Next Generation Emulation banner

AMD Radeon or nVidia GeForce?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ATi Vs Nvidia (2020)

78K views 678 replies 53 participants last post by  JohnKlein94 
#1 · (Edited)
So a new generation looms and ATi branding is no more so we can't ask ourselves ATi or nVidia again but yet the question remains the same.
Red or Green?
Where do we stand, nVidia GeForce or AMD Radeon?
Or is there a third contender for the crown?

You guys know where I usually stand but I have to admit the Radeon HD7000 series is looking pretty nifty.
Both are shaping up to be absolute power houses so whichever way one goes power seems assured at least this time around.

FIGHT!
 
  • Like
Reactions: violetpt
#3 ·
True the GTX680 definitely looks as if it has the single card crown all sown up but I'm not entirely sure nVidia will be quite so kind to people who can't buy that high up in the graphics card food-chain. The HD 7830 may just win the fight for the higher midrange.
 
#5 ·
Well since for me its not just about performance my vote still goes to ati/amd, i like there image output more and i'm quite fond of AVIVO as well. But it seems that nvidia is really doing well with there 680's they are selling better then freshly baked bread.
 
#7 ·
Seems Gnome 3 does better with ATI GPUs then Nvidia ones. At least thats what I have been seeing Hard core RIkki. I do not like gnome 3 or unity. I much prefer gnome 2 over any other UI even the traditional Windows GUI. Windows GUI is second to it. Enough of that but so far nvidia is top dog when it comes to drivers, power, price, and even better power mangenment meaning they dont use as much as the new AMD cards. But its still early so who knows where we will end up at the end of this year and even with the next generation of cards.
 
#9 ·
Geforce is less problematic on all platforms. I shudder at the idea of using ATI on linux.
Plus, no Cuda: no sale.
Actually last time i used linux ati really stepped up there driver quality and performance (it was mint), i can't complain at all regarding that. As for CUDA actually AMD has given some thought into this as well and they came out with a similar cuda variant as well AMD APP, its probably not so good now but who knows what the future brings.
 
#10 ·
The HD 7830 may just win the fight for the higher midrange.
I thought your idea was GeForce GTX 570-like performance at a cheaper price?

The Radeon 7850 is roughly a bit better the GeForce GTX 560 Ti and Radeon 6950 area overall (sometimes slower actually, but that's more at lower resolutions), but it's also a bit more expensive proportionally, so a presumed Radeon 7830 would likely be even weaker, no? It might be cheaper though, but it's still a far cry from the GeForce GTX 570 performance at a lower price.

Maybe it's still a good fit though, because if you're looking at cards of that sort of performance, I'd consider overclocking to get the most of it; otherwise you may consider saving some money and getting something lesser like that instead anyway.
 
#11 ·
I'm not saying for me necessarily but as a whole, I tend to look at all the offerings and try and make an unbiased decision on which team I prefer though I am heavily biased by local pricing.
Locally nVidia's pricing basically never offers anything worthwhile under $300 when converted and that's really starting to bug me.

I personally wouldn't consider something under the HD7850 for me and in a few reviews it was pretty close to the GTX570 so it's definitely an option. That said it may STILL not be time yet. It may never be time, somehow I don't think I can keep gaming up as a hobby much longer, at least enough to do high-end cards justice.
 
#12 ·
The Radeon 7850 isn't quite the GeForce GTX 570; seems to be more between it and the GeForce GTX 560 Ti overall. Since anything much higher will probably see less potential on your platform, I'd actually consider now the time, and then let it last you a few years or whatever. That'd be what I'd do though (with an overclock, that is).
 
#13 ·
No it's not quite, but it's inbetween. Back then I said GTX570 because the GTX560 just wasn't enough and AMD didn't have the right thing either, but a little below is fine if that exists now.

And yeah I see what you're getting at BUT the GTX260 is still doing ok (having a lower native res monitor really boosts a card's longevity) every once in a while I come across something where I have to do some severe settings tweaking to get what I want but I also still come across stuff I can just set to being all high and not worry about any tweaking. Especially because I not only have a large backlog in games (haven't touched DX-HR for instance) but I also have a large purchase backlog of older games I haven't bought yet but still want and I pretty much never get anything on release so the games that will need all the extra power have to wait and so the card can too.
 
#14 ·
(having a lower native res monitor really boosts a card's longevity)
yeah, tell me about it.
i'm using factory OC'ed 560ti on a 1360x768 screen.
this card rarely hit full gpu usage.

need a new monitor, soon :)

anyway, back on topic. performance wise, i prefer nvidia. read a few review on 680, it really got some juice.
though, i don't really have plan for an upgrade but might be interested when they release 660/ti or 670
 
#15 ·
In my head I still say ATI instead of AMD and in my head theyre still inferior to nvidia cards
 
#16 ·
Yeah having a lower res of 1600x900 helps me out with games as well meaning i dont need top of the line parts for this monitor. Ill be looking into getting a SB i5 2500k with a 560 ti gpu to go along with it. I dont mind using last years tech when its a little cheaper then the current tech and with my monitor i cna live with last years tech for a few years since i dont play games at 1080p or higher.
 
