But of course Tom's Hardware never reported on that....
To be fair Vista sucks... I've had 0 problems with Nvidia, hell I've had more friends computers with ATI's go down much more frequently than the Nvidia ones. Maybe AMD can help em? I research like crazy before I build so I will take it on a case by case basis.
But of course Tom's Hardware never reported on that....
To be fair Vista sucks... I've had 0 problems with Nvidia, hell I've had more friends computers with ATI's go down much more frequently than the Nvidia ones. Maybe AMD can help em? I research like crazy before I build so I will take it on a case by case basis.
To be honest, Vista runs better on proper hardware then XP ever would. I could run Vista at speeds that XP never would, why? Because my hardware was MADE for it. Most people complain about Vista because their hardware sucks. Vista compatible does not in no way mean Vista CAPABLE.
Owner/Admin of GodlessGamer.com - Gaming news and reviews for the godless.
But of course Tom's Hardware never reported on that....
To be fair Vista sucks... I've had 0 problems with Nvidia, hell I've had more friends computers with ATI's go down much more frequently than the Nvidia ones. Maybe AMD can help em? I research like crazy before I build so I will take it on a case by case basis.
nvidia arent oc friendly from nvidia
ati is!ati had fan issue last year ,and it seem they still do they dont speed up or speed down they turn at max always(graphic card fan)
Well I love my 4850,yes its getting old but it pumps out 60 plus fps on eve full settings with 2 clients running
My rig costed me 256USD with free shipping 2 months ago.I know its not the fastest But i can play All of my games at 1900 400 full settings with aa and af cranked up ,Quake 4 <biglots 3.99 >,eve,allods,tf2,css,dod sorce,cod mw and mw2,aoc,the list goes on and on..
OCing isn't a proper estimate for guaging a hardwares ability. Hardware is typically manufactured at a safe clock for a large batch. So sometimes you get a good overclocker and sometimes you get a bad one. Most of the time hardware review sites get good overclockers to make their product look good. Chances are as a consumer you won't be able to clock them as well as you see on these hardware sites.
If anything nVidia is a worse overclocker, their cards are hotter and suck more juice at stock. This leaves very little headroom by default.
Well as you may have noticed in a lot of reviews and forums, the majority pretty much rules in favor of ATI owning 2010 and possibly 2011 if they keep chugging along at this route. At one point Nvdia was a couple steps ahead but now this time it's the complete opposite. And let's not forgot Intel's plans to jump into the market therefore creating another competitor for them.
What reviews and forums? The majority don't know the benches of the fermi cards or even a price, but most, even ATI, admit that they will be faster than the current ATI offerings bar the 5970. The only reason the ATI fans are vocal right now is because Nvidia fans don't have anything to retort with. Nvidia is still apparently on schedule to put out the 2nd round refresh cards at the end of year when ATI is dropping their refresh.
So since the GF100 cards will be faster than the current ATI cards and both companies are putting out refreshes; I don't see ATI retaking the performance crown. Nvidia will have caught up to ATI by the end of the year so I don't see how you think ATI is multiple steps ahead.
Price wise ATI will win but performance will be Nvidias. The question is which you choose to base your opinion on. Those with money will pick performance and those on budgets will pick price.
Intel isn't ready to jump into the high end graphics fray. They pulled their plans to drop a high end graphics card on the market because ATI had already gone passed the theoretical specs of their card. You might see them later in the future but probably not any time soon.
of caurse we dont know what a fermi bench they are 7 month later then ati (IF THEY LAUNCH IN MARCH)
ati can sit till september and not even be worried !why?
i got a ati 5770 and i oced it to the max 950 or close to that (850 stock)
and 1450 (1200 stock)
there are probably other tweak i could have touched .i went back to stock
ati hasnt been sleeping for 7 month lol but why would they lunch other card
nvidia isnt even close to be ready to try to comperte vs the 7 month old card from ati
and intel changed the way they plan to take ati head on.yes some might see this as a weekness
but i can assure you that the last time they turned around they were 1 year beind amd
now they are 1 year ahead of amd .and one more bad news for ati,intel is already on the 25 nm process(for their memory chip
8 gig on a single half inch x half inch.so intel is very far ahead in the size shrink ,they probqably delayed because they are at their second year for the 32 nm process and as we ll know intel always go beseark on the second year of a die shrink
first year they carbon capy existing but smaller second year they go beseark and make all competition unhappy because intel become impossible to catch up(processor)
good thing mmo havent use proc since 2004 or some company (amd)would be in trouble
but with the need mmo ask of proc lol the techno is 6 years too early for mmo game!
