ATI vs Nvidia, new gfx cards...

For those of us who enjoy playing new graphical games with high res and high quality graphics, as of the end of May ATI launches it's competetor to the new Nvidia Geforce 6800 ultra. ATI promise that the new card the X800 XT will double the performance over the current best on the market, the 9800xt. (BTW the X in X800 is from the roman numerology for ten, just the next card after the 9xxx series)

Quote:

---

xbitlabs.com

Conclusion
So, the new RADEON X800 graphics processors from ATI Technologies demonstrated themselves as extremelly powerful rivals for the high-end of NVIDIA GeForce 6-series graphics products.

The top-of-the-line $499 RADEON X800 XT appeared to be faster compared to its main competitor – the GeForce 6800 Ultra – in plethora of applications where it was pretty natual to expect – the games that broadly use complex geometry and loads of math-intensive pixel shaders. Additionally, the new graphics processors from ATI Technologies are also getting performance advantages over the rivalling NVIDIA’s solution when full-scene antialiasing and anisotropic filtering are switched on – that’s because of the new HyperZ HD technology that maximizes the efficiency of memory bandwidth utilization as well as because of high-performance anisotropic filtering method.

A little bit less speedy flavour of the R420 – the RADEON X800 PRO – that has only 12 pixel pipelines and clocked at lower speeds undoubtedly demonstrate an excellent performance rise over the previous generation RADEON 9800 XT and the GeForce FX 5950 Ultra hardware. But the final conclusion about this one should still be put on hold, as NVIDIA has not finalized specification of its $399 product. This is a kind of funny, but the RADEON X800 PRO is expected to be available in retail instantly, making the process of choice at $399 price-point pretty tricky, as the actual performance comparison with competing solution from NVIDIA is still to see the light of the day.

Regrettably for the Markham, Ontario-based company, due to some drawbacks with efficient texturing in the new VPUs from ATI, NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra manages to beat the rival in games where high fillrate and rapid texturing are important.

Furthermore, NVIDIA still has some more trumps in its hands. Firstly, the company’s GeForce 6800 Ultra GPU is able to calculate up to 32 Z/stencil values per pass, therefore, games that heavily use Z or stencil buffers for generation dynamic shadows will have loads of chances to run faster on NVIDIA’s hardware. Secondly, eventually game developers may implement Shaders 3.0 into their titles for the purposes of performance optimization, which will also boost the speed on NVIDIA’s latest hardware that supports the Shader Model 3.0, a capability that seems to be trimmed on the ATI’s RADEON X800 XT and X800 PRO.

Unfortunately for NVIDIA, right now there are no games that actually use the shaders 3.0 and there is also no DirectX 9.0c that will actually switch on the support for the SM 3.0. With that said, we should probably let the time to say its last word in the cruel battle between the R420 and the NV40 technologies, but based on current numbers achieved in benchmarks we believe that the RADEON X800 XT clearly packs the punch over the competitor in terms of performance in applications that use shaders 2.0/2.x and are available today.

---

One review of the card:
http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/...S/X800arch.htm

Both www.tomshardware.com and www.xbitlabs.com have reviews comparing the two new cards, and it definately shows that ATI have taken the lead again.

One though though, does any gamer need the power of these cards? Possibly not, even half life 2 will not be able to utilize the full power of them. I think I'll be getting the ATI -- I like having 300 fps on average, but that's probably just me wanting to keep up with technology. Will anyone else be purchasing one of these, or will you be waiting for the prices to fall significantly after a newer card is out?

I have to say that I would still not trust my computer to an ATI card.

Their driver support is still ABYSMAL and the bugginess of their drivers is still incredible.

The horror stories continue and not just from newbies. I have a good friend with a bachelors in electrical engineering and a masters in computer science who majorly knows his stuff. He has had enormous problems with his last two ATI cards and has finally given up on ATI.

Until they can establish a SOLID reputation for reliability, they aren't worth it to me.

