My new Intel dual quad build
#106
Posted 02 February 2008 - 03:45 AM
why do you recommend the ati? any input is valued, as more options are open because of availability and lower prices per card...
#107
Posted 02 February 2008 - 05:04 AM
#109
Posted 02 February 2008 - 02:09 PM
#110
Posted 02 February 2008 - 03:30 PM
Dunno About DX10.1, supports it this tech. or not , but everyone saying that 10.1 is faster.. so go For ATi..
Why to get Old slow Cr@p, if there is something fresher and more powerful.. ?
Edited by TheBearLT, 02 February 2008 - 03:32 PM.
#111
Posted 02 February 2008 - 07:25 PM
m.oreilly, on Feb 1 2008, 10:45 PM, said:
why do you recommend the ati? any input is valued, as more options are open because of availability and lower prices per card...
I saved it from when you posted it back at the planet like years ago. I think it was in one of those tinfoil hat threads or somethin. Yeah, I'm an intraweb packrat.
Anyhow, from what I know (which admittedly isn't much) ATI cards are in general a bit better when it comes to quality, and Nvidia better in terms in quantity. Meaning generally ATI will give you a bit better picture quality while Nvidia will get you some more FPS. At higher resolutions traditionally ATI wins the battle as well. (I have no idea how much of this is actually correct or possibly outdated)
Anyhow, when ATI came out with the 3870, I thought they hit a home run for the first time since...crap, a long time. Smaller nm process, less heat, good price, etc. Since I'm more worried about overall picture quality at higher resolutions (i run 1920 x 1200) then I am straight high FPS on games, I personally would opt for the ATI.
Just my opinion. I could be wrong. F it who wants pie?!?
#112
Posted 02 February 2008 - 07:40 PM
#113
Posted 02 February 2008 - 09:23 PM
eniparadoxgma, on Feb 2 2008, 09:25 PM, said:
Anyhow, from what I know (which admittedly isn't much) ATI cards are in general a bit better when it comes to quality, and Nvidia better in terms in quantity. Meaning generally ATI will give you a bit better picture quality while Nvidia will get you some more FPS. At higher resolutions traditionally ATI wins the battle as well. (I have no idea how much of this is actually correct or possibly outdated)
Anyhow, when ATI came out with the 3870, I thought they hit a home run for the first time since...crap, a long time. Smaller nm process, less heat, good price, etc. Since I'm more worried about overall picture quality at higher resolutions (i run 1920 x 1200) then I am straight high FPS on games, I personally would opt for the ATI.
Just my opinion. I could be wrong. F it who wants pie?!?
Just for you to note..
ATi is better with Graphic rendering
nVidia is better with the Filters
#114
Posted 02 February 2008 - 09:27 PM
#115
Posted 02 February 2008 - 09:29 PM
m.oreilly, on Feb 2 2008, 09:40 PM, said:
Well, if a noob says, that he can run game, with everything turned on.. probably that is Indicator of best image quality..
Another thing to note.
Most of todays games are optimized for nVidia, that automatically makes ATi cards slower in handling it..
But, If we measure Nude performance of Graphic processors, ATi was always one step further than nVidia
#117
Posted 03 February 2008 - 01:03 AM
Quote
I have no idea.
And just so you know, I've been running ATI cards for like 5-7 years now and I haven't had any problems with driver updates for at least a couple years. Of course, not running a Nvidia card I don't know how fast or easy it is to update drivers. I'm just saying I don't have any issues updating the Catalysts anymore.
Nude graphic performances are the best, btw.
Edited by eniparadoxgma, 03 February 2008 - 01:05 AM.
#118
Posted 03 February 2008 - 01:12 AM
<insert nude graphics/performance here>
#119
Posted 03 February 2008 - 01:18 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users