But of course Tom's Hardware never reported on that....
Maybe because that's a useless stat?
1. Vista was new in 2007 and a major change from XP there were a ton of issues all around. You don't see this with Windows 7 mostly because of what was learned from vista and W7 being basically an upgraded vista.
2. Nvidia wasn't just doing Graphics card drivers. They also had their chipset drivers that could also have a hand in those figures and at that time didn't much of a competitor from AMD/ATI. Do the AMD chipsets even count as ATI?
3. Nvidia has/had a much larger portion of the market than ATI. This was also the time of the Geforce 8XXXX series which were awesome. Even recently Nvidia has double the market share according to steam, HERE.
So if a larger market share and chipset don't explain those figures I don't know what will. In fact I find it astonishing that ATI has such a high rate of problems considering their low market share and lack of chipsets.
The other thing is this: most graphics card related issues don't usually result in a computer crash. You will find a lot of the problems with ATI drivers or ATI cards don't result in computer crashes. Heck I remember the game crash lines in WoW for ATI users. Nothing like going to do chromagus and 3-4 people dropping because they had ATI cards.
Well as you may have noticed in a lot of reviews and forums, the majority pretty much rules in favor of ATI owning 2010 and possibly 2011 if they keep chugging along at this route. At one point Nvdia was a couple steps ahead but now this time it's the complete opposite. And let's not forgot Intel's plans to jump into the market therefore creating another competitor for them.
What reviews and forums? The majority don't know the benches of the fermi cards or even a price, but most, even ATI, admit that they will be faster than the current ATI offerings bar the 5970. The only reason the ATI fans are vocal right now is because Nvidia fans don't have anything to retort with. Nvidia is still apparently on schedule to put out the 2nd round refresh cards at the end of year when ATI is dropping their refresh.
So since the GF100 cards will be faster than the current ATI cards and both companies are putting out refreshes; I don't see ATI retaking the performance crown. Nvidia will have caught up to ATI by the end of the year so I don't see how you think ATI is multiple steps ahead.
Price wise ATI will win but performance will be Nvidias. The question is which you choose to base your opinion on. Those with money will pick performance and those on budgets will pick price.
Intel isn't ready to jump into the high end graphics fray. They pulled their plans to drop a high end graphics card on the market because ATI had already gone passed the theoretical specs of their card. You might see them later in the future but probably not any time soon.
It depends on how you look at it. Evergreen isn't a new architecture, so technically Nvidia will be coming out with a "next-gen" architecture GPU first. However, ATI have been engineering their new architecture all this time and are not in a hurry to release it, since evergreen can be refreshed at least once more before its potential is maxed out. GF100 cards may take the performance crown for a short while, but only until the mid-year ATI refresh. So, about three months maybe? This is also what AMD's CEO is saying. Nvidia had better have something up their sleeves besides GF100, because yes its very flexible, but it can only be engineered down not any further up, at least not on current processes.
But of course Tom's Hardware never reported on that....
Maybe because that's a useless stat? 1. Vista was new in 2007 and a major change from XP there were a ton of issues all around. You don't see this with Windows 7 mostly because of what was learned from vista and W7 being basically an upgraded vista. 2. Nvidia wasn't just doing Graphics card drivers. They also had their chipset drivers that could also have a hand in those figures and at that time didn't much of a competitor from AMD/ATI. Do the AMD chipsets even count as ATI? 3. Nvidia has/had a much larger portion of the market than ATI. This was also the time of the Geforce 8XXXX series which were awesome. Even recently Nvidia has double the market share according to steam, HERE. So if a larger market share and chipset don't explain those figures I don't know what will. In fact I find it astonishing that ATI has such a high rate of problems considering their low market share and lack of chipsets.
The other thing is this: most graphics card related issues don't usually result in a computer crash. You will find a lot of the problems with ATI drivers or ATI cards don't result in computer crashes. Heck I remember the game crash lines in WoW for ATI users. Nothing like going to do chromagus and 3-4 people dropping because they had ATI cards.
