Nvidia or AMD graphics card for this game?

[TheOldHermit]

And oh dear, I forgot that asking for comparisons between AMD/ATI vs Nvidia is like asking for input on Democrat vs Republican, Coke vs Pepsi, Sith vs Jedi. I definitely did not intend to start any flame war with this thread.

 

Primarily, just want to know if there are any real, known issues with SWTOR and either chipset.

[savagepotato]

Also, I have had a couple games in the past year or so where there were nvidia driver issues. I can't really remember the games at this point. I remember waiting for a patch on a couple games at least.

 

In my opinion, both companies these days have their issues with drivers. It's a complicated process, so I don't really fault them.

 

Nvidia for what it's worth has even had some catastrophic driver releases in the past. At one point they briefly released a beta driver that would damage cards due to cooling issues I believe. The specifics are foggy, but they have had some real dud's too.

[Draylore]

 

AMD methodically releases a driver update each and every month.

 

That's most likely because they have more issues to fix. =P

 

Having been into PC gaming and PC building for longer than most of the people playing TOR have been alive, I can say that NVIDIA is the better choice if for those concerned with compatibility ....err 'piece of mind'. IMO ATI has almost always produced cards that had better image quality(that however is subjective) ...but again their driver/support leaves alot to be desired. ATI has also usually been the better choice in terms of price/performance.

 

That said....I doubt I will ever go with ATI again simply because I am tired of having to spend 5x as much time 'tweaking' drivers and such.

 

Also, for better or for worse....Game designers seem to put out games that just run better on NVIDIA out of the box.

[savagepotato]

And oh dear, I forgot that asking for comparisons between AMD/ATI vs Nvidia is like asking for input on Democrat vs Republican, Coke vs Pepsi, Sith vs Jedi. I definitely did not intend to start any flame war with this thread.

 

Primarily, just want to know if there are any real, known issues with SWTOR and either chipset.

 

One that comes to mind is I believe I saw a dev tracker post about AA still being forceably disabled on 69xx ati hardware due to issues.

 

I have also seen complaints about shadows from ATI users, though that is simply what it is, forum complaints, nothing personally verifiable.

[XortiN]

And oh dear, I forgot that asking for comparisons between AMD/ATI vs Nvidia is like asking for input on Democrat vs Republican, Coke vs Pepsi, Sith vs Jedi. I definitely did not intend to start any flame war with this thread.

 

Primarily, just want to know if there are any real, known issues with SWTOR and either chipset.

 

I have a radeon 4870 that works very well and is a little older. Only problem is when I first played in Beta the starting video did not show. Updated my drivers and have not had an issue since.

 

That said I get the idea from people talking on forums and some friends input, that Nvidia runs a little better and has less issues. Though if you got a 6870 I doubt you would be disappointed with how it ran and they are in a very good price/performance bracket

[Starfrost]

Not sure why some people are having so much trouble with their ATI cards and this game; it sounds like many of these ATI problems are due to other issues with the users' systems.

 

I and my wife are both using AMD 4870's (Sapphire Toxic, 2 GB onboard memory) and we run the game as smooth as silk on both our systems--even after patch 1.1. Our systems are similar, and we were both averaging 80 FPS, except in the crowded fleet areas. The funny thing is, these 4870s are older AMD cards( though using latest catalyst drivers) so I don't get it--people with the newer, more powerful AMD cards are having more performance issues!?

 

Yes we have the green 'laser light show' at times, in certain areas, but I don't believe this is limited to just the ATI/AMD cards. I have seen lots of performance complaints from people that list I7-spec'd systems with GTX 560's, so right now, I really think it is a toss up.

 

With this game, it is more an optimization issue for some systems, rather than what brand of graphics card you are using.

 

If I was up-grading, I would go with what ever card gives you the most 'bang for your buck' utilizing a recently released single-player game as a bench mark. Do not base a graphics card purchase on SWTOR--EA/Bioware have some serious work to do with this one.

