Ati vs nvidia, the features

[death_relic0]

first of all yes i searched google, but diddnt quite find wat i was looking for so now im asking here...
so basically, my question is regarding the features of ati and nvidia... like ive heard nvidia has physx or something and something called cuda and ati dosent have these...

so wat i wanted to know was that if ati dosent have these, does it have something else? some other specific features that make ati attractive (excluding eyefinity ofcourse). Also, how much of a graphics impact does playing a game without physx and cuda on an ati card vs playing a game with physx and cuda on nvidia have? how much better do the visuals look? also ,the cuda and physx features, do they put extra load on ur graphics card so that if u have them on u may have to lower AF and/or AA? and how many games/which games have physx and cuda or do these features effect graphics of all games?

 

[96Firebird]

AMD:
-Eyefinity (3+ monitor setup)
-MLAA (A different type of AA that I guess doesn't use as much GPU power?)
-Crossfire

nVidia:
-Physx
-CUDA
-SLI

Most titles with Physx can use the CPU to do the physx processing, only a select few titles ONLY use GPU physx (where it would show up with nVidia only). However, with nVidia cards you can select which (GPU or CPU) processes the physx. I'm not sure which is better, as I have not messed around with it. Maybe someone else can chime in...

CUDA is a programming language. It uses the GPU to process, instead of relying soley on the CPU. At least that is what I think it is...

 

[benski]

Physx does strain your GPU so if you don't have a dedicated card you will likely have to lower settings to maintain performance. There are a few titles that have noticable physx effects but not many so it's cool to have but I wouldn't base my buying decision on it unless I really really loved one of the games that uses it. CUDA doesn't have any effect on gaming, and I consider SLI and Crossfire the same thing so that's a push. NVidia has a better 3d solution (ATI's solution is just to sell you someone elses 3d technology). ATI has eyefinity, but it's kind of a scam because you have to buy an expensive DP adapter or DP monitor, and even though they include the feature in a single card only the highest end cards are powerfull enough to really run games in the resolutions that eyefinity supports, so I don't really see it as much of an advantage over Nvidia surround. MLAA sounds interesting but I barely notice AA anyways, my eyes aren't good enough to notice blurred edges when I'm already running 1080p on a 23 inch screen.

 

[eyefinity]

You don't need a high end card to run eyefinity, that's a myth. And you can get cheap displayport adapters now.

 

[17seconds]

GPU-based PhysX is better/faster when rendered by the GPU, rather than CPU. It does lower framerates somewhat, but most of the better Nvidia cards, and any of the recent GTX400 series models are good enough to handle both tasks. In those games that use GPU-based PhysX, the effect on the visuals can be dramatic. If you play, for example, Mafia 2, Unreal Tournament III, Metro 2033, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Dark Void, Shattered Horizon, Mirror's Edge, or Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2; an Nvidia card would be preferred.

 

[benski]

You don't need a high end card to run eyefinity, that's a myth. And you can get cheap displayport adapters now.

Sure you can "run" eyefinity with a 5770 or even below, but you won't be able to play any games across 3 screens with descent detail level so what's the point? No one willing to invest in 3 monitors is going to want to game at that level, at least I wouldn't, so personally I see no value in being able to span 3 screens with a single low to mid range card.

 

[eyefinity]

That's because you've never tried it. 3 monitors aren't very expensive either, you start with 1 already and can buy 2 more for around £200.

Check out these vids

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=19312

Say £350 ($560) for 2 more screens and a 5770. By all means get a 6850 like I did recently for 50 bucks more. There aint no way any single card and single screen can compete with that at the price point.

 

[benski]

Well if you are willing to spend over 400 bucks on monitors I don't know why you would want to settle for a sub $200 video card setup thats going to force you to play at lowered settings. Just my personall opinion, and you're right I haven't tried it, but I read alot of reviews because I'm planning on it (2nd GTX 465 should be delivered by tommorow). I already have 3 1650x1050s and the benches I saw showed the games I want to play struggling on SLI 460s on high settings, so I doubt a single radeon under a 5870 would have any chance of playing at 4950x1050 at the detail levels I want. I don't want to have to butcher my settings or play at lower resolution in order to span 3 screens.

 

[benski]

And the guy posting those videos says in that forum that he's getting 15-20 fps, maybe that's just because of fraps...

 

[Mousemonkey]

And the guy posting those videos says in that forum that he's getting 15-20 fps, maybe that's just because of fraps...

I recall a certain ATi fan mentioning 20-30 fps with dual 5770's and eyefinity, not what I would call funky frame-rates but each to their own I guess.

 

[eyefinity]

And the guy posting those videos says in that forum that he's getting 15-20 fps, maybe that's just because of fraps...

In bad company 2 yes. Did you check out deadspace, fallout 3 etc?

If you haven't tried it, don't comment on it like an authority please.

 

[eyefinity]

I recall a certain ATi fan mentioning 20-30 fps with dual 5770's and eyefinity, not what I would call funky frame-rates but each to their own I guess.

I'd guess that would be maximum settings, and probably with AA set too high. AA especially can kill it for obvious reasons but nobody who has seen eyefinity in action would take a single screen with higher settings and claim it was a better experience.

Look at the dirt 2 one - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLdd6SQcrac aint no way you will ever get a better experience on a single screen, no matter what settings. It's the same for all fps as well.

 

[Mousemonkey]

I'd guess that would be maximum settings, and probably with AA set too high. AA especially can kill it for obvious reasons but nobody who has seen eyefinity in action would take a single screen with higher settings and claim it was a better experience.

Off the top of my head I can't recall if settings were mentioned, I'd have to go digging through their post history for that.

 

[eyefinity]

Well whatever, the videos on that link show enough games running very well to dispel the myth that you need 2 high powered graphics cards for 3-screen gaming.

 

[benski]

I'll go with legitimate benchmarks and reviews over grainy youtube vidoes and the word of an obnoxious fan boy but thanks anyways

 

[Mousemonkey]

I'll go with legitimate benchmarks and reviews over grainy youtube vidoes and the word of an obnoxious fan boy but thanks anyways

I found this on our very own THG but it's not very expansive.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5570,2552-13.html

Did you want lower cards or higher end card benchmarks?

 

[eyefinity]

I found this on our very own THG but it's not very expansive.

http://media.bestofmicro.com/X/L/238377/original/Eyefinity.png

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5570,2552-13.html

Did you want lower cards or higher end card benchmarks?

Maybe you want to check the card again mousemonkey.

 

[Mousemonkey]

Maybe you want to check the card again mousemonkey.

That's why I asked for clarification. And drop the insults or you will be taking a holiday again.

 

[eyefinity]

Ah mousemonkey, back to deleting my posts but not the attacks against me.

You sure are one pathetic mod.

 

[eyefinity]

That's why I asked for clarification. And drop the insults or you will be taking a holiday again.

Obnoxious fanboy isn't an insult? You really are an embarrassment to tomshardware.

 

[Mousemonkey]

Your postings speak for themselves mate and they are frequently of an obnoxious nature together with an avatar that kind of singles you out.

 

[yanje03]

AMD:
-Eyefinity (3+ monitor setup)
-MLAA (A different type of AA that I guess doesn't use as much GPU power?)
-Crossfire

nVidia:
-Physx
-CUDA
-SLI

Most titles with Physx can use the CPU to do the physx processing, only a select few titles ONLY use GPU physx (where it would show up with nVidia only). However, with nVidia cards you can select which (GPU or CPU) processes the physx. I'm not sure which is better, as I have not messed around with it. Maybe someone else can chime in...

CUDA is a programming language. It uses the GPU to process, instead of relying soley on the CPU. At least that is what I think it is...

you forgot a big feature.

nVidia support 3D but ati doesn't, all other feature is nothing, to be honest. nVidia card can support 3 monitors too.

 

[eyefinity]

No your postings speak for themselves. Not deleting his attack on me, and instead quoting it, then deleting my reply says it ALL about you.

 

[Mousemonkey]

you forgot a big feature.

nVidia support 3D but ati doesn't, all other feature is nothing, to be honest. nVidia card can support 3 monitors too.

I think ATi have some sort of 3D support through third party software and you need two Nvidia cards to do three screen gaming but you can't do dual screen gaming.

 

[eyefinity]

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/ATI_Radeon_5770_5750_-_Featured_Review_-_Page_12

Far Cry 2 - 60fps can be in with 0xAA, Very High Settings, and 4800x900.

I used the highest video settings in every game with the exception of AA.

At highest settings and three 1080p screens on a SINGLE 5770, that's not bad. Lower those settings a notch, use 1680 by 1050 screens and it's much better - you can easily add 50% to all those numbers.

Don't tell me you can't run eyefinity well with a 5770. I did every day for months, and it's a million times better than single screen.