1. There was plenty of coverage at the time of Nvidia's difficult transition to Vista. It's why I couldn't use Vista for a few months.
2. ATI made chipsets as well, half of why AMD bought them.
3. Google knows the marketshare. About 3 to 2, or 50% more, for Nvidia at the time. Should correlate to 9% and 14% not 9% and 28%.
And yep I played WoW when that bug existed too. Nvidia had the exact same bug, I played in the same room as a buddy on a Radeon x1800 and one using a Geforce FX 5700 and they were both crashing from WoW all the damn time. I had a different issue, my Geforce 6600GT hard crashed occasionally due to a driver incompatibility issue with my AGP chipset that took a while to get fixed. Now I never see crashes on anyones (that I know) Radeon or Geforce systems, so I call progress.
Comments
To be fair Vista sucks... I've had 0 problems with Nvidia, hell I've had more friends computers with ATI's go down much more frequently than the Nvidia ones. Maybe AMD can help em? I research like crazy before I build so I will take it on a case by case basis.
To be fair Vista sucks... I've had 0 problems with Nvidia, hell I've had more friends computers with ATI's go down much more frequently than the Nvidia ones. Maybe AMD can help em? I research like crazy before I build so I will take it on a case by case basis.
To be honest, Vista runs better on proper hardware then XP ever would. I could run Vista at speeds that XP never would, why? Because my hardware was MADE for it. Most people complain about Vista because their hardware sucks. Vista compatible does not in no way mean Vista CAPABLE.
Owner/Admin of GodlessGamer.com - Gaming news and reviews for the godless.
To be fair Vista sucks... I've had 0 problems with Nvidia, hell I've had more friends computers with ATI's go down much more frequently than the Nvidia ones. Maybe AMD can help em? I research like crazy before I build so I will take it on a case by case basis.
nvidia arent oc friendly from nvidia
ati is!ati had fan issue last year ,and it seem they still do they dont speed up or speed down they turn at max always(graphic card fan)
Well I love my 4850,yes its getting old but it pumps out 60 plus fps on eve full settings with 2 clients running
My rig costed me 256USD with free shipping 2 months ago.I know its not the fastest But i can play All of my games at 1900 400 full settings with aa and af cranked up ,Quake 4 <biglots 3.99 >,eve,allods,tf2,css,dod sorce,cod mw and mw2,aoc,the list goes on and on..
Amd 62 x2 reagor 240 @ 2.8 stock<dual core>am3 slot
gigabyte motherboard ga-ma785gm-us24 <nice mobo>
A-Data 4 gigs ddr 2 1066 <faster and cheaper than dd3 cause of the timing's>
Sapphire 4850hd <onboard hdmi:)>
i keep my case psu and dvdrw drives,120 gig hd
Notbad for 256 with free shipping eh?
Also the mobo is am3 ready so no problems for upgrading when needed ,same with the gpu .
I used to be nivida only but after i got my first ati card 2600xt i was sold,the IQ looked way better to me IMO
OCing isn't a proper estimate for guaging a hardwares ability. Hardware is typically manufactured at a safe clock for a large batch. So sometimes you get a good overclocker and sometimes you get a bad one. Most of the time hardware review sites get good overclockers to make their product look good. Chances are as a consumer you won't be able to clock them as well as you see on these hardware sites.
If anything nVidia is a worse overclocker, their cards are hotter and suck more juice at stock. This leaves very little headroom by default.
What reviews and forums? The majority don't know the benches of the fermi cards or even a price, but most, even ATI, admit that they will be faster than the current ATI offerings bar the 5970. The only reason the ATI fans are vocal right now is because Nvidia fans don't have anything to retort with. Nvidia is still apparently on schedule to put out the 2nd round refresh cards at the end of year when ATI is dropping their refresh.
So since the GF100 cards will be faster than the current ATI cards and both companies are putting out refreshes; I don't see ATI retaking the performance crown. Nvidia will have caught up to ATI by the end of the year so I don't see how you think ATI is multiple steps ahead.
Price wise ATI will win but performance will be Nvidias. The question is which you choose to base your opinion on. Those with money will pick performance and those on budgets will pick price.
