Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Ati VS Nvidia... what brand do you prefer?

Last response: in Systems
Share

Which one of these Video Card Brands do you prefer?

Total: 99 votes (12 blank votes)

  • Nvidia
  • 59 %
  • Ati
  • 42 %
October 2, 2007 2:23:08 AM

Just vote the Video Card company that seems more dominent to you.
October 2, 2007 2:49:06 AM

I dunno about dominent but IMO ATi for sure. They make better drivers and solid cards. Also better image quality.
October 2, 2007 2:56:56 AM

yeah but the the ati have nothing on 8 series. Image quality took ati's. I never thought the day would come but it did:p  I use to love ati!

Related resources
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2007 2:58:12 AM

Nvidia for one reason: Linux.
October 2, 2007 4:02:10 AM

They do, just not in the super-high-end segment. with the new drivers there mid-high range card does infact come close with the GTX. I really wish their flagship card (HD2900XTX) came out. It looked pretty impressive.
October 2, 2007 4:20:41 AM

nvidia because of personal familiarity dealing with drivers, and support for linux thus far as was mentioned... but from an overall performance perspective, it could go either way depending on price/performance and availability.
October 2, 2007 5:10:49 AM

nvidia for driver consistency and overall ease of use
October 2, 2007 5:39:10 AM

ATi. They know how to make drivers and dont just throw **** out there to be the "best". As much as I used to love nvidia, they are just getting real **** lately.
October 2, 2007 5:45:33 AM

ATI, they release drivers regularly. They just opened up their specs, for open source drivers, nVidia has not. I always have problems with nvidias drivers and rarely with ATI.
a b B Homebuilt system
a b Î Nvidia
a c 175 U Graphics card
October 2, 2007 5:52:27 AM

Which brand do I prefer? AMD for the most part. It actually matters on how much I have to spend. I prefer to buy the fastest part for my price point, regardless of who made it. If I run an AMD + Nvidia this month, and an Intel + AMD the next, as long as it was the fastest that my money could buy, then I'm happy.

For example, if I can get a 7900GS for my $110, then I'll buy that because the cheapest x1950pro I could find was $145. If I have $175, then i'm buying the x1950pro because I can't afford the 8800GTS. If I have tons of money and don't care how much things cost, then you'll find an 8800GTX in my system. (I didn't say Ultra because I'm rich, not dumb...)

For me its all about how much I can get for my limited dough. I don't care who made it as long as its the fastest that I can get, at the time I'm buying, without going over budget.
October 2, 2007 9:40:58 AM

Ati but its performance and quality is what i decide my purchase on
October 2, 2007 11:57:09 AM

ATi, i think this hd2900 has a lot left in it we have not yet seen, and if you think that Ati lost the image quality trophy... Lost coast...

But i am a fanboi....

a poor one.
October 2, 2007 12:09:53 PM

I never count Ati out but at the moment its left in the dust. I was kinda suprised that the 2900s fell so far behind the Atis, but thats how the wind blows:p 
a b B Homebuilt system
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2007 12:17:28 PM

4745454b said:
Which brand do I prefer? AMD for the most part. It actually matters on how much I have to spend. I prefer to buy the fastest part for my price point, regardless of who made it. If I run an AMD + Nvidia this month, and an Intel + AMD the next, as long as it was the fastest that my money could buy, then I'm happy.

For example, if I can get a 7900GS for my $110, then I'll buy that because the cheapest x1950pro I could find was $145. If I have $175, then i'm buying the x1950pro because I can't afford the 8800GTS. If I have tons of money and don't care how much things cost, then you'll find an 8800GTX in my system. (I didn't say Ultra because I'm rich, not dumb...)

For me its all about how much I can get for my limited dough. I don't care who made it as long as its the fastest that I can get, at the time I'm buying, without going over budget.

DITTO!!!!
October 2, 2007 1:06:27 PM

Nvidia

I had a great time with my 6600GT, still works like a charm...
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2007 1:44:27 PM

For gaming I am using nVidia, but for my HTPC it's ATI. It's hard to beat the All In Wonder series just don't use the ATI software.
October 2, 2007 2:09:08 PM

I like nvidia's (whatever manager) to ati's control center, green > red..
October 2, 2007 2:28:51 PM

I personally preferr nvidia because of prior bad experience with ati cards. (3 bad cards in a row, how unlucky can one be?)
So, even if nvidia doesnt deliver the absolute highest performance I get a good working card and that makes me happy :) 
October 2, 2007 9:29:45 PM

I think I'll be going with AMD...that 2900pro is tempting. That said, all of my current computers have NVIDIA cards, I'm happy with either.
October 2, 2007 10:21:29 PM

both of the drivers suck but I pick Nvidia b/c I didn't have to wait 9 months for a high-end card!
October 2, 2007 10:31:03 PM

nVidia.


