• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Nvidia vs. ATI

L

lsweet

n00b
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
12
I'm a long time Nvidia card user looking to do an upgrade to a 4890 or a 275 this month or early next.

I've seen the review comparisons done in terms of ability and FPS benchmarks, but what I'm looking for is some information from the consumer perspective.

1 -- XFX aside, I'm not all too familiar with ATI brands. I recognize them, but with little to no experience, whom would be best to go with?

2 -- I will potentially overclock the card, but I doubt very much that I'll be pushing the card to it's extremes if I bother to do it at all. I think it's safe to exclude overclocking the card as a reason for purchase.

As it stands, I'm fairly certain that nvidia, despite the higher price point, may be the card I end up with, I'd just like to hear from people whom have had more experience on both sides to give their feedback. Perhaps my worries are unfounded?
 
after trying both...I'd pay around $20-$40 more for the GTX 275. Any more than that and I'd go for the HD4890.
 
I have used both, and would say go with what is cheaper.
I chose a HD4870 1gb as it was cheaper than the gtx260 216 at the time.

I believe the hd4890 is the better choice per price atm, but read the numerous other threads about the topic

Although if price/performance happened to be exact I would pick ATI to help out the little guy/ encourage competition.
 
I would personally buy the cheaper one when you buy it. They should be about the same performance, but if i had the extra money i would go with nvidia.
 
In my experience (which doesn't include multi-gpu setups), ATI has had more reliable drivers, software, and image quality. I also have better luck with brightness and contrast on ATI cards, though some may argue this causes or stems from a less realistic look. Also their cards are easier to work with if you want to upgrade the HSF.

The differences are pretty slight though. Basically as long as you don't buy an Nvidia mobo you shouldn't QQ.
 
Since I have high hopes for Physx I would go with Nvidia..altough it seems you can just add a lesser 8800gt or so for Physx if you wanted to and run the ATI as primary card.
 
flegg said:
In my experience (which doesn't include multi-gpu setups), ATI has had more reliable drivers, software, and image quality. I also have better luck with brightness and contrast on ATI cards, though some may argue this causes or stems from a less realistic look. Also their cards are easier to work with if you want to upgrade the HSF.

The differences are pretty slight though. Basically as long as you don't buy an Nvidia mobo you shouldn't QQ.
Click to expand...

I've dealt with many single GPU ATI setups (since the Rage 128 Pro up to the X800XT and now the HD 4890) and Nvidia's 8800 GTX. I also dealt with 8800 GTX SLI and Tri-SLI, and I'm now running Radeon HD 4890 CrossfireX, so I have fairly recent multi-GPU experience with both "sides" as well.

ATI's drivers are shit. They always have been. I've had about as many issues with Catalyst 9.4 in the week to two weeks I've had the 4890s as I had over two and a half years with the 8800 GTXs. ATI really needs to get their shit together in this regard; PowerPlay is broken, my cards rarely hit 3D clocks, many applications don't make use of the second GPU at all.... and the list goes on.

That said, when they are working right the 4890s are fast as hell. A single card is roughly as fast as 8800 GTX SLI and the pair are crazy fast. CrossfireX appears to scale far far better than SLI ever did for me. I see 90%+ increase in performance when the second card is in use almost across the board; I was lucky to see a 60% increase with SLI, and the third 8800 GTX rarely gave more than a 15% boost.

A single 4890 stock fan at 100% is louder than all three 8800 GTX fans at 100% combined were. Luckily they rarely go over 40% and are generally livable. ATI still needs to sort this out, as there's no excuse for that kind of leafblower noise bullshit in this day and age. Nvidia's shame after the FX series should've put that to rest permanently.

ATI compared with Nvidia, Image quality is about the same, close enough that I've never noticed a difference. ATI is generally brighter, Nvidia a bit darker, but they both have equal detail. I've never been able to take those claiming there's an appreciable difference seriously.

Over all I'd say if you're going single GPU get the 4890. If you're going multi-GPU and want the most performance and are willing to deal with some bullshit to get it, still go 4890s. If you want comparatively trouble-free multi-GPU that doesn't perform quite as well,get 275s.
 
Last edited:
ATI will save you from flashbangs in CS:S.

Otherwise just go with BFG, EVGA or XFX.

However...I've noticed that HD 4890 is really good at maintaining high minimum fps (Crysis) compared to GTX 280 I owned in the past. Makes for a lot smoother gameplay when Im playing warhead at 1920x1200 with everything enthusiast.
 
