NVIDIA and ATI

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

beserkfury15

Member
Jun 25, 2003
91
0
0
It's not technically that one driver is better than the other. Trying not to get in the ATI vs. NVIDIA fight here, I can see that the nvidia drivers are more user friendly. For ATI drivers, one would at many times install fixes and patches to make the game run. I have a gf4mx440, and my friend has a radeon 9700pro. We run pretty much the same games, except he usually encounters alot more problems than me. This is with a freshly reformated computer too. When he can run his games, his card blows mine right out of the water, but for compatibility, I would say my mine was better. This is with the latest drivers from both company.
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
Congrats BenSkywalker, you've reduced yourself from knowlegeable bias to myopic fanboi...either that or the vast majority of reviewers and users are liars, and your experience with your "card" is the norm.

I say that latter is much closer to the truth, but not quite it. Obviously you tollerate if not embrace bugs that degrade the level of the products you buy. Why don't you tell me which of the bugs I've listed don't exist? Since I'm the one being a "myopic fanboi" here, why don't you try that? Tell me, which driver issue I've brought up is not a point of fact?

not a single one a deal breaker and that includes every single driver set from the set on the CD that launched with the AIW 9700 right up to Cat 3.5, but it sure seems to me you could use a little honest analysis of your own.

Breaking the most popular on line game in the world is OK by your standards? I'm the one that needs honest analysis....?

Get over it, ATI produced a damn fine card in the r300

Overall I'd say it was very good yes. They screwed up on the power filtering circuitry on their boards(a sin that many nV OEMs also have) and they have a rather poor AF implementation in terms of IQ- although they also have an exceptional AA implementation to go along with it(though they need a SSAA option to deal with legacy titles that need it).

the Catalyst drivers are very good

I wasted my money listening to that BS. They are very good by your standards, certainly not in absolute terms.

The fact that ATI's software engineers try to help an idividual user, and regularly post at sights like Rage3D( and get flamed incessantly I might add) is proof to me that they are commited to their product.

Most single A minor league baseball players have more dedication then their big league counterparts. Doesn't make them any better at it. If you think ATi themselves are truly commited and isn't just their current angle, why did they increase the time between new cores? If you honestly believe that any international corporation is concerned with their customers beyond how it helps them in the long run you are fooling yourself. Some of their employees certainly do care, maybe even a few of their shareholders do.

They may not be as great in every situation with every configuration as some folks make them out to be (drivers) but they're most certainly not as bad as you make them out to be.

Hard lock bugs in the most popular on line game in the world. One title that is in the top 50 PC games of all time on GR had massive image corruption for nearly a year with their drivers(maybe still does, I'm not buying another board to test it again). I buy four to five new games a month on average, about half of them are PC games on average(though it fluctuates, this month I bought six PC games and only one for my consoles). I expect every game I buy to work with my vid card period. Are you saying that is too much to ask? I expect that my vid card drivers will never hard lock my system. Are you saying that is too much to ask? I expect my vid card not to have massive image corruption in any game I play due to drivers. Is that too much to ask?

You seem to be saying it is. There are numerous people in this thread claiming that ATi's drivers are as good as nVidia's, I find that rather laughable. I just helped one of my friends from work build himself a new rig(his first build). I told him about the R9700 and how fast it was and relatively speaking cheap it was. He asked me to paraphrase- "Didn't you have a Radeon that you couldn't get working right?", when I confirmed this he decided if I couldn't get it working properly there was no way he was going to buy one. Good drivers work, period. Good drivers don't send people scrambling to search on line boards and post in forums about why their favorite games won't work. Good drivers don't cause people to to say things like "why are you playing that game, it's old/not good/you have other games". Good drivers don't come with a full page of serious bugs that are fixed with every revision. A new nVidia driver release hits and people ask about performance increase and that's pretty much it. A new driver release from ATi hits and you have people asking about if bug x was fixed, or wanting to see the bug fix list.

