for me its Nvidia because i used Nvidia
[OFFICIAL] ATI vs. Nvidia
Started by
Guest_bandido
, Mar 21 2005 10:13 PM
280 replies to this topic
#202
Guest_gamechaser002
Guest_gamechaser002
-
- Guest
Posted 18 September 2007 - 10:26 PM
i prefer to angle towards NVidia, but i will use whatever my computer came with (unless i can get a better card, and the computer's a desktop)
#203
Guest_TehFox1
Guest_TehFox1
-
- Guest
Posted 19 September 2007 - 11:43 PM
nVidia .... ATI doesnt seem to give as much power
#204
Guest_onionring
Guest_onionring
-
- Guest
Posted 20 September 2007 - 03:15 AM
ATI cards generally generate more power, but they also are a bit more dodgy when gaming. Some games it works beautifully, better than their equivalent nVida cards, while some others are worse than cards much less expensive.. But with ATI, their cards are buggy at first, but the drivers make them so much better. I'm personally an ATI fan. nVida has more well rounded cards but none of them especially excel unless u want to spend 600$
#205
Guest_Benko The King
Guest_Benko The King
-
- Guest
Posted 20 September 2007 - 09:04 PM
Nvidia of course, ati sucks!!
#206
Guest_DJN1908
Guest_DJN1908
-
- Guest
Posted 21 September 2007 - 03:48 AM
NVIDA all the way. much better cards. better drivers, programs, overclocking ability, best cards on the market right now. they outperform ATI easily.
#207
Guest_Farion
Guest_Farion
-
- Guest
Posted 21 September 2007 - 03:56 PM
Nvidias been out for longer so i prefer it.
#208
Guest_Frenkieh
Guest_Frenkieh
-
- Guest
Posted 22 September 2007 - 03:51 PM
I would day nVidia..i always buy those
#209
Guest_baczynskims
Guest_baczynskims
-
- Guest
Posted 22 September 2007 - 04:07 PM
I would really like to see AMD/ATI pull through this battle. I think they have great potential coming out with the first 65nm video cards. Its kind of crazy really. ATI is usually a power hog, but with the new 65nm the power consumption is severely cut. I am waiting for something just a bit better than the hd2600xt, maybe something competitve with the 320 8800gts but for less money. ATI is great on price right now, but i dont want to buy a midrange card yet seeing as i have a 7600gt right now and it is not that much worse than current midrangers.
#210
Guest_tier2geek
Guest_tier2geek
-
- Guest
Posted 22 September 2007 - 07:28 PM
I would have to go with Nvidia this round simply because it's almost like ATi isn't even being serious at all. Nvidia keeps on pushing the performance limit with the 8800 core while ATi is still twiddling their thumbs with nothing to compete even the 8800 GTS. A real shame seeing how large and grand ATi always was. Well the 9000 series anyway. I still remember the 9800 pulling in all the records. Maybe it's AMD that's keeping ATi from getting back to their full potential? Budget cuts? Either way, I'm plenty happy rocking on with my Nvidia 8800 GTS! 
#211
Guest_N64_Gamer
Guest_N64_Gamer
-
- Guest
Posted 22 September 2007 - 07:43 PM
I'd choose Nvidia if I was looking for pure performance in my games. If I wanted to play all the games in the world at high resolutions, I'd take the 8800GTX if I had the moneyATi is apparently going to release two mid-range card called the 2900Pro and GT . These cards are basically 2900XTs with slower clocks and one having 1/2 the memory bandwidth. That may sound bad, but it's only going to be $150-$250 (GT-Pro) and it has the same number pixel shaders. In addition, the PCB is nearly the same so you could basically overclock it to a 2900XT. 2900XT's give 8800GTS 640 and sometimes GTX's a run for the money. The latest drivers have helped the performance dramatically. In addition, the card is built on the 55nm process which means it is much more energy efficient than the 2900XT. So theoretically, you could OC past a 2900XT and get similar performance. The GT would be a good match for the 8800GTS 320MB, and if the price is $150, then it's $100 cheaper as well!There is also one thing I'll admit to: I like to earn points for F@H. Nvidia has no support for that and ATI does on the last-gen cards. That is why I go ATI, mostly.(yes I'm a bit obsessed, that's why I got a PS3 as well)
#212
Guest_lil_danger
Guest_lil_danger
-
- Guest
Posted 24 September 2007 - 12:31 PM
i think thta the nvidia graphics card are alot better and now they have the 1st direct X 10 card but they are around the same great standerd
#213
Guest_Superlanboy182
Guest_Superlanboy182
-
- Guest
Posted 25 September 2007 - 07:20 AM
Well the GPU battle seems to go in cycles. Right now, NVIDIA is the way to go but it wasnt too long ago ATI had the advantage.