Why? Because you like what you use and I own more nVidia cards than ATI and have become more familar with the nVidia software and product line.
October 2, 2007 10:59:37 PM

I've mostly owned Nvidia cards, along with a couple ATIs, an STB, a VooDoo 2, a Hercules. At the moment, I have Nvidia cards in two of my three computers, but the 8800 GTS has been a PITA, so if I were to replace it, I'd get an ATI again.
October 2, 2007 11:39:20 PM

Nvidia Drivers blow atis's away.
Oh yeah, nvidia linux drivers make the headaches go away.
October 2, 2007 11:40:05 PM

ATI. Last card I had of NVidia's blew up! Now my laptop is a great expensive coaster for my coffee table.
a b B Homebuilt system
a b Î Nvidia
a c 112 U Graphics card
October 3, 2007 1:00:02 AM

I use both....about the same amount of both in fact. I like Nvidia's Open-GL performance and quiet heatsinks(at least on my Asus GF4 ti 4200 and my 8800 that rarely goes over 60%) better better

-My 9800 was a loud monster....but it was fast..once Zalman'd it was good
-X850pro flashed XT needed an after market heatsink too....it was loud even at stock anyway....
-My X1900XT(512mb one) has AC'd to make is quiet..... was a beast with exception to some poor open-gl performance on some games...

My 8800....no need to touch anything....my ati cards where still good and stable...i am not tied to Nvidia or ATI

Both companies SUCK at drivers....there is no need for flickering textures and other anomalies that one can get on ANY(no overheat....come on half life 1 never had double textures flickering on one another with drivers of its day....) card....


i know its game dev's sometimes...but old games that used to be good....it like of takes away a bit of the fun when you see a flickering texture in the distance...

EDIT

forgot to add ATI's tv out is FAR better and customizable with overscan....
October 3, 2007 1:20:52 AM

I guess I'm all in for NVIDIA; my first card was a 7950GTX and it performed very well but when the PSU failed it wiped out the motherboard and the 7950...
I didn't mind the catastrophe as DX/10 was upon us and i wanted to upgrade the system; after the RMA's were handled i settled on the 8800GTS 320 and never looked back.
The GTS is easier on the 12V rail, overclocks nicely with included software and provides the most bang for the buck.
Stock cooling was weak with temperatures @ 65C during gameplay; removed the stock heatsink and installed Thermalright HR-03+; the modified GPU runs @ 52C now, a 13C degree improvement...
a b B Homebuilt system
a b Î Nvidia
a c 112 U Graphics card
October 3, 2007 1:56:48 AM

hey mad-dog do you have the full animated version of your display pic(avatar)? its funny :) 
a b B Homebuilt system
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2007 2:31:56 AM

I got to favor ATI, and I use to be a person who loved Nvidia for years.

The quality of color and texture between the ATI X19XX series vs Nvidia 79XX series is noticable.

From what I hear the Nvidia 8 Series caught up with the ATI X19XX series in color quality, however ATI moved even further ahead with the 2900 Series.

Tom’s Hardware gave the 2900 Pro great reviews in there “Best Gaming Graphic cards for the Money” Segment for the month of October.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/01/the_best_gaming_...

However for all of you thinking about getting a 2900 Pro I would hold off.
I just saw another post indicating that the 2950 Pro is suppose to launch Mid-November
The thread states that it is a LOT less power hungry than the current 2900 Pro and will be built on the 55nm fabrication process.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/245246-33-launch-rv67...

Quote:

AMD is preparing to launch its new Radeon HD 2950PRO (RV670) chip on November 19, according to sources at graphics card makers. The company recently notified graphics card makers that design verification test (DVT) samples will be sent out at the beginning of this month and AMD will start producing a batch of 1.5 million chips in the first week of November.

The Radeon HD 2950PRO will continue to adopt the R600 chip structure. It will support DirectX 10.1, Shader Model 4.0, PCI Express 2.0, UVD and CrossFire technology. The chip also features built-in HDMI, HDCP and 320 stream processors per GPU.

The Radeon HD 2950PRO will come in two versions, Gladiator and Revival, with Gladiator adopting 512MB GDDR4 graphics memory, a GPU frequency of 825MHz and a memory frequency of 2.4GHz. Revival will adopt 256/512MB GDDR3 graphics memory, a GPU frequency of 750MHz and a memory frequency of 1.8GHz.

