Jump to content

Nvidia or ATI that is the question


Recommended Posts

I agree in regard to Dell Computers, but their U3011 monitor is quite fantastic.

Just for all you Dell bashers, I have bought nothing else for my business and myself for the last 12 years and in all that time, I had one monitor with a problem, which they replaced the next day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

ATI Sapphire 5870 Vapor-X, very quiet and runs everything nice apart from Cliffs of Dover (bloody epilepsy filter)

Sperry 8086 followed by mmx 200mhz that i oc to 250mhz plus massive 105mb hd, what a killer computer that was. Geoff Crammonds Grand Prix and Lucasarts X-Wing ran good anyway.

Editing Config.sys and Autoexec.bat to squeese every last 1k of ram out of comp was so much fun, do i need expanded or extended ram, cd driver or no nocd, how much ram for smartdrv, think 620k was best i ever saw, gonna have a lie down now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redwolf -

The old-fashioned way - saved turns in a CMAK large battle. I swapped out the 7900GT (256 MB) and 9800GT (512 MB) cards several times (same drivers), always recalling the discussions concerning more advanced DX9 or 10 not really helping older titles (such as CMx1). It wasn't small potatoes - the ability of the 512 MB 9800GT to retain graphic info (esp. all our modded stuff) made a clear difference. No FRAPS test to submit, apologies.

Does this not scale with your own experience, sir?

I think what Redwolf means is that you didn't verify whether the performance increase was really due to the memory increase (as you think) or whether the faster GPU also played a role (or even played the main role). The only way to check that would be to test with the same GPU, but with a different amount of memory (for instance by disabling half the memory of the 9800GT, if there's a way to do that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glukx - agreed. They eventually made a 512 MB version of the 7900GT at some point. Perhaps we could get Schrullenhaft to contribute here, with his years of CMx1 tech experience. As I recollect, many of the technical improvements of the 8/9 series GPU's over the 7 series wouldn't serve a game built on DX5/DX6.

Vergeltungswaffe - If there's one thing Dell has going for it, it's an extensive customer support network. There was a time when their gear was decent, too, but that has long since passed. As previously noted, by employing proprietary equipment, Dell's are often harder to modify/update than standard PC's.

And yes, they manufacture a mean LCD monitor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redwolf -

The old-fashioned way - saved turns in a CMAK large battle. I swapped out the 7900GT (256 MB) and 9800GT (512 MB) cards several times (same drivers), always recalling the discussions concerning more advanced DX9 or 10 not really helping older titles (such as CMx1). It wasn't small potatoes - the ability of the 512 MB 9800GT to retain graphic info (esp. all our modded stuff) made a clear difference. No FRAPS test to submit, apologies.

Does this not scale with your own experience, sir?

No, I have to say that it is unlikely that you exceeded 256 MB of video RAM with CMx1 in a way that would require constant swapin and swapout (which is what then slows things down).

People who say that a game won't profit from a modern card if the game doesn't use DX8, DX9 or DX10 features don't understand how it works. Sure, there are unused shader units and whatnot in the card.

But that doesn't change the fact that a large CMx1 battle pushes a lot of polygons and uses a lot of memory bandwidth (inside the card, VMRAM to GPU). You see CMx1 has no LOD (level of detail) and each vehicle and each of the 3 men in a squad is always rendered in full, no matter how far away it is. Only two pixels visible? Still going to draw dozens of polygons one by one.

So I think raw speed (memory bandwidth and polygon rendering) is what sped up the game for you.

If you really want to know you can download a tool from NVidia that profiles what's going on on the card, that includes memory usage and everything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for all you Dell bashers, I have bought nothing else for my business and myself for the last 12 years and in all that time, I had one monitor with a problem, which they replaced the next day.

Dell desktop computer are from my experience better ventilated, have better PSUs and more durable cooling components than comparable competitor's computers, namely HP and Sony which sometimes bring out outright junk. However, in any given Dell desktop the PSU and the ventilation have been right-sized for what is in it and you cannot just go and put in a graphics card that uses 150 watts more than the old one.

