Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is ati on top or not?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 28, 2007 1:43:12 PM

About 2 weeks ago, I heard some people saying that the very latest ati graphics cards actually have and edge over the high end nvidia cards. At first, I thought I misread the info since ati is legendary for making mediocre graphics cards. However, I read through it a second time and it even said that many of the latest intel motherboards are compatible with only the ati cards. What's the deal with that? Did ati really make a comeback or did they just get lucky when they were negotiating with intel?

More about : ati top

December 28, 2007 1:48:21 PM

Nah, Nvidia still has the top spot in the graphics area, but the 3850 / 3870 are still very good. ATI does, however, scale better in Crossfire (ATI's version of SLI) better than most Nvidia cards, so maybe that's what you were reading about?
December 28, 2007 1:53:05 PM

Is that just for normal version for the version of crossfire (with 2 cards) or does it also apply to the other crossfire setups as well.
Related resources
December 28, 2007 2:01:13 PM

Crossfire is just 2 ATI cards. SLI is 2 Nvidia cards.

One card setups is where Nvidia performs better (in most cases), but Crossfire setups is where ATI scales better.

Just as an Example...

Let's say an SLI may goe as follows:
1 8800GT in BF2142 - 60FPS @ 1900x1200
SLI in BF2142 - 90 FPS @ 1900x1200
SLI gain = 30 FPS

Crossfire may go as follows:
1 3870 in BF2142 - 50 FPS @ 1900x1200
Crossfire in BF2142 - 100 FPS @ 1900x1200
Crossfire gain = 50 FPS

Like I said, this is just an example to help you understand. There are actual benchmarks somewhere, but I can't find the link atm.
December 28, 2007 2:23:43 PM

Quote:
However, I read through it a second time and it even said that many of the latest intel motherboards are compatible with only the ati cards. What's the deal with that? Did ati really make a comeback or did they just get lucky when they were negotiating with intel?
About that, I think Intel is pissed at Nvidia for not selling them SLI, so they're moving on to support ATI as well.
December 28, 2007 2:26:19 PM

Strange, I thought that they were good business partners.
December 28, 2007 2:52:45 PM

I dont own either, but the benches I have seen is very close in comparison. Some folks say Nvidia actually skips frames to get better FPS? Who knows. Most people claim ATI looks better. I'm going to buy both cards and try them out for myself.

I watched some crysis videos on youtube and as far as I can tell on the crappy videos the ATI performs as well if not better then Nvidia. Crossfire wins hands down against sli IMHO just from watching youtube videos.
December 28, 2007 2:56:42 PM

Quote:
I dont own either, but the benches I have seen is very close in comparison. Some folks say Nvidia actually skips frames to get better FPS? Who knows. Most people claim ATI looks better. I'm going to buy both cards and try them out for myself.
Yeah, they did this with some of their beta drivers for Crysis recently. It only rendered a hand full of frames, like 3/10 or something, I forget the exact amount. It was rumored that they did this to increase their FPS before Crysis was released.

Quote:
I watched some crysis videos on youtube and as far as I can tell on the crappy videos the ATI performs as well if not better then Nvidia.
Hehe, like Intel was supposed to perform better than AMD in Crysis, but many AMD chips received near to, if not matching performance to Intel CPU's. (I think this is mainly due to have heavy the game is on the GPU - so it makes the CPU less of a bottleneck.)
December 28, 2007 3:01:06 PM

Nvidia has never and will never "skip frames" :|
It was just a bug (or maybe an attempt to cheat)... which caused some reflections in the water to update slower than normal. It was a very subtle change, and you actually had to be looking for it to catch it, and you really only could catch it because of the camera angle/speed in the benchmark sequence.
December 28, 2007 3:08:06 PM

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. I do remember reading the article and it saying how it wasn't really a noticeable difference to the naked eye. either way, it won't really effect my opinion about them. I'm neutral towards both ATI and Nvidia. :p 
December 28, 2007 3:22:25 PM

mikekazik1 said:
At first, I thought I misread the info since ati is legendary for making mediocre graphics cards.


lol, im sry...I had to quote this because I thought that maybe I read this wrong! You are joking correct?

