Duke4.net Forums: Why Not To Get A Ati Based Card - Duke4.net Forums

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Why Not To Get A Ati Based Card

User is offline   WedgeBob 

#31

That doesn't scare me...the HD5850 is probably the best bang for the buck right now, and most likely the only DX11 game in town, at least for the beginning stages of Windows 7. Even tho the HD5870 is better, I certainly don't see that extra $120 as being that justifiable yet. I'm told from Guru3D that if you overclock an HD5850, you could actually surpass the HD5870 performance a little bit. Time will tell if I'm ever gonna do much. Don't really know if I can trust Sapphire's policy on overclocking, they may not be nearly as strict as some other brands out there.
0

User is offline   Alithinos 

#32

View PostCultureShock, on Oct 10 2009, 10:43 AM, said:

ATI hardware is generally better designed and their OpenGL drivers are more conformant. NVidia relies on frying their chips and their drivers are more forgiving because they're sloppy.

Epic made a big splash over NVidia and their Unreal Tournament shovelware nosed into the ground on release. The idiots had developed and tested against NVidia junk so UT was buggy as hell and crashed on ATI's conformant drivers.


I ain't know what you are saying but with my Ati 4850 I can play Crysis with everything at maximum 16x AF and 4x AA.
It costed me 100 euros while the Nvidia card with the same performance cost 170 euros.
And I didn't had problem with Duke 3d which is an open GL game.
I play the high resolution updated pack and I get 400 fps max,120+ min with AF 16x and AA 24x forced by Catalyst.
0

User is offline   WedgeBob 

#33

Ever since I switched from an eVGA 9800GTX+ to my new Sapphire HD5850, I've hardly encountered any BSoDs, hiccups in performance, or any failure whatsoever. ATI has been far more reliable now than they've ever been when it comes to better price-to-performance GPUs. Ever since AMD owned ATI, they've been flooring nVidia, and it shows.

EDIT: Just so I'm wondering...is there going to be anything in AMD/ATI's future that will compete with the PhysX idea? That's one thing nVidia has that AMD/ATI does not.

This post has been edited by WedgeBob: 01 December 2009 - 02:34 PM

0

#34

Way back in the day I had Voodoo cards, such as Voodoo3, then I had a GeForce of some kind I forget which. For years though, my past three video cards or so have been ATI Radeon ones, and I've had no complaints.

Currently using the Radeon HD 4850, no complaints.

This post has been edited by PsychoGoatee: 01 December 2009 - 07:23 PM

0

User is offline   Tea Monster 

  • Polymancer

#35

View Postpeoplessi, on Aug 26 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Hah, not really :lol: I would expect some real argumentats backing your claim. If we look market shares, yes, nVidia has major edge over ATI - majorly due the brand fanaticism. Even the FX series wasn't enough to break the mold. ATI is better than people give credit for, their fast & cheap cards forced nVidia to lower prices of their cards - I wouldn't complain as a customer.


You would if you purchased an ATI card, installed it, found that ATI's drivers won't run OpenGL games and that you couldn't play Polymer Duke. Yes you would! ATI seemed to be good for a while, but now they are known for major compatibility issues with OpenGL on multiple platforms. If you want to play a modern game with DirectX, you should be OK. Want to play any OpenGL game? You're screwed.

View Postpeoplessi, on Aug 26 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

In the end, I would buy the product that offers most value for my money. For years that has been delivered from ATI. HD2 and HD3 failed a bit, but before that ATI had dominance with X1*** -series, X800 series, 9700/9800 series. Taking front again with HD4, and with HD5 atleast until GT300 is realeased for real. GT300 has a hard time matching HD5 due the big size of the die -> wasted units from wafer. It equals to a expensive chip. Like with GT200 - which were priced almost double to that of HD4.

I wouldn't undermine ATI with such poor basis.


I would buy the product that does the business with OpenGL - Always bet on NVidia! ;) :lol:
0

User is offline   Plagman 

  • Former VP of Media Operations

#36

Polymer fully complies to the OpenGL and GLSL specifications. In fact, the only problems that ATI users were having were caused by two major bugs in their OpenGL driver; these bugs were confirmed by an ATI OpenGL driver engineer.
0

User is offline   Tea Monster 

  • Polymancer

#37

EDuke32, Half Life Blueshift and Doomsday all crap out and die when running on ATI hardware. Blender's GLSL materials renderer dies, quoting OpenGL errors. Blender itself is plagued by display errors.