On the flipside, NVIDIA has a 6+ year history of writing amazing drivers. They are so good that they actually improve OLDER cards as well quite significantly. They don't abandon their old cards when writing new drivers which I think is really awesome of them. The card you buy today will still be getting faster 2 years from now from the drivers they release.

I agree to a point with what you say. The 9700 was a big disappointment, so at that time I stuck to nvidia. The 9800/9800pro used the same chipset as the 9700, so I didn't bother either. I'm now running the 9800xt, a completely new chipset, with up to date drivers and have had no problem on any games. I play pretty much any game that's worth playing, and my card deals with them without fault. The last few haven't been that great, but I really think ATI have gotten their act together recently.

It will take a few more cards to get a decent reputation -- hercules cards are now thought of as the best (not so, but reputation is) and only four years ago they were releasing incredible pile of shit gfx cards.

Nvidia is great when it comes to driver upgrades, pretty frequent compared to ATI and they usually work. (though I remember a few months ago they released some new ones which were a disaster, but they cleared it up pretty quickly).

The new ATI cards seem really good to me, but I do not have any brand loyalty. I try to just go with what gives me the best deal - if Nvidia brought out a new card which beat the new ATI, I'd not think twice about which to get (apart from price, software issues etc.)

However as one review said, in the future the performance of the Nvidia card should improve greatly as the Pixelshader 3.0 becomes used in games, so results could change then... only time will tell.

Zyth, you're lucky its working for you.

I'm glad to hear its working out for ya.

I just know too many people who are great with computers that have had nightmare after nightmare with ATI's cards. I'm not talking years past, I'm talking the last few months with the latest cards and latest drivers.

Until they can fix their QA, I'm staying FAR away.

I am strongly considering getting the X800 Platinium Edition when it comes out.

The fact that X800 has better performance then the Nvidia card is only half the reason - the new Nvidia cards need a ridiculous amount of power. I for one am not interested in having an extra power supply just for my graphic card :eek


As for the drivers for ATI cards, I have never had any problems with 9800, and I know about a dozen other people with ATI cards (the whole gang switched to 9800-series:)) and they haven't had any problems either. But I belive Ari and I had this discussion before... :p

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Nazon
The fact that X800 has better performance then the Nvidia card is only half the reason - the new Nvidia cards need a ridiculous amount of power. I for one am not interested in having an extra power supply just for my graphic card :eek

---

All the reviewers have tested it with the normal power supplies and it ran fine. What do you care about having more power when it costs about $10 more at best and for people who don't build their own computer it will be done for them automatically by the company (Alienware, Falcon Northwest, Dell, etc).

Also, most custom builders have been putting TONS more power in their machines for a while anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Nazon
As for the drivers for ATI cards, I have never had any problems with 9800, and I know about a dozen other people with ATI cards (the whole gang switched to 9800-series:)) and they haven't had any problems either. But I belive Ari and I had this discussion before... :p

---

Unfortunately, their reputation is for having VERY buggy drivers that are well known to cause severe computer problems. :( That doesn't mean everyone has problems, it just means the problems are very widespread and they just don't have a corporate attitude to take drivers seriously.

For example:

http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardw...eviews/2836/5/

Quote:

---

It is unfortunate that buggy drivers and software have been ATI’s bane for quite some time now.

---

ATI Radeon 9800 XT 256MB
http://reviews.designtechnica.com/user_reviews1510.html

Quote:

---

I've had mine for a few months now and while the performance is nothing to scoff at, the drivers are somewhat buggy. I have had many issues with texture tearing and items not being drawn properly. This was fixed by using the omega drivers found at www.omegacorner.com but I dont think that an individual should have to fix the problems in a big companies product. Overall this is a very good card as long as you dont mind using 3rd party drivers.

---

News.com
http://att.com.com/ATI_Radeon_9800_X...-30565215.html

Quote:

---

ATI Radeon 9800 XT
How would you rate this product?
57% thumbs up
43% thumbs down

---

What rocks about NVIDIA's drivers is that they have a unified architecture that means you use the SAME drivers no matter which card you have from the last 6+ years (ever since the first GeForce).

