Are Radeons cards really better than NVidia?

[halcyon]

Check here: http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html

Are they really better? Someone here may have told me that NVidia is better.

I know the tech is chaning almost daily, but in my experience I've found that the Nvidia cards provide noticably better 2D video quality, especially when pushing an analog signal. I see this most when routing an analog signal through a KVM switch. I've also noticed that the Nvida drivers seem to be a bit more polished. This is my experience through personal testing and @ the office. Perhaps with the higher-end cards or the latest drivers ATI has remedied this. ...and you'll likely hear that ATI fans will tell you that this is all in my head. I'm neither an ATI or Nvidia fan, at all, as I'm not a gamer. Matrox still offers the best analog 2D IMO (some of you young-uns are wondering..."What is a Matrox?" LOL). The highest end products I've used from ATI are the X300 (which is terribly low-end, I know) while the best nVidia card I've experience with is the 7600GT OC, which is not high-end either.

Good luck in your endeavors.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Alright this thread's pretty pointless, but your post made me jump in.

I know the tech is chaning almost daily, but in my experience I've found that the Nvidia cards provide noticably better 2D video quality, especially when pushing an analog signal. I see this most when routing an analog signal through a KVM switch.

Interesting, 'cause that goes again the norm of previous 2D testing where Matrox came outon top as you point out later, and then ATi, and then nV. Though the last good test I've seen was in the FX era (2D doesn't get much respect). And prior to the FX it's elementary the ATi and Parhelias had better 2D quality due to faster RAMDACs on the ATis and better filtering on the Matroxs along with faster RAMDACs.

I've also noticed that the Nvida drivers seem to be a bit more polished.

Not a hard and fast rule anymore, each has it's benifits and weaknesses now. But there are some places where there's clear wins, nV with Linux, and ATi with 2D motion video.

This is my experience through personal testing and @ the office. Perhaps with the higher-end cards or the latest drivers ATI has remedied this.

Depends on what the shortcoming was, if the cards were old enough (original radeons aka R7200 [not R7000] actually had slower RAMDACs than the Geforces) then there's been alot of improvement, if they are fairly recent, then the only improvements are really found on the digital side of the equation with a move to Dual-Link TMDS(s) throughout the X1K line.

I'm neither an ATI or Nvidia fan, at all, as I'm not a gamer.

Actually they make workstation cards too, eh!

Matrox still offers the best analog 2D IMO (some of you young-uns are wondering..."What is a Matrox?" LOL).

Hmmm, I think I'm familiar with them. :lol:

The highest end products I've used from ATI are the X300 (which is terribly low-end, I know) while the best nVidia card I've experience with is the 7600GT OC, which is not high-end either.

However they are different categories as well as different generations. The X300 is from the previous generation and is the entry-level product, the GF7600GT is the current generation's mid-level product (and a strong and highly [often] recommended card). However for 2D they both should be quite capaable, and would likely display the same characteristics of the other cards, baring any issues with PCB design.

Personally my Op-onion is the same as so many other threads on this topic. It all depends on the app, there is no clear winner at everything.

 

[dvdpiddy]

Prozac ja misle zi miecz jest polak czi ti tak samo mislis?

 

[prozac26]

On polak, pytalem go kiedis

 

[halcyon]

Alright this thread's pretty pointless, but your post made me jump in.

I know the tech is chaning almost daily, but in my experience I've found that the Nvidia cards provide noticably better 2D video quality, especially when pushing an analog signal. I see this most when routing an analog signal through a KVM switch.

Interesting, 'cause that goes again the norm of previous 2D testing where Matrox came outon top as you point out later, and then ATi, and then nV. Though the last good test I've seen was in the FX era (2D doesn't get much respect). And prior to the FX it's elementary the ATi and Parhelias had better 2D quality due to faster RAMDACs on the ATis and better filtering on the Matroxs along with faster RAMDACs.

I've also noticed that the Nvida drivers seem to be a bit more polished.

Not a hard and fast rule anymore, each has it's benifits and weaknesses now. But there are some places where there's clear wins, nV with Linux, and ATi with 2D motion video.

This is my experience through personal testing and @ the office. Perhaps with the higher-end cards or the latest drivers ATI has remedied this.

Depends on what the shortcoming was, if the cards were old enough (original radeons aka R7200 [not R7000] actually had slower RAMDACs than the Geforces) then there's been alot of improvement, if they are fairly recent, then the only improvements are really found on the digital side of the equation with a move to Dual-Link TMDS(s) throughout the X1K line.

I'm neither an ATI or Nvidia fan, at all, as I'm not a gamer.

Actually they make workstation cards too, eh!

Matrox still offers the best analog 2D IMO (some of you young-uns are wondering..."What is a Matrox?" LOL).

Hmmm, I think I'm familiar with them. :lol:

The highest end products I've used from ATI are the X300 (which is terribly low-end, I know) while the best nVidia card I've experience with is the 7600GT OC, which is not high-end either.

However they are different categories as well as different generations. The X300 is from the previous generation and is the entry-level product, the GF7600GT is the current generation's mid-level product (and a strong and highly [often] recommended card). However for 2D they both should be quite capaable, and would likely display the same characteristics of the other cards, baring any issues with PCB design.

Personally my Op-onion is the same as so many other threads on this topic. It all depends on the app, there is no clear winner at everything.

Thanks for the info, perhaps I can get my hands on an Xseries ATi piece and re-evaluate.

 

[Heyyou27]

Check here: http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html

Are they really better? Someone here may have told me that NVidia is better.