Best,

3Ball
December 28, 2007 3:30:50 PM

I'm nuetral also but I'm leaning towards ATI after the research I have done. I dont game a whole lot on my PC, but I got 100 DvDs on my HDDs and I'm going to be getting a tv tuner card, and I believe ATI is better for my sort of activities. However; I am going to buy a 3870 and an 8800GT to see for myself. Which ever one I dont keep will go in a PC to sell.

I got to kinda think if Nvidia has been "caught cheating in FPS" that the have been cheating all along and accidentaly pushed the envelope to far and got busted. 8800gt vs 3870 in benches that I have seen are only off by 5-10 FPS in alot of cases. If Nvidia cheats an extra one or 2 FPS every 10FPS then ya I'd have to say ATI is better. To many posts about people that have seen both in action and say ATI looks better. If Nvidia is cheating, the extra 5-10 FPS doesnt even exist.

Bottom line to me is how it looks, not how it runs on my screen not how it looks on synthetic benchmarks.

I for one would like to see ATI spank the hell outta Nvidia, so we can keep prices down. I think Nvidia price gouges to much. I like to see AMD pull their head out of thier butt and show Intel whats up once again. Intel is getting a little to confortable for my liking.

PS: I have never owned a ATI, or AMD product. Lol. Just been doing alot of reading lately. I did however build an AMD PC for a friend. It was cheap, and it runs fast to.

Just my 2cents. Im not a fan of anything except fair prices and IMHO ATI 3870 is alot better bang for the buck the 8800GT. And if you do SLI or Xfire 3870 wins hands down.

One more note, Nvidia done PO'd Intel and now Intel and ATI are teaming up. Bad move on Nvidias part. I quess Crysis 2 will have Intels logo and Atis logo lol.
December 28, 2007 3:38:47 PM

Quote:
I'm nuetral also but I'm leaning towards ATI after the research I have done. I dont game a whole lot on my PC, but I got 100 DvDs on my HDDs and I'm going to be getting a tv tuner card, and I believe ATI is better for my sort of activities. However; I am going to buy a 3870 and an 8800GT to see for myself. Which ever one I dont keep will go in a PC to sell.
There is a nice DVI to HDMI converter for the 3800's, so that could work out pretty well for you watching movies if you have a separate HDTV or something. :p 
December 28, 2007 3:40:32 PM

roadrunner197069 said:


One more note, Nvidia done PO'd Intel and now Intel and ATI are teaming up. Bad move on Nvidias part. I quess Crysis 2 will have Intels logo and Atis logo lol.


Which would be weird.. because ATI is owned by AMD, Intels rival.
a c 363 U Graphics card
December 28, 2007 4:26:27 PM

mikekazik1 said:
At first, I thought I misread the info since ati is legendary for making mediocre graphics cards.


I agree with you 100%. At least up until ATI released the Radeon series back in 1999 or 2000.
December 28, 2007 5:30:40 PM

Vindicoth said:
Which would be weird.. because ATI is owned by AMD, Intels rival.



Do some research. Intel changed their penryns so the 680i wount be compatible anymore. And intel boards are going xfire. Intel would love to have Nvidia on there side incase ATI ever invents something uber with both technologys. Nvidia wont help intel so if they support ATI and Nvidia starts to stugle then they can make a deal. AMD does own ATI but Intel and ATI dont compete. Intel needs a highend chipset to compete, and since ATI nor Nvidia is for sell they would obviously go with the one they feel helps them the most.
December 28, 2007 5:37:26 PM

Ok, so it appears that ATI is better in crossfire mode. However, what is the best crossfire setup. Would the best choice be to have 2 cards in crossfire? Or would it be better to do one of the other configurations that use 3 or 4 graphics cards? Are there even any games that use that many graphics cards and is the extra performance worth the crapload of money that you would have to spend for it?
December 28, 2007 5:45:38 PM

2600 series = legendary mediocre lol
December 28, 2007 6:05:47 PM

that seems strange ati owned by amd but intels latest chipsets using amd's/ati's crossfire i would think amd/ati would only allow crossfire on their amd motherboards. at the moment i think ati are in a very deep hole and are only just trying to get their way out their 38*0 series is good but i think nvidia are miles ahead picture what a g92 core could do with 1gb of memory? :) 
December 28, 2007 6:24:20 PM

At first, I thought I misread the info since ati is legendary for making mediocre graphics cards. said:
At first, I thought I misread the info since ati is legendary for making mediocre graphics cards.


