Nvidia VS Ati

[Marvelous]

like I said before my opinion and you have yours. Soon as I mention Intel or AMD people want to choke me what the hell. Leave me alone.

Prescotts are running 20C hotter under load than my overclocked Winchester, for Christ's sake. And you are bragging about Intel heat management? Bitch, please.



Since they overheat out of the box with the stock heat sink anyway, why not?

Yup I;m really bragging. Second I'm not a bitch. I'm a dawg. Maybe you play with 2 many dolls when you were growing up? I don't know.

For you info I'm not using winchesters or Prescotts. Did I even mention that Prescotts wasn't hot? Just that their themal protection is better than AMD. Not my fault Intel is still a leader. Not my fault Intel is used in the corporate world. Like I've stated before.

 

[bountyhunter]

both of these cards are on the level of a Radeon 9800 pro. So I declare that one the winner since it came out long over a year ago.

 

[FingerSlut]

My argument still stands, why pay $250 for the 6600gt when you can get the x800xl for $300?

 

[Dan_D]

6600GT is a better performing card.

But not everyone tells you straight up facts.

People have more problems with certain situations or games with the GT.

X700 pro is slightly slower on some games and a lot in doom3 but you get a peace of mind with ATI. Like Intel does for CPU's.....

ATI always had better 2D and better DVD decoding. When you do resell your radeon card you'll get more back than an Nvidia card.

SM3 is useless on a 6600GT. 6800GT is different. It has the raw power.

Piece of mind for by getting an ATi card? I don't think so, of course there are Nvidia card makers out there that produce crap, but any card from a reputable manufacturer will last just as long as any ATI.

Plus some of the ATi board makers produce junk. That's a bit different than the Intel Vs. AMD subject where chipset drivers are really more of the problem than the processors are.

 

[Marvelous]

Okay I retract my statement. No peace of mind. Better now...

But it is true in fact Nvidia cards have more problems than an ATI card. Is this not true? Nvidia's older cards had these issues as well. Not functioning with certain motherboards. Not enough juice getting in the board.

And now Everquest studdering problems.

Before you say it's not Nvidia's fault and say it's the motherboard makers fault. Issues are issues whether you like it or not. And the customers have to suffer for it. This is why I say peace of mind.

 

[{NG}Fidel]

What problems do Ati Board makers have any more than Nvidia?
Please I have owned four radeons in my lifetime and none of them broke since Ive bought them. I think on the quality front (as far as production goes) ATis and Nvidias card makers produce at the same level of quality.

 

[Marvelous]

ATis and Nvidias card makers produce at the same level of quality.

Only if this was true. It's like saying Ford makes the same quality as Hondas..

 

[Hate_Bot]

Only if this was true. It's like saying Toyota makes the same quality as Ford's..

Why si that? The quality of the cards ar both good. It truly depends on the manufacturer.

Then again, there have been makers who have been deemed "Bad". when I got my apollo card, I remember that it was not a great maker of the card, but look now, nearly five years later, andmy card is still playing along (Plays HL2, at low setting with 4xaa and no af, at 1024x768. I got a good 40FPS which, in my eyes is playable) so ya, it really is subjective and the luck of the draw.

 

[Marvelous]

I'm not trying to really down play Nvidia cards. Maybe in your life time you didn't have issues with either cards but that's you. I'm just using my judgement after using both ATI and Nvidia cards.

For the money Geforce 6800GT was the best performance for the money without breaking the bank. Now it's the XL. People have their reasons for buying the card whether it's for money situations or whatever. If you like your card good. I'm happy for you. But these problems should be corrected.

Just like when I bought Gefoce 4 card. They told us that Aniso peformance issues were going to be fixed. It was never fixed. At least ATI admits and say yeah are Aniso on our Radeon 8500 is doing bilinear aniso instead of Trilinear aniso.

 

[ray4389]

again that is your opinion. As I have stated mine.

Intel has advanced CPU thermal protection than an AMD system. For instance you might fry your AMD cpu if you didn't have a heatsink but an intel system will not croak because of this.