Intel isn't ready to jump into the high end graphics fray. They pulled their plans to drop a high end graphics card on the market because ATI had already gone passed the theoretical specs of their card. You might see them later in the future but probably not any time soon.
of caurse we dont know what a fermi bench they are 7 month later then ati (IF THEY LAUNCH IN MARCH)
ati can sit till september and not even be worried !why?
i got a ati 5770 and i oced it to the max 950 or close to that (850 stock)
and 1450 (1200 stock)
there are probably other tweak i could have touched .i went back to stock
ati hasnt been sleeping for 7 month lol but why would they lunch other card
nvidia isnt even close to be ready to try to comperte vs the 7 month old card from ati
and intel changed the way they plan to take ati head on.yes some might see this as a weekness
but i can assure you that the last time they turned around they were 1 year beind amd
now they are 1 year ahead of amd .and one more bad news for ati,intel is already on the 25 nm process(for their memory chip
8 gig on a single half inch x half inch.so intel is very far ahead in the size shrink ,they probqably delayed because they are at their second year for the 32 nm process and as we ll know intel always go beseark on the second year of a die shrink
first year they carbon capy existing but smaller second year they go beseark and make all competition unhappy because intel become impossible to catch up(processor)
good thing mmo havent use proc since 2004 or some company (amd)would be in trouble
but with the need mmo ask of proc lol the techno is 6 years too early for mmo game!
Maybe because that's a useless stat?
1. Vista was new in 2007 and a major change from XP there were a ton of issues all around. You don't see this with Windows 7 mostly because of what was learned from vista and W7 being basically an upgraded vista.
2. Nvidia wasn't just doing Graphics card drivers. They also had their chipset drivers that could also have a hand in those figures and at that time didn't much of a competitor from AMD/ATI. Do the AMD chipsets even count as ATI?
3. Nvidia has/had a much larger portion of the market than ATI. This was also the time of the Geforce 8XXXX series which were awesome. Even recently Nvidia has double the market share according to steam, HERE.
So if a larger market share and chipset don't explain those figures I don't know what will. In fact I find it astonishing that ATI has such a high rate of problems considering their low market share and lack of chipsets.
The other thing is this: most graphics card related issues don't usually result in a computer crash. You will find a lot of the problems with ATI drivers or ATI cards don't result in computer crashes. Heck I remember the game crash lines in WoW for ATI users. Nothing like going to do chromagus and 3-4 people dropping because they had ATI cards.
What reviews and forums? The majority don't know the benches of the fermi cards or even a price, but most, even ATI, admit that they will be faster than the current ATI offerings bar the 5970. The only reason the ATI fans are vocal right now is because Nvidia fans don't have anything to retort with. Nvidia is still apparently on schedule to put out the 2nd round refresh cards at the end of year when ATI is dropping their refresh.
So since the GF100 cards will be faster than the current ATI cards and both companies are putting out refreshes; I don't see ATI retaking the performance crown. Nvidia will have caught up to ATI by the end of the year so I don't see how you think ATI is multiple steps ahead.
Price wise ATI will win but performance will be Nvidias. The question is which you choose to base your opinion on. Those with money will pick performance and those on budgets will pick price.
Intel isn't ready to jump into the high end graphics fray. They pulled their plans to drop a high end graphics card on the market because ATI had already gone passed the theoretical specs of their card. You might see them later in the future but probably not any time soon.
It depends on how you look at it. Evergreen isn't a new architecture, so technically Nvidia will be coming out with a "next-gen" architecture GPU first. However, ATI have been engineering their new architecture all this time and are not in a hurry to release it, since evergreen can be refreshed at least once more before its potential is maxed out. GF100 cards may take the performance crown for a short while, but only until the mid-year ATI refresh. So, about three months maybe? This is also what AMD's CEO is saying. Nvidia had better have something up their sleeves besides GF100, because yes its very flexible, but it can only be engineered down not any further up, at least not on current processes.
2. ATI made chipsets as well, half of why AMD bought them.
3. Google knows the marketshare. About 3 to 2, or 50% more, for Nvidia at the time. Should correlate to 9% and 14% not 9% and 28%.
And yep I played WoW when that bug existed too. Nvidia had the exact same bug, I played in the same room as a buddy on a Radeon x1800 and one using a Geforce FX 5700 and they were both crashing from WoW all the damn time. I had a different issue, my Geforce 6600GT hard crashed occasionally due to a driver incompatibility issue with my AGP chipset that took a while to get fixed. Now I never see crashes on anyones (that I know) Radeon or Geforce systems, so I call progress.