You have to be kidding me!
Just a bit over a year ago, ATI had the fastest single GPU solution around (the X1950XTX), up until the release of the 8800GTX. They still produce great cards, and while their best cards do not quite match up to Nvidia's, they're FAR from mediocre.


Quote:
2600 series = legendary mediocre lol


And what exactly do you call the 8600 series? ;) 


I'm no fanboy of either company, but come on!




you misunderstood, he was saying that until the radeon series they produced mediocre cards not after. said:
you misunderstood, he was saying that until the radeon series they produced mediocre cards not after.


Now that I read it again, you're right.
This was also directed at mikekazik1, so first quote changed to the original statement.


December 28, 2007 7:55:56 PM

imo:

for 1 card i like nvidia, particularly the 8800GT
for 2 cards i like ati, particularly crossfire with 3870.
December 28, 2007 8:09:41 PM

2600 and 8600 both sucked.
a b U Graphics card
December 28, 2007 9:03:38 PM

roadrunner197069 said:
Do some research.....

AMD does own ATI but Intel and ATI dont compete.


:pt1cable: 

Oh man that made me laugh out-loud.
Ati and intel don't compete? Like not in intergrated graphics or their media-centric chipsets, right? :lol: 

While CPUs are still the bread and butter of the AMD-intel fight, ATi's products competed with intel since way back, even more so than nvidia in the past with mobile and integrated solutions well before the others.
December 28, 2007 9:47:21 PM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
:pt1cable: 

Oh man that made me laugh out-loud.
Ati and intel don't compete? Like not in intergrated graphics or their media-centric chipsets, right? :lol: 

While CPUs are still the bread and butter of the AMD-intel fight, ATi's products competed with intel since way back, even more so than nvidia in the past with mobile and integrated solutions well before the others.



Intel has nothing for highend graphic market is what I was implying. So basically ya.

If I were Intel I would team up with ATI to make Nvidia broke then buy NVIDIA. Then show ATI whats up.

I believe Intel and Nvidia was kinda working together and that could be another reason Nvidia cards work so well with Core 2 Duos. Now that Intel is gonna role with ATI lets see if the CPUs optimize better for ATI.
December 28, 2007 10:41:59 PM

This quote from a post above"I for one would like to see ATI spank the hell outta Nvidia, so we can keep prices down. I think Nvidia price gouges to much. I am also exited to see AMD pull their head out of thier butt and show Intel whats up once again. Intel is getting a little to confortable for my liking."...
AMD has their head up their butt even farther now,and THEY are not showing Intel anything...GTX still owns anything ATI throws at it
December 28, 2007 11:02:54 PM

Quote:
Quote:
At first, I thought I misread the info since ati is legendary for making mediocre graphics cards.


lol, that is all i have to say about that, lol.


At least ATI wasn't legendary for making the Nvidia FX5200 :lol: 

Both companies have had good cards, both have had bad cards. I've always liked ATI for their All in Wonder cards that were also good gaming cards. They don't make them anymore sigh. Still, I really like the 3850's in my price range over the 8800GTs with only 256 megs of RAM.

roadrunner197069 said:
I dont own either, but the benches I have seen is very close in comparison. Some folks say Nvidia actually skips frames to get better FPS? Who knows. Most people claim ATI looks better. I'm going to buy both cards and try them out for myself.


Though I prefer ATI, I've been told the Nvidia skips frames is not the current 8000 series generation. My wife mods for Morrowind etc. and says that the image quality of ATI is a bit better. I can't tell myself, but I generally like ATI cards for AVIVO, so I'm going 3850 too.

I could put an 8600GTS in the MSI Nvidia 405 chipset system for comparison. I'd have to get a new power supply to have enough amps for an 8800GT 256. 22 is all the Cooler Master Realpower 450 has on the 12 volt rail. Still, though it would allow an image comparison.

roadrunner197069 said:
Intel has nothing for highend graphic market is what I was implying. So basically ya.

If I were Intel I would team up with ATI to make Nvidia broke then buy NVIDIA. Then show ATI whats up.

I believe Intel and Nvidia was kinda working together and that could be another reason Nvidia cards work so well with Core 2 Duos. Now that Intel is gonna role with ATI lets see if the CPUs optimize better for ATI.


I could be wrong, but Nvidia wanted to charge Intel, whereas AMD allows Crossfire for free. AMD almost bought Nvidia instead of ATI but the Nvidia CEO wanted to be in charge of the company and Hector Ruiz would not allow it. Most AMD fans preferred Nvidia and were disappointed. I wasn't one of them.

If Intel bought Nvidia, then there would be major antitrust issues, as Intel's developing discrete GPU's while still having the largest market share when IGP's are factored in. If Nvidia bought AMD/ATI then there would be fewer issues, due to market shares being smaller.

I'd love to see the best of ATI and the best of Nvidia's tech merged with AMD's to compete against Intel when Intel has discrete GPU's and their version of Fusion. That won't happen, but what I think will happen is that Crossfire will become the new defacto standard for multi GPU's on both AMD and Intel platforms.

What will Nvidia do when Fusion comes out? Fusion might not work alongside hybrid SLI. Fusion improved hybrid Crossfire could push Nvidia into a hard place on the AMD quad core platform market circa 2009. Imagine slapping a Fusion quad core with an HD 3000 series core into a 780G hybrid Crossfire board with a 2250 series IGP and a 3000 series discrete GPU. That would be triple Crossfire on the cheap.

Unless AMD has non-Fusion CPU's for Nvidia chipsets, then what will happen? Intel's already done damage to Nvidia's chipsets vis a vis their upcoming quad cores. Does Intel's choice of Crossfire mean the end of SLI in the long run?

After all, AMD giving away Crossfire to Intel might lead to Nvidia dropping SLI and adopting the Crossfire standard. It's the defacto standard for both AMD and Intel. AMD could simply accept Intel competition in discrete GPU's while winning on the multi platform side of things.
December 28, 2007 11:48:04 PM

yipsl said:
I'd love to see the best of ATI and the best of Nvidia's tech merged with AMD's to compete against Intel when Intel has discrete GPU's and their version of Fusion.


Can't agree with you more. Only problem is the issue of monopoly.

What a long post as always...
December 29, 2007 1:18:35 PM

mikekazik1 wrote :

At first, I thought I misread the info since ati is legendary for making mediocre graphics cards.

What a joke statement .... pull your hips from around your head and take it out of that cavern ... LOL .

And this one :
roadrunner197069 wrote :

Do some research.....

AMD does own ATI but Intel and ATI dont compete.

Ape .... where have these guys been ? Or are they just new to computer systems ???

Plus INTEL just hired a high end graphics card research team and I would think are developing the video cards as we speak . They're not famous for wasting money ...





December 29, 2007 8:39:23 PM

trooper1947 said:
where have these guys been ? Or are they just new to computer systems ???

Plus INTEL just hired a high end graphics card research team and I would think are developing the video cards as we speak . They're not famous for wasting money ...


Though I remembered that Intel tried to make a go of the discrete graphics market in the late 90's, I had to look up the name: Express 3D.

Back then I was stuck in the 8 meg 2D card and 12 meg Voodoo II 3D generation...

Most people think of Nvidia for AMD chipsets and ATI's chipsets were mostly ignored by enthusiasts who weren't into IGP solutions. I always thought it was a good idea just for troubleshooting, now with hybrid Crossfire and hybrid SLI on the way, it will be even better.

ATI got a bad rap because of driver issues prior to the Radeon days, but that's over. Except for Crysis, I believe Nvidia's skipped frames for higher framerates are a thing of the past too. Both ATI and Nvidia have been known to fudge drivers for benchmarks.

Intel should actually do well with discrete graphics this time around. I really hope they make them Crossfire compatible, because we need a standard. In fact, a newer standard could incorporate some SLI features, if Nvidia actually wanted to cooperate. I'd love to see multi card support on boards from each company where ATI works with Nvidia works with Intel.

I'd rather see a "we all win" situation than another battle to just be on top for a mere generation.
December 29, 2007 8:50:15 PM

For us consumers to got cheap prices for our cpu's and gpu's there needs to be competition between companys if one company say amd/ati sucks the kumara intel and nvidia's prices are going to skyrocket and we will all be screwed so i dont want amd/ati to go.
a b U Graphics card
December 29, 2007 8:57:37 PM

Depends on usage, price, etc.

In my major use (which is Linux), ATI is not on top. Nvidia has a better Linux driver. Also, for the record, the 2600XT is a great HTPC card, same as the 8600GT. It's just right the 38X0 series cards are great midrange cards. Overall, Nvidia is on top with their 8800GTX.
December 30, 2007 5:03:10 AM

neisonator said:
For us consumers to got cheap prices for our cpu's and gpu's there needs to be competition between companys if one company say amd/ati sucks the kumara intel and nvidia's prices are going to skyrocket and we will all be screwed so i dont want amd/ati to go.


Sigh, I really don't know what's going on in the minds of people who only want AMD around to make Intel drop prices on their C2D or quads, and ATI to be around to only drop prices on their Nvidia tech. Guess what? Intel did not really drop prices all that much when they had bad tech and better competition from AMD.

Nvidia hasn't dropped prices much even though the 3850's and 3870's are giving them some serious mainstream competition. I don't recall, but did Nvidia drop prices when they lost to ATI during the FX 5xxx days when the Radeon 9800 reigned supreme? Or where they propped up by fans?

Nvidia often gives a few extra fps in first person shooters, but not all of us prefer FPS, and ATI provides me with slightly better image quality in the single player CRPGs I prefer. Everyone is claiming that AMD Phenom sucks, well it didn't match the hype, but it's not a new architecture. I hope that Fusion matches the hype.

Phenom doesn't really suck because a look at Tom's Hardware CPU charts shows that it's not much worse than Q6600 in games like Supreme Commander, and it's very close in 3DS Max 9. See below:

Supreme Commander:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&m...

3DS Max 9:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&m...

Even in a FPS like Quake 4, what's the real world difference between 110 fps for the Intel CPU and 103 for the Phenom 9700? Granted, availability now is more like the 2.2 and 2.3 Phenoms, but that's still only 16 fps less in Quake 4, 5 fps difference in Supreme Commander and 9 seconds in 3DS Max. So, I'd rather flash my ASUS board's bios and put a $199 Phenom in than to get a new board and Intel CPU (I'm glad I have a board that passes the AM2 upgrade path test because a good bios flash is available).

Phenom isn't a failure. AMD hype and upper management are failures. AMD's engineers did a good job. If they are in a repeat of the K62 days, it's because their innovation in tech was mismanaged. I want them to survive because I want their innovation, not just a spur to get Intel off it's complacent tuchis or to keep prices a little bit low for the Intel fanboys.
December 30, 2007 6:25:48 AM

mikekazik1 said:
About 2 weeks ago, I heard some people saying that the very latest ati graphics cards actually have and edge over the high end nvidia cards.


Who did you hear that from? And no, NVIDIA is still the best when it comes to performance.

mikekazik1 said:
At first, I thought I misread the info since ati is legendary for making mediocre graphics cards.


ATI has never been known for "mediocre" graphics cards. Ever heard of the X1k series? The X1800XTX and X1800XT were amazing cards when they were released. They outperformed more often than not the than competing 7900GTX and 7800GTX. Not to mention the X1900XTX was phenomenal. In addition to that the X1950XTX coupled with GDDR4 is arguably the fastest pre-DirectX 10 card out there. Plus the X1600 series and older X800 series, such as the X800XT and X850XT Platinum Edition were legendary. Those cards helped to move and set a standard for cards, had it not been for ATI's competitiveness towards NVIDIA with the X800 series, you may not see the performance that you do in today's cards.

Don't the HD2900 Pro was a HUGE hit with a lot of the GPU crowd, it's debatable to say that if the 8800GT was pushed back another month or two that ATI would have gained an even better advantage with that card. The HD3850 is also the best buy if you're on a budget. The card dominates 8600 and some 8800 series cards, and HD2600 and almost beats the X1950XTX out-right in every benchmark.

To say ATI is a mediocre graphics company is just stupid.
December 30, 2007 6:32:14 AM

Vindicoth said:
Which would be weird.. because ATI is owned by AMD, Intels rival.


Interesting to add onto that statement, is that Intel considers its direct rival to be Samsung, not AMD. In the business world Samsung is a MUCH larger threat to Intel than AMD is. AMD is a bigger threat in the x86 market, but in everything else, Samsung is supreme.
!