Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Ati vs nvidia, the features

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 11, 2010 1:46:54 PM

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?

More about : ati nvidia features

November 11, 2010 1:51:24 PM

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...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 2:21:03 PM

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.
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 4:41:50 PM

You don't need a high end card to run eyefinity, that's a myth. And you can get cheap displayport adapters now.
m
0
l
a c 607 U Graphics card
a c 400 Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 4:56:25 PM

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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 5:09:26 PM

eyefinity said:
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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 5:38:57 PM

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.ph...

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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 6:08:37 PM

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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 6:15:48 PM

And the guy posting those videos says in that forum that he's getting 15-20 fps, maybe that's just because of fraps...
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 6:22:44 PM

benski said:
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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 6:25:45 PM

benski said:
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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 6:29:47 PM

Mousemonkey said:
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.
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 6:32:31 PM

eyefinity said:
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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 6:40:26 PM

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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 7:47:09 PM

I'll go with legitimate benchmarks and reviews over grainy youtube vidoes and the word of an obnoxious fan boy but thanks anyways :p 
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 7:59:57 PM

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

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?
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 8:06:32 PM

eyefinity said:
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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 8:07:56 PM

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

You sure are one pathetic mod.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 8:08:52 PM

Mousemonkey said:
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.
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 8:14:09 PM

Your postings speak for themselves mate and they are frequently of an obnoxious nature together with an avatar that kind of singles you out.
m
0
l
November 11, 2010 8:15:07 PM

96Firebird said:
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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 8:16:23 PM

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.
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 8:17:51 PM

yanje03 said:
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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2010 8:39:43 PM

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/ATI_Radeon_57...

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




Quote:
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.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 11, 2010 10:54:02 PM

Impressive numbers on a nicely OCed 5770, honestly alot higher than I thought they would be, but I really like Dirt 2 and Warhead and I wouldn't call those framerates playable for either. I'm kind of curious what the insult that got deleted was :)  Anyways try to lighten up dude, and remember your rudeness will always be reflected back at you.
m
0
l
November 12, 2010 1:39:36 AM

OK, i'm not sure really where to begin on this considering the war thats going on here, but here it goes.

Eye, I see mousemonkey pointing out a 5570, not the 5770. I also don't think he is arguing that a 5770 can do 3 monitors decently, just maybe not optimally? If you look at anyone running 3x 30 inch screens, 1 5770 or even 2 5770's in crossfire is not acceptable. (If you run all games and resolutions at max)

However, dispite the 5770 your posting being OCed and not vanilla, those are impressive numbers. And it looks like you don't have to turn off much to get those FPS. Which is also very impressive.

For me, (and i'm ONLY speaking for myself) I need a computer with the graphics ability to run ANY game regardless of bad coding or game engine, to run at 60+ FPS with ALL settings turned to max on 1 1920x1080 monitor. But that's just me. I hate settling or being held back by anything.

Mousemonkey, If i'm wrong on assuming what you mean then i'm sorry. But you do have to admit, that even an OCed 5770 has some impressive numbers as per the above posting by EYE.

Please keep in mind for everyone here, that the OP was only asking about the differences in the cards, not for a debate or war of any kind.

If you really want to laugh about something listen to my build.

I just made a new game rig with a 4.4 GHZ OC i7-950, an asus sabertooth mobo, 6 gig of corsair dominator ram, a corsair 1000HX PSU, a 300GB velociraptor with a new 26 inch samsung touch-of-color monitor. Now whats so funny about that? I currently run an EVGA 220gt 1GB videocard. LOL It's mostly because I built this rig a few days ago and the 580s and 6900's were around the corner, and i'm on the fence about what to buy. So i'm waiting. But until then, i run call of duty blackops, gothic 4, etc etc all pretty well with a 1920x1080 monitor. It's still funny! lol. Such a waste of a 1K PSU. lol.

Anyways, I think the OPs question about the differences in the labels is understood and explained by now. Just take all advice and information with a grain of salt in the future.

If you really wanna argue about something, argue about helping me pick out 2 videocards! My mobo does both sli and Xfire!.
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 12, 2010 1:45:01 AM

wickedsnow said:
If you really wanna argue about something, argue about helping me pick out 2 videocards! My mobo does both sli and Xfire!.

For the answer to that you really need to start your own thread, for the OP I would say that a mid range card cannot run three screens at a decent frame rate.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 12, 2010 1:55:35 AM

It is odd that this turned into a debate about eyefinity when the OP specifically said "(excluding eyefinity ofcourse)." My fault I guess. Sorry death_relic0. Hopefully you can sort through this and find the answers you were looking for.

m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 12, 2010 2:02:29 AM

benski said:
It is odd that this turned into a debate about eyefinity when the OP specifically said "(excluding eyefinity ofcourse)." My fault I guess. Sorry death_relic0. Hopefully you can sort through this and find the answers you were looking for.

96Firebird was the first to list eyefinity as a plus, so you are sort of off the hook on that one.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 12, 2010 2:15:13 AM

Sweet, I'll go get the rope!
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
November 12, 2010 2:18:04 AM

benski said:
Sweet, I'll go get the rope!

Now, now. :lol: 
m
0
l
November 12, 2010 2:22:22 AM

All these replies and the 2nd post is the most relevent to the OPs question.

To reiterate what 96Firebird said:

Nvidia has the best support for 3d right now.
Cuda is not relevent for games, only video processing and number crunching.
OpenCL is ATI's version of CUDA and is not as widely supported.
NVidia pays game devs to make games with their hardware in mind which means better performance for those games on Nvidia hardware.
SLI and Crossfire are ways of using 2 video cards to render content. Only with the 6xxx series has AMD/ATI caught up with NVidia on scaling perf. As MM says, 2 is better than one.
If your game uses PHYSX than an NVidia card will perform better than an AMD/ATI, but not many games do this.
Visuals are on par between AMD/ATI and NVidia as far as gaming goes, but the new MLAA is supposed the help AMD/ATI 6xxx cards perform AA without the typical loss in performance.
m
0
l
November 12, 2010 2:55:47 AM

I agree with Firebirds assessment on the 2 brands. That's about as direct and to-the-point you can get.

I personally play many games that are better used with nvidia cards. However, the new 6xxx series is very nice. i can't wait to see the new 69xx versions.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2010 8:29:46 AM

can anybody explain to me how a 5770 @ 1ghz managed to get 60fps on avg @ a resolution that high, even with no AA? :|

or can anybody with a display capable of 1080p with a 1ghz 5770 do a ranch (no AA) run through pls. i'm guessing it should pull out around 100fps on a single display.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2010 9:06:48 AM

I understand that ATI Eyefinity can put out to 3+ monitors.

Does Nvidia have a similar offering (excluding the 3D vision thing, i'm not interested in 3d, just 3 monitors).
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2010 10:30:38 AM

^ yes they do, but SLI is a pre-requisite as it's not available on a single card solution.
m
0
l
November 12, 2010 1:14:03 PM

Mousemonkey said:
96Firebird was the first to list eyefinity as a plus, so you are sort of off the hook on that one.


Hey now, we all know if I hadn't mentioned it some people would have complained. I did it to save myself from backlash. :spookie: 
m
0
l
!