AMD declined the opportunity to comment on this report saying it cannot comment on unannounced products.

October 3, 2007 2:39:06 AM

I never had issues with ATI drivers and getting my TV to run correctly, but the nVidia drivers make it a pain in the butt to get it working with a monitor at the same time but both at different resolutions. In my price range it goes back and forth between ATI and nVidia, now on an nVidia card, but my last two have been ATI, and I've overall liked ATI better.
October 3, 2007 4:35:29 AM

I think I lean toward NV for two reasons. 1) I've owned 3 NV cards (MX400, 6800, 7950GTX) and liked how they performed. 2) The only ATi card I have owned is an X300 and quite frankly, it sucks both driver wise and performance wise. I know that's not fair to ATi since it was never intended to be a good card, but it's my experience. Would I not buy an ATi card because of that? Of course not, I'd go with what was cheaper. If it was a tie though, I think NV would get my vote.
October 3, 2007 5:39:43 AM

I used Voodoo for a while. When Nvidia bought them I went to Nvidia. In 2003 I bought an ATI video card and boy was I sorry. I installed what was their 'new' catalyst drivers that were supposed to be SO much better. Every, and I mean every game I installed I had to install some 'special patch' because every game out there wasn't compatible with this card. I think it was a 9850 Pro. I'm sorry but I should be able to pull a card out of the box and use it in 99% of games. All the patches I had to install were just so it would be playable. Some games you couldn't access the main menu to start a game, others the graphics were so broke you couldn't see what you were shooting at. You name it I had a problem with it. I then gave that card away 3 days later to a friend(yes.. GAVE) after I had spent $250 or so on it and bought an Nvidia card. I won't even attempt to use ATI now.

Obviously my results aren't typical because ATI wouldn't have stayed in business if everyone had problems like I did. I don't think ATI lovers are wrong. I just don't like the taste in my mouth after spending $250 on a card that couldn't even play Half-Life which was several years old and should have worked fine.
October 3, 2007 7:08:09 AM

For price, ATI; for power, nVidia. For Linux, I don't care; one of them just release a decent driver for goodness sake! ATI, innovate a little faster. nVidia, release a dual-card setup for Intel chipsets.
October 3, 2007 9:57:01 AM

I tend to go with nVidia, simply because IN THE PAST, I've not liked ATI's drivers...but I've heard things have changed. I'll have a better idea after my 8800GTX arrives tomorrow.
October 3, 2007 8:17:43 PM

I use omega drivers so it doesn't matter 2 me:) 
a b B Homebuilt system
a b Î Nvidia
a c 112 U Graphics card
October 3, 2007 10:38:52 PM

@ Zeka - I have that game!!!! Snes rocks
October 3, 2007 10:59:25 PM

Tough choice, but I would have to pick nvidia. Why? They release vidcards faster than ATI. I know ATI cards are usually better than nvidia, but 6 to release it like 6 months later...it's pretty disappointing. Also I really hate the ATI's drivers, they are inefficient and huge in size.
October 3, 2007 11:16:52 PM

nukemaster said:
hey mad-dog do you have the full animated version of your display pic(avatar)? its funny :) 

Yes i do, but i like it the way it is,
i can do w/o seeing the blood splatters...lol
October 3, 2007 11:33:22 PM

mad-dog said:
Yes i do, but i like it the way it is,
i can do w/o seeing the blood splatters...lol


I almost used that one the other day. I like the one I ended up with better. :D 
October 3, 2007 11:34:45 PM

I have no preference. I go with whatever fits my price range better. I may have a 7900GT for now, but I'm really considering a 2900 Pro. Best performance for the money, by far.
October 3, 2007 11:39:18 PM

chedrz said:
I have no preference. I go with whatever fits my price range better. I may have a 7900GT for now, but I'm really considering a 2900 Pro. Best performance for the money, by far.

Smart
October 4, 2007 12:09:56 AM

nukemaster said:
I use both....about the same amount of both in fact..... quiet heatsinks...


Got an ATI x1950xt and it is one noisy card. The new 8800GTS looks similar (huge fan) but it is much much more quiet.

I prefer ATI's "theatre mode" when using a computer to watch DVDs/video on a big screen. ATI allows for window mode on one screen and full screen on a second "theatre" screen at the same time (very cool).

The nVidia 7800gt would only display video on one screen at a time (very annoying if you have 2 screens).

