Nvidia causes twice as many crashes as ATI/AMD?

[VirtualLarry]

link

"So when they put out the information as part of their lawsuit that NVIDIA was more than twice as likely as AMD to create a crash, it felt really good ? based on all the work we had done and engineering resources we?d put in, it was great to see we were being recognised."

Perhaps this will change the perhaps long-standing perception about "issues" with ATI's drivers.

 

[SergeC]

Wrong thread, sorry.

 

[AmberClad]

Back when that Vista crash study was done, Nvidia had a larger share of the GPU market than they do now -- thus they accounted for a larger percentage of the crashes in Vista than ATI cards did.

 

[Wreckage]

AMD only has 18% of the GPU market.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2327123,00.asp

Also 60% of AMD supported chipset are from NVIDIA
http://www.techspot.com/news/3...pu-chipset-market.html

So just looking at marketshare alone kind of sheds light on this issue.

 

[Extelleron]

I can't say that I have ever had a problem with nVidia drivers, or ATI drivers for that matter. Both have worked well. The first Vista/DX10 drivers for the 8800 series were not the best, but that was to be expected. The initial ATI drivers for the R6xx family were not that great either.

 

[Canterwood]

In general use I've found ATI's drivers work better than Nvidia's in both XP and Vista.

Not to mention that ATI release regular monthly updates which cover a vast range of their GPU's.

Nvidia's updates are very slow in comparison, and I seem to remember waiting ages for new official drivers for my 8800GT whilst the 9600GT got new performance ones straight away. :thumbsdown:

And don't get me started on Nvidia's crappy chipsets! :laugh:

 

[apoppin]

We covered this many moons ago
- this interview is from May

The only period that Nvidia was experiencing "unusual" crashes - beyond what simple Marketshare would suggest - was *only* for the few months after the G80 - 8800 series - architecture was released.

As Extelleron pointed out, AMD experienced the *same thing* for a few months after R600 [2900] was released

who cares about ancient history?


excuse me but that article's BS FUD-mastering marketing by AMD is making me physically ill
- i need to breathe

pure marketing garbage
- charlie could [and probably does] takes lessons from this Source of All AMD FUD

 

[Keysplayr]

Is that all cleared up for ya now Larry?

 

[Rubycon]

My GTX280 has been the best video card I've owned to date. Makes the 3870X2 I had worth about two sheets of the roughest outhouse toilet paper you can find. :laugh:

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Rubycon
worth about two sheets of the roughest outhouse toilet paper you can find. :laugh:

There's a mental image I did not need.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I've never had problems with nvidia drivers for my gf2, gf3, gf4200 ti, 5900, 6800, 7900 or with the 6100 integrated graphics. I'd have bought a GTX 280 instead of an ATI 4870 in July if nvidia hadn't arrogantly priced it at twice its real value.

That said, my ATI 4870 is working great so far. I just wish Powercolor would release a BIOS to let me run the idle/2D clock speed lower than 500 MHz since I don't want to use a brand-change hack.

 

[sandorski]

ATI's Drivers are excellent these days. Nvidia's I can't say for sure, but I have recently went from a X800XL to 7900GS. I have some beefs with the 7900GS, but haven't spent a lot of time trying to fix the problem I'm having with it, so it might not be Driver related. At any rate, the situation is kinda funny so here it is:

I do some light 3D Modeling as a Hobby with Maya. For years when someone asked about a Video card for Maya everyone always recommends Nvidia over ATI due to some "ATI issues". When I started using Maya I had a 9800XT and back then there were some glitches withit while using Maya. Not major issues, just some minor annoyances. After upgrading fom WinXP to WinXP 64 and possibly from my 9800XT to x800xl the glitches just went away and Maya has been working perfectly for a couple years.

A few weeks ago, a friend upgraded his 7900GS to a 8800GT and gavve me the 7900GS. Though it's Performance is approx equal with the x800xl, it does havve SM 3.0 which fixed some iissues with UT3 Editor, so I was enthused with the idea. So I uninstall the ATI Drivers/Utils, take out card, install 7900GS, Install latest WinXP 64 WHQL(required for XP 64) Nvidia Drivers everything was swell. UT3's Editor ran without Error/glitches, games were fine, yaddayaddaya. Day later I fire up Maya and begin working on something, a few minutes pass when all of a sudden Maya freaks out on me. I was not impressed one bit and I quickly began thinking of putting the x800xl back in. I sorta of stumble upon a temporary solution(simply moving the mouse pointer over the Auto-Hide Windows Taskbar ends the glitch in Maya....until it occurs again. So, that's what I've been doing for the last couple weeks while using Maya. It's a PITA and I still swear a lot everytime it happens, but at least I can work.

Things I might try but haven't: 1) Driver cleaner...maybe there's some ATI stuff hanging around; 2) older Driver version, these Drivers are already many months old; 3) re-install Windows, no thanks, suppose I could Repair, but I'll hold off

 

[bangmal]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
AMD only has 18% of the GPU market.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2327123,00.asp

Also 60% of AMD supported chipset are from NVIDIA
http://www.techspot.com/news/3...pu-chipset-market.html

So just looking at marketshare alone kind of sheds light on this issue.

It is the rate of the cards crash, not the absoulte number, know the difference? get a clue.

And that is Q2 number, before 4800s came out, indeed, that is quite sad for nvidia, they had supposesly faster products in the last 18 months, but only 13% lead? that is pathetic, no wonder AMD is being very optimistic about their market share will be 50% in coming quarters.

 

[SickBeast]

A study can be created to make people believe anything.

IMO NV has the best Linux drivers.
AMD has the best Vista drivers.
XP is a proper, stable, and proven OS, and both sides have equally good drivers.

Disclaimer: The above was SickBeast's opinion and does not necessarily reflect reality. :beer:

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Canterwood
In general use I've found ATI's drivers work better than Nvidia's in both XP and Vista.

Not to mention that ATI release regular monthly updates which cover a vast range of their GPU's.

Nvidia's updates are very slow in comparison, and I seem to remember waiting ages for new official drivers for my 8800GT whilst the 9600GT got new performance ones straight away. :thumbsdown:

And don't get me started on Nvidia's crappy chipsets! :laugh:

Agreed, I've owned a bunch of video cards over my life, including:
Voodoo 3
Geforce 3
Geforce 4 TI
9700 Pro
6600GT
X850XT
X1950XT
Geforce 9800GTX+
HD3200 IGP

And the only cards I've ever had problems with were the nvidia cards. All of the nvidia cards. (and my laptop's Intel GMA900 graphics really blow too, glitchy and slow)
Strangely enough though, nvidia's drivers under linux are way better. Well, sort of, they've already corrupted my display config more and caused me to have to reinstall than ati ever did, but they actually work properly with linux 3d stuff, games, etc that ATI isn't really a valid choice as of the moment for linux 3d. Good thing nvidia works well in linux too, I've had to turn to Linux + Wine to play a few of my old (>2 years old) games that don't work properly in windows anymore. Whether that is Vista's fault, the game's fault, or nvidia's fault, I dunno.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Were these crashes all do to discrete graphics? I don't believe thats facts. I believe it was for all graphics . That being the case . Intel has the Biggest market share and by assuming they are talking about discrete graphics only, You can scew the numbers so it looks like NV has biggest market share.

You guys are doing the same thing the AMD guys is talking about Intel charging over the top prices compared to AMDs present pricies. LOL . He must think we have short memories. I wish deneb would be faster than nehalem . Just to show how many truely talk from there asses. We would see $1000 denebs if they were faster. I know thats offtopic. But it was in the link.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: apoppin
We covered this many moons ago
- this interview is from May

The only period that Nvidia was experiencing "unusual" crashes - beyond what simple Marketshare would suggest - was *only* for the few months after the G80 - 8800 series - architecture was released.

As Extelleron pointed out, AMD experienced the *same thing* for a few months after R600 [2900] was released

who cares about ancient history?


excuse me but that article's BS FUD-mastering marketing by AMD is making me physically ill
- i need to breathe

pure marketing garbage
- charlie could [and probably does] takes lessons from this Source of All AMD FUD

You moved to Canada?