I have a lengthy history here that people can search through if they are so inclined. Drivers being solid without exception have been a long standing stance of mine that I have held and there is certainly no way in he!l that is going to change because a bunch of rabid loyalists want to defend the card they decided to buy. You want to state why I'm overreacting either explain which of the particular issues I've brought up are not valid or explain some reproduceable issues from nVidia that are comparable.
 

rbV5

Lifer
Dec 10, 2000
12,632
0
0
Why don't you tell me which of the bugs I've listed don't exist?
Because I have no personal experience with them obviously. I don't play Sacrafice, CS and I'm not sure which games are Lithtech engine games, apparently none of mine since none of the games I play suffer from input latency issues.

I can comment on my experiences with the games I play, and on the other features of the cards I actually use, and I do. I have read your posts over the years, and I have noted your past knowlegeable but biased style. You do seem to have an advanced handle on the complexities of graphics hardware, and I've learned from your posts most certainly. I am not a hardcore gamer however, and definately don't buy numerous games each month, but I do play alot of the demos, and pick the games I really like to actually purchase. I am a hardcore enthusiast however, and likely use more of the advanced multimedia features of the cards than your average user. I use custom timings, multiple displays, capture/edit analog and digital video. I edit digital photographs and dabble in 3D animation and graphic arts. I also have several ATI cards, all of them VIVO or AIW class cards, and have and am using them on VIA, Ali Magic and Nvidia chipset based boards. I have also assembled several rigs over the last couple years using various cards. The fact is, when I say the ATI's drivers are good, its based on that experience and that alone.

Say what you want, but the vast majority of users share my same experience despite what you claim. I don't have to sit here and blast nvidia to make my point either. Fact is, I own a couple ASUS nforce2 boards that I like despite having some minor issues, and I should get my ti4200 any day now for my budget gamer rig...I hope it will be as trouble free to set up as my excellent ATI boards have been.

Bottom line, My ATI cards are working very well. I can't think of a negative issue I'm dealing with right now. I'm using Cat 3.5 drivers and XP SP1. Currently have Morrowind, Offroad from Rage Software, UT, UT2003, Q3a, WolfET, MOHAA and MotoGP installed and working fine....honestly


 

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
2,980
126
LOL, well that settles it, if they work on BFGs hardware and games, AND he has "extensive" experience", they MUST be good..........er, sure.
From where I'm sitting they work just fine. I tend to have a habit of speaking from personal experiences wherever possible and if that offends you then too bad.

Had to draw the line on "the problem is your Epox 8KHA+ motherboard"
Is that the same motherboard that is known to not adhere to the AGP spec?

Rolling wavey lines through my desktop, that I didn't have with the GF4 it replaced.
Hardware faults != driver problems. Why didn't you just RMA the thing? Faulty hardware happens to the best of them.

On UT, I had corrupted textures as often as not on maps like "Face" with the 9700pro.
I have never had any problems with UT2003 on my 9700 Pro on all drivers ranging from 2.2 to 3.5.

Yep, nothing to see here. ATI works flawlessly, with any hardware, on any game. LOL
Nobody ever said that so cut the strawman crap. I said that ATi's drivers work extremely well and from my personal testing they're at least as good as nVidia's. Also I don't appear to be the only one who thinks so either.

With every driver release we have ATi posting a full page of bugs that they have fixed, some of them full system hard lock bugs,
Unlike nVidia who don't even bother posting release notes?

despite the ATi advocates stating that the driver release was 'bug free'.
Likewise, why is nVidia leaking betas when each of their driver releases are "bug free"? And don't even try to pretend that the WHQL drivers (often months apart, unlike ATi's 4-6 week cycle) are even remotely bug-free, not after all of the IQ degradation that reviewers themselves (who are usually pretty slow on such things) picked up.
 

BoomAM

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2001
4,546
0
0
Just to add to the arguement. Ive never had an mouse latency issues in any litetech engine game i own. Those include AvP2 and NOLF2. With my 9700pro, with cats 2.2 to 3.5.
But, i had very bad mouse latency issues with my GF3. In DeusEx, and GTA3, and ProjectIGI. And that was with the latest drivers at the time. v30.41

Overall I'd say it was very good yes. They screwed up on the power filtering circuitry on their boards(a sin that many nV OEMs also have) and they have a rather poor AF implementation in terms of IQ- although they also have an exceptional AA implementation to go along with it(though they need a SSAA option to deal with legacy titles that need it)
Actually the power problems with the 9700pro cards were with revision 1 & 1.3, but less than a month after the problems became apparent, ATI released a revision 3.0, which fixed the power problem, got rid of the coldboot error on older motherboards, and 90% of the rolling lines instances. Which i am happy to say, i have had none of the above, and the 9700pro wasnt even ment to work propely with a KT7A. So i`d say thats pretty fast error fixing.