Not only is the 7900GTX and 7950GX2 not included, but these tests were also run with old drivers. Nvidia's latest Forceware release (90) does improve performance, and knowing how old this chart is, I'm pretty sure the drivers are in need of updating.

 

[GPU]

what the hell is wrong with people nowadays,i mean really is chosing a graphics card that HARD!
anyone who has problems chosing a graphics card should go to an asylum.

 

[Eviltwin17]

it depends on the game, ati cards do better on shader intensive games such as oblivion or call of duty 2. Nvidia cards do better in games such as doom 3, quake 4.

 

[dvs1]

ATI SUCKS! NVIDIA SUCKS! The good ol' NES can blow them out of the water!!! LMAO!!!!!

 

[uber_g]

NES

( no comment )

 

[dvdpiddy]

On polak, pytalem go kiedis

Mislalem pzis jego ijmme kurwa ale on robi wstit dla nas tak czi nie?

 

[dvdpiddy]

ATI SUCKS! NVIDIA SUCKS! The good ol' NES can blow them out of the water!!! LMAO!!!!!

I wish but hey it was made when people actually cared about gameplay and not graphics.

NES

( no comment )

:lol:

 

[Multiplectic]

NES????
What's that???
....
I'm still playing Pong! Is that a new console? 8O





:lol: :lol:

 

[dvs1]

Yeah, it's State-Of-The-Art in home entertainment! And has tons of titles!


It's also a great overclocker! LMAO

 

[fainis]

those charts look good ..indeed no 7900 high end series in there...but in most cases 7800gtx does a much better job expecially than 7900gt...

as for ati x1900 does a good job ...... as expected followed by x850xt pe and x1800 series.......

 

[GPU]

nvidia cards do great in openGL games.also in terms of image and DVD Quality they are better.ATI seems to be focusing more on performence these days and with each generation their cards grow stronger.

 

[MasterLee]

I can't believe there are 4 pages full of this shit, it's dragging on like the Israelis and the Palastinians crap.
So we all have to look forward to this type of crap for 1000's of years.........great.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

also in terms of image and DVD Quality they are better.ATI...

Supporting evidence?

Most tests out there show ATi leading the video department;
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_catalyst_5.13_video_quality/

 

[fainis]

well not so sure about that my friend..i respect your opinion but when it cames to image quality expecially in games ..ati holds the flag up high....

adaptve antialiasing, HDR+AA, temporal antialiasing, AA up to 6x..etc etc that`s what i call quality my friend...

i personally don`t imagine my self to play anything without AA, but that`s just my preference...

good luck

 

[Multiplectic]

Supporting evidence?

Most tests out there show ATi leading the video department;
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_catalyst_5.13_video_quality/

That test seems a little bit biased... :roll:
Not to mention outdated... (Catalyst 5.13?) 8O

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

That test seems a little bit biased... :roll:

LOL! Alot less biased than you obviously right, nice LOGO! :mrgreen:

Considering their previous review gave the nod to nVidia;
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_nvidia_xgi_mainstream_video_quality_comparison/
I'd say they're a far more unbiased source than someone else just spouting of their subjective op-onion that clashes with the currently tested reality.

Not to mention outdated... (Catalyst 5.13?) 8O

Well there has been some improvement for nV and ATi improved their encoder (not part of his statement, but another advantage), but little to change the results much, nV has made minor improvements to their PureVideo but sofar not enough to change the balance of power (Catl6.4 vs FW84 recent enough?);
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q2/budget-gpus/index.x?pg=12

It's still relatively inferior and still costs EXTRA money, unlike ATi's free AVIVO.
Also ATi still has the lowest CPU overhead for processing video;
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q2/budget-gpus/index.x?pg=11

So explain to me how his statement in any way reflects the current reality? Just like so many other fanbois, he's living in the past.

Like I said, post something to back up your/his statements, from a review site that is at least as unbiased, like I have. It's just the way things are now. Both do things well, and I have no problem with the OpenGL statement, because while ATi is better than before it's still not quite there yet.

 

[Multiplectic]

Relax! I'm not trying to start a war...
And yes, I like NVidia, but I'm not a blind fanboy, trust me. Sometimes hurts my feelings, but ATi has leadership in IQ.
It's just every screen capture of NVidia in that test seemed a little bit red-tone, and blurry; and ATi's captures are perfectly color-balanced with almost no blur. I thought it was kinda suspicious.
XGI was a surprise there!

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Relax! I'm not trying to start a war...
And yes, I like NVidia, but I'm not a blind fanboy, trust me. Sometimes hurts my feelings, but ATi has leadership in IQ.

OK, I'll tone down my reaction a bit, but like I said I was simply providing some supporting evidence, of which there is alot out there.

It's just every screen capture of NVidia in that test seemed a little bit red-tone, and blurry; and ATi's captures are perfectly color-balanced with almost no blur. I thought it was kinda suspicious.
XGI was a surprise there!

Yeah XGI is the surprise, and really SIS does a good job too if you see other reviews.

I can't wait to see the new Intel GMA965/3000 which should make Intel a contender compared to current solutions, that will be nice for HTPC owners IMO.

 

[GPU]

here is a test using the forceware 91.29 and catalyst 6.5 both nvidia and ati recieve a score of 113 so for the time being both are doing great jobs.
Click Here

 

[GPU]

you should do more research.nvidias new forceware 90 comes free with the purevideo decoder and supports every Major DVD playback software that is avaible.i havent found a review of the 91.31 yet if i do i will post it.