On most benchmarks....
- CATALYST AI Advanced is not used
- Benefits of Temporal FSAA are not mentioned
- Geometry Instancing was never enabled (It is disabled by default for DirectX compliance).
ATI wins on features easily, but I still reckon the XFX GeForce 7900 GTX (with 1.8 GHz Video RAM) is the best card out there for raw performance.
nVidia does have the Shader Model 3.0 advantage in more of its GPUs though, which mean applications can be made using 'Sh' (a C style language for programs that want to offload to the shader).
However tests using such 'Sh' created software put ATI ahead. (eg: Complex sound mixing software that CPUs alone can't handle are doing similar things to this now, Physics processing engines may start using it tomorrow, MPEG2/4 video encoding, etc aswell).
ATI CCC under x64 sucks though, far to many driver related problems, not enough for 'normal' people to notice though. Their CCC x64 implementation lacks VPU Recovery, and I suspect that is why some people are having problems with it, while others (using CCC x86/Win32) are not.
It works, for the most part, but it is the poorest excuse for a driver user interface I've ever seen, even the drivers still need some work.
You don't use .NET for drivers, or anything related to drivers, Microsoft need to make that a rule for development.
The Z precision on nVidia cards is far nicer than ATIs though, anyone doing stuff with 2.7 km view distances would aggree with me there.
, Even in Return to Castle Wolfenstein the Z precision on ATI cards was poor.... poor but acceptable for the performance gain + FSAA though. (You'd need zoom to notice it in RTCW, but in other engines, ones that perhaps originally used floating point W-Buffers, or not, Either way you really see it at ~ 2.7 km)