The AF implementation on ATI cards has equal to, if not better IQ than nvidia cards. You dont notice the textures being AF`ed at certain angles, ATI researched this, and decied not to waste VPU processing time doing something that people wont notice anyway. The only way you`d notice them surfaces at angles not being AF`ed is if you had you head tilted perminently. Have a look at the reviews that compare nvidia cards to ATI ones in 3D IQ. almost all of them praise ATI for their IQ, and notice the inferiorioty of nvidias IQ.
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
Because I have no personal experience with them obviously. I don't play Sacrafice, CS and I'm not sure which games are Lithtech engine games, apparently none of mine since none of the games I play suffer from input latency issues.

The older Lithtech games that I have that have problems are NOLF, AvP and KPC. AvP2 and NOLF2 are based on the newer Lithtech builds and don't suffer from such issues. The Sac issue is massive Z fighting artifacts throughout the game. They were present in launch drivers and were still there as of the 3.2 release at least. Everyone knows about Coutnerstrike.

I have read your posts over the years, and I have noted your past knowlegeable but biased style.

My bias is based on what I want, and I will gladly buy the product that offers it best no matter who makes it. Drivers are paramount and always have been for me. Feature support is another major issue, but it is fairly a wash as of this point between the big two. Texture filtering is also a major concern of mine, with AA being relatively non important(it's nice, but it isn't close to the level of importance I place on the others).

I am not a hardcore gamer however, and definately don't buy numerous games each month, but I do play alot of the demos, and pick the games I really like to actually purchase.

I'll say this, I don't know of a single person who buys as many games as I do that thinks ATi has good drivers.

I have also assembled several rigs over the last couple years using various cards. The fact is, when I say the ATI's drivers are good, its based on that experience and that alone.

You ever seen me criticize ATi's VIVO capabilities? I don't bash a company because they are that company. When a gamer comes looking for a card and hears that ATi's drivers are equal to that of nVidia's then I certainly take exception. I was lead to believe the same thing and was extremely irrate when I had to actually use the product.

Say what you want, but the vast majority of users share my same experience despite what you claim.

Most PC users seem to think the Intel i810 graphics are fine. You sure you want to go that route?

Currently have Morrowind, Offroad from Rage Software, UT, UT2003, Q3a, WolfET, MOHAA and MotoGP installed and working fine....honestly

I don't doubt any of that. The titles you list are mainly high profile titles, shouldn't be any surprise that those work(although ATi did have the CS issue and also problems with Freelancer when it came out also but I digress). It's when you pick up the game that isn't the kind that is used by the tech sites or for promotional reasons that you start having a greater chance of running in to problems.

BFG-

Unlike nVidia who don't even bother posting release notes?

For what exactly? Are they faster?

Likewise, why is nVidia leaking betas when each of their driver releases are "bug free"?

Speed. The AF speed on the GF4 Ti line as a general example has gone up considerably in the last few months, although that pales in comparison to the massive performance boost the FX 5800 saw from newer drivers.

And don't even try to pretend that the WHQL drivers (often months apart, unlike ATi's 4-6 week cycle) are even remotely bug-free, not after all of the IQ degradation that reviewers themselves (who are usually pretty slow on such things) picked up.

Which IQ issues? The shader search/replace scripts that ATi and nVidia use? ATi had their 4-6 week cycle going when I was using a R300 core board and it wasn't close to fast enough. They had numerous serious bugs that needed to be fixed. I'm waiting to hear an example of nV's game impacting bugs.

Boom-

Just to add to the arguement. Ive never had an mouse latency issues in any litetech engine game i own. Those include AvP2 and NOLF2. With my 9700pro, with cats 2.2 to 3.5.

Older Lithtech games- NOLF and KPC in particular were unplayable.

