Radeon vs. Nvidia

[AzN]

Only thing 9600gt has is texture fillrate. When games are SP limited by 64SP 3850 will have a substantial performance gain over 9600gt. 10% faster in current games does not mean better.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Lithan

Originally posted by: Azn
Of course there's a reason to buy ATI. 3850 isn't a half bad card for the price, have slightly better image quality than a Nvidia card and much better SP performance than a 9600gt can dish out.

Better image quality based on what? And where's the proof that its SP performance is better?

ATI tends to have better color contrast and level of detail but it's really subjective to the eye of the beholder.

3850 has peak shader of 429 GFLOPS and 9600gt does 208 GFLOPS. you do the math.

Theoratically true, NOT true in real-world testing or current gaming.

8900(9800)gtx > 8800GTS > 8800GT > 3870 > 9600
$230 $200 $150 $135 $125

 

[hooflung]

Originally posted by: Lithan

Originally posted by: Nomel
Well the 3870 looks nice, I mean it has GDDR4 and I think DirectX 10.1 and so on, but I'm on a SLI mobo so if I choose a Radeon card I wouldn't have the option for crossfire. After some more research I also noticed that for most benchmarks it was kinda behind the others. So right now I'm not sure if I should get the 8800 GT or GTS.

I say go for the GTS unless ya save $50+ on the gt.

Azn, != means "does not equal", I was pointing out that even though the 3850 looks better on paper, I can't think of a single benchmark it beats the 9600gt in, so capability is not the same as performance. It's more capable at shader work, but for a variety of reasons it doesn't perform better at it.

What Azn is getting at is that the market can change on its ear in a matter of months. When Nvidia released the Geforce FX branded cards they were technologically superior to the 9 series of ATI however the games of that day didn't need VLIW ( Very Long Instruction Word ) graphics hardware. It was too compiler sensitive for all games outside of Unreal 2.x based games.

Nvidia went back to a brute force method which is more in line with smaller instructions that get executed in order via scheduling hardware. The compiler can be more simplified and the Game Developers don't have to learn a new way of making games and the Driver manufacturers don't have to tweak the shader compilers as much.

With DX10 on the horizon and their experience building the Xenon GPU for the Xbox 360, AMD decided that simple stream processors with a VLIW foundation would allow their hardware more scalable which means that as die shrinks happen their hardware performance increases by just adding more simple stream processors.

Unfortunately because Nvidia is still dominant and work very closely with game developers VLIW is not as supported. This means AMD must themselves tweak the shader compilers for every single graphic engine on the market if the game runs slower. This is why you see performance improvements by moving to a newer AMD driver on popular games since the release of the HD2000 series.

It isn't because Nvidia hardware is superior, in fact from technology standpoint its pretty barbaric. There is a reason Transmeta was injected with cash from Intel AND AMD years ago. Both companies believe in VLIW platforms are the way forward in many markets. It is a very economical parallel processing.

In the future you might just see more Xbox 360 ports coming to the PC which will probably run slower on Nvidia hardware as the Xbox 360 games get more advanced. It also means people developing on next gen consoles won't be too far from home if they decide to work on PC game projects. If or when that happens you might see outdated AMD products competing with cutting edge Nvidia products. As it is right now AMD is competitive and profitable. The 4800 looks to be exactly what the doctor ordered. More shader power to help 'brute force' VLIW code and more texture units to get them out the door.

 

[Lithan]

Do people not understand what capability and performance mean? They are not synonyms. You can not prove that ati cards perform better by added MORE explanation of why they are more capable cards. Especially when your explanation is as ludicrously bias and ridiculous as to call nvidia gpus's barbaric. I said that just because the 3850 looks better on paper, the fact that it is beaten in every single game (wow, ati must suck at doing all these optimizations themselves if they have this awesome card and are tweaking it engine by engine... but can't make it faster on any engine in existence) means that it is not a smart buy. It's the same philosophy as buying a 6ghz quad core that runs at 2v and has a stock cooler permanently affixed. Sure it will throttle itself down to <1ghz the second it boots up due to heat, but its the fastest... at least according to your definition of performance.

Fanboys are always the same. When it's not "But it will be better in future games... according to me... with no evidence", it's "But image quality is better", or "Even though it performs worse, its architecture is more refined... who cares about it's performance in what I bought it to do... the only thing that's important is that I feel its method of doing what it does is polished."

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Lithan

Originally posted by: Azn
Of course there's a reason to buy ATI. 3850 isn't a half bad card for the price, have slightly better image quality than a Nvidia card and much better SP performance than a 9600gt can dish out.

Better image quality based on what? And where's the proof that its SP performance is better?

ATI tends to have better color contrast and level of detail but it's really subjective to the eye of the beholder.

3850 has peak shader of 429 GFLOPS and 9600gt does 208 GFLOPS. you do the math.

Theoratically true, NOT true in real-world testing or current gaming.

8900(9800)gtx > 8800GTS > 8800GT > 3870 > 9600
$230 $200 $150 $135 $125

Never said anything about current gaming. 9600gt wins. But by how much in current games? Not much really. 10-20 % doesn't necessarily mean better.

