Draylore Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 No that's Nvidia users. They got conned by Nvidia's advertising and think that because their cards cost more they must be better. ATI users are generally tech clued people. That's why they pay less for more performance...like any knowledgeable person would. You can tell the clued ones from the not-so-clued, ie people who bought a 560 Ti when they could almost certainly have got a 6950 at the same price instead. Not always the case. Ask anyone that knows me, I am one of those tech clued people. I always try to make sure I get the best possible components for the best possible price....(now that depends on budgets, etc). Benchmarks, specs, etc while important in the end are not what really counts. What really counts is actual performance in whatever games or applications you use. I have gone back and forth over the years between NV and ATI....always going with what is the better 'spec' at the time and have learned one lesson......ignoring price....when comparing GPUS of equal 'tier' between NV and ATI......while the benchmark crown varies....actual in game performance is always in NV favor. Its not hardware or specs its drivers....ATI drivers just plain suck ....there simply is no other way to say it. I recently had to get a new gaming laptop......my final choice on GPU came down to 580m -vs- 6990......where the 580m was ....+$330 more than the ATI.......on paper and benchmarks the two cards were virtually equal....and in some cases ATI was the winner. Against my better judgment with regards to price-vs- performance I went with the 580m purely due to piece of mind. Again, if you were to ask anyone that knows me......forking out ~$300 dollars just for piece of mind is not something I normally do. Thats how bad my opinion of ATI drivers is based on my previous gaming laptop that had a ATI chip. My desktop PC currently has an ATI card and once I get around to upgrading it ....I will be getting the best NVIDIA card I can afford.....not going to even look at ATI anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LionRampant Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) Not always the case. Ask anyone that knows me, I am one of those tech clued people. I always try to make sure I get the best possible components for the best possible price....(now that depends on budgets, etc). Benchmarks, specs, etc while important in the end are not what really counts. What really counts is actual performance in whatever games or applications you use. I have gone back and forth over the years between NV and ATI....always going with what is the better 'spec' at the time and have learned one lesson......ignoring price....when comparing GPUS of equal 'tier' between NV and ATI......while the benchmark crown varies....actual in game performance is always in NV favor. Its not hardware or specs its drivers....ATI drivers just plain suck ....there simply is no other way to say it. I recently had to get a new gaming laptop......my final choice on GPU came down to 580m -vs- 6990......where the 580m was ....+$330 more than the ATI.......on paper and benchmarks the two cards were virtually equal....and in some cases ATI was the winner. Against my better judgment with regards to price-vs- performance I went with the 580m purely due to piece of mind. Again, if you were to ask anyone that knows me......forking out ~$300 dollars just for piece of mind is not something I normally do. Thats how bad my opinion of ATI drivers is based on my previous gaming laptop that had a ATI chip. My desktop PC currently has an ATI card and once I get around to upgrading it ....I will be getting the best NVIDIA card I can afford.....not going to even look at ATI anymore. Sucks how? I can't believe you would actually pay $300 for an equal card just because of some nonsense "driver" issue. I already linked a ton of stuff showing that Nvidia drivers were responsible for 30% of all Windows crashes, and proof of their "card killing" driver. What did ATI ever do? I'm sorry but for me you are just parrotting the same tired old stuff we hear about. ATI drivers are absolutely fine, I've bought many, many ATI cards and never once had a driver problem. They also tend to run this game slightly better - especially with minimum framerates. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/star-wars-gaming-tests-review,3087-6.html Edited January 13, 2012 by LionRampant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ltankhsd Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 To the OP and those agreeing with him: No! A quick check of the Horrid FPS thread of the customer support forum will show you there are plenty of Nvidia users with FPS issues including me and I use a GTX 560Ti. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaediyen Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I'm running two 6870s and it's fine. It could be better, but it rarely goes below 60 fps and is usually around 80-100. And for all you fanboys out there, you get what you pay for and an similarly priced AMD setup will get you nearly the same performance as an Intel system. Intel just offers higher priced options that perform extremely well. As far as graphics cards go, a lot of it is just how the engine is built. Sometimes one kind of card runs a bit better than the other. Usually after a few updates from the card manufacturer and the game enigne developer, they gear nearly equal performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draylore Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Sucks how? I can't believe you would actually pay $300 for an equal card just because of some nonsense "driver" issue. I already linked a ton of stuff showing that Nvidia drivers were responsible for 30% of all Windows crashes, and proof of their "card killing" driver. What did ATI ever do? I'm sorry but for me you are just parrotting the same tired old stuff we hear about. ATI drivers are absolutely fine, I've bought many, many ATI cards and never once had a driver problem. They also tend to run this game slightly better - especially with minimum framerates. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/star-wars-gaming-tests-review,3087-6.html Sucks based on what I experienced. When I was specing my new laptop I had the chance to test two identical specs....except for the GPU.....one with the 580m the other with the 6990m. Ran all the usual epeen benchmarks and as I said ...the top dog varied depending on which benchmark. Then I fired up some games I play.....Skyrim, Rift, Batman, CoD, BF3 and SWTOR. Tweaked both systems as much as possible (i.e driver settings, windows, yada yada.....the usual stuff us tweakers do). In all...100% of those games.....the in game performance on the 580m system was rock solid while the ATI was rock solid in some, choppy in others......and inconsistent in some....and in a few like Rift it was not even close. Trust me I spent alot of time messing with drivers (the fact I spent 4x the time messing with the ATI ones -vs- the NV ones was a sign in and of itself). My decision after that was not very hard to make. The only thing I saw the ATI system do better at was actual image quality. In all my years of PC gaming ATI has always just had a better image quality IMO. Don't get me wrong......I am no brand fanboy....If I had seen equal in-game results there would have been non choice.....the cheaper better product would have won easily. It could be drivers....it could be the company.....it could be the hardware....it could be game designers for some reason writing code that works better with NV than ATI......really no clue ...but for me the end result is what it is. If it were one or two games I would blame me or my systems.....but game after game after game that I tested the results were pretty much consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Grissom Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 EVGA Superclocked Nvidia GTX 560 (NON TI) running at max settings and ALWAYS sitting above 65 FPS. It runs battlefield 3 on full settings as well so I am quite happy with my cart. Im so happy in fact that I will be getting a second one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gasaraki- Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I went AMD and Nvidia this time around. I consider it the best of both worlds. Especially since I can get greater performance for my dollar out of AMD than I can Intel. Seriously, Intel wants 200+ for a quad core, and I got a 6 core AMD for 150. yeah, Buying an Intel right now is like buying Hilfiger slacks over Duckies. Right... cores mean sh*t now. You think an eight-core AMD is faster than a 4 core- Intel i7? Go read some more. Games don't even take advantage of the extra cores. They might use 4 if that, most only really use 2 cores. The fastest AMD chip right now has around the same performance as a i5 Intel. Cost is around the same, with most of the difference between the mobos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuanceNW Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Seems arbitrary. I actually removed my GTX 560-TI and put an older ATI 5870 in to get better performance and better shadows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DroidDestroyer Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Seems arbitrary. I actually removed my GTX 560-TI and put an older ATI 5870 in to get better performance and better shadows. I run the 560 TI and have absolutely none of the reported issues with high res and performace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DroidDestroyer Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Right... cores mean sh*t now. You think an eight-core AMD is faster than a 4 core- Intel i7? Go read some more. Games don't even take advantage of the extra cores. They might use 4 if that, most only really use 2 cores. The fastest AMD chip right now has around the same performance as a i5 Intel. Cost is around the same, with most of the difference between the mobos. You are correct and the i5 is the better choice for gaming over the i7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajikMyst Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) Mars II isn't a real production card it's a 1000 unit showoff card. AMD could easily make a quad 6990 and blow it away, a quad 580 would drain all the power in the US. AMD had the fastest single gpu card 18 months ago - the 5870. They've been fastest card overall since 2009 with the 5970 then the 6990. The sad truth of it comes to light when you consider that AMD's dual-gpu cards consume less power than Nvidia's single-gpu cards, and are usually only half the (chip) size. Nvidia is rubbish and has been for ages. Now the 7970 dominates, the 7950 will be out in 2 weeks followed soon by the monster 7990 and Nvidia won't have a new card for months. AMD will have 4/5 of the top fastest cards soon - 7990, 6990, 7970 and 7950 with Nvidia only having the 590 in the top 5. It's embarrassing. I find it truly sad when someone bashes one company in favor of another.. Quite simply.. The facts say otherwise.. See for yourself. Both Nvidia and ATI make good cards.. It is up to the consumer to decide what is better for them.. Obviously in this case AMD/ATI combinations are having more issues than Intel/Nvidia are.. Hence this thread.. I am not sure what the issue is.. But it isn't because Nvidia is rubbish.. Evidence might suggest the opposite.. Edited January 13, 2012 by MajikMyst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hulduet Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Some people are really trolling hard in this thread... When it comes to video cards they're all pretty much the same, looking at the price class/performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solockic Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 All I can say ist that our GTX 460's work great but Ive seen plenty of complainers with 5xx models so I think any conclusion is misguided. I agree I run the GTX460 and love the way it runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sithkllr Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) ATI 6970 beat all NVIDIA cards FPS on Tomshardware.com test of SWTOR. I myself have a 5870 and it does about 50-60 fps in open world areas and 60+ in instances. What am I missing? PS I found out by using Performance monitor that anytime I get choppy fps or skipped frames it is not my video card but my HD that is the issue. This game EATS HDs ALIVE. The HD usage was literally off the charts everytime I would get a skipped frame or "bad FPS". CPU - low usage. Memory - low usage. Check it out yourself. Edited January 13, 2012 by sithkllr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajikMyst Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 ATI 6970 beat all NVIDIA cards FPS on Tomshardware.com test. I myself have a 5870 and it does about 50-60 fps in open world areas and 60+ in instances. What am I missing? Except this one.. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-590-dual-gf110-radeon-hd-6990,2898-6.html Sorry.. 6970 near the bottom of the list here.. Even the Geforce 480 got a better score than the 6970.. At least for the test I linked.. Tom's Hardware as well.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sithkllr Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Except this one.. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-590-dual-gf110-radeon-hd-6990,2898-6.html Sorry.. 6970 near the bottom of the list here.. Even the Geforce 480 got a better score than the 6970.. At least for the test I linked.. Tom's Hardware as well.. I was talking about the SWTOR test. Sorry, I should have clarified: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/star-wars-gaming-tests-review,3087.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancientwolfgr Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 No that's Nvidia users. They got conned by Nvidia's advertising and think that because their cards cost more they must be better. ATI users are generally tech clued people. That's why they pay less for more performance...like any knowledgeable person would. You can tell the clued ones from the not-so-clued, ie people who bought a 560 Ti when they could almost certainly have got a 6950 at the same price instead. So its all uninformed consumers who cannot get good performance out of the box? As a retailer who sees 10 to 1 returns/exchanges on ATI products over Nvidia I tend to go with what works. Im not talking about a few cards here, but hundreds, consistently over quarterly figures- and it has been that way with some consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kabhal Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I have a Radeon HD6770 and the game runs wonderfully on full high settings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sithkllr Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) So its all uninformed consumers who cannot get good performance out of the box? As a retailer who sees 10 to 1 returns/exchanges on ATI products over Nvidia I tend to go with what works. Im not talking about a few cards here, but hundreds, consistently over quarterly figures- and it has been that way with some consistency. My last 2 cards were Nvidia. They sucked. $300 range each. Last card I got BSODS on Win7 with even the most up to date drivers. I wound up installing XP again and it ran fine. BOTH cards literally died at close to the year mark. Black screen. Toast. Went to ATI next and got my 5870 a year ago. Solid as a rock, cheaper, no BSODS or issues of any kind. I will most likely always get ATI\AMD from here on out. Very anecdotal, I know. But like you I wil llet my experiences dicate what I buy. Edited January 13, 2012 by sithkllr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruCompany Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) Well, so far I've had zero problems what so ever with the game and Nvidia. In fact, I've only experienced two bugs in the game so far. One being a lighting glitch on Tatooine, and the other was a glitch with a mission stage, where I can't complete the quest because of it. Edited January 13, 2012 by TruCompany Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bltzkrieg Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I know I am. MY Nvidia Geforece GTX-580 x 2 in SLI rock the show. This game is smooth as silk. I find it funny how everyone likes to say ATI is better, but in every PC game I have ever played there is always an ATI Problem thread on the respective games message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajikMyst Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) I was talking about the SWTOR test. Sorry, I should have clarified: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/star-wars-gaming-tests-review,3087.html Better read your link again.. Some settings yes.. The 6970 performed better.. But at max detail, 4x AA, at 1280x1024.. The 6970 came in at 3rd.. Again beat out by the GTX 460.. It did however perform a little better at higher resolutions.. I see no need to play at a super high resolution.. In the end.. In most cases, you are looking at a difference of 4 fps or less.. Which is barely worth mentioning.. With the way fps can change while playing a game.. 4 fps is really nothing.. Now it becomes a compatiblity issue and possibly heat issue.. In the end, the 6970 is not the better card in all situations.. Just as Nvidia cards are not the better card in all situations.. People are going to have to figure out what will work for them and their needs.. Edited January 13, 2012 by MajikMyst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHeadCapper Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) I think I first read this kind of post on the Camelot forums. It's an old issue. ATI makes great cards, but their drivers suck. I used to buy ATI. Never again. This, i quit buying their cards a while ago due to all the driver issues. Nvidia has been smooth as silk. Cards are good and a lot of games have no issues, but sometimes they fail really hard on their drivers and i didn't want to deal with it anymore. Edited January 13, 2012 by TheHeadCapper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sithkllr Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Better read your link again.. Some settings yes.. The 6970 performed better.. But at max detail, 4x AA, at 1280x1024.. The 6970 came in at 3rd.. Again beat out by the GTX 460.. It did however perform a little better at higher resolutions.. I see no need to play at a super high resolution.. In the end.. In most cases, you are looking at a difference of 4 fps or less.. Which is barely worth mentioning.. With the way fps can change while playing a game.. 4 fps is really nothing.. Now it becomes a compatiblity issue and possibly heat issue.. In the end, the 6970 is not the better card in all situations.. Just as Nvidia cards are not the better card in all situations.. People are going to have to figure out what will work for them and their needs.. I would never play at 1280X1024 so i didnt even look at that. But in looking again it seems you are wrong? The 6970 is always listed 3rd, but the order he lists them in is arbitrary. Look at the actual FPS in each bar chart. It wins in every scenario I see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Private_Jenkins Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 For all the talk about Nvidia drivers being better, the facts tell a different story - http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2008/03/vista-capable-lawsuit-paints-picture-of-buggy-nvidia-drivers.ars Nvidia drivers caused more than 3x the number of crashes compared to ATI drivers. /thread did they normalize for differences in the prevalence of AMD and Nvidia cards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts