ATI or NVIDIA

[e2Genesis 0]

Hey all, yea, I'm in need for a new video card upgrade, and having a bunch of troubles deciding which to go for, I've read everywhere that ATI is the way to go and that's what I own at the moment, but your input would be cool, thanx

[EM 0]

My experience with Nvidia and XP sucks. BSOD over and over with NV4_disp.dll named as the culprit. Tried numerous drivers and have finally just ditched it in favor of the ATI Radeon 8500. Not too many issues so far but I have only had it one day.

 

Ed

[emthompson 0]

I have owned a Geforce2 GTS and a Radeon 8500(current). I would say that the driver support from Nvidia is much better than ATI. I have read about some problems with the 8500 in XP but have never seen any my self that werent or couldnt be fixed with updated drivers. As far as performance goes. Just look at it this way. The Geforce3 chip is at the end of the line. I dont think much more performance is going to be squezed from it. But on other hand the 8500 still has a lot of growing to do. That is all I can tell you right now. Just remember that it is only a video card and unless you are going to be a supper oc'er then you will forget about it about a week after you get it.

 

BTW - dont forget about the new Nvidia Chip.

[CrazyKillerMan 0]

I havent been disappointed with my radeon 64 meg ddr vivo card yet. Cept 3dmark2001 scores (nvidia biased in my opinion)

[BladeRunner 0]

I can't really fault the latest NVidia drivers under WinXP - however it hasn't always been that case.

The latest official drivers, the 23.11's have been rock solid for me, not one single crash and they also offer great performance.

Before those drivers however, I couldn't get a single set of the Detonator XP drivers to work without at least a couple of crashes a day.

 

As for which you should buy?

Will card to card ATI are usually cheaper and they offer better overal screen image quality.

Not quite up to Matrox standards, but far better than NVidia can do.

It's just the usual 'lackluster' driver support from ATI that puts me off buying another of their cards.

I'm sure things have improved over the years, but past experience tells me to stick with NVidia until such time that Matrox release something competitive at the high-end.

[Ant -|- One 0]

I started with ATI's RagePro3D, then Rage128, Rage128ProViVo AND NOW

--> ATI's RADEON 7500 (hadn't the bucks for the 8500)for three little days now, and I can tell this card rocks !!! I can AT LAST play Soul Reaver 2, QuakeIII Arena, Max Payne, and American McGee's Alice (amongst other great titles) at 1600*1200*32 just like a charm !!! And whaou, everything is so beautiful !!!

I must mention, though, that QuakeIII is somewhat to fast for me even at this res., I have to correct my mouse acceleration and it will be OK !!!

[clutch 1]

I have had many ATI and nVidia cards at home and work, and I would have to suggest the nVidia cards for stability and speed. The last time I had a problem with an nVidia-based card was when I had a GeForce2 Ultra that I was trying to install on my Apollo Pro 133a based board. That was more a failure of Via than nVidia, however.

[Four and Twenty 0]

Nvidia is the sh1t. All Nvidia problems that I have seen seem to be related to via chipsets. Stick to Intel/Nvidia and you get a nice stable system.

[JP- 0]

I to would choose nVidia. Simply because thats what i use and ive had 0 video card related problems. I wont say things like 'ati drivers suck' because to be honest ive never owned a desktop ati card.

 

But in every review ive seen the gf3 beats the 8500 in real gaming situations, i think it even wins in 3dmarks now.

 

You buy nvidia and you are pretty much guaranteed compatibility with both old and new games and all these infinite loop errors are vias fault, maybe if they made a good chipset they wouldnt have such a reputation. Btw all this talk that ati image quality is better than a gf3 is stupid, they look exactly the same. ;(

[pmistry 0]

Antoine de Rorthais, amazing line of successful ATI cards, not for me though, I went from ATI VGA Wonder > ATI 3D Xpression [Rage 1] > ATI Xpert 98 [Rage Pro], ATI Xpert 2000 PRO [Rage 128 PRO] all were crap, and poor driver support, the cards had potential with lots of room for improvement but got abandoned once ATI focused on a new card. The Radeon 8500 like others say has ROOM to grow, but won't when ATI tries to compete with GeForce 4 coming up. The Radeon 8500 will get abandoned like the rest.

[Brian Frank 0]

ATI is actually having leaked drivers, like nVidia. I have had woes to no end with the 23.11's. I'm working on a little fix with my Radeon right now because it or my AK77 is bad, and I'm leaning more toward the Radeon. It is an extremely fast card, and ATI's drivers are actually good for once.

Nvidia is still a safe bet if you're not sure. Other than the latest drivers, they seem to be doing very well.

[BladeRunner 0]

"Btw all this talk that ati image quality is better than a gf3 is stupid, they look exactly the same"

 

Trust me on this one, they don't.

NVidia's 2D quality is absolutely sh1t.

The last batch of PC's I bought in for work had NVidia cards in as standard - every single one of them was sent back and replaced with either a Matrox (For those general desktop users) or an ATI (For those that needed a faster graphics card).

The NVidia cards give a 'washy' and rather bland look to a desktop.

It's all down to the filters being used on their cards.

You could argue that NVidia don't care about 2D quality as they design their cards to be the best at 3D, but when you are using your PC for something other than games you want the best quality possible.

If you've never owned an ATI or Matrox card then you really don't know what you are missing.

Do a search on the net about 2D Image quality & NVidia, you'll see it's industry recognised the NVidia's are be far the worst.