But, i had very bad mouse latency issues with my GF3. In DeusEx, and GTA3, and ProjectIGI. And that was with the latest drivers at the time. v30.41

DeusEX had the same problem on ATi boards and also the Kyro2(that I had a chance to experience first hand). It only ran properly on 3dfx hardware for quite some time. GrandTheftAuto3 has the same problem with the R9500Pro with all the drivers I tried unless you patch the game and then do the workaround for it(lower your AGP aperture setting to the lowest possible), that is a game bug. I don't own ProjectIGI, didn't look appealing to me in the least. If I find it in a bargain bin somehwere I'll pick it up and test it out. Really want to see some of these examples played out.

The AF implementation on ATI cards has equal to, if not better IQ than nvidia cards.

No, it really isn't close.

You dont notice the textures being AF`ed at certain angles

Maybe you don't, I do.

Have a look at the reviews that compare nvidia cards to ATI ones in 3D IQ.

You mean reviews like Anand's where he can't even tell the difference between bilinear and trilinear? Most reviewers don't see too much properly. ATi's AF implementation besides having the obvious issues with improperly filtering angles also is too agressive with their LOD bias which actually increases texture aliasing instead of reducing it. The FX isn't perfect either, they drop the ball on certain angles(although not nearly as bad as ATi) with their adaptive filtering. The only board that I've seen that really does AF right is the GF4, unfortunately that is very slow in comparison. Between the FX and the R3X0 boards the FX offerings are noticeable superior in AF quality. The majority of reviewers harp on AA. I read one of the reviews someone posted a link to hear and they posted some screenshots from an AA comparison tool and using that alone judged the R3x0 boards to have superior IQ. Considering that AF impacts a significantly larger portion of screenspace then AA, you would think that at the very least they could cover the shortcomings with the various implementations. Whenever the majority of reviewers do look at AF IQ, they almost always look at LOD Bias. That makes about as much sense as running HD Tach to test your vid cards fill rate. We saw this with the R200 core boards and some reviewers praising ATi's disgustingly horrendous AF implementation on that board. Obviously the R3x0 is leaps and bounds above that, but you wouldn't know it by reading some reviewers comments about the R200 core boards AF. If the only thing you care about in terms of IQ is AA on recent titles then obviously the R3x0 boards come out ahead and comfortably at that.
 

BoomAM

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2001
4,546
0
0
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Older Lithtech games- NOLF and KPC in particular were unplayable.

DeusEX had the same problem on ATi boards and also the Kyro2(that I had a chance to experience first hand). It only ran properly on 3dfx hardware for quite some time. GrandTheftAuto3 has the same problem with the R9500Pro with all the drivers I tried unless you patch the game and then do the workaround for it(lower your AGP aperture setting to the lowest possible), that is a game bug. I don't own ProjectIGI, didn't look appealing to me in the least. If I find it in a bargain bin somehwere I'll pick it up and test it out. Really want to see some of these examples played out.

No, it really isn't close.

Maybe you don't, I do.

You mean reviews like Anand's where he can't even tell the difference between bilinear and trilinear? Most reviewers don't see too much properly. ATi's AF implementation besides having the obvious issues with improperly filtering angles also is too agressive with their LOD bias which actually increases texture aliasing instead of reducing it. The FX isn't perfect either, they drop the ball on certain angles(although not nearly as bad as ATi) with their adaptive filtering. The only board that I've seen that really does AF right is the GF4, unfortunately that is very slow in comparison. Between the FX and the R3X0 boards the FX offerings are noticeable superior in AF quality. The majority of reviewers harp on AA. I read one of the reviews someone posted a link to hear and they posted some screenshots from an AA comparison tool and using that alone judged the R3x0 boards to have superior IQ. Considering that AF impacts a significantly larger portion of screenspace then AA, you would think that at the very least they could cover the shortcomings with the various implementations. Whenever the majority of reviewers do look at AF IQ, they almost always look at LOD Bias. That makes about as much sense as running HD Tach to test your vid cards fill rate. We saw this with the R200 core boards and some reviewers praising ATi's disgustingly horrendous AF implementation on that board. Obviously the R3x0 is leaps and bounds above that, but you wouldn't know it by reading some reviewers comments about the R200 core boards AF. If the only thing you care about in terms of IQ is AA on recent titles then obviously the R3x0 boards come out ahead and comfortably at that.
I also had the problem with AvP 1 come to think of it.

