164 replies to this topic

[m.oreilly]

hehe, where did you find that pic? i remember puting it up like 100 years ago
why do you recommend the ati? any input is valued, as more options are open because of availability and lower prices per card...

[m.oreilly]

heck, the 8800gt has my attention atm. the price is really great...i dunno...

[nitram]

Nvyseal, on Jan 8 2008, 03:58 PM, said:

Hey MO, look at THIS!

Nice but to update it to its top spec would cost $22,546.00
Bit out of most peoples budget.

[Tweak]

If cost isn't a defintive factor here, ATI is as you stated, great for quality...assuming none of the historical driver problems come up, excellent choice, but for the one that saves some $ and is still extremely capable, the GT, why bother with the GTX which for the most past offers bragging rights and higher benchmarks scores, personally I'd prefer cost effective and overall performance offered by the GT as well as real-world usability, benchmarks and bragging rights on a video card mean nothing at the end of the day.

[TheBearLT]

Because nVidia 88XX is a Failure.. slow, not support, can't remember the Technology name.. when you zooming out, model becomes less Complexed, with less polygons, but when you zoom in, more Polygons appear, model becoming more complexed.. DX10.0 not supports that. Now imagine, how hard loaded would be 88XX with rendering all models as they are, no matter how far you are from "object"

Dunno About DX10.1, supports it this tech. or not , but everyone saying that 10.1 is faster.. so go For ATi..

Why to get Old slow Cr@p, if there is something fresher and more powerful.. ?

Edited by TheBearLT, 02 February 2008 - 03:32 PM.

[eniparadoxgma]

m.oreilly, on Feb 1 2008, 10:45 PM, said:

hehe, where did you find that pic? i remember puting it up like 100 years ago
why do you recommend the ati? any input is valued, as more options are open because of availability and lower prices per card...

I saved it from when you posted it back at the planet like years ago. I think it was in one of those tinfoil hat threads or somethin. Yeah, I'm an intraweb packrat.

Anyhow, from what I know (which admittedly isn't much) ATI cards are in general a bit better when it comes to quality, and Nvidia better in terms in quantity. Meaning generally ATI will give you a bit better picture quality while Nvidia will get you some more FPS. At higher resolutions traditionally ATI wins the battle as well. (I have no idea how much of this is actually correct or possibly outdated)

Anyhow, when ATI came out with the 3870, I thought they hit a home run for the first time since...crap, a long time. Smaller nm process, less heat, good price, etc. Since I'm more worried about overall picture quality at higher resolutions (i run 1920 x 1200) then I am straight high FPS on games, I personally would opt for the ATI.

Just my opinion. I could be wrong. F it who wants pie?!?

[m.oreilly]

yeah, i'm into the quality, and run at 1920x1200 also. i guess i don't understand these bench results from all these early reviews: if said card gets higher fps with everything turned up, is that indicative of better over all image quality, or am i missing das boot?

[TheBearLT]

eniparadoxgma, on Feb 2 2008, 09:25 PM, said:

I saved it from when you posted it back at the planet like years ago. I think it was in one of those tinfoil hat threads or somethin. Yeah, I'm an intraweb packrat.

Anyhow, from what I know (which admittedly isn't much) ATI cards are in general a bit better when it comes to quality, and Nvidia better in terms in quantity. Meaning generally ATI will give you a bit better picture quality while Nvidia will get you some more FPS. At higher resolutions traditionally ATI wins the battle as well. (I have no idea how much of this is actually correct or possibly outdated)

Anyhow, when ATI came out with the 3870, I thought they hit a home run for the first time since...crap, a long time. Smaller nm process, less heat, good price, etc. Since I'm more worried about overall picture quality at higher resolutions (i run 1920 x 1200) then I am straight high FPS on games, I personally would opt for the ATI.

Just my opinion. I could be wrong. F it who wants pie?!?

Just for you to note..
ATi is better with Graphic rendering
nVidia is better with the Filters

[m.oreilly]

thanks guys. i guess i want both oh well...i just remember the ease that it is to install nvidia drivers, though they don't release many new ones/in a timely manner. i'm getting a headache from looking at these cards...

[TheBearLT]

m.oreilly, on Feb 2 2008, 09:40 PM, said:

yeah, i'm into the quality, and run at 1920x1200 also. i guess i don't understand these bench results from all these early reviews: if said card gets higher fps with everything turned up, is that indicative of better over all image quality, or am i missing das boot?

Well, if a noob says, that he can run game, with everything turned on.. probably that is Indicator of best image quality..

Another thing to note.
Most of todays games are optimized for nVidia, that automatically makes ATi cards slower in handling it..
But, If we measure Nude performance of Graphic processors, ATi was always one step further than nVidia

[m.oreilly]

TheBearLT, on Feb 2 2008, 01:29 PM, said:

...But, If we measure Nude performance...

cool. got any nude samples you'd care to share

[eniparadoxgma]

Quote

if said card gets higher fps with everything turned up, is that indicative of better over all image quality, or am i missing das boot?

I have no idea.

And just so you know, I've been running ATI cards for like 5-7 years now and I haven't had any problems with driver updates for at least a couple years. Of course, not running a Nvidia card I don't know how fast or easy it is to update drivers. I'm just saying I don't have any issues updating the Catalysts anymore.

Nude graphic performances are the best, btw.

Edited by eniparadoxgma, 03 February 2008 - 01:05 AM.

[m.oreilly]

well geez...if the picture quality is ati, but filters is nvidia: why would you need filters if the picture quality is there? @ tall rezes, is there that much need for aa and af? man, i feel more confused than i did yesterday...








<insert nude graphics/performance here>

[m.oreilly]

enip, which card are you running atm? i'll take a second look at the 3870s. i was checking out the x2s, but i think it would be a waste for me to own it...

[talker]

m.oreilly, on Feb 2 2008, 03:32 PM, said:

cool. got any nude samples you'd care to share

MO!!!!!!! FOR SHAME

Edited by talker, 03 February 2008 - 02:39 AM.