NVIDIA is the worst thing in the world - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 01-26-2005, 10:54 PM   #21 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5,280
Send a message via AIM to beedubaya
Default

NVidia is better because they have less driver problems, Pixel Shader 3.0 support, and great support for both OpenGL and Direct3D. I am an unproud owner of the X800 Pro, which in my opinion is the worst $400 i've ever spent. While it does okay in HL2, it can barely play Doom 3, while the 6800GT can play Doom 3 at twice the settings I play it on and still beat me by 40 fps. In HL2, you see the X800 Pro beating the 6800GT by 5-10 fps at the most. There are some cases when the 6800GT will do better in HL2 than the X800 Pro. I am getting ready to upgrade from the X800 Pro to the 6800 GT because I am so freaking tired of getting crap performance in Doom 3. And its only going to get worse when more games come out with the Doom 3 engine.
__________________

beedubaya is offline  
Old 01-26-2005, 11:05 PM   #22 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 69
Default

Benchmark scores never lie.

Maybe the same reason AMD is better than Intel. The architecture or processes are more efficient and better.

Just to point some credibility my way ... I own and have tested both the Radeon 9800Pro and the Geforce 6800Ultra. I prefer the 6800 Ultra hands down.
__________________

TheRanger is offline  
Old 01-26-2005, 11:09 PM   #23 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,019
Default

lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao


lol lol lol

defensive lil xxxxxxx aint ya ?

just admit it sometimes u buy Crap 2nd rate hardware(i.e amd and ATI), and nothing u say about it can improve it


do not try to mask your swearing. the word filter may not see it but I do.

ekÆsine
Tech Forums Super Moderator
__________________
Sig reinstated. SigSanta
VIII is offline  
Old 01-26-2005, 11:14 PM   #24 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5,280
Send a message via AIM to beedubaya
Default

Thats the thing I don't like about fan boys. They think defending their crap product is going to magically make it better when in fact it can't. LOOK AT THE FACTS!
beedubaya is offline  
Old 01-26-2005, 11:25 PM   #25 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 242
Send a message via AIM to DyNaStY336
Default

^ true
__________________
• Antec Super Lanboy case
• Asus P4SD-LA Mobo
• Intel P4 2.6GHz HT @ 3.11/960fsb
• 1.75GB PC2700 DDR Memory
• 120g HD
• Atapi CD-ROM
• HP DVD Writer 300n
• Creative SB Audigy2 NX
• Logitech Z-640 5.1 speakers
• PNY 6800 GT @ 408/1.1
• Logitech Dual Action Game Pad
• Windows XP Home
• Mag Innovision 19\" Lcd Monitor [no ghosts :)]
CSS: {TF}Dynasty336

http://img106.exs.cx/img106/7439/gamer5sj.jpg
DyNaStY336 is offline  
Old 01-26-2005, 11:27 PM   #26 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 69
Default

Go ahead and say what you want, but can you OC an Intel 6Ghz and still have it Cold like I have my AMD? I have a MOBILE Athlon 2500+ OC'd to 2.4GHZ and stock is 1.83 also my temps are 36Celsius.

Oh, and don't tell me that you can do that with a Pentium cause I have proof you can't. I literally cracked and nearly melted a P4 1.8 trying to OC it a mere 2 Ghz.
TheRanger is offline  
Old 01-26-2005, 11:28 PM   #27 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 242
Send a message via AIM to DyNaStY336
Default

P4 2.6 at 3.2 here and nice and cool
__________________
• Antec Super Lanboy case
• Asus P4SD-LA Mobo
• Intel P4 2.6GHz HT @ 3.11/960fsb
• 1.75GB PC2700 DDR Memory
• 120g HD
• Atapi CD-ROM
• HP DVD Writer 300n
• Creative SB Audigy2 NX
• Logitech Z-640 5.1 speakers
• PNY 6800 GT @ 408/1.1
• Logitech Dual Action Game Pad
• Windows XP Home
• Mag Innovision 19\" Lcd Monitor [no ghosts :)]
CSS: {TF}Dynasty336