Do some research please before opening up and say ahhhhhh,,,,,

Notice I didn't mention about heat issues and your already bluntly going down my throat. Your an AMD fan. As I like quality over speed.

Actually I'm not an AMD fan. My first CPU was a pentium 100mhz in 1995. Not until liek '99 did I get an AMD 1600+ and now a 3200+. I Found that they seem to work faster and the quality is really just as good. My 3200+ 64 mobile is wonderful so I decided to order a 3000+ 64 for my desky. But I was just joking but sensors have been proven to fail especially when OCing.

 

[ray4389]

Can you really have this so called peace of mid with computers. Mass productuon will always allow for imperfectiosna nd electrcity is not easily controlled. Every manufactor has its little problems but overall quality of the hardware is very similar. However I will agree that Intel and ATI do have better software support. But hardware wise thigns can alwasy catch one fire with or without "thermal sensors" that supposidily stop burning.

 

[Dr. X]

And hate_bot ruins another thread. Can we vote to ban or something?

 

[pistola]

Please I have owned four radeons in my lifetime and none of them broke since Ive bought them. I think on the quality front (as far as production goes) ATis and Nvidias card makers produce at the same level of quality.

I agree, however I have had some cards die on me with in less than 3 months, without overclocking. I had a 9700pro built by ATi die, and a eVGA 6800GT die. Both good quality cards, but sometimes you get a bad one. Doesn't mean that they're crap. I just happened to be unlucky.

I vote the for the 6600GT, only cause nVidia has impressed me with there recent lines of cards. Im waiting to be awed by ATi, nothing they shown me thus far has, and since the 9700pro has really struck my attention. Im waiting for that next card thats like the 9700pro.

 

[ray4389]

My argument still stands, why pay $250 for the 6600gt when you can get the x800xl for $300?

Actually a 6600gt is only $185...

 

[ray4389]

And hate_bot ruins another thread. Can we vote to ban or something?

Like in Counter Strike??? LMAO!

 

[ray4389]

PEOPLE PEOPLE!!
All cards as created differently but all have the ssame similar quality. Not necessarily better performance.

And AMD and Intel both have strenghts and weaknesses. Both are needed for most efficentcy in this world.

BTW sorry for so amny posts I kept getting more ideas and stuff.

 

[Marvelous]

different strokes for different folks

 

[Marvelous]

Can you really have this so called peace of mid with computers. Mass productuon will always allow for imperfectiosna nd electrcity is not easily controlled. Every manufactor has its little problems but overall quality of the hardware is very similar. However I will agree that Intel and ATI do have better software support. But hardware wise thigns can alwasy catch one fire with or without "thermal sensors" that supposidily stop burning.

Actually I'm not an AMD fan. My first CPU was a pentium 100mhz in 1995. Not until liek '99 did I get an AMD 1600+ and now a 3200+. I Found that they seem to work faster and the quality is really just as good. My 3200+ 64 mobile is wonderful so I decided to order a 3000+ 64 for my desky. But I was just joking but sensors have been proven to fail especially when OCing.

that's why I like to have peace of mind when it comes to computers. Little bit better quality the better especially when it comes to PCs. Right now speed isn't the issue if you haven't noticed.

I would have to agree. AMD does perform in games and does decent in other apps. But have you noticed things like your performance slow down when USB is used. You use a mouse don't you? Most people here have USB mouse. I know that I do. Some things to consider before buying that AMD system.

 

[atp1916]

I vote the for the 6600GT, only cause nVidia has impressed me with there recent lines of cards. Im waiting to be awed by ATi, nothing they shown me thus far has, and since the 9700pro has really struck my attention. Im waiting for that next card thats like the 9700pro.

Agreed. The 6600GT's performance in the midrange segment is extremely impressive. The X700 Pro is fast, but i've seen too many reviews where the 6600GT comes away with the victory in most games (D3D or OGL), with or without AA / AF. The only card ATi has in the midrange segment capable of defeating the 6600GT is the X800SE (or the now defunct X700XT), but i have to yet see those cards come down to anywhere close to 6600GT prices.