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: Azn
10-20 % doesn't necessarily mean better.

There is no spoon.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Do people not understand what capability and performance mean? They are not synonyms. You can not prove that ati cards perform better by added MORE explanation of why they are more capable cards. Especially when your explanation is as ludicrously bias and ridiculous as to call nvidia gpus's barbaric. I said that just because the 3850 looks better on paper, the fact that it is beaten in every single game (wow, ati must suck at doing all these optimizations themselves if they have this awesome card and are tweaking it engine by engine... but can't make it faster on any engine in existence) means that it is not a smart buy. It's the same philosophy as buying a 6ghz quad core that runs at 2v and has a stock cooler permanently affixed. Sure it will throttle itself down to <1ghz the second it boots up due to heat, but its the fastest... at least according to your definition of performance.

Fanboys are always the same. When it's not "But it will be better in future games... according to me... with no evidence", it's "But image quality is better", or "Even though it performs worse, its architecture is more refined... who cares about it's performance in what I bought it to do... the only thing that's important is that I feel its method of doing what it does is polished."

Gaming trends shift. Performance gain now does not mean capability.

 

[Lithan]

You're right. I mean the 8800gtx was a fast card when it came out, but now look at it. Oh wait, nevermind.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Azn


Never said anything about current gaming. 9600gt wins. But by how much in current games? Not much really. 10-20 % doesn't necessarily mean better.

[/quote]
9600 is best value..

3870 really should cost $135 but its selliing for $150 cheapest on newegg.. not a good deal compare to 8800 also selling for $150 w. 10-20% better performance..

 

[AzN]

8800gtx is still a modern GPU with 128 SP with massive pixel fillrate and bandwidth. G92 is just a rehash of G80.

You should look at 7900gtx instead. It can barely keep up with a 1950pro in modern games that cost hundreds less at the time.

We are just tapping the power of SP currently. Trend is changing if you looked at the games from 2 years ago.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Azn


Never said anything about current gaming. 9600gt wins. But by how much in current games? Not much really. 10-20 % doesn't necessarily mean better.

9600 is best value..

3870 really should cost $135 but its selliing for $150 cheapest on newegg.. not a good deal compare to 8800 also selling for $150 w. 10-20% better performance..


[/quote]


3870 is much powerful gpu than 9600gt and shouldn't cost anywhere near it. 8800gt cost $150? where?

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Azn

3870 is much powerful gpu than 9600gt and shouldn't cost anywhere near it. 8800gt cost $150? where?

umm.. first page , op's link.. 2nd one?...lol

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...205&CMP=AFC-C8Junction

its been selling for ~$150 alot lately, sometimes lower, often cheaper than 3870

I the the loweest was $140 abt 2 weeks ago on fatwallet..

 

[hooflung]

As long as people see benchmarks where their favorite game with the Nvidia cards they will never listen to which is the better technology. Damn the driver debauchery going on over at Nvidia, the lack of support for many older games which are still played by hundreds of thousands of people around the world. As long as it runs Crysis and a few other titles a bit more faster it must be 'better.'

Both camps have their fanbois, but its a shame when people can't make coherent arguments other than 'oh oh oh but look it has the brightest color on that chart on that forum.' We'll see how it all goes when the 4800 series drops and the 8 series is just making up new internal marketing numbers on the same hardware and restricting drivers that increase performance in a few games.

Then when Nvidia release G200 out which doubles the girth of the current boards and then AMD lowers their 55nm chip to .45 and then scale up even higher and add more texture units and keep profitting from their lower cost chips and rival them in that market too. AMD already has the lowend market in lockdown, the G200 better be an awesome foundation for low/mid range parts. They certainly dropped the ball with the 84/5/600 series of crap.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: hooflung
As long as people see benchmarks where their favorite game with the Nvidia cards they will never listen to which is the better technology.

Phenom X4 is supposed to be "better technology" than c2q, but its not, buggy, and run hotter. so what is your point?

its simply absurd to buy a videocard today to expect it to run games better in 2 years.

8800gs /320/256 has low end of market in lockdown, not 3850. 3850 is mostly dead now a days...

edit: edited to be less mean...

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: hooflung
As long as people see benchmarks where their favorite game with the Nvidia cards they will never listen to which is the better technology. Damn the driver debauchery going on over at Nvidia, the lack of support for many older games which are still played by hundreds of thousands of people around the world. As long as it runs Crysis and a few other titles a bit more faster it must be 'better.'

Both camps have their fanbois, but its a shame when people can't make coherent arguments other than 'oh oh oh but look it has the brightest color on that chart on that forum.' We'll see how it all goes when the 4800 series drops and the 8 series is just making up new internal marketing numbers on the same hardware and restricting drivers that increase performance in a few games.

Then when Nvidia release G200 out which doubles the girth of the current boards and then AMD lowers their 55nm chip to .45 and then scale up even higher and add more texture units and keep profitting from their lower cost chips and rival them in that market too. AMD already has the lowend market in lockdown, the G200 better be an awesome foundation for low/mid range parts. They certainly dropped the ball with the 84/5/600 series of crap.

lol wut?