#214
Guest_tekturowe
Guest_tekturowe
-
- Guest
Posted 27 September 2007 - 07:33 PM
Nvidia has the upperhand right now, they're high end cards beat ATI's high end cards. Personally, I don't think it has anything to do with games being made specifically for Nvidia. I just think ATI's in a rut. ATI had the better cards for awhile, now Nvidia does.
#215
Guest_lqdmetal
Guest_lqdmetal
-
- Guest
Posted 05 November 2007 - 09:28 AM
which GFXCard is better in hardcore gaming???ATIorNvidia???
#216
Guest_Vestige
Guest_Vestige
-
- Guest
Posted 05 November 2007 - 11:01 AM
i personally prefer NVIDIA. i have an NVIDIA GeForce 7600 in my computer and love it.
#217
Guest_KaMaKaZe
Guest_KaMaKaZe
-
- Guest
Posted 05 November 2007 - 01:28 PM
Go the Nvidia! - Im currently organising finance for a system with 2x 8800 Ultra's (the Superclocked ones 
) i find that ATI has problems with user interface and the catalyst control centre is slow and sucky. then again the new nvidia tool panel for Win XP for "7 series" is prety lame too 
hopefuly this isnt a problem with the 8800's and DX10 / Vista and Ntune!I once had an MX440 - 64 meg running at double the frequency on halo 1 for pc 
that was... interesting 
i still have the burns on my knuckles! but hey, it worked alright once overclocked!
) i find that ATI has problems with user interface and the catalyst control centre is slow and sucky. then again the new nvidia tool panel for Win XP for "7 series" is prety lame too hopefuly this isnt a problem with the 8800's and DX10 / Vista and Ntune!I once had an MX440 - 64 meg running at double the frequency on halo 1 for pc that was... interesting i still have the burns on my knuckles! but hey, it worked alright once overclocked!
#218
Guest_hann00
Guest_hann00
-
- Guest
Posted 05 November 2007 - 07:29 PM
I have a Radeon 1960Pro. I really love it (maybe I'm a ATI FAN) but i dont like the way NVIDIA works.
#219
Guest_Dark Orpheus
Guest_Dark Orpheus
-
- Guest
Posted 07 November 2007 - 06:37 AM
Right now it seems (unfortunately because I like ATI) the nvidea 8800 is the best card on the market for the majority of games. As for the catalyst control center problems, those are easily solved by getting ati traytools and removing the control center completly (even easier if you get the omega drivers, they'll do it for you).
#220
Guest_Animonster
Guest_Animonster
-
- Guest
Posted 07 November 2007 - 07:27 AM
i think you should go for nvidia. if you are really looking for a gaming pc go and look at a widow. widow pcs are awsome, but they are pretty expencive...
#221
Guest_A Love Supreme
Guest_A Love Supreme
-
- Guest
Posted 07 November 2007 - 11:49 AM
Right now the Nvidia 8800GTX has the crown, although we don't know how long it will have this title.The Nvidia 8800 GT is the best bang-for-your buck card. It nearly beats the GTX yet, two of them put in Sli will only cost a little more than one GTX. r
#222
Guest_bonesquat
Guest_bonesquat
-
- Guest
Posted 08 November 2007 - 02:45 AM
Nvidia seems to be doing the best now. ATi is really struggling in the GPU department. High power consumption, worse bang for your buck except in my case (2900 pro 512mb at XT speeds for $270). Nvidia has the 8800GT right now which is nearly as fast as an 8800GTX. Definitley the best thign you can buy now for graphics. Nvidia I'll have to say.
#223
Guest_freak_gamer
Guest_freak_gamer
-
- Guest
Posted 12 November 2007 - 08:39 AM
i recommend Nvidia if u are going for hardcore gaming... Nvidia has higher standard and better resolution....
#224
Guest_kiekun
Guest_kiekun
-
- Guest
Posted 12 November 2007 - 09:05 AM
i'd like Nvidia better because it support most of the games found on the market today, but technically speaking, ati is slow in making cards that supports lastest technology such as DX10 support,and though nvidia I think has 120 streaming processing units as of ati has 320, theoretically it should perform better, but according to the gaming reviews out there, nvidia is still the king of the hill. maybe I think it is just a software issue to address such problems.
#225
Guest_MrIbanez
Guest_MrIbanez
-
- Guest
Posted 13 November 2007 - 03:26 AM
I use an ATI X1600 Mobility on my laptop, which is about a year old right now. It can keep up with most games, but I do have to admit that benchmarks prove that Nvidia takes the lead right now.I'm personally a fan for ATI, but I have to admit that right now is just not the time for ATI graphics cards if you really are looking for the best graphics possible.