ATi might own the high end with its X800 flavors, but NVidia's 6600 series is the better of ATi's X600/X700 lineup in the midrange market. Add in the vanilla 6800 for $250 and you have a killer lineup in the midrange / upper midrange. The X800XL for $300 is easily the best bang / buck of them all, but i hardly consider $300 to be "midrange", so it doesn't exactly qualify.

And yes, the 9700 Pro was one hell of a step up from my old GF4 Ti 4400

 

[Hate_Bot]

Agreed. The 6600GT's performance in the midrange segment is extremely impressive. The X700 Pro is fast, but i've seen too many reviews where the 6600GT comes away with the victory in most games (D3D or OGL), with or without AA / AF. The only card ATi has in the midrange segment capable of defeating the 6600GT is the X800SE, but i have to yet see those cards come down to anywhere close to 6600GT prices. So, NVidia wins there again.

ATi might own the high end with its X800 flavors, but NVidia's 6600 series is the better of ATi's X600/X700 lineup in the midrange market.

And yes, the 9700 Pro was one hell of a step up from my old GF4 Ti 4400

What about the X800XL, thats (Somewhat) midrange, and it offers fantastic performance.

 

[atp1916]

What about the X800XL, thats (Somewhat) midrange, and it offers fantastic performance.

Most people don't consider $300 to be "midrange". $100 ~ $200 is more like it.

And yes, i do agree that the X800XL is one hell of a card... but it shouldn't be used to compete with a 6600GT which is $100 or more less.

 

[atp1916]

I would have to agree. AMD does perform in games and does decent in other apps. But have you noticed things like your performance slow down when USB is used. You use a mouse don't you? Most people here have USB mouse. I know that I do. Some things to consider before buying that AMD system.

That isn't AMD's problem. It's the board manufacturer's implementations of USB that are the problem. The A64 chips have exactly nothing to do with that USB "problem", rather the chipsets and 3rd party controllers used. Besides, i haven't noticed anything.

But seriously, do you actually use that as an excuse for not buying an AMD system?

 

[Marvelous]

That isn't AMD's problem. It's the board manufacturer's implementations of USB that are the problem.

But seriously, do you actually use that as an excuse for not buying an AMD system?

But it's a problem either way do you not see? Why can't AMD make a decent chipset. I have no idea. Maybe they should work on that instead of just making their processors faster.

 

[Hate_Bot]

That isn't AMD's problem. It's the board manufacturer's implementations of USB that are the problem.

But seriously, do you actually use that as an excuse for not buying an AMD system?

Yah, mouse slow down isnt really an issue, when selecting a CPU.

The only problem with AMD is that (for a reason, not quite sure, I believe it has something to do with RAM) they can't support BTX, now then alot of people dont like BTX here for some reason, I on the other hand welcome change. I do believe you will get better cooling with BTX, plus, at least now, when you install a card, You can actually see the fancy Cooling/Visuals placed on the card, rather then them pointing at the ground.

 

[atp1916]

But it's a problem either way do you not see? Why can't AMD make a decent chipset. I have no idea. Maybe they should work on that instead of just making their processors faster.

I have seen no documented issues with that at all. If you can provide proof of this "problem" please let me know so i can form an honest opinion about it.

I've used the KT133a, KT266, KT333a, NForce, NForce2, NForce3, and K8T800 chipsets and have noticed no USB problems. Once again, i ask you to back up your claims.

Edit: Why in the hell is the fact that AMD hasn't made their own desktop chipsets an issue in the first place? My current FX53 / SK8N runs like a dream, just like all of my other older AMD rigs. You Intel people grasping at straws

 

[swatX]

Most people don't consider $300 to be "midrange". $100 ~ $200 is more like it.

And yes, i do agree that the X800XL is one hell of a card... but it shouldn't be used to compete with a 6600GT which is $100 or more less.

if its a x800xl AGP its 150$ more than 6600gt considering x800xl AGP goes for 350$ and surely when its released it will have a inflated price at the beginning

 

[atp1916]

Yah, mouse slow down isnt really an issue, when selecting a CPU.

