Still thinking in buying nVidia hardware for HL2? Errr...read.

P

Pr()ZaC

Guest
http://www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_desktop/001.htm

Gamers Depot:
I don’t know how anyone could objectively look at the performance we’ve seen in these benchmarks and conclude that a 5900 Ultra is a smarter buying decision than a 9800 Pro – even the 128MB 9800 Pro (as used in the tests here) trumps the lofty 256MB 5900 Ultra. If you’re still “stuck in the past” and think that ATI is plagued with driver issues, than go ahead and keep your head stuck in the sand like an ostrich, buy a 5900 Ultra and then start crying when your pals are smoking your ass in games like Half Life 2 and Halo because they’re running ATI hardware.



And ATi's Patti Mikula, Public Relations Manger, Desktop Products wrote:

"The R300 architecture was built from the ground up for performance in DirectX 9. DX9 instructions map naturally to our hardware, without any tweaking or driver optimizations. This is important, because the vast majority of games out there won't have the benefit of driver optimizations from anyone (unlike certain game benchmarks), because no-one has the engineering resources to spare. Whether you look at brute force (our 8 pipes versus the competitor's 4) or elegance (we can run many shader operations in parallel that our competitor can't) we have a fundamental advantage with our hardware. With more and more DirectX 9 games coming onto the market, the battle will be all about who can run shaders faster and more efficiently. And our shader performance is hugely better. ShaderMark and other tests show shader performance that is three to six times better on ATI's hardware than Nvidia's. This architectural advantage is evident in shipping games like Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness. You will also see this in Half-Life 2 and every DX9 game coming out before the holiday season."



And John Carmack (Doom3)

"Yes. NV30 class hardware can run the ARB2 path that uses ARB_fragment_program, but it is very slow, which is why I have a separate NV30 back end that uses NV_fragment_program to specify most of the operations as 12 or 16 bit instead of 32 bit."
Click to expand...
 
yes there have been a few reviews looking at the dx9 features of the cards, and every one agrees that ati kills nvidia in that area (not to mention almost everything else), but it won't convince the fan boys, if anything it will only affect those that, "wait and see" whats the best.
 
i used nvidia geforce 3 ti200 for a year faithfully but ati is just currently better...just as 3dfx was with their voodoo cards 4-5 years back
 
lol actually the size of the fx5900 ultra, totally reminded me of voodoo cards 5 or 6 was....those cards were immense!1!!

Anyhoo i've "always" used nvidia, but they're just getting too expensive and too far behind ATI
 
Im going with ati 8500le probably, might get 9500np if i can afford it.
 
I joined the gfx card market late, with a GeForce3ti being my first graphics card ever, got it last July)

Heard about HL2, and decided to upgrade, ATI kicked NVidia out of the market IMO. Now I am the owner of a Radeon 9800 np
 
remember voodoo 5? it had its own power supply... wth was up wit that?
 
I have always gone with NVidia for my video cards, but since the 9800, I just have to go with ATI. I have always liked the features I've gotten with Nvidia drivers, but those features can't outweigh the performance difference. (and ATI may have really good driver features now too). Anyways, I can't wait to get my hands on my 9800 I'm getting. It'll be badass!
 
That's why I don't buy a graphics card solely for Half-Life 2.

And most of you are gullable fools if you actually base your decision based on the original post... as the stuff quoted is very biased statements.
 
Gabe Newell has already confirmed that the relative (DX9) performances of the latest Nvidia and Ati cards in HL2 are similar to those cropping up in some comparative hardware reviews.
Just one of the reasons why I've just switched to a Radeon 9800 Pro after years of using Nvidia products (virtually problem-free, I should add).
 
Originally posted by Lifthz
That's why I don't buy a graphics card solely for Half-Life 2.

And most of you are gullable fools if you actually base your decision based on the original post... as the stuff quoted is very biased statements.
Click to expand...

well, they tested tomb raider angel of crappy games, and halo, both of which use DX9, and we see the radeon 9800 pro beat the 5900, and they contacted john carmack and he said that the 5900 sucks with pixel shader 2.0, and another person has contacted gabe newell and he said they were getting the same sort of results that are seen in tomb raider....

so, does it not look like 9800 pro is a better choice for new games which are coming out using dx9?
 
ATI, Nvidia, they both produce excellent video cards. ATI's drivers have gotten alot better, I've had no problems with my ATI Radeon 9700 Pro, and my Geforce 4 ti4600 runs problem free also. Damn rivalries :cheese:
 
i still want a gabe newell doll wearing an ATI shirt

(its all in my profile) ati. i love you.
 
I'm still buying a Nvidia card. I trust Nvidia to support their cards with GOOD drivers for ALLLOOONG time. I don't trust ATi at all.
 