I havnt had the problem with my 9700pro in Deus Ex, and my cousin didnt have it with his rage128. Same with GTA3. bty, you might like Project IGI, but not IGI2, it sucks.

I`ll think you find, if you are honest with outself, that nvidias image quality in 2d and 3d doesnt compare to ATIs. And i very much doubt that you would notice, try being honest rarther than slamming something that is so obviously superior in IQ.
You seem to be one of those people who complains when one company makes it that their product doesnt draw something, but still keeps the image quality(ie, ATI and their AF), but then praises another for doing something similar (ie, nvidia and ultra shadow)
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
I havnt had the problem with my 9700pro in Deus Ex, and my cousin didnt have it with his rage128. Same with GTA3. bty, you might like Project IGI, but not IGI2, it sucks.

Try loading up DeusEX and old Dets and run the game with the latest patch. GTA3 issue is a documented bug that is described on Rockstar's tech support section for the game. If I see IGI going for a good deal I'll grab it.

I`ll think you find, if you are honest with outself, that nvidias image quality in 2d and 3d doesnt compare to ATIs.

This discussion was about drivers, but the 2D quality on my Radeon9500Pro using the analog VGA out was significantly worse then any nVidia board I have ever used actually(or my circa 1998 ATi RagePro AIW, any 3dfx board I have had, and my Kyro2). I was one of the lucky 'rolling line' winners. Due to this I was forced to use the DVI adapter which gave me 2D quality clearly inferior to that of the Gainward nV board it was replacing(so much so that I got crap from my wife about it). Through the DVI adapter the IQ was at least significantly improved, still worse then my Herc GeForce, Gainward GF2, or BFG GF4 but better then my Herc Kyro2 or my ancient Diamond TNT1.

What I normally see is people that think IQ equals brightness/saturation and LOD bias setting with some AA thrown in. If the LOD bias is set very agressively, even too agressively, I regularly see people comment on how great the IQ looks. This includes the R200 which I have mentioned previously. It introduces significant artifacts, namely excessive texture aliasing, but it looks great in screenshots so it is deemed to have 'better' IQ. With the exception of AA, I have not seen anything to lead me to believe that ATi's 3D IQ is comparable to nV's. By default they use 'brighter' settings(introduces color bleeding which I guess a lot of people consider good), their LOD selection is too agressive, their AF is sub par. Their AA is exceptional which I have already mentioned multiple times in this thread. I am being completely honest on my end, why not break it down on your end and tell me how you see it as being superior? Are you comparing the 3D IQ of the R9700Pro against your GF3? That is akin to comparing a FX 5800 to a R9000. With the 5800 running 16x12x32x4x8 it is easily going to look better then the R9000 running 10x7x32x2x4 at comparable performance levels.

You seem to be one of those people who complains when one company makes it that their product doesnt draw something, but still keeps the image quality(ie, ATI and their AF), but then praises another for doing something similar (ie, nvidia and ultra shadow)

I care about the end visuals. ATi doesn't filter very clearly visible textures properly. If nV's US has the same issues I won't hesitate to point them out. Check my last post, I have already stated that in terms of IQ the FX line of boards are inferior to the NV2X line. If the rasterization technique doesn't impact the end visuals then it doesn't impact me and I don't care(actually, if they have the potential to impact me then it is an issue). If PVR came out with a TBR that was the best solution for my needs I wouldn't have a problem picking it up, despite that they don't draw anywhere near what all the other IHVs cards do.
 

BoomAM

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2001
4,546
0
0
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

This discussion was about drivers, but the 2D quality on my Radeon9500Pro using the analog VGA out was significantly worse then any nVidia board I have ever used actually(or my circa 1998 ATi RagePro AIW, any 3dfx board I have had, and my Kyro2). I was one of the lucky 'rolling line' winners. Due to this I was forced to use the DVI adapter which gave me 2D quality clearly inferior to that of the Gainward nV board it was replacing(so much so that I got crap from my wife about it). Through the DVI adapter the IQ was at least significantly improved, still worse then my Herc GeForce, Gainward GF2, or BFG GF4 but better then my Herc Kyro2 or my ancient Diamond TNT1.

