Discussion in 'Computer Talk' started by Lotus49, Mar 4, 2006.
ATI has never given me any trouble, not even in Linux.
Not that it matters, but this motherboard would work ($250), right?
Because most of the Crossfire mobos are a bit flaky, to say the least. If you aren't planning to use Crossfire (waste of money, just like SLI), who cares?
While ATI is still teething new technology - though RD580 has quite a bit of promise - the nForce4 is a solid piece of kit that's been around for well over a year.
Do these horror stories mention ATI's superior image quality?
ATI = driver nightmares but generally superior to Nvidea
Nvidea = good drivers + support, not as much grunt
To answer the original post and drawing from what I have read, Athlon's outperform Pentium's by a small margin. I read on an ES4 Oblivion thread that an Athlon XP +3200 2ghz is the equivilent of a Pentium 4 3ghz. And looking on Tom's Hardware for cpu benchmarks, I saw that said Athlon beat said Pentium in a DirectX9 benchmark test by Tom's Hardware.
So the Athlon XP 3200+ is what I got today.
Debateable. Except for when there's a unique situation with a massive advantage to one side or the other (like nVidia had from the launch of the 7800 until Nov '05, and from late '04 to the present with SLI) there's not a *significant* reason to choose one over the other.
Personally I am not an ATI fan since I have had huge issues with reliability from them. The faliure of 2 9800Pro's in less than a month, plus the (later) faliure of a x700 doesn't leave a good taste in one's mouth. OTOH the 4 nVidia cards I've owned have been rock solid. Oh sure there have been minor issues from time to time, but nothing major. Haven't had a hiccup with my 7800GTX. My old GF4 Ti4400 is still sitting in my server, and heck, its cooling fan has been dead since 2003 - still no problems out of it, as long as you don't touch it (the thing will give you a nasty burn ). TNT2 is going strong in my dad's PC, and the old Riva128 is in the parts pile in case the TNT2 ever dies
BTW, this seems on topic, has anyone seen the supposed benchmarks for intels new chip (forgot what it was called) that they announced at the IDC(F)? IF those are true then i may think twice about buying AMD chips
my nvidia 6800 ultra has beter analog and digital output than my Radeon 9700 Pro. And plus it boots up every time.
Eh, Conroe isn't due for at least 6 months, and you'd be very foolish declare your undieing love for it before you see independent benchmarks (unless you're just the fanboi type ).
Besides, I've heard whispers from some decent sources that AMD has a competitor waiting for COnroe (not AM2).
For the moment and the near future, AMD is clearly superior. When Conroe is actually on the shelf, then we'll see how it does.
Sorry, but it just ain't. After moving from a 7800GT to an X1900 XT, with settings maxed on both, the ATI card has much nicer image quality.
I have experienced some driver issues, but certainly not a "nightmare".
Here's an example I took from part of a screenshot taken with both cards, in City of Villains:
The "noise" in the docks are considerably reduced, and in fact, when my character is in motion, it's not even noticable, whereas it was very noticeable with my 7800GT.
However, this game is also where I have my driver issue, as currently I have to disable Bloom/Depth of Field/WaterFX in order to keep AA, so score one for "the way it's meant to be played". However, the game programmers are just as much to blame as ATI is, and a fix is coming.
Gee, and that wouldn't have anything to do with those two cards being different generations? Buy a X850 XT and then then back to me.
X850XT doesn't support SM 3.0 thus it falls pale if compared.
Both cards have 400MHz RAMDAC thus are comparable.
What about linux? My every machine has linux on it, and ATi drivers in best case can be installed. Half of stuff they create they don't support.
No, they aren't. X800 series has many improved features over an 9700 Pro, improved AA, etc. and there's no point to be made comparing a 9700 Pro to a next generation GeForce 6 series card.
And I still haven't heard the hordes of X800 owners crying over not being able to play SM3.0 games.
hey, i never said im the fanboi of intel.....believe me, ive come to learn to not like it ( wanna say hate but cant). i mean think of it this way, i buy an first gen p4, says its a 1.3 ghz chip. run tests- 700mhz actual speed, yechh. I think amd is clearly superior
I am talking about 2D image quility if you haven't noticed. X800 is brute force improvement over 9700 Pro: same SM support.
And I still hear hordes of 9700/9800 users how their cars die because inproper cooling.
I hear Matrox makes the best 2D cards around, if that's your thing.
Cheaper than buying high-end gaming cards too. Sadly, no SM3.0 support for all that 2D eye candy, though.
Danny, my Radeon 9700 Pro just died.
That's because it doesn't have SM3.0.
Allthough I guess that wasnt the posters intention when suggesting the two drives (otherwise it would have been two of the same type if things didn't change two much - my knowledge may be outdated), having two drives makes sense performance-wise when using a mobo with a raid controller and running both HD's in raid 0 (striped) mode.
That way, reading and writing could be done at both drives at once whilst they appear as one drive in your setup, resulting in increased performance.
As mentioned before, I don't know the latest developments, so maybe raid has become outdated, but in my system, it works really well...
it is because of poor ATi's deisgn - no cooling of the memory.
Separate names with a comma.