Originally posted by Jedi_2
lol this is a funny review. First and formost you can't get real results from using two games, one is a beta the other is a horribly buggy game then test the hardware these are newbie reviewers. Look at www.3dguru.com and http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030512/index.html to find out the real results or firingsquad.com yeah I believe all those sites to that one.
Click to expand...

they're looking for DX9 results, they're not doing an overall review of the cards, so two games using DX9 will have to do.

they're looking at future performance with DX9 games, the other reviews you linked to are DX8.1 games, other than 3dmark03 (which only has one DX9 test anyways....) so really these dx9 reviews are the best look at future performance.
 
I just don't see what 5900 has to offer over 9800 today. Apart from a few more FPS in some DirectX 8 games, I don't really see a benefit to owning a 5900.

The whole ATi driver thing is just not even worth going over nowadays, their drivers have been fine for a while... but each to their own :)
 
Thing is, my 9800pro cost me 380$, and I get better results than the 5900ultra reviewed on tomshardware, a card that costs quite a bit more. Besides, Gabe himself said that the new radeons preform better than the fx cards.
 
Originally posted by Joneleth
I'm still buying a Nvidia card. I trust Nvidia to support their cards with GOOD drivers for ALLLOOONG time. I don't trust ATi at all.
Click to expand...

Fool of the month right here people!
 
yes we all know that Gabe Newell was paid off by ATI. This has been spoofed by many a website.First and Formost Gamespy.com reviewed both of those graphics cards and the 5900 ultra won. Also, they did a special bechmark on Doom3 (which is second to HL2 as the DX9 game) and the Nvidia card got on high with aa on and all high settings at 640x480 65fps the Radeon 10fps in fact all across the board the radeon was getting 10fps (driver probelm not ready for Doom 3 yet).Look, both companies are good and usually Nvidia makes better drivers, this is why I stick with them. Will HL2 own with a radeon yes with a Nvidia yes it DOESN'T MATTER!
 
"Yes. NV30 class hardware can run the ARB2 path that uses ARB_fragment_program, but it is very slow, which is why I have a separate NV30 back end that uses NV_fragment_program to specify most of the operations as 12 or 16 bit instead of 32 bit."

That means when Doom III comes out it will look better on a R3x0. Why nvidia doesnt have FP24 i still dont know. :cheers: looking good for ati users though. Had they used Fp32 on nvidia for doom3 it would be ultra slow but now they are lowering the card down just so it can be a faster. pathetic.
 
I ordered my AIW 9800 Pro Wednesday and got it today (friday) and put it in my comp hooked my 350w PS up to it turned my comp on and got nothing but green and blue lines all over my screen and the bios letters were all messed up. Sigh, they sent me a f00ked up card :\ . Now i have to RMA the damn thing back and wait another week or two for a new one. /me cries!
 
i'll always buy nvidia cards till i see concrete proof ATI can make a card that works all around.

even on the 9800/latest catalyst drivers i've had mixed results. some things ran great and other things were troubled. i've seen graphics bugs when running 3d apps that don't happen on nvidia cards. despite all the strides ati has made in becoming competitive, nvidia just has more mature, more stable drivers.

5900 prolly doesn't have as impressive hardware as the 9800. probably doesn't prove itself as well in certain games and synthetic benchmarks. but i know an nvidia card will work, whereas an ati card may or may not.

and they're both fast. i don't see how anyone could be disappointed with the speed of either the 5900 or 9800. its all very powerful hardware.
 
Originally posted by Jedi_2
yes we all know that Gabe Newell was paid off by ATI. This has been spoofed by many a website.First and Formost Gamespy.com reviewed both of those graphics cards and the 5900 ultra won. Also, they did a special bechmark on Doom3 (which is second to HL2 as the DX9 game) and the Nvidia card got on high with aa on and all high settings at 640x480 65fps the Radeon 10fps in fact all across the board the radeon was getting 10fps (driver probelm not ready for Doom 3 yet).Look, both companies are good and usually Nvidia makes better drivers, this is why I stick with them. Will HL2 own with a radeon yes with a Nvidia yes it DOESN'T MATTER!
Click to expand...


Thats such a crock of shit.........

Your just another nvidia fanboy who is pissed that ATI has been making better hardware for the past 2 years....
 
The reason why Gabe picked ATI instead of Nvidia is because ATI performes better on HL2 , its a FACT, not because ATI paid him. Should we even mention Pixel Shader 2.0 performance ? It is the other way around with Nvidia , Nvidia paid John carmack. Face it the entire GFX line was built around that game. Im pretty sure Carmack isnt impressed with the gfx either.
 
yes, w00t w00t! for us 9800 Pro users

anybody who sticks by the ATI drivers are bad argument needs to catch up, just as ATI did a while ago

there are no more problems with their drivers now as their are with the nvidia cards, especially considering since ATI has employed old 3dfx engineers that nvidia fired when they acquired the company :devil:
 
Thats such a crock of shit.........