What I normally see is people that think IQ equals brightness/saturation and LOD bias setting with some AA thrown in. If the LOD bias is set very agressively, even too agressively, I regularly see people comment on how great the IQ looks. This includes the R200 which I have mentioned previously. It introduces significant artifacts, namely excessive texture aliasing, but it looks great in screenshots so it is deemed to have 'better' IQ. With the exception of AA, I have not seen anything to lead me to believe that ATi's 3D IQ is comparable to nV's. By default they use 'brighter' settings(introduces color bleeding which I guess a lot of people consider good), their LOD selection is too agressive, their AF is sub par. Their AA is exceptional which I have already mentioned multiple times in this thread. I am being completely honest on my end, why not break it down on your end and tell me how you see it as being superior? Are you comparing the 3D IQ of the R9700Pro against your GF3? That is akin to comparing a FX 5800 to a R9000. With the 5800 running 16x12x32x4x8 it is easily going to look better then the R9000 running 10x7x32x2x4 at comparable performance levels.

I care about the end visuals. ATi doesn't filter very clearly visible textures properly. If nV's US has the same issues I won't hesitate to point them out. Check my last post, I have already stated that in terms of IQ the FX line of boards are inferior to the NV2X line. If the rasterization technique doesn't impact the end visuals then it doesn't impact me and I don't care(actually, if they have the potential to impact me then it is an issue). If PVR came out with a TBR that was the best solution for my needs I wouldn't have a problem picking it up, despite that they don't draw anywhere near what all the other IHVs cards do.
You must have got a dud 9500, cos the image quality should have blitzed all the cards you mentioned.
The IQ in AF is more than acceptable, and as far as im aware, the GF3 uses the same AF techniques as the latest nvidia cards, so it wouldnt be that bad of a comparison.
The fact is, that 90% of people cannot tell the difference between nvidias AF and ATIs, due to ATIs good output quality though, the ATIs appears better. Thats coming from what i see. Both are more than acceptable. Unless you play games zoomed in by 400% then you wont notice all the stuff you mentioned. And i highly doubt that you do play games like that. In most situations and unless you are looking for it, you wont notice that lack of AF at the angles that ATI cards dont do, you only notice the AF at regular angles, horizontal textures and vertical textures. And i refuse to belive that you are in that 10%.
 

nRollo

Banned
Jan 11, 2002
10,460
0
0
BFG:
From where I'm sitting they work just fine. I tend to have a habit of speaking from personal experiences wherever possible and if that offends you then too bad.
The only point of the post you are quoting is the poster I was replying to had said the drivers must be ok, because you say they are. You are knowledgeable, but your experiences are only useful in that they "prove" you have no issues with ATI compatibility. Many others do.

Is that the same motherboard that is known to not adhere to the AGP spec?
Err, yes, but that's not really relevant to this discussion because the way it's does not meet AGP 2.0 spec is that the slot is positioned too close to some tall capacitors. (so a card manufactured within spec might not fit if it had components too near the motherboard when the card was inserted) The R8500 fit fine, just didn't work at full clock speed.

Hardware faults != driver problems. Why didn't you just RMA the thing? Faulty hardware happens to the best of them.
I never said "Hardware faults != driver problems", I said I've never heard of this hardware fault on nVidia based boards, and I heard of it a LOT on ATI.

I have never had any problems with UT2003 on my 9700 Pro on all drivers ranging from 2.2 to 3.5
Me either, but you note I said "UT" not "UT2003", and same as I had on my MAXX, I has missing and corrupted textures in UT with the 9700Pro with some drivers/patch combinations.

Nobody ever said that so cut the strawman crap
Aaaaaaaa, Rogo has possessed BFG! I was parodying a common position these days, no offense intended.

Unlike nVidia who don't even bother posting release notes?
There driver updates are about speed, not "Giants won't run because the developers are on the take from nVidia".

