Enjoy your house fires, NVIDIA users.
The ATI master race will be enjoying a cool summer of playing the vidya.
|AnimeGalleries [dot] Net||AnimeWallpapers [dot] Com||AnimeLyrics [dot] Com||AnimePedia [dot] Com||AnimeGlobe [dot] Com|
Enjoy your house fires, NVIDIA users.
The ATI master race will be enjoying a cool summer of playing the vidya.
Last edited by Megadeth; 08-18-2010 at 11:22 AM.
I think PC games have been based on the limited performance of nVidea graphics cards for too long... So I'm all for ATi getting one over its rival!
Last edited by .:neuko:.; 11-13-2010 at 07:46 AM.
Herpderp religious wars.
Each vendor has their strengths, and both are pretty competitive price/performace-wise at most price-points these days. I own a mix of ATI and nVidea cards, and I cannot say that either is definitively better. I don't understand people's zeal over who makes the GPU on their card.
What does this even mean? Are you trying to complain about DX11 or something? I don't understand how a game can be built on "limited performance" of a graphics card. That's nonsense.PC games built on the limited performance of NVIDEA graphics cards.
In visible performance terms though, you may not notice much difference between nVidea and ATi graphics cards, because their manufacturers tend to be secretive about the more meaningful specifications. Indeed, both ATi and nVidea graphics cards can give apparently simalar results in terms of visible graphics performance; but even if that's the case, that doesn't necessarily mean they perform in the same way as each other, nor does it mean they have simalar power consumption ratings or price points. Graphics cards are one of the most power-hungry components in a PC, so their power efficiency is one crucial factor that shouldn't be overlooked... because if a graphics card is consuming more power than necessary, it is you (or your parents) who'll be paying an unnecessarily higher electricity bill. The more powerful graphics cards require power supply units from about 750w to 1500w to perform at their best. That's like having a kettle switched on for as long as you care to use your PC.
However, if PC game developers simply ignored the hardware potential of graphics cards, their games wouldn't run that well on most PCs to begin with... but here I'll explain how a game can be built (or based rather) on the limited performance of a graphics card...
Game developers have to endure higher costs these days to develop ever-more sophisticated games; as a result they're more likely to cut development costs where they can. One way for them to do this is to base their games on the hardware of one specific (and usually high-end) graphics card; so, if the hardware has certain limitations, game developers will have to simplify or configure their game engines somewhat in order to get around them. All graphics cards have different limitations in performance and therefore games have to factor that in, or else they just won't run properly.
As for which of the 2 graphics card brands would be more limited in performance... I just so happen to believe that nVidea graphics cards are more limited overall than ATi graphics cards, because ultimately they're less efficient. To give you an example, Crisis was one game that demanded high-performance graphics cards to run at a decent framerate... An ATi Radeon Series card to the tune of around £200 was able to run the game at an average of 40fps with all the hardware features enabled and on maximum settings. A competing nVidea graphics card at the same time was able to run the game 5fps faster under the same settings - however for that it cost around £380.
Last edited by .:neuko:.; 11-13-2010 at 08:02 AM.
Notice how the cards alternate between ATI and nVidea. Note that the top of the chart includes configuration for CrossFire/SLI. At the moment, ATI is on top, and your argument about marginal gains in performance for higher costs actually applies better to ATI.
Let's look at a few price points:
nVidea: 480 GTX+, $450, benchmarking score of 809 (sum across several games)
ATI: 5870, $400, benchmark 782
ATI wins out here, but nVidea's new architecture isn't being fully utilized yet, since few games support DX11 and tesselation. There has also been a rumored price drop for the 480s soon, so although in the immediate present, ATI would definitely be the better choice here, it's possible that the 480 will become a better value soon.
nVidea: 470 GTX, $250, 697.5
ATI: 5850, $250, 678.4
nVidea: 280 GTX, $255, 508.1
ATI: 4870, $280, 494.2
nVidea wins, and ATI is actually a bit more expensive while also being worse in performance.
nVidea: 260 GTX, $170, 422.8
ATI: 5770, $160, 458.6
nVidea: 9800 GTX+, $100, 375.5
ATI: 4770, $120, 363.1
nVidea: 9800 GT, $90, 289.1
ATI: 5670, $100, 297.5
nVidea wins, and is less expensive
The prices are cheapest decent brand with the most common memory configuration I could find on Amazon/Newegg. These aren't perfect comparisons, but it should be good enough to illustrate that it's a pretty close call in most cases for either brand.
The best analogy I can give is RISC versus CISC, or the tradeoff between clock speed and number of processors, but it's much more complicated than that.
Here's some info about electricity costs (at least here in the US):
The maximum difference in card power draw between cards of the same tier is about 10%, which translates to 30 watts more worst case. The average cost of electricity in the US is about 9 cents ber kWh. With these numbers, gaming 4 hours a day (idle differences in power consumption are going to be virtually negligable), you'd be paying about $4 more a year. Even over a 5-year estimated lifetime of a card, this is only $20.
Rather, bigger studios (with lots of money) are developing these kinds of games. Which brings us to:
tl;dr: don't make an argument based on random conjecture, do some more investigation before trying to generalize and oversimplify a topic like this. The graphics card market is constantly changing, prices are always dropping, and you'd be a fool to not consider half of the graphics cards out there.
Last edited by div; 11-13-2010 at 01:04 PM.
Whoa... You got pretty mixed up with my brief comment and Neuko's ones, div
I'm not saying any of nVidia and ATI doesn't support AA or/and AF. I'm simply state that both graphic card giants offers discreet graphic solutions to avid gamer market that emphasis on visual gaming experience on their gaming title. These section of market consumer most probably owned the latest graphic card solution they had afford at that time, regardless the manufacturer. They probably want to upgrade their previous card to the latest in the market. The question is whether the buyer willing fork out on the high-end card or settle on affordable card with similar performances to its high-end counterpart to go with the latest games on the market. It's all matter of preferences.
The mainstream market section probably don't care/less about these advance graphic setting while playing their gaming title. They most probably want something that work that are friendly with their pocket.
Without disclosing my benchmarking sources, I do follow closely on the graphic card wars between nVidia and AMD/ATI which currently come down to prices cards and releases of next flagship; nVidia Fermi chip set, GF110 and Radeon HD6xxx series. I do compare the market pricing of these discreet solutions on the local and global market.
Yeah, sorry about that. I get pretty worked up over this stuff sometimes. Please neither of you take this personally. @_@
I just realized I mis-attributed a lot of those quotes to you, La3mnator. Your statement was reasonable, but I misunderstood your point. Yeah, ATI and nVidia try to put their name out there behind big games to gain sales, which makes sense. I was mostly responding to Neuko. One thing that bothers me more than anything is when people make some statement, and then poorly defend it, or defend it with misinformation or assumptions. Sorry if you got caught in that crossfire. XD
The graphics debate between ATI and nVidia is pretty ridiculous, and I'm glad to hear that you take a reasonable stance of judging the cards for what they are based on benchmarks rather than who makes the thing.
Last edited by div; 11-13-2010 at 01:08 PM.
My experience with ATI cards has been pretty poor, I've used a fair deal of low-end and mid-end cards from them as well as low-end and mid-end nVidia cards, and I've found the nVidia ones to be better.
Also, why do people bash this anyway? What I just said is opinion, in the long run there is usually very little difference between identical cards across the two companies and almost always where one has an advantage, it also has a disadvantage across the other.
I'm going to be honest and say that, if I recall correctly, at some point ATI's cards were actually genuinely a great deal better than nVidia cards, but nVidia's drivers and software were simply able to get more out of their architecture than ATI could. I don't know if that's the case today, but from what I know nVidia have been getting more out of their cards than ATI does.
I just prefer nVidia solely based on my own personal experiences. I know that may be biased but that's just me. I've got nothing against ATI ... I have an AMD processor after all. xD
and for the record, I have a GTX275.
I prefer Nvidia because they've always been good about their Linux drivers. But performance wise, there really isn't a tremendous difference. Unless you're into getting the most high end card available(and who the hell can afford that? Nevermind that the other team will have a better card out in a few months after your purchase), you'll find Nvidia and ATI cards with roughly the same performance for roughly the same price.
Last edited by Eris; 12-22-2010 at 05:41 PM.
Hey look, Japan made a movie about me!
Hi i believe that Nvidia i a better graphics card because i don't have to go through the hoops that you do with ATI i'v have been using and Nvidia card for about five years and the only problem i've had with it is that it can't support fully animated water but ATI is just not good but to each his/her own
In life we expect things to go the way that they are supposed to. But it never does when things go bad we go to our friends, our family for help and support to get through the tough times. take care of your family and don't burn your bridges you'll regret it later on
I have a nvidia 9800gs 512mb in my laptop and its ok. Is getting pretty dated now though but in its time it was an awsome card. I have a really old ati card (think its a 2400 pro) in my desktop as I use my lappy for gaming and I've never had any trouble with it. Actually the ati software that comes with the card makes it easier to OC than the nvidia. I hate nvidia software. Any way, there's my 2cents worth.
I have 2 gtx 465's, but I'd have to say radeon wins this won. Cheaper and more powerful
http://www.myanimesource.com - My anime site
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)