ATI vs Nvidia

[stingerhs]

given that this is a tech forum, i thought it might be prudent to get some good discussion going. not to mention that i happen to be in the market with about $400 USD to spend....

 

anyways, which company do you prefer, why do you prefer them, and why doesn't the other company meet your specifications??? i'll post my thoughts on the issue later.

 

at any rate, let the debate begin!!

[Ray Jones]

nVidia

 

Reason 1: They have better Linux support. Of course that might change some day, but not tomorrow. I use Linux, so it would be stupid to not go nVidia. (There are of course other vendors, but this is ATI/nVidia, so..)

 

Reason 2: Better experience with nVidia cards. Basically, I have never been disappointed by nVidia hard- and software. Compared to that I had more trouble with ATI stuff (mostly driver related).

 

 

Besides that I have no other reason to go for nVidia cards, because performance wise I can not really make a difference, and the price is not really an issue when it comes to the above mentioned reasons.

[Astrotoy7]

lolz....no surprise here... my vote goes to nvidia..

 

Things I like about nvidia

1. Large range of options,and good options too - not just PCBs with different colours

2. Optimised for gaming

3. Dont have the rubbish catalyst control center

4. SLI technology more supported than crossfire

5. Always beavering away on drivers.

 

I know the HDTV crowd are having trouble with nvidia card atm, as nvidia is prioritising gaming and apps, not HDTV/home theater users(a very specific slice of them with crappy TVs that need custom rez timings)

 

That being said though, Im sure your life wont be utterly miserable if you buy some of the newer ATI cards.... just research some Vista benchies first....if you can find them

 

All in all however, I think most gamers lean toward nvidia cards... I'd say a good 80% of Lan gamers I meet have an nvidia whirring away in their rig

 

at that price youve nominated, Id go for the same card I got - the evga 8800GTS 640MB.

 

go great reviews all around. Overclockable, and shown to kick some ass in SLI..

 

whilst I await for mu shuttle smallform to arrive...mine sits on my shelf.... so painful !!

 

mtfbwya

[Q]

I voted nVidia because I HATE the CCC with a passion and you don't need an onboard nuclear reactor to power an 8800GTS.

 

BTW: Here is an interesting article on how well (or not) the current hardware from both camps fare in DX10 games. It's rather depressing.

[Astrotoy7]

lolz...I saw that. But surely it's not that big of a surprise is it. No one has published a fully DX10 optimised game yet......so the devs are figuring it out just as much as the hardware manufacturers ...and the rest of us.

 

The directX 10 SDK isnt exactly something you can master in a short time, or with unreleased titles

 

Of course, it has been clearly established that the new GPUs outperform in a DX9 environment

 

mtfbwya

[Pho3nix]

I'm a longtime Ati user but I recently upgraded my PC and decided to go with an nVidia GeForce 8600 GTS and I'm very happy with it.

 

I might become a full-fledged nVidia fanboy, but I don't really care that much. I go with the better performer.

[stingerhs]

well, i'll finally jump in with my thoughts on the issue.

 

i've always leaned more towards the ATI camp, especially whenever they merged with AMD several months ago. the main reason is that since the introduction of the Radeon 9700 Pro, ATI has introduced cards that are mostly ahead of their times. they haven't all been successes given the X800 generation of cards that didn't support Shader 3.0, but even at that time, Shader 3.0 was still an emergent graphical feature that wasn't entirely required at the time. with the previous generation of cards, the X1800 series of cards, ATI produced a card that maximized shader processes which made them more efficient (although not necessarily faster) than the GeForce counterparts during shader-heavy processes. for those reasons, ATI can sometimes sound like they're in the lead.

 

however, i'm constantly forced to chastise ATI for their lousy driver support. in that way, Nvidia has taken a clear lead up until the Vista launch (although that problem has mostly been remedied as of now).

 

so, for the most part, i've always leaned towards the ATI camp, but i have always been willing to give Nvidia a good look over as evidenced by my last two video card purchases: a GeForce 7800GS for my old AGP-based system and a GeForce 8800GTS 640MB card for my new system.

 

it really all comes down to timing: who has the better deal and what the availability is for the cards. right now, Nvidia has a distinct advantage as ATI is clearly in a messy situation with their lackluster HD2900XT launch and the supposed simultaneous launch of mid-range and low-end cards which has yet to fully materialize.

 

at any rate, that's my opinion on the matter.

[Negative Sun]

Ati, because they're better value AFAIK...and they do the job very well, and I don't like the Nvidia control center or their upgrades at all.

 

And because they've merged with AMD to form the Fusion which is gonna kick major behind...I do agree nVidia are a bit ahead at the moment, but I've always found AMD/Ati to be a very good combination for me.

[urluckyday]

Whichever one gives me more *Bang* for my buck.

[JKLE_Cougar]

I like Nvidia cause they are more backwards compadable than most cards... i know when i was looking for an older card for my older computer Nvidia had a really nice one 6800 GS that still worked with my old Pentium III

 

infact i saved this card and still use it now in my new computer

[urluckyday]

After this round with my video card (nvidia geforce 7600 GS AGP 512 meg), I'm switching to ATI...what are the chances I get a faulty video card...apparently high...not to mention, I've used 2 Nvidia cards thus far...and they both suck.