#19 ·
ATI (and I'm a Linux user). I've had little to no issues with the proprietary drivers and absolutely no issues with the open source driver. I know there are problems with newer cards being compatible... but that's on both sides of the fence and isn't exclusive to ATI or Nvidia.

As far as wine gaming is concerned, yeah ATI ****ing sucks but hell, dual-boot.
 
#20 ·
I am forced to stick with Nvidia these days (3D Vision only works with Nvidia GPU's)

However, I would still choose Nvidia anyway.
Nvidia always has just felt like a more "complete" purchase with CUDA and PhysX support.

I am loving the GTX 580 3GB I got recently, its helped me gain just enough power to run everything I own quite nicely.

I must say I am extremely impressed by the specs of the GTX680.
However I will skip this gen of cards and see what the 700 series brings to the table.
 
#21 ·
The card a little stretched :p

Id go for nVidia.
Maybe so, but it still runs WoW decently :p. I remember taking it to a LAN party a few years ago and everyone was shocked that it could run Crysis. Granted, the framerate was in the teens, but most of their PCs couldn't run it at all. I played through nearly all of BioShock on it too; a bit on the choppy side, but definitely playable.

RT: I've been impressed with the Radeon 7800 series and the GTX 680, not as much with the Radeon 7900s though, at least with gaming performance. They stepped up their game significantly with compute performance. Right now, I'd say I'm leaning a bit towards nVidia, but it's very close.

I was just thinking, I didn't realize it had been so long since I bought an nVidia card for my primary desktop PC. The last time was in July 2005, when I got a 7800 GTX. I've purchased nVidia cards since then, but for my spare PCs (7600 GT for the Athlon XP, GTX 460 for the Opteron, 7800/7950 GTX in the laptop). Come to think of it, I've gone through a lot of GeForce 7-series cards. Odd...
 
#25 ·
I still remember when a 7800GTX was a beast of a card. Also the 8800 GTX and Ultra was legendary :p
I thought the 7800 GTX was badass too, until I got my Radeon X1900XT. That card wtfpwned it. I'm still sad it died, complete negligence on my part :(.

As for voting, I haven't voted yet. I'm going to wait until more 7000/600 series cards are released before I do so.
 
#26 · (Edited)
I still remember when a 7800GTX was a beast of a card. Also the 8800 GTX and Ultra was legendary :p
I don't think the GeForce 7800, for the most part, was all that great. The GeForce 6 series it replaced was much better in it's time. ATI was much better off around the GeForce 7 series. With the GeForce 6 series, the GeForce 6800 Ultra fell in and made nVidia's own previous GeForce 5950 and even the Radeon 9800 look silly, and the lesser GeForce 6800 GT (same thing underclocked) was even cheaper and really popular. I remember back in 2004 on these forums when it was the card to have, and I wanted one so badly and seemingly everyone here had one, but my GeForce 4 Ti 4200 had to do, and do it did (I actually had a GeForce 4 MX 440 w/AGP8x at the time that performed closer to a GeForce 4 MX420). I mostly did emulation then (and had just a Pentium III 800MHz anyway...), but I wanted to try OpenGL 2. When I got my GeForce 6800 GS AGP and got more into modern (at the time) PC gaming, it was rather magical though. Far Cry, Doom 3, OpenGL 2, and more... those days were just magical.

As for the GeForce 8800 Ultra, it was a joke. It was just an overclocked GeForce 8800 GTX (which itself was great), and it was more expensive and late to the party. With the GeForce 8800 GT being half the price of the GeForce 8800 GTX (let alone the Ultra), but almost as good in most cases... it destroyed the merit, but then again, the GeForce 8800 GT was a rare card, like the GeForce 4 Ti 4200. I'm proud to have owned both (can't say I own both anymore; the former was given to someone here).

I had a GeForce 4 MX 440 w/AGP8x, GeForce 4 Ti 4200 w/AGP8x, GeForce 6800 GS AGP, GeForce 8600 GTS OC, GeForce 8800 GT OC, and now a GeForce GTX 560 Ti. In that time span, I had but on ATI card, and it was some sort of Radeon 9700 or Radeon 9800 (can't remember which, exactly). The Radeon X1550 I bought for my parents since the Intel IGP's drivers kept crashing under Vista was good though, and actually works flawlessly to this day for them under Windows 7. I prefer nVidia, although that's half a subjective choice. My favorite has to be the GeForce 6800 GS AGP. Far Cry was amazing. Now, the games to need such GPUs seem to be smaller (what, with all the console ports), and I'm back to how I was in my GeForce 4 Ti 4200 days just playing a set of games that don't need the latest and greatest, so I'm set. Choosing now though, I'd go nVidia still.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top