It is pretty amazing to get 10-20% performance gains in your OLD card years after you bought it simply because NVIDIA constantly improves the drivers for ALL their cards.

I really, really, really wish ATI would see that this is one of the big reasons so many people stick to NVIDIA. I always want healthy competition in any PC marketplace because that is good for competition.

But ATI just refuses to take its drivers seriously. They think all that matters is the speed of their card and that the driver situation will somehow work itself out. In reality, the drivers are even MORE important than the hardware since without good drivers the hardware is useless.

Every time I am in the market for a PC or a graphics card I always give the ATI card serious thought, but their refusal to adopt a driver strategy that is competitive with NVIDIA's sends me away every time.

Relying on 3rd parties to release drivers is just inexcuseable!

I am not saying that ATI's drivers are perfect, what I was stating is that I, personally haven't had any problems or met anyone that has. And I for one am of the satisfied customers. That being said, yes ATI has a history of buggy drivers (mostly before the radeon series of graphic cards)- there is no denying that.

As for the power requirements of Nvidia's Geforce 6800 Ultra, here is direct quote form Tom's Hardware Guide (page 6 of the review):

Quote:

---

The card sports two auxiliary power connectors. NVIDIA prescribes that each of them receive a four-pin molex connector from an ATX power cable that is not connected to other devices, with the exception of fans. In English - each of the ports requires a dedicated ATX power cable, and both need to be connected! This may pose a problem for many users, since even many of the more powerful power supplies often only feature a total of three ATX power cables. That would leave one cable for all of the remaining devices in the system, e.g. hard drives, optical drives and the like.

---

TWO dedicated power cables? That's the reason for me to choose ATI, even if it wasn't for the performance.

By the way, was I the only one surprised of how fast, and with how (seemingly) little effort ATI topped Nvidia's new card?

Nope. ATI's hardware is second to none in my opinion, though I do understand your reasons for being wary Aristotle. I am extremely confident however that were you to install a 9800xt for instance, you'd not regret it. I have 20 odd friends all on the 9800 series, none of which have problems with anything. Some of my friends on the 9700 series have a few problems, but say most were fixed in the most recent Catalyst drivers. This being the case, I'd avoid the 9700s like the plague, but from my experience the 9800xt cannot be faulted.

People are going to get problems with drivers for anything, whether they are computer experts or newbies... you'd be surprised how often people's problems are fixed when they format and reinstall their stuff.

I'm not trying to be an ATI salesman, just making the point that everyone I know has no problem with their cards (the new ones).

The other thing is, for every couple of reviews saying that the 9800xt drivers are buggy, there's loads more saying they're not.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTI5

Another reason I previously forgot to mention on why I chose the 9800xt... I overclock a lot of my hardware, and the 9800xt allows me to get far more out of it than the Nvidia. I've had the 5950, its a good card... but when I play for instance 'Far Cry' on it, it autodetects the settings at high. When I autodetect with the 9800xt, it cranks them all to very high.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zyth
Nope. ATI's hardware is second to none in my opinion

---

Nope? Nope what? I hope you aren't saying "Nope. Their driver strategy is fine."

Their hardware is great. I never said a single thing against their hardware.

Their software sucks ass.

Unfortunately for them, the hardware is useless without the drivers to power it.

As for the power supplies:

Complaining about that is like complaining about a graphics card needing 10 screws instead of 8 to attach to the case. Honestly, it is totally irrelevant. Power needs for computers grows over time. Most hardcore users have been putting tons more power in there for a long time to support things like external hard drives and such things.

I would LOVE to buy ATI cards. I love supporting the underdog in the hardware industry because I am terrified of one company having no competition.

But the reasons I won't make the switch are:

1) ATI's absolutely horrendous record with drivers.