http://img106.exs.cx/img106/7439/gamer5sj.jpg
DyNaStY336 is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 12:05 AM   #28 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 422
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by jnev_89
did you read what i wrote? nvidia's perform 99% as good as ati in games like HL2 (which caters to ati), whereas ati cards barely run games like doom 3 (which cater to nvidia). overall, nvidia has better performance. now, if you only run games like HL2 and don't care about games like doom 3, then yes, ati is probably better for you. otherwise, nvidia offers better overall performance. plus, if you run linux, nvidia has a HUGE advantage.
I have to disagree 100%. My Sapphire Radeon 9800SE LITE was able to get 30~40FPS in Doom 3, on Medium (I think, or High can't remember)... except a few parts where it dropped to 3 FPS but we won't go there hehe

You see, OpenGL is not truely *designed* for games. It's supposed to be used for multimedia applications (not games). Of course, Doom 3 is great and was designed with OpenGL. DirectX is optimized for gaming, designed for gaming, and is a lot better then OpenGL in many ways. And OpenGL is a lot better in its own ways.

I bet if Doom 3 was designed in Direct 3D, ATI would run just as good as any Nvidia.

Yes, I am an ATI guy- I will always stick with ATI.

My question is--how many games (commercial and big like Doom 3) actually USE OpenGL? I can't name many, really, all I can name is Doom 3.

So really, why should ATI spend extra time optimizing their cards for one simple game, when the developers of Doom 3 should of made it in DirectX?

Oh well. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's still my opinion . Personally, I didn't like Doom 3. I like Half-Life 2 better.Doom 3 was dark, scary, and uh boring... although I do like being able to play on the computers such as the security cameras

As for Nvidia supporting Linux, that's all good and well but there are like no good games for Linux... very few. Also, for those few games ATI will just do fine with their current drivers.
__________________

Current PC
Windows 7 Pro x64
AMD 965 Black Edition 3.4GHz
ASUS Crossfire III
Corsair 650 Watt
12GB RAM
Sapphire ATI 5770
500GB Samsung*2 | 150GB VelicoRaptor 10K HDD
1TB Samsung
Jobs
Electrician
C# Programmer+Web Programmer
Gamer :)
mack is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 12:08 AM   #29 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 113
Default

The 6800 series are great.
Nvidia makes great cards.

The X800 series are great.
ATI makes great cards.

No need to start a debate about such a silly topic... if you think you can design better video cards, then you may be my guest.
__________________
I\'m not a vegetable!
RedRecon2004 is offline  
Old 01-27-2005, 12:18 AM   #30 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

I prefer the 6800's over X800's, and I prefer 9800's to FX 5950's

overall I am unbiased to the maker of the card, I like cards that perform better. it is a simple fact that 6800's perform better in Doom 3 and almost as good, and sometimes better than the although it is true that AA and AF take a heavier toll on the 6800's

and it is also true that the Radeon 9800 beats all Nvidia 5xx0 cards also

I don not think that "Nvidia rules" nor do I think "ATI Rules"
I just think they have both made some really good cards, and some bad ones too.

Quote:
o and also VII If your running HL2 with 6x AA than you are running with no AA because for nvidia if i understand correctly 6x means none at all.
I don't quite understand how 6xAA can mean no AA at all. AA is present in virtually all cards out today.

Quote:
just admit it sometimes u buy Crap 2nd rate hardware(i.e amd and ATI), and nothing u say about it can improve it
AMD and ATI are not crap at all.

I like Athlon 64's because they have a lot of advancements over Pentium 4's. although Pentium 4's are just starting to make 64-bit Pentium 4's, they perform really badly when they do run 64-bit apps. also the onboard memory controller, and shorter pipelines make them great CPU's to oprate. although they are not as good as Pentium 4's when it comes to mathematics and multimedia apps, this is partly due to larger cache
now, I'm not biased towards AMD either, I prefer this particular CPU over the opposing Intel CPU's today. I prefer Pentium 4's to Athlon XP's for the most part, except for Mobile XP's when it comes to overclocking, and I heavily prefer Pentium 3's to Durons.

being biased towards a particular company is not good. while that company may be doing very well now, they may not be in future. for all we know, AMD or Intel might go out of business in 5 years (although I doubt that for both of them)
__________________

__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.