Your just another nvidia fanboy who is pissed that ATI has been making better hardware for the past 2 years....
Click to expand...

No it's not. Look on hardware match-ups It's not that hard. Sure you can keep going by what gabe and an ATI CEO has said. But when it comes down to the crunch the 9800 series has been so far over glorified by bunches of tight ass ATI fanboys it's crazy, as you can see in all the tests.

As far as the drivers go. ATI have improved quite a bit. Although I bought a 9800 3 weeks ago and have been disappointed with driver problems since then its not too bad. But in all honesty who gives a f**k if one of the cards out performs the other by a mere handfull of frames in a test just buy what you feel you can afford and trust. This ATI versus NVIDIA war is stupid both cards are great and bloody fast. Just remember IT"S ALL ABOUT THE GAMES PEOPLE!!!!!!! :cheers:
 
yeah, well, according to this pixel shader 2.0 information coming from John Carmack, Gabe Newell, and at least 2 (could be 3) articles/benches, it's not a handful of frames, it's nvidia really letting down on the thing

and i wouldn't trust ANY tests or benches with Nvidia in them, because apparently there are "optimizations" in these new drivers they just came out with, according to what tom's hardware found anyway

and how the hell do you equate Gabe Newell to the ATI CEO? he has no biased opinion either way in this, he's stating what they've seen in their offices with the pixel shader 2.0 stuff in HL2, and it coincides in what info has been coming out recently: the 5900 is blowing it when it comes to the pixel shader 2.0
 
yeah, well, according to this pixel shader 2.0 information coming from John Carmack, Gabe Newell, and at least 2 (could be 3) articles/benches, it's not a handful of frames, it's nvidia really letting down on the thing
Click to expand...

True but thats just one of many aspects of a video card....game bench marks (because after all you cant play a pixel shader 2.0 but you can play a game) the FX 5900 is faster. This is also the case for 3d mark 2003.

EDIT: hmmm something tells me your an ATI fanboy Tork....
 
... we are talking ingame here... at least John Carmack and Gabe Newell are, and the TROAD and HALO benches are ingame, in engine benchmarks, they aren't like 3dmark2003
 
Originally posted by =Coy0te=
True but thats just one of many aspects of a video card....game bench marks (because after all you cant play a pixel shader 2.0 but you can play a game) the FX 5900 is faster. This is also the case for 3d mark 2003.
Click to expand...


that makes no sense .....and is nothing but weasling around the issue.

yes you can play ps2.0...... in the games that use it.

There are significant differances in performance........ id rather have 70fps than 40.

will it make a big differance in gameplay, no....but im not going to spend MORE money on inferior hardware

The fx 5900 is slighty faster in some DX8 games...but is significantly slower in DX9.....and since people are not buying new hardware to play yesterdays games......IT DOES MATTER.

edit: for the record. i am not a fanboy.
 
Yea, but ATI's card's have better Image Quality. I mean, I had an option of either gettin a Radeon 9800 PRO, or FX 5900 Ultra. I went with the Radeon 9800 Pro because I've done my homework on this stuff, and it comes out ATI does have the upper hand. Image Quality, technology, etc. etc. I just think in general, that the GF FX line of cards are just..well...crap. :dozey:
 
and how the hell do you equate Gabe Newell to the ATI CEO? he has no biased opinion either way in this, he's stating what they've seen in their offices with the pixel shader 2.0 stuff in HL2, and it coincides in what info has been coming out recently: the 5900 is blowing it when it comes to the pixel shader 2.0
Click to expand...

For starters they are 2 different people. (there were people commenting on what some ATI guy said). Did I say gabe was biased? no I didnt... I was saying sure he can say that ATI are great at the moment but when it comes to games performance NVIDIA are still slightly faster ( and bucketloads more expensive)
 
faster in directx 8 games, and only by a small margin

all evidence in dx 9 points to ATI taking the lead by quite a bit

you used Gabe in the same context as the ATI ceo, therefore implying that you equated them in that post
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Who's left or joined Valve in recent history
Replies
4
Views
32K
MFL
MFL
-smash-
Using Unity at Valve - Vision Summit 2016
Replies
5
Views
6K
Ennui
Ennui
Omnomnick
Valve Announces Source 2 + Steam Link [GDC 2015]
2
Replies
67
Views
37K
Skyace65
S
-smash-
Valve and The Road to GDC 2015
Replies
10
Views
44K
Engineer123
E
Omnomnick
Steam Announcement #2: Steam Machines
Replies
38
Views
9K
Eejit
Eejit
Back
Top