(ati vs nvidia) is alot like (intel vs amd)

[jg38141]

Good point about the market share though. Ati has a higher share because nearly every compaq (the worlds largest pc maker) IBM, and dell computer comes with an intigrated ATI rage chip on board. If you actually looked at graphics cards that people went out to buy though, not just one's they had no choice but to get, you would find nvidia's market share vastly surpassing ATI's. That's not my oppinion, since nvidia has such a large chunk of the market and almost no intigrated graphics, it is a fact.

"Are you saying that I can dodge bullets?"

 

[toonces]

don't forget all the crappy mac's that have ati chips in them.

<font color=red>booyah, grandma, booyah..</font color=red>

 

[Grizely1]

And don't forget about the mobile market.

 

[xxsk8er101xx]

Shouldn't it be (ati vs nvideo) = (AMD vs intel)?
I have an ATI card, i had an nvidia card. havn't had a problem with either of them. i will say though that the picture quality is awsome compared to the nvidia card. I'm talking quality, not speed now.

Also, have you ever given the thought that the ATI's full potential isn't even being used? think about it! Games today don't use 3 texels per cycle, but only 2. Games today don't use the directx 8 capabilities yet. I also believe that the ATI card has something that nvidia cards do not! A voxel engine. To smooth out those textures i believe. The whole reason the picture quality is abover average maybe? I'm not sure about that, can someone fill me in about it?Also the ATI's drivers are premature (because the chip is completly different then the previous chip designs unlike nvidia chips that are based on the original design, just upgraded from it, hence the reason for matured drivers from nvidia) nooo shut up with the ati verse nvidia [-peep-]. they are both good company's. Those are opinions based on what i've read from tomshardware and anandtech.

what do u think?
-Jeff

 

[Grizely1]

i will say though that the picture quality is awsome compared to the nvidia card. I'm talking quality, not speed now.

Yeah, the ATI card you have is a Radeon, and the NVidia card you had was a TNT2 card. Bad comparison.......

But still, the Radeon <i>does</i> have maybe 5% better image quality (probably less) than the GF2 cards. The graphics absolutely KICK ASS on my system.

 

[Guest]

Hey, does anybody remember when this thread used to be about what that guy originally posted? hehe. Not actually complaining, most of this has been more interesting, or at least amusing, anyway. There is one thing though that's been bugging me about what that guy keeps saying. That without the radeon there would be no mx. I admit that I'm chronologically challenged, but didn't the mx come out first?


Tom Mc

Even a fool, when he remains silent, appears wise.

 

[Hobbit]

I will never buy another ATI product. ATI sucks. The new ATI Radeons suck. ATI will be the next company Nvidie buys out and farts on. The drivers don’t work for [-peep-] on win2k. Driver updates are non existent as in the past. They have no toll free tech support. Their new Radeon cards ship with win2k drivers which don’t work properly. If you want to feel [-peep-] on buy Radeon.