Go for whichever one you can get cheaper as they will both give you a similar experience. If you do decide to go with ATI go with XFX for the warranty.
 
Thank you to those who have given some feed back. When it comes to cheaper though; it's not really something I look for in a card. It's definitely something I look for, don't get me wrong, but it's not the be all, end all.

For example, a Sapphire 4890 may be cheaper than say, an XFX -- but in the long haul, is my stress level and possible hassles worth saving 10 - 20.00?

Same for the 4890. Would saving 40.00 (CDN Prices) compared to a 275 be the same? I keep hearing a mixed bag of opinions when it comes to ATI and drivers. Sounds a bit to me like the cost savings isn't worth having a 60.00 video game unplayable off the shelf.

Anyway; I'm still tossing the two cards around right now -- thanks all for your insight.
 
When I mentioned cheaper I was referring between ATI and nVidia not brands. I would always pay more for a better brand. Don't let all the ATI driver bashing sway you as it is always different for everyone. I in particular have had nothing but trouble with the past few nVidia drivers even on a fresh Vista install yet the ATI 9.4 drivers have been rock solid for me.
 
For what it is worth, I got my card a month after release and have yet to come across any problem with the driver.
 
Depends where you are.

If you're in a fairly developed country with strong retailer support, for peace of mind, the brand is not relevant. What is important is that you buy from a reputable retailer or e-tailer that will honour your RMA with minimal fuss or questions when told to (I'm the customer and I'm right and if I say this is an RMA, I expect them to do as told).

However, if you're in a country with limited retailer support like Zimbabwe or America, think you need to rely on the brand to handle this. In this case, nVidia has the better support.
 
echn111 said:
Depends where you are.

If you're in a fairly developed country with strong retailer support, for peace of mind, the brand is not relevant. ...

However, if you're in a country with limited retailer support like Zimbabwe or America, think you need to rely on the brand to handle this.
Click to expand...

What was that? I don't follow... Please elaborate.
 
Some places, primarily in Europe, allow RMAs via the shop you purchased at a year or more after purchase. Here in the US and Canada that is pretty much never done.
 
lsweet said:
Same for the 4890. Would saving 40.00 (CDN Prices) compared to a 275 be the same? I keep hearing a mixed bag of opinions when it comes to ATI and drivers. Sounds a bit to me like the cost savings isn't worth having a 60.00 video game unplayable off the shelf.
Click to expand...

I've had a 4850 since about a month after launch, I couldn't be happier. I like ATI's drivers better than Nvidia's (I had a 7950GT previously). Honestly, neither company's drivers are actually bad. They are both good. There are, of course, exceptions and some people have bad experiences. But from what I've seen, a vast majority of driver crashes are due to external issues (unstable overclocks, bad RAM, bad card, etc..) and not with the drivers themselves.

Personally I would recommend the 4890 - it seems to be the faster card (albeit slightly) and it overclocks like crazy. Whats not to like?
 
Roughly 1 out of 4 titles I've tried thus far (and it's an extensive list) have had serious issues with 4890 CrossfireX to the point that I've had to disable Catalyst AI (and thusly, CrossfireX) in order to get them playable. The more time I spend with these cards the more I hate ATI's drivers and wonder why I ever purchased them. They're very fast when they're working, the problem is they don't work at all reliably.

The latest example of this would be Zeno Clash, a new Source based game that is completely unplayable with Catalyst AI enabled because there are clipping issues and the ground around the player character becomes semi-transparent and blinks incessantly. Disabling Catalyst AI fixes this, but also disables my second card. I paid for two, I expect to use them both, particularly in a title using such an old engine. There is simply no excuse for this shit. What's more, there doesn't appear to be a good way to contact ATI (short of their Catalyst feedback program, which is literally a bug reporting service, zero feedback, only hope of a fix is via the next driver) to resolve the problem.

At this point if I could return them without a restocking fee both cards would already be gone. I'm absolutely irate.

Issues aren't solely limited to CrossfireX support, either; half the time the cards don't clock up to 3D clocks in game and my performance is shit. I had to create a RivaTuner profile to force them to get around this. That's just pathetic -- they should not include the detection routines at all if they can't make sure they will work on all platforms. There is nothing abnormal about my system, either. It's a P45 for fuck's sake.


Honestly, the fact that the things are so fast when they decide to work only pisses me off more, because they so often just don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top