BTW- I ran across another FX5800 review where the reviewer OCd it to Ultra speeds and has been running it that way for a month. So if I can, and all the reviews I've come across say the same, to me that's a fair indication the 5800s are pretty OCable.
More 5800 goodness, and check out the benches with latest drivers









 

nRollo

Banned
Jan 11, 2002
10,460
0
0
Have a look at the reviews that compare nvidia cards to ATI ones in 3D IQ. almost all of them praise ATI for their IQ, and notice the inferiorioty of nvidias IQ.
LOL After 7 months with the 9700Pro, and a few weeks with the 5800, I can't tell the difference. I'm not often zooming in on screenshots though....
 

bluemax

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2000
7,182
0
0
Originally posted by: Rollo
Have a look at the reviews that compare nvidia cards to ATI ones in 3D IQ. almost all of them praise ATI for their IQ, and notice the inferiorioty of nvidias IQ.
LOL After 7 months with the 9700Pro, and a few weeks with the 5800, I can't tell the difference. I'm not often zooming in on screenshots though....

That's the thing... unless you switch from one to the other almost instantanously, it's hard to see the difference in action. Mind you, if you play for a month on one and switch to the other, you'd likely also see the difference in what you're used to seeing....
 

nRollo

Banned
Jan 11, 2002
10,460
0
0
That's the thing... unless you switch from one to the other almost instantanously, it's hard to see the difference in action
I think you'd have to have them side by side on similar systems. In any case, the point was nVidia IQ isn't noticeably worse or better. I didn't regret going from a 9700Pro to a 5800, haven't noitced a lot of differences.
 

bluemax

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2000
7,182
0
0
Enough people have noticed the ATI image quality difference to say it exists. That's not to say nVidia's rendering quality is BAD.... far from it. It's like two kids getting 92% and 96% on a pop quiz that day...
 

bittersweet81

Senior member
Jul 25, 2001
298
0
0
My Radeon 9700 pro has crazy squares flashing all the time and wont run in 8x agp mode so I would have to choose nvidia cuz they dont' have the flashing square things and run in 8x agp

IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
You must have got a dud 9500, cos the image quality should have blitzed all the cards you mentioned.

In 2D? I haven't seen an ATi board that has 2D IQ equal to my Gainward nV based board(with ATi's in order to eliminate color bleeding you need to lower the color settings too much). Sure, they easily better the cheaply made BFG style boards, but so do well made nV based boards.

The IQ in AF is more than acceptable, and as far as im aware, the GF3 uses the same AF techniques as the latest nvidia cards, so it wouldnt be that bad of a comparison.

The nV2X boards utilize a very different technique for AF then the GFFX. The nV2X boards are the only ones that do proper AF that I am aware of to date in the consumer market.

The fact is, that 90% of people cannot tell the difference between nvidias AF and ATIs, due to ATIs good output quality though, the ATIs appears better.

I understand most people have very poor sight, don't calibrate their vid equiptment and don't know what they are looking at. There is a much larger varriance between well made nV based boards and poorly made nV based boards then their is between nV and ATi in terms of output quality. The only company I've seen with a clear edge, when comparing 2D quality amongst top tier vendors is Matrox when all are properly calibrated.

Unless you play games zoomed in by 400% then you wont notice all the stuff you mentioned.

Maybe you don't, I most certainly do.

In most situations and unless you are looking for it, you wont notice that lack of AF at the angles that ATI cards dont do, you only notice the AF at regular angles, horizontal textures and vertical textures. And i refuse to belive that you are in that 10%.

Refuse to believe reality if it makes you sleep better, that is entirely up to you. Your explenation on when you really notice AF, on horizontal and vertical textures is interesting as if a texture is perfectly horizontal or perfectly vertical there is no AF applied at all. I guess I understand where you are coming from now, if you can't tell when AF is even applied or not, then there is no use getting in a lengthy discussion of the finer points concerning 3D image quality. If you can't see it, all the power to you. I know there are a lot of people on this board that can't see the difference between ATi's quality and performance AF settings, Anand seems to be included in this based on his comments. Those people that don't notice mip banding I have a very hard time listening to when it comes to taking their input as valid to how I will see things. Perhaps when I age enough my eyes will be reduced down to the pitiful state of 20/20 and I won't be able to see it either, that way I could save money on vid card upgrades
 

rbV5

Lifer
Dec 10, 2000
12,632
0
0
In 2D? I haven't seen an ATi board that has 2D IQ equal to my Gainward nV based board
Excellent, I'll be getting my Gainward ti4200 thursday, I'll be building it around an ASUS NF2 platform like my AIW 9700, so I'm excited to put it through the paces. I'll be powering as my HTPC with it for some serious testing as well for a short time. I'll start with the latest Dets, any advice on any particular driver set to try out? or stick with the latest?
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
Excellent, I'll be getting my Gainward ti4200 thursday

