Who has better picture quality AMD or NVIDIA?

[LiuKangBakinPie]

You're drunk aren't you? I'd feel better about this if you're drunk.

Charming. cmon make me laugh

 

[badb0y]

Back in the ATi 9000/ nVidia FX 5000 series days I noticed that the ATi cards had a sharper 2D image(on desktop). Nowadays I can't tell the difference.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

This is untrue.

well so you get a game written for Amd and they write one for nvidia?
Let me explain it for you
The operating system helps coordinate the allocation of data by the CPU, by using a specific Graphics Driver to translate the CPU instructions into a format that's optimal for the graphics card you are using.
when the cpu is done porting the gpu related to the gpu. Then the gpu stores the data on its vram. The gpu then takes the data and do a range of complex calculations we also call the graphics pipeline.
now the aim of the pipeline is to convert raw 3 dimensional data to something we can view on a 2d viewable screen.
First it starts with transformation of raw vertex data.
Then the colors and shades is applied. The stage is called lightning.
Then the viewpoint. objects are with the mindset that they will be viewed from a certain angle. So distant objects will be placed further away and close ones closer
Then it will be clipped. If you got a 90 degree field of view aka FOV the other 270 degrees will be clipped. Otherwise the gpu will waste a lot of calculations.
Then all the points are joined together to create triangles and polygons
Then rasterization coz a Pixel is the smallest unit of graphics information displayed on your monitor. Since everything in a 3D will end up being displayed on a flat 2D as a pixel, every object in the scene is assigned a particular pixel location on the screen.
Then culling comes in and remove all the pixels that can't be seen on the screen
Then every pixel has its colors and effects applied to it through texture and shading
When that's done it saves the data on the frame buffer. It normally uses two. Then when the gpu gets the signal from the LCD it will sent the primary one where the secondary one will move into the primary ones place and become the primary so on so on.
That's what a Amd and a nvidia gpu do to the data they get.

The rest is up to your LCD

 

[BFG10K]

well so you get a game written for Amd and they write one for nvidia

Sometimes yes in the case of vendor specific extensions, features, or custom rendering paths. But that’s not what I’m talking about.

Your cute little essay ignores things like anisotropic filtering which is hardwired to TMUs and is mathematically provable to be different between the vendors. Also transparency anti-aliasing is different across the vendors.

 

[insurgent]

Anandtech did image quality comparisons when HD4000 was released I think, now it's about the latest iGadget in between major hardware releases.

edit:I checked ABT's IQ Analysis in BFG's sig and in conclusion, I'm one of the guys who don't tweak IQ settings so it doesn't really affect me =/

 

[Lonbjerg]

If you way better picture quality buy a LCD or do a course in graphics design

Erhmmm...going from CRT to LCD would be a downgrade in I.Q.
No matter how you slice it.
There hasn't been made an LCD yet( and I doubt there ever will be) that surpasses the I.Q. of a good CRT.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Sometimes yes in the case of vendor specific extensions, features, or custom rendering paths. But that¡¯s not what I¡¯m talking about.

Your cute little essay ignores things like anisotropic filtering which is hardwired to TMUs and is mathematically provable to be different between the vendors. Also transparency anti-aliasing is different across the vendors.

Quincunx, Transparency, and Gamma Correct Antialiasing are variations of antialiasing methods used by Nvidia graphics cards.
Temporal and Adaptive Antialiasing are variations of antialiasing methods used by Amd graphics cards
But your resolution can also affect how many pixel samples are already being taken, and hence how smooth your graphics appear. So in other words if you run at a high resolution you don't need much AA. And no its not hardwired into the gpu. Its in the drivers. A gpu can follow instructions like a cpu. Days of the Geforce 6 80 percent of the gpu is in idle are over.
If you want another method of a AA effect drop your native one down. Your LCD upscaling the image also creates a sort of AA. Not as good as the real thing but its not bad give it a test

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Anandtech did image quality comparisons when HD4000 was released I think, now it's about the latest iGadget in between major hardware releases.

edit:I checked ABT's IQ Analysis in BFG's sig and in conclusion, I'm one of the guys who don't tweak IQ settings so it doesn't really affect me =/

probably cause your one of the clever people who got a gpu to power their monitor and not their ego.
If you play at high resolutions you don't need the artificial emulation stuff like AA or you can use less of it.
AA is cool but it doesn't beat the real thing of a higher resolution.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Erhmmm...going from CRT to LCD would be a downgrade in I.Q.
No matter how you slice it.
There hasn't been made an LCD yet( and I doubt there ever will be) that surpasses the I.Q. of a good CRT.

Digital information is discrete and precise. Analog is continuous and imperfect. No way a CRT match the image quality of a LCD. Not when you still have a ramdac doing the digital to analog conversion.

 

[Tempered81]

Here are Gothic 4 screens from computerbase.de's GTX590 review:

Look at the sheep. Can you guess which is the 6990 and which is the 590?

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...force-gtx-590/15/#abschnitt_arcania__gothic_4

 

[ronnn]

Those pictures don't work for me, even went to the web site - still no luck.

 

[Tempered81]

Those pictures don't work for me, even went to the web site - still no luck.

It should be fixed now.

 

[Cerb]

The top one has fine detail, but IMO too much so (distracting specks == bad), and both need AA, and to have the eye-searing soften filters turned off. I would guess, if both had AA, the bottom one would look better in motion, but the top one could have AF or texture filter settings adjusted to be basically identical. Others, like Mass Effect 2, have more differences from JPEG artifacts and not being identical shots, than by the cards/settings.

OTOH, I do see a difference in the sheep: what are they supposed to look like?

If you play at high resolutions you don't need the artificial emulation stuff like AA or you can use less of it.
AA is cool but it doesn't beat the real thing of a higher resolution.

Except for one tiny detail: I can't go to Newegg and buy such a monitor, nor a video card that could render fast enough on one. They are still many years out, along with consumer graphics processing hardware that could drive them. Even a UHD 24" might not be quite dense enough to not need AA.

 

[aphelion02]

Is that screen representative of Nvidia IQ or is it just a black sheep.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Digital information is discrete and precise. Analog is continuous and imperfect. No way a CRT match the image quality of a LCD. Not when you still have a ramdac doing the digital to analog conversion.

You are very uninformed.
Both color and contrast ratio are way superior on a CRT even compared to the latest LCD.

Otherwise you show me a LCD that have better I.Q. than my CRT's...I dare you.

 

[Arkadrel]

@Lonbjerg

I like my LCD more than I did any CRT I ever had.

I googled "LCD advantages" and found this:

1) uses less power, generates less heat.

2) takes up less space, weighs less for when you need to move it around.

3) Highly adjustable. Many LCD models can be rotated 90 degrees, allowing you to view websites in portrait mode. LCDs can also be mounted on the wall or on an arm.

4) No flicker. LCDs don't have lines that need to be scanned like in CRTs. No flicker = a lot less eye strain.

5) Less glare. Due to the material of the LCD screen, less light is reflected at the user. Same with "no flicker", this results in less eye strain.

6) Brightness. LCD monitors are brighter than the traditional CRTs.

7) Less distortion. Using a direct digital input from the graphics card produces cleaner 'output'. The monitor's perfect geometry means images aren't distorted, which is a boon for graphic designers and the like.

1,4 and 5 are really nice, theres no way Id go back to the CRT I had before I changed to LCDs... I do "feel" like my eyes are more relaxed than back then when I had a CRT.

 

[Acanthus]

I think since the 8800 cards both have been pretty equal. Both are good.

This.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Tempered81, I am playing Gothic 4 now... you start the game as a sheep herder. I assure you my 5870's draw sheep. That's really an odd issue there.

 

[Borealis7]

also notice the difference in the cloud in the sky. upper one has no clouds.

 

[1h4x4s3x]

Tempered81, I am playing Gothic 4 now... you start the game as a sheep herder. I assure you my 5870's draw sheep. That's really an odd issue there.

Uhm? There are sheep on both images.
The upper one is the GTX590 according to computerbase.

 

[Borealis7]

oh! those white ones aren't rocks LOL

 

[SlowSpyder]

also notice the difference in the cloud in the sky. upper one has no clouds.

The game has a lot of different weather, that could be what's going on there. It doesn't look like the screenshots were taken at the exact same time based on the position of the character and animals.

Uhm? There are sheep on both images.
The upper one is the GTX590 according to computerbase.

I see sheep and some creatures that look like wild boars or something.

 

[Arkadrel]

also notice the difference in the cloud in the sky. upper one has no clouds.

Weather is differnt on the two pictures <.< (so your not compaireing a apple to a apple, your compaireing a apple to a orange, which doesnt work)

So you cant assume that, and yes there is light sunny weather with soft shadows in 1 picture, and non in the other with the darker sky weather (but this could just be how the game looks with bad weather, they didnt test with the same weather ingame I assume).


Also why do you assume the light picture, with shadows is the nvidia card? that could be the AMD one.
(I didnt check the page, but so far it hasnt been mentioned which is which in this thread).

 

[jimbo75]

Poor 590, it really is the black sheep of the graphics card market.

 

[1h4x4s3x]

Also why do you assume the light picture, with shadows is the nvidia card? that could be the AMD one.
(I didnt check the page, but so far it hasnt been mentioned which is which in this thread).

Read what I wrote and check the source yourself.

I see sheep and some creatures that look like wild boars or something.

The black ones look like boars, indeed. AMD's sheep look way better as far as I am concerned.

oh! those white ones aren't rocks LOL

Haha, didn't see them at first either.