[Bamajawn]

I use both ATI and nVidia cards. For this game, I'm using a pair ofXFX Radeon HD 6770s in Crossfire. Very smooth, no problems to report. (other than the conspicuous lack of high res textures and lack of DX11 support and some green lines as reported by others.) Edited January 19, 2012 by Bamajawn

[TomWhiting]

Stick to reliable sources like anandtech or other quality hardware sites.

riiiight, because they're not biased

AT

ALL

[MaGicBush]

This is bad advice on drivers...

 

AMD methodically releases a driver update each and every month. Nvidia does take longer to update drivers. I use Nvidia cards, but let's be accurate shall we.

 

Well I said from personal experience, and that was back when I had a ATI card. It has probably changed(that was around 10 years ago). As for those talking about the driver issues, I have never seen a problem with a driver in the last 6 years(since I got my GTX260). As others have said though, it's best to use a professional review site that tests both in the current generation and go off of that as opposed to someones personal experience.

Edited January 19, 2012 by MaGicBush

[CODKill]

I have been switching between ATI and Nvidia for nearly 12 years now. I have finally concluded that Nvidia is better. I currently am running a ATI 6970 which was an "upgrade" from my Nvidia GTX 295. Here is how I feel about the two companies:

 

ATI: Better pricing, lower power consumption, better performance gains from multiple card setups

Nvidia: Better performance, MUCH better drivers and software

 

The reason I switched from my GTX 295 was for bitcoin mining (ATI is the ONLY way to go and it eventually payed for my card) and to get rid of the single card SLI setup (I was getting too much frame tearing and artifacts). But looking back on it, I would rather have the frame tearing for a more consistent frame rate and the better drivers, by which result in less artifacts and graphical glitches. I am considering throwing my GTX 295 back in since I am not doing bitcoin mining anymore and am not hearing of some of the problems, I have experienced, from Nvidia users. Nvidia just seems to be more solid and if you go with EVGA as the Nvidia card brand, you will get great customer support and solid build quality.

 

One thing to also consider is which technologies you would like to use as each company has their own "features."

 

ATI: Eyefinity (multi-display gaming)

Nvidia: 3D Vision (3D display required), CUDA, PhysX

 

I find that gamers will benefit much more from the Nvidia cards and technologies. But in the end, ITS ALL OPINION

[Vyradder]

I'm running with an ATI 5770 1GB DDR5 card...all settings on max, with no problems to report. Two days ago I was getting 28 fps in the fleet, and 60+ out on Hoth. Those numbers should be higher today after the latest patch.

[Marmerus]

My video card (Geforce 9800 GTX+ 1GB) died and now I'm deciding between a Geforce GTX 560 and a Radeon 6870.

 

Besides Mass Effect 3, SWTOR will likely be the last major PC game I buy for quite some time. With that in mind, does SWTOR run better on AMD or Nvidia graphics cards?

DO NOT LISTEN TO THE TROLLS IN THIS THREAD!

 

Now back to your question.

ATI runs this game better than Nvidia. This benchmark clearly shows you get a 10%-20% increase in performance with equal value card.

For an example if you decide between a GTX 570 and a Radeon 6970 they are both in the same price segment and they are both equal in terms of performance in most games. But in this game ATI is around 15% faster.

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/star-wars-gaming-tests-review,3087-7.html

[Lifeshield]

That said....I doubt I will ever go with ATI again simply because I am tired of having to spend 5x as much time 'tweaking' drivers and such.

 

Get a little tired of seeing this sort of stuff. Unles you're running CrossFireX (of which SLI has equivalent issues normally) there's no more driver tweaking needed than with Nvidia cards.

 

Over the past year I owned dual HD5770s and a HD6870. I also owned a X1800XT and a X1950 in the past before those. Out of all the games I own (well over 50 currently) I have only had problems with two of them (The Witcher 2 and Skyrim), both of which were CrossFireX related. Single card I've had no problems whatsoever.

 

People are too quick to blame just drivers for their problems. It's just as likely their own inadequacy that's at fault, but of course they don't want the internet to know that they failed. Heaven forbid.

 

Sure everyones a desktop expert on the internet, some may even comment the same about my opinion but I find it hard to believe I am the only person on this planet who has had a relatively good experience with AMD and their drivers overall.