Cool, haven't had a chance to test the GF4 Gainward yet(I actually traded my Radeon9500Pro for a BFG Ti4200, would not reccomend it), but I did build a rig with a Gainward GF3 Ti this weekend for one of my friends and it was easily comparable to the Gainward board I do have. I'd strongly adise taking a bit of time to calibrate the board, by default nV is a bit too high on the gamma(which requires you to adjust all the rest of the settings of course ).

I'll start with the latest Dets, any advice on any particular driver set to try out? or stick with the latest?

The 44.03s would be my reccomendation, the latest official drivers(the newer builds floating around are likely fine too, but I have heard nothing about a big performance boost so don't see a need for them).
 

Mem

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
21,476
13
81
I'll start with the latest Dets, any advice on any particular driver set to try out? or stick with the latest?

The 44.03 are a good place to start and have excellent image quality,I`m doing the opposite of you rbV5,I`ve just ordered a 9700NP to replace my trusty Leadtek GF2 TI.


It`ll be interesting to see how games and image quality are between the two .

 

rbV5

Lifer
Dec 10, 2000
12,632
0
0
I'd strongly adise taking a bit of time to calibrate the board, by default nV is a bit too high on the gamma(which requires you to adjust all the rest of the settings of course ).
Yea, I'll be taking my time, its the first NV board I'll actually get to keep around I've built a couple rigs with GF4 cards this year, but they went out the door the same day they were done. I'm extremely busy this time of year, so its going to take a little time.
I`m doing the opposite of you rbV5,I`ve just ordered a 9700NP to replace my trusty Leadtek GF2 TI.
Wow, I didn't think you'd ever part with that card. I'm building this one for my daughter for her 4.0 GPA this year <--proud Dad
 

Mem

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
21,476
13
81
Wow, I didn't think you'd ever part with that card. I'm building this one for my daughter for her 4.0 GPA this year <--proud Dad

Hehe well it`s going in my old backup PC(has a Sparkle GF2 MX at the moment) so I`ll still have it .I just hope ATi drivers live up to my Nvidia driver standard,I`ll try anything once being I`m an open minded guy,besides the price on the 9700NP is such great value so was hard to pass up and also Insane3D has been bugging me to buy one .

 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,824
21,601
146
Originally posted by: oldfart
Is it true that newer Dets (4x.xx) disable DVD playback?
I've heard that as well but I'm using the 44.03's on my 75MRN-L with G4MX IGP and My P4PE/L with ti4200 and the DVD playback on both systems is smooth and stable.
 

Extrarius

Senior member
Jul 8, 2001
259
0
0
Originally posted by:[...]it's a fact that more people still have issues with ATI drivers than nvidia.. so just because you don't have any problems with them.. doesn't mean others don't...[...]
I wonder why it is that I often see(in forums such as this one) people saying "I'm having problems with Detonator vX.Y" and the first response is usually "vX.Y is really buggy, use vA.B instead". Of course, I'm not talking about offical bugs, but ACTUAL problems people have. Unless its really a big conspiracy run by ATI to make NVidia look bad...

I've owned a Radeon 8500 since it came out, and for the first few versions of the drivers I had a few problems with it (but I'm not even sure it was the drivers because my system was somewhat unstable before I got it and reformatting kept the problems away for a while), and since the 3rd driver for it, I've only had 1 driver release that caused a problem and it was fixed by going to the previous drivers. Since then, new drivers have been released and they cause no problems either.
I've never had any problems with input latency or CounterStrike at all.

NVidia really makes me wonder. How can you possibly get a 15%+ speed increase every single release? Eventually, you would run out of optimizations until the CPU etc changed drastically, which hasn't happened for a long time really.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |