Video cards: ATI and Nvidia compared

[Scali]

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: ScaliWhat I find funny is that people still bring up Athlon vs Pentium 4/D comparisons in discussions VERY often. You don't hear people about Core2 vs Athlon/Phenom or Core i7 vs Phenom II, even though the performance differences between those are larger than they ever were between Pentium 4/D and Athlon.
Pentium 4/D is ancient history, I don't see why people still care.

It's probably in reference to some "AMD is always getting owned by Intel" comment. The positions change, always. P4-C was awesome, then P4-D got owned by Athlon 64, then Core 2 was a revolution, etc. Some people just don't realize that.

Intel and AMD have released TONS of processors before Pentium 4 and Athlon. I think some people don't realize THAT.
All this time AMD managed to outperform Intel only ONCE. Positions normally do NOT change, sometimes AMD is just closer to Intel than others.
Core2 isn't so much a revolution as it is Intel returning to form. The Pentium 4 was an anomaly.
Looking at the history it's completely normal to see AMD competing against Intel's last-generation parts, mainly on a low-price strategy (The 486 was on the market when the Am386 was released, Pentium was on the market when Am486 was released, etc... even Athlon originally was supposed to compete against Pentium III... it's just that Pentium 4 couldn't distance itself from the Pentium III).
So Phenom II against Core2 3 years after its release, is nothing out of the ordinary. It's just the fate of a relatively small company licensing technology from the biggest chip manufacturer in the world.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Scali

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: ScaliWhat I find funny is that people still bring up Athlon vs Pentium 4/D comparisons in discussions VERY often. You don't hear people about Core2 vs Athlon/Phenom or Core i7 vs Phenom II, even though the performance differences between those are larger than they ever were between Pentium 4/D and Athlon.
Pentium 4/D is ancient history, I don't see why people still care.

It's probably in reference to some "AMD is always getting owned by Intel" comment. The positions change, always. P4-C was awesome, then P4-D got owned by Athlon 64, then Core 2 was a revolution, etc. Some people just don't realize that.

Intel and AMD have released TONS of processors before Pentium 4 and Athlon. I think some people don't realize THAT.
All this time AMD managed to outperform Intel only ONCE. Positions normally do NOT change, sometimes AMD is just closer to Intel than others.
Core2 isn't so much a revolution as it is Intel returning to form. The Pentium 4 was an anomaly.
Looking at the history it's completely normal to see AMD competing against Intel's last-generation parts, mainly on a low-price strategy (The 486 was on the market when the Am386 was released, Pentium was on the market when Am486 was released, etc... even Athlon originally was supposed to compete against Pentium III... it's just that Pentium 4 couldn't distance itself from the Pentium III).
So Phenom II against Core2 3 years after its release, is nothing out of the ordinary. It's just the fate of a relatively small company licensing technology from the biggest chip manufacturer in the world.

I chalk it up to human psychology...we've had lots of US presidents before Reagan but I'll prolly hear about Reagan every 4 yrs until I die or the current generation of GOP leaders pass away.

Why is the current generation of vocal enthusiasts fixated on P4 vs. K7/K8? Because it happened at a very impressionable time in their lives.

In another decade we'll be inundated with the "Core vs. K10" analogies by the current generation of late-teens/early-20's youths living thru this time period at an impressionable point in their lives.

Before P4 vs K7/K8 it was never ending comparisons to the Pentium vs cyrix days.

 

[Scali]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I chalk it up to human psychology...we've had lots of US presidents before Reagan but I'll prolly hear about Reagan every 4 yrs until I die or the current generation of GOP leaders pass away.

Why is the current generation of vocal enthusiasts fixated on P4 vs. K7/K8? Because it happened at a very impressionable time in their lives.

In another decade we'll be inundated with the "Core vs. K10" analogies by the current generation of late-teens/early-20's youths living thru this time period at an impressionable point in their lives.

Before P4 vs K7/K8 it was never ending comparisons to the Pentium vs cyrix days.

Interesting theory.
Not sure if the Core vs K10-part will ever come true though. I mean, Athlon vs P4 is interesting because it's the underdog beating the reigning champion.
Intel just isn't 'cool'. I don't think Intel having the fastest CPUs really leaves an impression. More of a fact of life.

I've personally heard SO many wars relating to CPUs or computers, that I find it hard to take them seriously.
In the old days you had C64 and Amiga vs Atari and such... Then it was Mac vs PC/Motorola vs Intel... Then indeed Cyrix vs Intel, later AMD vs Intel.

I personally never even wanted to use PCs/x86. I liked the Amiga because the Motorola 68000 was a very powerful CPU and very nice to program for... and the rest of the Amiga platform was amazing aswell, way ahead of its time.
I just had to move to PC when Commodore went out of business. Doesn't mean I suddenly like x86/Intel. I still think it's an atrocious architecture. At least we have soundcards and video accelerators these days, so the whole platform isn't as crap as it used to be, when the CPU was all you had for doing graphics and sound.
But yea, the whole idea of this war about whether AMD or Intel has the best x86... still has a feel of the Special Olympics to me.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Originally posted by: Scali

Originally posted by: Gikaseixas

Originally posted by: dguy6789
I Disagree. I recall that from launch, Hammer beat the P4. The Athlon 64 won in every socket it had vs everything Intel had single or dual core until the Core 2 Duo came out.

same here, i remeber very well that P4 was better than XP but when A64 entered the scene it was a beating specially in games. Intel did have a few advantages at encoding but things only got worse for Intel once X2 arrived.

What I find funny is that people still bring up Athlon vs Pentium 4/D comparisons in discussions VERY often. You don't hear people about Core2 vs Athlon/Phenom or Core i7 vs Phenom II, even though the performance differences between those are larger than they ever were between Pentium 4/D and Athlon.
Pentium 4/D is ancient history, I don't see why people still care.

i didn't start this argument so chill. It's history but what's wrong in bringing that up? I owned P4's, XP's, A64's and I still have X2's so know what i'm talking about. Oh by the way i have a E8000 series too, a great processor and much better than my X2.

Last, i don't know why this bothers you so much. Do you complain when people compare i7 to Phenom's??? i7 is untoutchable right now, that's a fact and i don't have a problem in saying that. Hope that makes you a bit happier.

 

[Scali]

Originally posted by: Gikaseixas
i didn't start this argument so chill.

I didn't say you did, I just continued the argument where you left off.
No need to shout 'chill', because I'm as cool as they come.
Perhaps you should take your own advice to heart though.

Originally posted by: Gikaseixas
It's history but what's wrong in bringing that up?

Well, it's a bit strange in a thread about nVidia/ATi videocards, don't you think?
Besides, this is just one example. The subject surfaces repeatedly, on many places.
I don't know about you, but I am personally getting tired of hearing the same old rhetoric over and over again.

Originally posted by: Gikaseixas
I owned P4's, XP's, A64's and I still have X2's so know what i'm talking about. Oh by the way i have a E8000 series too, a great processor and much better than my X2.

So you never owned a CPU before the Pentium 4/Athlon XP era?
That may tie in with Idontcare's theory.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Scali

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I chalk it up to human psychology...we've had lots of US presidents before Reagan but I'll prolly hear about Reagan every 4 yrs until I die or the current generation of GOP leaders pass away.

Why is the current generation of vocal enthusiasts fixated on P4 vs. K7/K8? Because it happened at a very impressionable time in their lives.

In another decade we'll be inundated with the "Core vs. K10" analogies by the current generation of late-teens/early-20's youths living thru this time period at an impressionable point in their lives.

Before P4 vs K7/K8 it was never ending comparisons to the Pentium vs cyrix days.

Interesting theory.
Not sure if the Core vs K10-part will ever come true though. I mean, Athlon vs P4 is interesting because it's the underdog beating the reigning champion.
Intel just isn't 'cool'. I don't think Intel having the fastest CPUs really leaves an impression. More of a fact of life.

I've personally heard SO many wars relating to CPUs or computers, that I find it hard to take them seriously.
In the old days you had C64 and Amiga vs Atari and such... Then it was Mac vs PC/Motorola vs Intel... Then indeed Cyrix vs Intel, later AMD vs Intel.

I personally never even wanted to use PCs/x86. I liked the Amiga because the Motorola 68000 was a very powerful CPU and very nice to program for... and the rest of the Amiga platform was amazing aswell, way ahead of its time.
I just had to move to PC when Commodore went out of business. Doesn't mean I suddenly like x86/Intel. I still think it's an atrocious architecture. At least we have soundcards and video accelerators these days, so the whole platform isn't as crap as it used to be, when the CPU was all you had for doing graphics and sound.
But yea, the whole idea of this war about whether AMD or Intel has the best x86... still has a feel of the Special Olympics to me.

Well . Shit. That was really well said . Fact is that was really very well said.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Originally posted by: Scali

Originally posted by: Gikaseixas
i didn't start this argument so chill.

I didn't say you did, I just continued the argument where you left off.
No need to shout 'chill', because I'm as cool as they come.
Perhaps you should take your own advice to heart though.

Originally posted by: Gikaseixas
It's history but what's wrong in bringing that up?

Well, it's a bit strange in a thread about nVidia/ATi videocards, don't you think?
Besides, this is just one example. The subject surfaces repeatedly, on many places.
I don't know about you, but I am personally getting tired of hearing the same old rhetoric over and over again.

Originally posted by: Gikaseixas
I owned P4's, XP's, A64's and I still have X2's so know what i'm talking about. Oh by the way i have a E8000 series too, a great processor and much better than my X2.

So you never owned a CPU before the Pentium 4/Athlon XP era?
That may tie in with Idontcare's theory.

u where the one who got offended by the tone of ur sentence so yeah just chill

If u read the entire thread u'll notice that some cpu's became part of this argument when Tom's was mentioned and we where just going along. Don't know that pissed u off so much.

i never said i didn't own a cpu before XP/P4 era, just didn't mention them. I've been in this business for a very long time pal so idc's theory might apply more to you hehehehe.