2) The fact that HOBBYISTS release better drivers than ATI. (outrageous)

3) The fact that NVIDIA provides long term support for ALL cards- even old ones- and you get consistent gains many years down the road.

This is incredibly similar to AMD. I loved AMD. I rooted for them like mad. Then they got a big head and started charging MORE for their chips than Intel just because they had a year or two where their AMD chips were faster.

Wrong Strategy.

When you're the underdog you have to do a BETTER job for a CHEAPER price than the dominant player.

Take the best ATI and NVIDIA cards today. Be generous and assume the ATI is 10% faster (and this isn't even the case with the next generation cards). A year from now that performance gain is totally gone because NVIDIA's drivers continue to improve OLDER cards. Two years from now the NVIDIA card absolutely obliterates the ATI card. In fact, most likely the ATI card won't even work due to lack of driver support.

ATI just doesn't take their drivers seriously and they don't care about their older cards. That's pathetic and I just cannot support that business philosophy.

This isn't a Mac vs. PC holy war. I *want* to support ATI. I *want* to help them be a viable competitor to NVIDIA. But the bastards just won't take SUPPORT seriously and that is just WAY too much risk to take with a part of the computer that is absolutely vital to even basic functionality.

If you are lucky that things work just right for you then I am DEFINITELY happy for you.

But no matter how well it works for you, it is fact that they do not take drivers even half as seriously as NVIDIA takes them, and I just cannot support that attitude. I highly recommend AGAINST ATI until they fix this severe design problem.

Quote:

---

Nope? Nope what? I hope you aren't saying "Nope. Their driver strategy is fine."

---

By bad, I meant Nope in reference to Nazon's post:

Quote:

---

By the way, was I the only one surprised of how fast, and with how (seemingly) little effort ATI topped Nvidia's new card?

---

I agree with a lot of what you say Ari, there is stuff to work on in regards to their strategy - the fact that it works for me is not a worldwide indicator.

In regards to:

Quote:

---

2) The fact that HOBBYISTS release better drivers than ATI. (outrageous)

---

This is the case with Nvidia as well. Many Nvidia users swear by the Starstorm Detonator drivers over Nvidia's, citing massive increases in speed.

I definately agree with you that ATI should not start charging *more* than Nvidia as they are doing with the new generation. They are no way near ready to take over the position as official market leader, and be able to do that. I think it will bite them in the ass. To be honest I cannot comment on their support as things are running fine, so it is very likely their support is bad.

I guess it will come down to personal preference at the end of the day. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zyth
This is the case with Nvidia as well. Many Nvidia users swear by the Starstorm Detonator drivers over Nvidia's, citing massive increases in speed.

---

I don't think that compares to the fact that it is WIDELY known that third party hobbyists release the best and most functional ATI drivers. I've never even heard of "Starstorm Detonator" drivers and I follow this stuff pretty seriously.

The point is that NVIDIA's official drivers rock. If some third party hobbyists push things to the bleeding edge that's one thing.

If the third party hobbyists are NEEDED just to make the cards WORK for many people, that's inexcuseable.

There is no comparison between hardcore tweakers who suck every last frame per second from a card and third parties making drivers just to make the card WORK.

Speaking of which, I like to tweak so I'm going to look into those Starstorm drivers. :) Thanks for mentioning them.

I really wish ATI would see NVIDIA's awesome driver support strategy and copy it. If they could just do that, they'd have me as a customer in a heart beat.

In fact, if ATI was the same price, same speed, and same driver support, I'd switch to them just to help keep the underdog healthy. Competition is GOOD, but I'm not going to shoot myself in the foot and risk the functionality of my computer just to help the marketplace.

Speaking of competition, there's a new provider on the way with a corporate aim to be #1 by 2007. Wouldn't go near them for the first couple of years, but if they succeed then we're in for a treat.

The name is XGI, link here

http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031107/

That's great. The more the merrier.

More competition in the graphics card market equals better products for lower prices.

Matrox sure doesn't seem to have what it takes to be a legitimate player so its good to see someone else giving it a shot.