Welcome home. :beer:

When is the new website ready?

Whereabouts in Canada did you choose?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: apoppin
We covered this many moons ago
- this interview is from May

The only period that Nvidia was experiencing "unusual" crashes - beyond what simple Marketshare would suggest - was *only* for the few months after the G80 - 8800 series - architecture was released.

As Extelleron pointed out, AMD experienced the *same thing* for a few months after R600 [2900] was released

who cares about ancient history?


excuse me but that article's BS FUD-mastering marketing by AMD is making me physically ill
- i need to breathe

pure marketing garbage
- charlie could [and probably does] takes lessons from this Source of All AMD FUD

You moved to Canada?

Welcome home. :beer:

When is the new website ready?

Whereabouts in Canada did you choose?

no i did not move to Canada .. Just my Avatar
-and perhaps also in my thoughts .. the USA has lost a lot in the last 8 years

IF i moved to Canada, i would pick Victoria/Vancouver
- it's too damn cold for me there. Hawaii is more my style. Still in Cali
:sun:

at ANY rate, Nvidia and AMD have about the same driver quality now
- very good!

 

[ZimZum]

Originally posted by: AmberClad
Back when that Vista crash study was done, Nvidia had a larger share of the GPU market than they do now -- thus they accounted for a larger percentage of the crashes in Vista than ATI cards did.

The numbers don't really jibe with that theory.


2007
Desktop GPU Market Share:

Intel: 41%
Nvidia: 31%
ATI: 22%

2007
notebook GPU Market share:

Intel: 47%
ATI: 29%
nVidia: 22%


Cause of logged vista Crashes

nVidia: 29%
Microsoft: 19%
ATI: 9.3%
Intel: 8.8%

nVidia accounted for close to 1/3rd of all Vista crashes. Thats More crashes than Intel and ATI combined. And Over 3 times as much as ATI. Yet nVidia had only 10% more desktop market share than ATI in 2007. And thats if we completely ignore the laptop market. Which lest we forget, nowadays makes up the majority of PC sales . Where ATI actually has a larger share of the market.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: ZimZum

Originally posted by: AmberClad
Back when that Vista crash study was done, Nvidia had a larger share of the GPU market than they do now -- thus they accounted for a larger percentage of the crashes in Vista than ATI cards did.

The numbers don't really jibe with that theory.


2007
Desktop GPU Market Share:

Intel: 41%
Nvidia: 31%
ATI: 22%

2007
notebook GPU Market share:

Intel: 47%
ATI: 29%
nVidia: 22%


Cause of logged vista Crashes

nVidia: 29%
Microsoft: 19%
ATI: 9.3%
Intel: 8.8%

nVidia accounted for close to 1/3rd of all Vista crashes. Thats More crashes than Intel and ATI combined. And Over 3 times as much as ATI. Yet nVidia had only 10% more desktop market share than ATI in 2007. And thats if we completely ignore the laptop market. Which lest we forget, nowadays makes up the majority of PC sales . Where ATI actually has a larger share of the market.

As we said,

G80 new architecture caused it - coupled with being released almost simultaneously with a Brand New OS

It is *normal* for this to happen with new GPU architecture integrating with a {somewhat buggy} *brand new* operating system at the same time

it also happened a few months later with r600 when 2900xt launched with buggy-as-hell-ooB drivers that were not fixed for about 3 months [right when i got mine ]

*case closed*

we know already, because it was beaten to death here - this is ancient - and NO ONE gives a CRAP anymore except Nvidia haters and AMD marketing; besides, the OP is almost 6 months late posting the interview.

 

[ronnn]

Do you have the statistics when ati caused equal crashes? Not that I really care.

 

[apoppin]

Me? ... no, not any more .. 'search' might work her over the last year .. i lost interest the first time we went over the figures and the arguments
- a tempest in a teapot is the Summary.

AMD's drivers were actually fixed a little more quickly as Vista had matured by the time 2900xt was released and the GTS-640/OC i had, had stable drivers - better than AMD's in May. By July they were pretty equally good. Since G80 was released in November 06 and Vista had it pre-release then, the GeForce owners were whining for about 6 months.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: ZimZum

Originally posted by: AmberClad
Back when that Vista crash study was done, Nvidia had a larger share of the GPU market than they do now -- thus they accounted for a larger percentage of the crashes in Vista than ATI cards did.

The numbers don't really jibe with that theory.


2007
Desktop GPU Market Share:

Intel: 41%
Nvidia: 31%
ATI: 22%

2007
notebook GPU Market share:

Intel: 47%
ATI: 29%
nVidia: 22%


Cause of logged vista Crashes

nVidia: 29%
Microsoft: 19%
ATI: 9.3%
Intel: 8.8%

nVidia accounted for close to 1/3rd of all Vista crashes. Thats More crashes than Intel and ATI combined. And Over 3 times as much as ATI. Yet nVidia had only 10% more desktop market share than ATI in 2007. And thats if we completely ignore the laptop market. Which lest we forget, nowadays makes up the majority of PC sales . Where ATI actually has a larger share of the market.

As we said,

G80 new architecture caused it - coupled with being released almost simultaneously with a Brand New OS

It is *normal* for this to happen with new GPU architecture integrating with a {somewhat buggy} *brand new* operating system at the same time

it also happened a few months later with r600 when 2900xt launched with buggy-as-hell-ooB drivers that were not fixed for about 3 months [right when i got mine ]

*case closed*

we know already, because it was beaten to death here - this is ancient - and NO ONE gives a CRAP anymore except Nvidia haters and AMD marketing; besides, the OP is almost 6 months late posting the interview.

Oh! Come on now. It may have been beat to death. But some people actually have real concerns. Its not just NV haters. NV drivers just plan aren't as stable as ATIs. If you want to talk about Beating something to death . The ATI haters have strangled CCC to point were there is no flesh left just a bibey nick.

IF hardware has a problem its Hardware Benchmarkers Like AT to report said problems. Than it is for us to discuss rather than to say its just anti- marketing or fanbois. Even tho drivers are software. Its part of the package.

Covering things up or dening that problems exist in the end only proves. That companies cann't be trusted or fanbois.

A good example of this was AEG rollo thing. I read all the stuff here . Quit frankly thats when I found out Keys was a pretty good guy. But we all have faults.

There does seem to be a cover up going on right now. The people dening it are really going to look like fools in the end. Fool me once shame on you! Fool me twice shame on me! Also Hardware site such as AT should be reporting the known facts at least . Given what we now know the problem is hugh . Its just a matter of time befor a class action suite. A couple of failed 280's with the problem described below . and thats it. lawsuite.

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39045/135/

 

[ginfest]

...NV drivers just plan aren't as stable as ATIs....

That's an absolute falsehood-could you please provide some empirical evidence of same?

Because the only "evidence" that I see in your posts is intimation and "red-herring" arguments
But please, enlighten us if you can

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Canterwood
In general use I've found ATI's drivers work better than Nvidia's in both XP and Vista.

Not to mention that ATI release regular monthly updates which cover a vast range of their GPU's.

Nvidia's updates are very slow in comparison, and I seem to remember waiting ages for new official drivers for my 8800GT whilst the 9600GT got new performance ones straight away. :thumbsdown:

And don't get me started on Nvidia's crappy chipsets! :laugh:

it's not that nvidia updates are slow to come, but that they (almost) completely stopped for almost 6 months after purchasing ageia, as nvidia was integrating with it, and porting physX into its drivers.

Although nvidia does tend to offer WHQL drivers less often (instead releasing as beta).

As for the disparity... nVidia had a much bigger market share, especially in the DX10 hardware which was the main attraction of vista. (actually, vista and the first ever DX10 card were released on the same day... that was a G80 card, 6 months later AMD released their first DX10 card).

So if you were an ATI gamer during the early vista period, you had no reason to go to vista (lower performance, and a bunch of graphics bugs that affected both AMD and nVidia alike, since they were caused by vista itself, and were fixed in SP1; AND bugs from your video drivers themselves, as they had to be largely rewritten for vista).