 

I'm sure the same can be said about Nvidia. The truth is don't buy into brand loyalty, just read some reviews and buy what is good value for money for you. Both manufacturers do excellent cards, and if anything AMD are currently producing some top quality hardware (cards anyway). Nvidia just manage marketing better in my opinion.

Edited January 19, 2012 by Lifeshield

[XortiN]

riiiight, because they're not biased

AT

ALL

 

Anand himself I have found enjoys harping on hardware manufactures no matter who makes it. When needed he will push them pretty hard to fix things or admit to them.

 

Though others do write articles for Anandtech and I have seen some bias in theirs. Tom's Hardware as well is usually fairly good but it is more about who does the review than the site itself.

[Juicenewtonz]

Running on my single gtx 560 2gb and having perfect framerates everywhere but the fleet when its over 200 players and ******** ilum, which is fine with me.

[Shapewalker]

I started out with ATI, not the best card at the time. I then went with NVIDIA but their cards had so many issues and the driver support sucked. After the card literally dying I switched to ATI. Since AMD took over ATI the driver support has gotten a lot better and is a very stable card. I have a 4870 and it plays the game well.

 

To each his own, but guildies complain about NVIDIA cards more than ATI from my experience. NVIDIA has good frame rates but kept crashing and resetting according to them. That's just poor drivers. Pick the one that works for you though.

[doumalos]

Running with 2 Amd 6950 With no issue at all

 

Just make sure to force AA via the driver

[lordCriper]

As the poster above me said, it's a matter of personal preference really. My last 2 gaming machines i've went with AMD(ATI) and i have been very satisfied. At the moment i have 2 x 6950 2GB cards in x-fire running TOR without issues ( graphical;) ) at all.

 

Both companies make excellent cards. Some games run better on an Nvidia machine, some on an AMD. The developers gets paid by the two companies to optimize the performance with their product...

 

Someone already said it though, and i agree with that Nvidia do release better drivers overall.

 

To sum it up i'm a Radeon user running TOR with everything on high without issues, never lag. Can't say if TOR favors Nvidia over ATI though.

[savagepotato]

riiiight, because they're not biased

AT

ALL

 

How is anandtech biased?

 

When OCZ was releasing horrible jmicron SSD's anandtech was the one who took them to task on it. They forced them to pick it up and fix their junk even in the face of pressure from the company to provide good reviews.

[Marmerus]

I have been switching between ATI and Nvidia for nearly 12 years now. I have finally concluded that Nvidia is better. I currently am running a ATI 6970 which was an "upgrade" from my Nvidia GTX 295. Here is how I feel about the two companies:

 

ATI: Better pricing, lower power consumption, better performance gains from multiple card setups

Nvidia: Better performance, MUCH better drivers and software

 

The reason I switched from my GTX 295 was for bitcoin mining (ATI is the ONLY way to go and it eventually payed for my card) and to get rid of the single card SLI setup (I was getting too much frame tearing and artifacts). But looking back on it, I would rather have the frame tearing for a more consistent frame rate and the better drivers, by which result in less artifacts and graphical glitches. I am considering throwing my GTX 295 back in since I am not doing bitcoin mining anymore and am not hearing of some of the problems, I have experienced, from Nvidia users. Nvidia just seems to be more solid and if you go with EVGA as the Nvidia card brand, you will get great customer support and solid build quality.

 

One thing to also consider is which technologies you would like to use as each company has their own "features."

 

ATI: Eyefinity (multi-display gaming)

Nvidia: 3D Vision (3D display required), CUDA, PhysX

 

I find that gamers will benefit much more from the Nvidia cards and technologies. But in the end, ITS ALL OPINION

Im not gonna bash you or anything because there is a lot of things wrong in your text.

 

So Im just gonna point out that Nvidia also has multi-display gaming (Nvidia surround) and ATI has 3D gaming. Both not better than opposite sides in terms of support of development. But they are both working.

 

Also CUDA is pretty much useless outside of a Quadro.

Physx is used in very few games and in most games it requires you to have two or more cards. Best is to have 3 cards where the last one is dedicated for Physx.

 

Drivers are pretty much equal for both partners. Only difference is that you need to do driver sweeps when you install new cards with ATI.

 

And you should not get frame tearing if you use v-sync. It has nothing to do with SLI or CF at all.