The cheap Dells are mostly low profile cases, half-height PCIe card, smaller than ATX power supplies and no space for fans, that gets pretty nasty if you want to get a better card.

For any desktop you plan to expand later you should get a regular mid-size ATX tower than has at least 2x80mm or 1x120mm exhaust fans and space for a regular ATX power supply, preferably a long one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silly rabbit.. Nvidia is for kids.

ATI is much superior, of course. 6970 is whisper quiet (can't even tell the computer is on most of the time) and smokingly fast. And since its so quiet, you can Crossfire 2 of them and still have a quiet computer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, it doesn't matter whether you think ATI is better than Nvidia or not, the fact is that the Nvidia cards handle this game much better. I don't know why that is - but try it for yourself and see. My 6950 was a fab card, but it was awful in Shock Force. My 480 is utterly fantastic in Shock Force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Nvidia have silent cards?

My PC doubles as a server, and it is on 24x7, so I don't want any noise from my card.

I found a very affordable passively cooled ATI, that runs CMx2 just fine.

There are passive Nvidia cards out there but I have no experience with them. There are also very low noise top-end cards available by Nvidia, but these are not server based products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are also very low noise top-end cards available by Nvidia, but these are not server based products.

This ATI (EAH5550 SILENT) didn't support my Windows Server 2003 either, but with a bit of pushing I got the device drivers installed.

No ATI control centre for me though, but that has the advantage that I can't worry about all those options :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have agree with the build your own crowd. If you buy a good GAMING machine off the shelf you are going to pay 3x what it would cost to build your own. (This is not true for a simple home box.) Basically you'll want something with a big power supply, a good sound card, and a good video card. I'm running an AMD Quad core, ATI 4850 video card, 650 watt power supply and mirrored set of 10000 RPM RAID hard drives. Mirroring has saved my a$$ twice in the past and I highly recommend it. Also go with hardware that has been out for a year or so. You'll save a ton. Buying the latest and greatest is very expensive in the computer world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

Thanks for all the very down-to-earth advice from everyone.

I love this forum. Everyone here has some good ideas that they have acquired through years of experience, and they aren't afraid to share them.

btw, the only reason I was sticking with nVidea was because that's what I have in my latest Dell (from 2005) rig, and it is able to generate the fog graphics, etc., for CMx1, that I have heard some graphic cards don't support (not sure about that).

I still have a lot of good Combat Mission gaming opponents over at The Blitz site that still play a lot of CMx1, so I want to be able to continue for a while with CMBB and CMAK, while I come up to speed with the new CM:BN.

With a new rig, I also might try the CMSF series as well, as the Demo looks interesting, but my rig doesn't support the graphics as well as many of the screen-shots for CMSF that I see posted around this forum site.

Thanks again,

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well for those of you on the fence, it looks like Nvidia is the card to go with.

I've seen too many people with ATI issues. I have an older Geforce 210 and will be looking to upgrade to a 460 or better.

Game runs fine now, but I want to see it in all its glory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My experience with NVidia has been more positive than with ATI as well. I have seldom had issues with them the way I have with ATI cards. The ATI's are often cheaper, but not as reliable IMHO and have spotty performance in some games. I'm talking desktops but my laptop also has an NVidia 8800M GTS GPU and 512 MB dedicated video RAM and plays the demo just fine. If you have to go with a laptop, be sure it has a dedicated graphics GPU and RAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on our experiences from a tech support side... I'd say both have their fair share of problems, however I would go with a nVidia card before an ATI card. Just steer clear of the low end cards put out by either company. For a few bucks more you can get a MUCH better card that will be less prone to problems.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

I'm currently playing the demo using an Nvidia GTX260 bought a couple of years ago to replace the two Nvidia 512mb cards that came with the rig using the latest drivers on an old AMD 64 FX60 Dual Core chip. Two previous cards had died.

The demo is playing far better than I had though it would with all setting maxed out except Vertical Sync off. 1920x1080 @60Hz. Pretty smooth so far.

I put it down to the video card as my processor is hardly cutting edge now but it shows that some older systems appear to be able to run the game quite smoothly.

This is the demo though and the full game might be different kettle of fish. Bigger scenarios!!!!!!