The only problem with AMD is that (for a reason, not quite sure, I believe it has something to do with RAM) they can't support BTX, now then alot of people dont like BTX here for some reason, I on the other hand welcome change. I do believe you will get better cooling with BTX, plus, at least now, when you install a card, You can actually see the fancy Cooling/Visuals placed on the card, rather then them pointing at the ground.

The only reason why BTX is here is because Intel can probably use their market penetration (clout) to force a completely new standard upon the industry because their current high end Prescotts mimic volcanoes in the literal sense.

 

[sabrewolf732]

Idk, but a x700 pro at $159 is pretty good compared to a $185 6600gt. Since the gt is a tiny bit faster but also more expensive I would say they are of the same value IMO. Also a x800xl is double the price of a x700pro, thats alot more money.

 

[Hate_Bot]

Still If AMD Supported it, I would get an BTX Mobo, I have seen a review (At Anandtech I believe) where a BTX mobo did have better cooling...

Also, My next case will be BTX compatible, just to be safe.

 

[atp1916]

Idk, but a x700 pro at $159 is pretty good compared to a $185 6600gt. Since the gt is a tiny bit faster but also more expensive I would say they are of the same value IMO.

Well now, @ $159 + overclocking, the X700 Pro suddenly becomes a good deal... The only problem is that it needs X700XT clocks to defeat a 6600GT, which may be hard to do (not really up on how well X700 Pro's overclock, so i may be wrong )

 

[sabrewolf732]

The only reason why BTX is here is because Intel can probably use their market penetration (clout) to force a completely new standard upon the industry because their current high end Prescotts mimic volcanoes in the literal sense.

true. Amd from what I read cant do btx because of memory slot placement and the memory controller. Not like amd needs it anyways lol They still use aluminum coolers on alot of their proccesors, rofl.

 

[atp1916]

true. Amd from what I read cant do btx because of memory slot placement and the memory controller. Not like amd needs it anyways lol They still use aluminum coolers on alot of their proccesors, rofl.

Yeah, not to mention that the upcoming 90nm AMD chips are going to make Intel's heaters look even more laughable... The only chip i consider truly impressive from Intel is the Pentium M, but i find it a bit comical that they had to use the old Pentium Pro (P3) architecture to do it. Not saying that the P-M is a bad chip (actually think it's a badass one), but Intel can do better.

 

[lawrence131]

-Twenty-five percent of the Fortune Global 100 companies now use AMD Opteron™ processor-based systems to run critical enterprise applications.
-New AMD Opteron processor-based server customers include AOL, Merrill Lynch, Bell Helicopter, Sabre Holdings, BNP Paribas, E! Networks, Fox Sports, and Agere Systems.
-AMD Opteron processor-based servers and workstations are providing the digital backbone for Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. The AMD64 digital processing pipeline at JAK Films includes pre-visualization and pre-postproduction, which involves 3-D match moving, 3-D modeling, lighting, shading, texturing, compositing and rendering techniques.
-AMD demonstrated the industry’s first x86 dual-core processor on 90nm process technology. HP, IBM and Sun Microsystems, among others, announced support for AMD’s dual-core technology.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you personally break SEVERAL AMD CPU's installing heatsinks? Unless you've installed over 10,000 CPU's in the last few years that is an unacceptably high rate and can only correlate with a horribly slow learning curve. Ask any corporation about AMD and have them laugh at you ??? Have you even ONCE checked out the NYSE tech sections in the past 2 years? AMD has taken over a huge share of the corporate world in the past 2 years alone, and continues to gain marketshare every quarter. AOL, Merrill Lynch, Bell Helicopter, Sabre Holdings, BNP Paribas, E! Networks, Fox, Agere Systems, HP, IBM and Sun Microsystems --> yea those are tiny upstart gaming companies along with 25% of the Fortune 100.

At least he had the decency to admit his statements are purely personal opinions and hold no hard evidence.

Sorry to derail, but couldn't help it I have long been an Intel proponent and only somewhat recently switched over to AMD, but BS is BS.