I must be crazy, I always considered better technology to be technology that works better. You're saying better technology is whatever you say it is? How scientific. Also, exactly what games don't run on Nvidia cards?

Now, now, JackDruid. That's a little mean. Sure it's completely right and obvious to anyone who's never had an accident involving a nailgun and a lack of a safety helmet... but it's still mean. Subtly making them make mockeries of themselves by vehemently proposing arguments that are absolutely laughable... that's the way to go. It's less mean.

 

[Jax Omen]

Some older games have major issues they didn't have when they were released. I've encountered Doom 3 running as a slideshow if you use dual monitors personally (never happened on old card with old drivers).

 

[Lithan]

Actually, googly says that Doom3 always had a problem with dual monitors on some systems. Apparently this article has tweaks to fix it.

http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/7133

 

[JACKDRUID]

actually just get 9600gt for $109 AR

nothing beats it...

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: hooflung
As long as people see benchmarks where their favorite game with the Nvidia cards they will never listen to which is the better technology. Damn the driver debauchery going on over at Nvidia, the lack of support for many older games which are still played by hundreds of thousands of people around the world. As long as it runs Crysis and a few other titles a bit more faster it must be 'better.'

Both camps have their fanbois, but its a shame when people can't make coherent arguments other than 'oh oh oh but look it has the brightest color on that chart on that forum.' We'll see how it all goes when the 4800 series drops and the 8 series is just making up new internal marketing numbers on the same hardware and restricting drivers that increase performance in a few games.

Then when Nvidia release G200 out which doubles the girth of the current boards and then AMD lowers their 55nm chip to .45 and then scale up even higher and add more texture units and keep profitting from their lower cost chips and rival them in that market too. AMD already has the lowend market in lockdown, the G200 better be an awesome foundation for low/mid range parts. They certainly dropped the ball with the 84/5/600 series of crap.

I think we pretty much know who these mindless zombies are in this thread who don't listen to reason.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Jax Omen
But how many games do you know of that are SP-limited on the 9600GT?

Not currently but that day is coming sooner than you think. Fallout 3 is supposed to be very shader intensive based on updated oblivion engine.

So you are saying that the 9600GT is better in all games, but you recommend the ATI card because it may or may not be better in a game that in not yet released.

 

[woolfe9999]

While I'm not a fan of always telling people to wait for the next generation to get more performance/$, because that argument can always be made, ATI is releasing a new generation (not a refresh) of cards in a matter of days to a few weeks at most. The worst thing you can do is buy anything within a week or two of a new generation of cards coming out. Wait for the rv770 reviews to hit the web, which could be as earlier as late next week or the week after. You'll be kicking yourself if you buy right now and rv770 is a strong product line. Just wait.

- woolfe

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: woolfe9999
While I'm not a fan of always telling people to wait for the next generation to get more performance/$, because that argument can always be made, ATI is releasing a new generation (not a refresh) of cards in a matter of days to a few weeks at most. The worst thing you can do is buy anything within a week or two of a new generation of cards coming out. Wait for the rv770 reviews to hit the web, which could be as earlier as late next week or the week after. You'll be kicking yourself if you buy right now and rv770 is a strong product line. Just wait.

- woolfe

? I thought the releasing date is late 2nd quarter... aka end of June...

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
8800GT is 10-20% faster than 3870. no contest.

get the cheapest 8800GT (evga) for $159

it also has the best warrenty / upgrade option.

hans007 made a good point re shaders impacting 3870 performance. Also, since nvidia has a strange habit of abandoning their cards once a new generation is out, the 3870 will almost certainly continue to make up ground on the 8800gt. Have you looked closely at the 9800gtx release comparisons? Specifically, compare the 8800gt with the 3870 in those tests and you'll see that they are much closer now than they were at launch.

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
8800GT is 10-20% faster than 3870. no contest.

get the cheapest 8800GT (evga) for $159

it also has the best warrenty / upgrade option.

hans007 made a good point re shaders impacting 3870 performance. Also, since nvidia has a strange habit of abandoning their cards once a new generation is out, the 3870 will almost certainly continue to make up ground on the 8800gt. Have you looked closely at the 9800gtx release comparisons? Specifically, compare the 8800gt with the 3870 in those tests and you'll see that they are much closer now than they were at launch.

So you're saying that ATI can't work the performance issues out of their drivers in six months? If I believed that I'd warn people to not buy ATI cards ever. Luckily I don't. ATI's driver authors aren't retarded... their card just isnt as fast as Nvidia's. Denial much?

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
Have you looked closely at the 9800gtx release comparisons? Specifically, compare the 8800gt with the 3870 in those tests and you'll see that they are much closer now than they were at launch.

nop.. didn't happen... where did you see that? (pleeeeze, not that german site again)


checked review from quite a few places, most of them don't even use 3870 on their review anymore..
the few who did show the gap has widen since release...