Intel are hardly known for being sensible, too be honest I'm not all that bothered, I am using ATI anyway and for a while beyond the 4870GX2 is going to rule

and Nvidia cards will still work with the new CPUs, just Nvidia won't be able to release an NForce chipset for the Nahelem cores so there's not alot to worry about anyway.

~ Commander

 

[Renegade_R]

After being a long user of ATI cards I decided to switch to the nVidia nForce SLI architecture with a GeForce 8800GT 512MB. I have never been so satisfied in my life. ATI cards just lack that extra something that makes the game feel right.

Mind you, ATI makes the best VALUE cards out there.

 

[TheWingless]

Ah, I guess I should look them up on the website instead of just looking at the product pages. They don't show everything on them. Thanks to everyone.

 

[Westside]

As Shuny said speed and VRAM only play a part in what goes into rendering, architecture plays an equally large role, a card can be extremely fast but is limited in how much data it can process because the terrible design it will be useless.
ATI in the past had pretty bad architecture, however now they are spanking Nvidia and on top of that Nvidia is being screwed by Intel over the new Nehalem CPUs.

~ Commander

Depends on how far back. The Radeon 9800 was miles better than the competition Nvidia 5 series. After that, they started to suck... Also the whole Nehalem not supporting Nvidia thing is a dick move on Intel's part, because Nvidia is known for making best bang for buck VGAs, what else are you going to support? Intel 3d Graphics? Don't make me laugh...

Whats with the "you" part? Are you aiming it at me or just generally to anyone who reads it?

Intel are hardly known for being sensible, too be honest I'm not all that bothered, I am using ATI anyway and for a while beyond the 4870GX2 is going to rule

and Nvidia cards will still work with the new CPUs, just Nvidia won't be able to release an NForce chipset for the Nahelem cores so there's not alot to worry about anyway.

~ Commander

The "you" was aiming at Intel. Not at anyone here.

 

[juggernaut911]

I think Nvidia is better only because I updated from my ATI x1300 to an Nvidia 8800GT!!

big difference in cards

 

[Rayder]

Most games are optimized for nVidia cards. Ever see the logo that says, "The way it's meant to be played"? That means optimized for nVidia. They pay companies to optimize games for their cards. It wouldn't surprise me if they also purposely screw ATI in the process.

ATI HAS been faltering ever since AMD bought them though. But consider what they're up against......making their cards perform as well as they do when many games are optimized for the competition. ATI also has a very small market share compared to nVidia......who do you think gaming companies will optimize for?

I used to be an fanATIc, but I don't really care about PC gaming anymore (whole other story), so it doesn't much matter to me anymore.

 

[Joe88]

^QFT

its just that nvidia throws money at just about every game developer there is, there for they get the advantage even though their hardware isnt up to spec to the competition

should be illegal imo, then we would see real competition...

 

[fischju]

The newest nvidia cards use the same chip as the older once just at a higher clock speed - ATI should come back with the 4800x2 (And wipe the floor with the 9800GTX)

 

[stormwolf18]

The newest nvidia cards use the same chip as the older once just at a higher clock speed - ATI should come back with the 4800x2 (And wipe the floor with the 9800GTX)

Not really, newest cards have more shader processors.

 

[Gman 101]

Not really, newest cards have more shader processors.

Which means larger die size (due to Nvidia's inability to use 55nm with the new GT200 series), far higher power consumption and far higher heat output. Wouldn't it be nice if you're able to have a barbeque on your GTX280?

 

[Commander]

Most games are optimized for nVidia cards. Ever see the logo that says, "The way it's meant to be played"? That means optimized for nVidia. They pay companies to optimize games for their cards. It wouldn't surprise me if they also purposely screw ATI in the process.

ATI HAS been faltering ever since AMD bought them though. But consider what they're up against......making their cards perform as well as they do when many games are optimized for the competition. ATI also has a very small market share compared to nVidia......who do you think gaming companies will optimize for?

I used to be an fanATIc, but I don't really care about PC gaming anymore (whole other story), so it doesn't much matter to me anymore.

The drivers that Nvidia releases are optimized for the games, they pay them money to get access to the game so they can optimize the drivers, game itself is not optimized. ATI have been releasing better cards since AMD purchased them because they now have more money, also the difference in market share isn't as large as you have assumed.

And the HD 4870 is superior to the 9800GX2. Every benchmark I have seen the HD 4870 wipes the floor with the 9800GX2. On average the 4870 achieves 10-20 FPS more then the 9800GX2.

More shader processors is not necessarily better, more efficient shaders would be more useful then lots of them.

~ Commander