 

[robberbaron]

But it's a problem either way do you not see? Why can't AMD make a decent chipset. I have no idea. Maybe they should work on that instead of just making their processors faster.

Hahahaha! You have no idea what you're talking about! nVidia makes great chipsets for AMD, so why not have AMD spend their resources on just making superior processors? I've never had a problem using my USB mouse. Perhaps you just don't know what you're talking about.

 

[skratch]

like I said before my opinion and you have yours. Soon as I mention Intel or AMD people want to choke me what the hell. Leave me alone.

For you info I'm not using winchesters or Prescotts. Did I even mention that Prescotts wasn't hot? Just that their themal protection is better than AMD. Not my fault Intel is still a leader. Not my fault Intel is used in the corporate world. Like I've stated before.

You are so wrong.

AMD'S thermal design is far more advanced than intels right now.Your thinking of the old athlon days.

AMD did the 64's right the first time.They DO have thermal throttling.Its call "cool and quiet" you can adjust the throttle in the bios.

They have thermal shutdown protection like intel as well.Toms hardware took off the heatsink on one of the 64's first reviews and was suprised it didnt blow up.(he was very and still is intel baised)The chip shut it self down.

Now lets talk more about thermal protection.WHO USED SOI FIRST and now using a more advanced version with SS SOI.The 90nm 64's run COLD.AMD'S thermal tech is far ahead than intels right now.

You should do some reasearch before you open your big mouth.AMD didnt force people to get a new case and psu because they couldnt make there more advanced thermal protection chip run.

 

[Marvelous]

Hahahaha! You have no idea what you're talking about! nVidia makes great chipsets for AMD, so why not have AMD spend their resources on just making superior processors? I've never had a problem using my USB mouse. Perhaps you just don't know what you're talking about.

Oh my god I'm talking to a guy who picks his nose and still thinks girls are gross. And your still talking?

Scratch I did my research and I've been in the industry since 1989. Some news I do not hear sorry for that and your welcome to correct me with links etc...


Guys it is an issue for USB when 15-20% of your CPU cycles are use when using USB compared to 2-5% on intel processors. I read that on Tech Report. Benchmarks shows this. I don't feel like searching for it right now cause I need to goto the gym. But it's at tech report if you want to search.

 

[FaRKle0079]

Um... AMD does make their own chipsets. For servers.

 

[robberbaron]

Oh my god I'm talking to a guy who picks his nose and still thinks girls are gross.

Scratch I did my research and I've been in the industry since 1989. Some news I do not hear sorry for that and your welcome to correct me with links etc...

Great comeback. So, where are your facts again?

Guys it is an issue for USB when 15-20% of your CPU cycles are use when using USB. I read that on Tech Report. Benchmarks shows this. I don't feel like searching for it right now cause I need to goto the gym. But it's at tech report if you want to search.

And yet AMD's still benchmark higher than Intel in games (which tend to use USB devices such as mice, keyboards, gamepads, racing wheels, etc.)

Where is the problem again?

 

[Hate_Bot]

Oh my god I'm talking to a guy who picks his nose and still thinks girls are gross.

Scratch I did my research and I've been in the industry since 1989. Some news I do not hear sorry for that and your welcome to correct me with links etc...

This instantly made you 100% less credible. Considering you had to stoop to personal sissy disses, rather then actually stating some Nfo

Yes prescotts are hott. Obsenely hot infact. My dads work rig is a P4. 3.2 gghz, Hes actually had it shut down itself, with the stock cooling, just beause of heat.

The problem is intel just tried for more and more mhz, they ignored the heat problem, now they have to create a whole new form factor standard, just to compansate.

 

[skratch]

But it's a problem either way do you not see? Why can't AMD make a decent chipset. I have no idea. Maybe they should work on that instead of just making their processors faster.

WOW

Again maybe you should read up on the 64's built in memory controller.They dont need to make chipsets anymore.all 3rd parity 64 chip sets perform the same because of the onboard mem controller.

Its not on the mb buddy why should they waste there time competing with nv and via.

I have no slow downs using my mouse or wireless setup at all.