[JP- 0]

Well i have to disagree with you. It seems like a myth of graphics cards that matrox has the greatest 2d image quality. Well at the time of there g200/g400 (which i own) yes there image quality was amazing but then what did they have to compete with? Ive seen ati and nvidia cards running and they look practically the same, ive even heard people saying that 3dfx image qualty was excellent and i was suprised to find my voodoo 5 all blury in both 2d/3d.

 

I dont love nvidia i just buy what is proven to work and what has proven itself in reviews.

[valery 0]

DON'T BUY NVIDIA

 

Since I have an nvidia, with my VIA chipset, it's so crazy ...

I have tried all the possible issues, but it still doesn't work !

 

DON'T BUY NVIDIA

 

[JP- 0]

DON'T BUY VIA more like

 

I dont see anyone with non-via having these problems.

[Yearout 0]

Well I have Nvidia GF2 and GF3 and VIA and Radeon and all work great. You need to look into it your self. Your always going to find someone for and against.

[e2Genesis 0]

hmm, thanx, now the question is, my motherboard has 2x AGP only, so using a 4x card won't compromise speed from my understanding because the cards still don't utlize the full potnetial of even a 2x AGP slot??? I think I'm gonna for for the Radeon 8500

[SHS 0]

Make no diff e2Genesis beside 2x vs 4x there very little diff any way.

Like you I worry about that to being I got a nVidia GF3 Ti 200 so I said the heck with it and pop in to Abit BH6 and had no problem what so ever.

[BladeRunner 0]

Ref: 2D Quality

 

I can really only gues you haven't really looked close at two machines, side by side.

One running say a Matrox G400 and one running say a GF3 Ti200.

Even the old, and the G400 really is old now, has better quality.

I was forced to upgrade from my G400 because it couldn't offer me the performance I needed for gaming.

The GF3 Ti200 seemed to offer the best 'bang for buck' but the instant it was plugged in I could see the image quality drop.

 

The 'Matrox is king of the 2D & Image Quality' argument certainly isn't a myth.

Most independent industry people will agree with that statement, I wouldn't wish an NVidia based card on anybody who has to sit infront of a PC for 8hrs+ a day, not unless their eyes are well insured.

[Brian Frank 0]

Quote:

DON'T BUY VIA more like

I dont see anyone with non-via having these problems.

Uhh, I run Via, and only the drivers after the 21.xx caused me problems. I've been able to fix my problem by installing the Via AGP 4.10 patch. I like Via (and am one of the few who will say it).

[mike3169 0]

Quote:

Uhh, I run Via, and only the drivers after the 21.xx caused me problems. I've been able to fix my problem by installing the Via AGP 4.10 patch. I like Via (and am one of the few who will say it).

Me too..I liek VIA. If there is a stabilty problem with VIA dn Nvidia, well fix the darn thing you stupid manufacturers. I refuse to go out and buy a whole new system just to get my Video Card to work properly...BS if you ask me. but no one did.

As for Nvidia. I have had nothing but problems. Just as the one post on the first page with NV4_DISP.DLL giving me PAGE AULT errors when gaming. It is pretty random though. I have not tried to 4.10 AGP patch yet, but I will give it a try. If it doesn't wrk, I will probably resort to a RADEON rather than replace my MOBO.

Mike

[JP- 0]

Look, im sorry but im just speaking from personal experience. First i had an amd chipset (750/751) and had absolutly no stability problems. Then i moved to via (Abit KA7) because there chipset was significatly faster at the time, it was a kx133 which worked almost perfectly, but took some patching to get working (99% stable).

 

Next i moved to a kt133a chipset which was on an Abit KT7A, and ive never had so many problems with a computer in my life. I would consider myself to know enough about computers to get a system working stable, but no matter what i did it wouldnt not get anything close to stable. Authough i never had any problems with the SB Live! or USB like many people do, it would always crash to desktop when playing games eventually, and i tried everything. Almost all system components were replaced at some point but the problems still continued.

 

I eventually just sold that board to a friend who doesnt play any games and got my intel stuff.

 

Since then ive had absolutly 0 (ZERO) compatibility problems and guess how many patches ive had to apply....thats right none, and does it ever crash, no it doesnt.

 

As I said I can only speak from personal experience, but with this board i have had no problems with any drivers from any manufacturer including nvidia.

 

BTW you may have solved your problem by installing yet another via patch, but for others its not that simple. Also surely the fact that via had to release a patch indicates its a problem with there stuff rather than with nvidias.

[mike3169 0]

You are absolutely right M4 Carbine.(Delta Force?) I couldn't agree with you more. Why do manufacturers keep putting out products with so many comaptibility issues? I guess to make more money. Because in the end, that is what happens. Mayeb I will go Intel next time. For now, I will keep plugging away with this board and setup and see what happens. Al in all, I haven't had any problems other than Video realted with gaming. All APPS and everything else runs flawlessly. Darn fast MOBO too.

 

Mike

[JP- 0]

I was expecting ppl to have a go at me for that, its not that im bias against any particular manufacturer, i mean overall i was satisfied with my KA7 but why should i have to tweak and patch to get things working when i can just buy stuff that works straight outta the box.

 

M4Carbine from many games, mainly CS and Ghost Recon.

[pbuckne 0]

I also know a guy who bought an ECS board, think he traded his VIA for it. Sorry. I have long preferred Nvidia, but that last ATI driver actually worked, so who knows, there may be a rumble among the titans...