A decent card seems to make all the difference in CMSF and CMBN (so far) to me anyway. Your milage may vary. I would recommend Nvidia but I am not an expert and am only going on how the game plays on my system. Horses for courses.

I'd weigh up the pro Nvidia versus pro ATI comments and make a decision. Best bit of advice is to buy the best card you can as with anything, you get what you pay for.

I was tinkering with the idea of upgrading my card again but I'll be waiting until I need to buy a new system. This one does me fine just now and appears to be still going strong. Anyway, buy the latest today, it's obsolete before you get it into the car.

No plan survives contact with the next turn button.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFAIK Nvidia got the lead in Open GL driver performance at the moment. The ATI drivers are not so hot in Open GL. This seems to be the reason that CMBN is running a little better on Nvidia .

I use a Radeon 5750 , btw , with absolutely no problems.

But am thinking about getting a Nvidia GTX 560/570 as my next replacement ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are four camps, with regards to which video card is best.

1.) Nvidia owners who have everything working: Nvidia is the best!

2.) Nvidia owners who have a problem: ATI is the best!

3.) ATI owners who have everything working: ATI is the best!

4.) ATI owners who have a problem: Nvidia is the best!

The best advice I can offer is to see what your budget allows, find out what specs your motherboard/system have and therefore which cards are supported, read the reviews for specific problems (for instance, if you have the ABC Zultran motherboard and EVERYONE knows that the ABC Zultran doesn't work with the Hoodoo graphics card, don't buy the Hoodoo card. ;) ). Then add a large grain of salt to all you've read. Next, buy your card. Then add buyer's remorse bundled with a dose of "the grass is rendered greener by the OTHER card", and then acceptance. It'll work (whichever you choose) and you can play the game.

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are four camps, with regards to which video card is best.

1.) Nvidia owners who have everything working: Nvidia is the best!

2.) Nvidia owners who have a problem: ATI is the best!

3.) ATI owners who have everything working: ATI is the best!

4.) ATI owners who have a problem: Nvidia is the best!

The best advice I can offer is to see what your budget allows, find out what specs your motherboard/system have and therefore which cards are supported, read the reviews for specific problems (for instance, if you have the ABC Zultran motherboard and EVERYONE knows that the ABC Zultran doesn't work with the Hoodoo graphics card, don't buy the Hoodoo card. ;) ). Then add a large grain of salt to all you've read. Next, buy your card. Then add buyer's remorse bundled with a dose of "the grass is rendered greener by the OTHER card", and then acceptance. It'll work (whichever you choose) and you can play the game.

Ken

Yeah !

That really that, i'm coming back to desktop PC for running game in good sreen, i'm trying an ATI card at first (5750) but it had a big matter so return to the seller, so i take a Nvidia card (GT430) and all run well ! crysis and CN BN at full option on my 22' :)

my 2cts

Philippe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite a few people seem to have had problems starting/exiting the demo using ATI cards. A simple fix in MOST cases is to uodate to the latest 11.5 drivers. I'm currently using ATI/AMD, but i've used both ATI/NVIDIA over the years and each have their +/- points. I usually buy the card that seems to offer the best bang for buck at the time. No matter what card you have, my advice would be to keep your drivers up to date -- you can always roll-back if you have serious issues with a game you like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

simply avoid amd, pay 100 euros more for nvidia/intel but avoid amd.start thinking about amd after 2020ad. well unless you are playing top 10 most famous games (as someone mentioned earlier)

amd cpus have weaker single cores (cmbn uses only 1 so quad core amd would perform worse or same as some older intel dual core, generaly)

amd gpus are catastrophic. i am not fanboy of nvidia, they are just catastrophic, run from them ,RUN

THEY ARE NOT CHEAPER WITHOUT A REASON

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^

LOL! I've run all sorts of cards, going back over 20 years. (Or more. ;) ) EVERY card manufacturer has issues. AMD and Nvidia are both good. Shop, read reviews, discard the obvious flamebait and fanbois, and buy what works for you.

Ken

i even like amd's logo but nvidia is more ex pensive for a reason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...