The nVidia 8800gts is a big improvement over the 7800 because it will display video on both screens but it still isn't as cool as ATI's theatre mode.

So there you have it. ATI for a video machine and which ever brand is faster for a gaming rig. If the machine needs to do both I'd pick which ever was faster and not worry about theatre mode.
October 4, 2007 8:39:55 PM

Agreed for theatre definately Ati. I dunno happened though they use to be neck and neck, now Nvidia is yards ahead:S could it be because of AMD? :| lol
October 4, 2007 9:42:23 PM

1749156,42,566 said:

The nVidia 7800gt would only display video on one screen at a time (very annoying if you have 2 screens).
quotemsg]

Umm thats not correct. I do that all the time.
a b B Homebuilt system
a b U Graphics card
October 4, 2007 9:49:55 PM

Quote:

Which brand do I prefer? AMD for the most part. It actually matters on how much I have to spend. I prefer to buy the fastest part for my price point, regardless of who made it. If I run an AMD + Nvidia this month, and an Intel + AMD the next, as long as it was the fastest that my money could buy, then I'm happy.

For example, if I can get a 7900GS for my $110, then I'll buy that because the cheapest x1950pro I could find was $145. If I have $175, then i'm buying the x1950pro because I can't afford the 8800GTS. If I have tons of money and don't care how much things cost, then you'll find an 8800GTX in my system. (I didn't say Ultra because I'm rich, not dumb...)

For me its all about how much I can get for my limited dough. I don't care who made it as long as its the fastest that I can get, at the time I'm buying, without going over budget.


DITTO!!!!


Isn't this the same discussion we had the other day? Where the 2 cards in question were a 7900gs and a x1950pro, the 7900 having a $30 rebate? At the time I said I preferred nvidia, and would recommend that. Well, it seems that when I suggested that nvidia based cards had been dominating the market for awhile ( I believe its been about two years, others suggested it had been only a year) there was a general consensus that in the marketplace, yes nvidia's technologies have been dominant.

However, I noticed in the latest video card charts that ati seems to be making up ground. In fact, it looks like in some areas ati is really giving them a run for the money. Currently, I think this market is anybody's game and it looks like there will be plenty of competition. Which from a consumers perpective, is a great thing! Hope they really do heat up the competition, especially in the midrange market which would be benificial for many of us.
October 4, 2007 9:53:30 PM

No preference. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses. Right now Nvidia because the 8800 rocks. But previous to this one I had a X800XT because it rocked lol. At the time of upgrading, I test the market and take the one that satisfies me more, no matter the brand.
October 4, 2007 10:37:11 PM

skittle said:
1749156,42,566 said:

The nVidia 7800gt would only display video on one screen at a time (very annoying if you have 2 screens).
quotemsg]

Umm thats not correct. I do that all the time.
said:
Really? How? Perhaps we should move this to PM so we don't side track the thread? If I tried to watch a video on my 7800 the video would play correctly on whichever monitor was selected as the "primary" and the other monitor would be black where the video would normally be. Both monitors would display 2d pictures and/or the desktop just fine in clone mode but video or 3d games would only show up on the primary monitor?

I'm not making this up. My inablity to get the 7800 working on 2 displays was a part of the reason I replaced the 7800 with an ATI 1950.
October 4, 2007 11:38:57 PM

THe brand doesn't matter. Has more to do with the generation, high/low end, drivers. Currently the 8800GTX is fastest, the HD 2900XT is the most forward thinking.
I think a more decisive winner come in a month or two.
a b B Homebuilt system
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2007 12:45:15 AM

Quote:
THe brand doesn't matter. Has more to do with the generation, high/low end, drivers. Currently the 8800GTX is fastest, the HD 2900XT is the most forward thinking.


Why do you say that the HD 2900XT is the most forward thinking? 512bit memory? 320 Stream Processors? 1GB of onboard ram?

What good is forward thinking with out practical application?
October 5, 2007 11:39:32 AM

Yeah thats true. AMD has 64 bit Cpus lol they were forward thinking, too bad there isn't much in terms of 64 bit usage because there are barely any appliations for 64 bit even today!
October 5, 2007 12:05:31 PM

I'd prefer ATI as their image quality is a lot better. They also release their drivers monthly which is very good, Nvidia used to be woeful at this but seem to be copping on now a bit.
At present I'm using an Nvidia card, my last card was also a Nvidia 7950GX2, previous cards then was ATI's X1900XTX, X1800XTX, X850XT-PE/9800 Pro.
But overall if they both had the same specs I'd plump for ATI
!