 

Artifacts is most likely because you overheat your system. You should fix the cooling in your system.

[MrSchmo]

I upgraded from a 5450 to a 6870 and it was the best 150 bucks I spent. I went from 20-25 fps to over a 100 fps! Everything is high settings except the shadows.

 

Which brings me to a question. Why can I run this game at over 100 fps but soon as I turn shadows on, it takes a dive to 40fps? Shadows are a hog in this game which is a shame cause the game is breathtaking with them on.

[schmak]

Looking at your motherboard, you cannot do SLI.

 

IT can do Xfire, so you may be better off going with an AMD card if wanting the extra horsepower of an XFire setup.

 

Your PSU is a problem. Its only 520w. It does allow xfire and sli support, but if you have too many drives (DVD/BluRay) it probably won't take it.

 

That being said, going mid range ATI/AMD or nVidia should be fine for 1 card. 2 is probably pushing it (again, can only do it with ATI on that mobo)

 

Supposedly you can do SLI but its tricky.

 

Again its your call down to budget and preference. Just make sure if you buy only 1, put it in the BLUE PCIe slot as the black is 8x only. If you get 2, you would probably want to get an new PSU.

 

 

Check the video cards you are getting for minimum PSU recommendations, and cross reference at tomshardware.com

 

Its not a and little rig you got there for its age and you can probably pump a few more years out of it

[Dosblade]

Two computers with ATI 5870 and ATI 6870 and no problems what so ever. Everyone's system is different. DONT go by what some site or someone says.. Just make sure what ever you buy you can return it. TRY IT YOUR SELF.

[XortiN]

DO NOT LISTEN TO THE TROLLS IN THIS THREAD!

 

Now back to your question.

ATI runs this game better than Nvidia. This benchmark clearly shows you get a 10%-20% increase in performance with equal value card.

For an example if you decide between a GTX 570 and a Radeon 6970 they are both in the same price segment and they are both equal in terms of performance in most games. But in this game ATI is around 15% faster.

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/star-wars-gaming-tests-review,3087-7.html

 

Good to have the link to the performance comparisons.

So ATI seems to be what the game favors in terms of performance. No wonder I have hardly had any issues

[CODKill]

Im not gonna bash you or anything because there is a lot of things wrong in your text.

 

So Im just gonna point out that Nvidia also has multi-display gaming (Nvidia surround) and ATI has 3D gaming. Both not better than opposite sides in terms of support of development. But they are both working.

 

Also CUDA is pretty much useless outside of a Quadro.

Physx is used in very few games and in most games it requires you to have two or more cards. Best is to have 3 cards where the last one is dedicated for Physx.

 

Drivers are pretty much equal for both partners. Only difference is that you need to do driver sweeps when you install new cards with ATI.

 

And you should not get frame tearing if you use v-sync. It has nothing to do with SLI or CF at all.

 

Artifacts is most likely because you overheat your system. You should fix the cooling in your system.

 

You're right, I hadn't seen that Nvidia was getting into the multi-display gaming stuff and ATI 3D gaming I was not aware of. Physx, though, has had a big impact on games that utilize it. Games that I played with my GTX 295 and then again after using my 6970 had a drastic difference in visual quality and performance. V-Sync has AWLAYS produced too much lag for me, don't know why, so I had been forcing Triple-buffering in the background to deal with it, but still does not produce the results I have been looking for. The artifacts aren't from overheating in my case, although you are correct in that heat is usually the culprit.

But back to the tearing and V-sync, which is my major complaint all around no matter which vendor, it seems that there is no happy point. With V-sync off, tearing is horrible. With V-sync On, everything is delayed, but smooth. Triple buffering has helped a little, but is more of a middle ground. At this point, the lag/delay is much more bothersome than the tearing, so I have just dealt with it for now. But since this 1.1 patch, I am getting many artifacts and random flickers in which all models and scenery are gone for a fraction of a second and only the backdrop is shown, and then everything comes back. Don't know what that is about, but just started recently.

 

And thank you for being decent about correcting me and describing what was wrong. I really appreciate being treated with respect and knowing the facts. Many people on these forums need to learn about this.

Edited January 19, 2012 by CODKill