I somehow doubt that ALL these programs and games, which ran flawlessly on Nvidia hardware, suffer from dodgy programming.

ATI are well known for dodgy OpenGL problems. I can play Half Life Episode 2 in Direct X fine. Can I get Half Life 1 to run in Open GL? No way!

Oh, and Cultureshock - the reason that UT3 nosedived on launch is that they released their beta, and then went gold 7 days later! Basically they didn't seem to do ANY testing on any kind of different hardware.

This post has been edited by Tea Monster: 15 December 2009 - 03:27 PM

0

User is offline   The Commander 

  • I used to be a Brown Fuzzy Fruit, but I've changed bro...

#38

I can run all the games you mentioned above just fine and great on my ATI HD 3650, I even could on my old Radeon 9800 Pro.

As I have said before, I have owned both ATI and Nvidia card in the past but when it comes to choosing one to stick with I chose ATI as it's more affordable and for the past several years there drivers have been getting better and they acctully support old model cards longer than Nvidia does.

In all honesty I can't see the reason for this thread as it will always be the same bull crap arguments, and when ATI does manage to fix all the tiny bugs with OpenGL Nvidia fanny boys will come up with some other crap and vice versa.
0

User is offline   Tea Monster 

  • Polymancer

#39

View PostCultureShock, on Oct 10 2009, 01:43 AM, said:

ATI hardware is generally better designed and their OpenGL drivers are more conformant.


Posted Image


ROFLMAO!!
0

User is offline   Tea Monster 

  • Polymancer

#40

View PostCultureShock, on Dec 15 2009, 04:52 PM, said:

Apart from some annoying glitch in the Rage Pro drivers (broken hardware texture unit) I've never had a notable issue with ATI drivers. Other people have but it got fixed and NVidia have their issues. I did switch to NVidia for one generation but they got cocky and ATI had made massive investments in their OpenGL driver team. I switched backed to ATI and am happy with that.

I'm happier with ATI because their drivers are more strict and the hardware is better. NVidias image quality is lower and their drivers silently let through a whole mess of crap that should fail. This might explain your Half-Life issue. There's a showstopper bug in the Quake source. Can't speak for (nor do I give a shit for) Blender. From experience, 99% of the time the fault is in the code not the driver.

I don't code around driver bugs. The position I've taken for a long time is it lets driver vendors off the hook and they get lazy. As for vendor fanboism it's just irresponsible business and immaturity. I'm also pissed at Microsoft trying to shorten the business cycle for OS to 3 years. It doesn't work. They're only doing it to make more money in a flat growth market and it will bite them in the ass.

I come from a business and engineering background, and a lot of that stuck. I want stuff to "just work" and can't get over the habit of designing and building stuff with an eye on 20+ year support cycles. Plenty of vendors and fanbois have come and gone and I don't expect that to change. But my stuff will keep chugging on.


You can say what you like, but the above post proves otherwise.

Check these forums, the Blender forums and any other program/game where they use OpenGL. There will be a large section in the forums where people with ATI cards are having problems. That's just a fact.

I am not an NVidia fanboy. The last ATI card was a Rage II. There were no Open GL drivers for it anywhere. I wouldn't mind, but it was released as a gamers card when Open GL was the only way to play 'real' games. That was many years ago though. I got a Riva TNT and all my Open GL games ran like silk.
0

User is offline   Tea Monster 

  • Polymancer

#41

The big problem with PC games today seems to be that they are developed initially for consoles. Nothing evil in that, but what happens is that the console developer isn't usually willing or able to test the PC code on a wide variety of systems. With consoles, if it works on one unit, it will usually work with just about any other unit you find in the world.

On the PC, things are different. Obviously, there is a bewildering array of graphics cards, software and operating system varieties on the PC platform. Wgat seems to happen is that they test it on the PCs in the office. If it works, it ships!

That is bad, but it dosen't excuse the attitude of Epic Games, who refuse to fix major bugs in thier games. There is STILL no fix for the save game bug in Gears of War.
0

User is offline   WedgeBob 

#42

View PostTea Monster, on Dec 17 2009, 01:50 PM, said:

The big problem with PC games today seems to be that they are developed initially for consoles. Nothing evil in that, but what happens is that the console developer isn't usually willing or able to test the PC code on a wide variety of systems. With consoles, if it works on one unit, it will usually work with just about any other unit you find in the world.

On the PC, things are different. Obviously, there is a bewildering array of graphics cards, software and operating system varieties on the PC platform. Wgat seems to happen is that they test it on the PCs in the office. If it works, it ships!

That is bad, but it dosen't excuse the attitude of Epic Games, who refuse to fix major bugs in thier games. There is STILL no fix for the save game bug in Gears of War.


Not just them, but you have Volition doing this with Red Faction: Guerilla, too, and SR2, and what not, that's another developer with that same exact tone when it comes to PC ports of console games.
That's why I'm starting to go with developers/publishers that put the PC first, or at least treat the PC versions of their games with the same support they give to the console versions. Most PC ports get treated like second-class citizens.
0

User is offline   Martin 

#43

I'm a total PC noob. I've only ever owned two desktop units. The first one was a Windows 98 thing which had no graphics card (on-board 8-bit mobo graphics ftw!), and I used that PC for nearly 10 years with no upgrades bar increasing the RAM at one point from 64MB to 128MB (though only 127 registered?). In the end it was just ridiculous. Slow as fuck, many websites simply wouldn't work, so it was time for a new PC. As you may have guess from how long I made my previous one last with one little upgrade, I hate upgrading computers. So anyways, this was two years ago, and I blew £700+ on parts for a new tower. Everyone told me I'd be better of building it myself, so I did.

Can't remember the exact specification sheet, but it was pretty beast at the time. I have 4GB RAM, with the mobo being able to accept up to 8GB. 500GB hard drive, a 64-bit quad core Intel CPU running at a lovely fast speed that I can't remember. '3.2GHz' seems to jump out at me, so I'll say that. Most importantly for this topic, I got the rig a GeForce 8800GT 512MB. It was apparently at the upper-reaches of the mid-range of GPUs at the time, and since I don't really game on PC, I thought that'll more than last me for what I use my PC for. The rig itself was (and still is) ridiculous for what it gets used for. Some office-tasks, general surfing.

I've never had anything other than Ubuntu Linux on this PC, and am on I think my fourth iteration of Ubuntu? I always upgrade, and have never had any problems getting my now ageing GPU to run each time I upgrade. My whole rig runs very nicely, is still fast-as-fuck, and shows no signs yet of needing anything done with it. This is why I spent so much, I'm hoping it'll last me years (for what I do on it) before it starts seeming kind of shit. I have all the nice graphical effects on, so windows swish about nicely when I move them. No performance issues. The temperature never gets out of the blue, either (there's a nice temp readout on the front of the case).
0

User is offline   The Commander 

  • I used to be a Brown Fuzzy Fruit, but I've changed bro...

#44

@Martin
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=yIwa5Ek1M_0
0

#45

lol martin... such a nice and long post xD
0

User is offline   Spirrwell 

  • tile 1018

#46

View PostThe Commander, on Dec 5 2010, 04:50 PM, said:


Yep, but since he posted, I'll post now too.

I've had bad luck with ATI cards, I've had everything from minuscule driver error to the entire card blowing up and not working again. I've always had my favor towards NVIDIA I haven't had trouble with video card drivers up until just a few weeks ago when I tried using an AGP card with Windows 7. It's only under Legacy support now, so I couldn't get good drivers. The last video card I got though was an ATI Radeon HD 4650. I've had some driver issues when I tried using the latest drivers, at least under Windows, and some driver problems under Ubuntu (I'm assuming) with eduke32 HRP Polymer. It's a real nice board, but I'm still afraid that it's going to die soon because of the bad luck I've had.

It's kind of weird, I like AMD, but dislike ATI, I like NVIDIA, but I HATE their motherboards.(Really bad experiences)
0

User is offline   The Commander 

  • I used to be a Brown Fuzzy Fruit, but I've changed bro...

#47

Your 4650 should do ok with eduke32 as long as you stick to the 10.5 driver, anything above that will just cause the shitty white box error and make shadows fuck up.

Here is hoping that the 10.12 driver will fix it all, but meh.
0

User is offline   Spirrwell 

  • tile 1018

#48

View PostThe Commander, on Dec 6 2010, 12:33 PM, said:

Your 4650 should do ok with eduke32 as long as you stick to the 10.5 driver, anything above that will just cause the shitty white box error and make shadows fuck up.

Here is hoping that the 10.12 driver will fix it all, but meh.

Yeah, but it could also be the way that I was trying access it in the terminal. I don't know, I'm not a real Linux expert yet. Anyway, yeah, I am aware of the driver 10.5 working, at least under Windows, which I really don't like anymore, except for Windows XP, reasons why should be obvious.
0

User is offline   Martin 

#49

I'm late? As in dead, or failing to arrive on time?
0

User is offline   Spirrwell 

  • tile 1018

#50

Wedgebob - Dec 29 2009, 09:03 PM
Martin - Dec 5 2010, 02:54 PM

This post has been edited by Spirrwell: 13 December 2010 - 09:21 PM

0

User is offline   Martin 

#51

I see. Apologies.
0

User is offline   Jeff 

#52

I used to have an ATI card, but I switched to nVidia when I had some driver issues. I think it was because I was playing an OpenGL game like you guys said.

Never had any issues my nVidia cards. My oldest 8800 GTS is still working after 5 years.
0

#53

I have a Radeon 4650 on one of my PC's and so far I haven't had any problems.
0

#54

i7 960, Triple Channel Corsair 12GB (6 x 2GB), DDR3, 1866MHz a recently fried gtx 480 from evga and will soon replace it with an evga gtx580.
I have a monster pc and I always keep it like that because pc gaming is the best way to game.

Don't buy ati cards, their drivers suck ever since ati existed!
0

User is offline   MusicallyInspired 

  • The Sarien Encounter

#55

I've been trying to get away from ATI for years. Haven't yet succeeded. And I won't until I have enough money to upgrade to a system that supports PCI-e.
0

User is offline   Person of Color 

  • Senior Unpaid Intern at Viceland

#56

View PostMr.Deviance, on Jan 7 2011, 05:48 PM, said:

Don't buy ati cards, their drivers suck ever since ati existed!


Sure they do. Actually I switched from nVidia to ATi in 2003 mainly because ATi's drivers and rendering quality were much better.

I've never really had any product loyalties until, well, ever. I went from two AMD's to two Intels and now I'm back to AMD. Same went for video cards. Oh, I have money on x and x dates? You're winning this part of the product cycle? Fine. Who gives a shit.

I now own a Zotac 2GB GTX 460, and due to product cycles and finances it's my fourth nVidia card in a row. I love the card, hate the shitty drivers. Between micro stuttering in a single card setup, random framerate drops in Borderlands, and crazy hitching in all Source titles, I was forced to run beta drivers. Don't even get me started on FreeSpace 2 Open's hitching, which would cause me to take damage sometimes.

The older drivers, which would have been eight months old when I needed these issues fixed, had plenty of their own and honestly, were only the second build of drivers designed for this card.

Honestly this seems pretty run of the mill for nV, when their drivers are bad, they are an abortion. I've had to run drivers that are a full year old multiple times in the past few years.

At least if ATi is shitty I can roll back one or two months. Not so much with nVidia. You take a far bigger performance and bugfix hit.

My next card? Well, it's gonna be an nVidia. Two 460 2GB cards in SLi is sex. But my next build will have ATi.

This post has been edited by Descent: 04 February 2011 - 02:01 PM

0

#57

View PostDescent, on 04 February 2011 - 01:59 PM, said:

Sure they do. Actually I switched from nVidia to ATi in 2003 mainly because ATi's drivers and rendering quality were much better.

I've never really had any product loyalties until, well, ever. I went from two AMD's to two Intels and now I'm back to AMD. Same went for video cards. Oh, I have money on x and x dates? You're winning this part of the product cycle? Fine. Who gives a shit.

I now own a Zotac 2GB GTX 460, and due to product cycles and finances it's my fourth nVidia card in a row. I love the card, hate the shitty drivers. Between micro stuttering in a single card setup, random framerate drops in Borderlands, and crazy hitching in all Source titles, I was forced to run beta drivers. Don't even get me started on FreeSpace 2 Open's hitching, which would cause me to take damage sometimes.

The older drivers, which would have been eight months old when I needed these issues fixed, had plenty of their own and honestly, were only the second build of drivers designed for this card.

Honestly this seems pretty run of the mill for nV, when their drivers are bad, they are an abortion. I've had to run drivers that are a full year old multiple times in the past few years.

At least if ATi is shitty I can roll back one or two months. Not so much with nVidia. You take a far bigger performance and bugfix hit.

My next card? Well, it's gonna be an nVidia. Two 460 2GB cards in SLi is sex. But my next build will have ATi.

Bullshit. There is no such issue with any driver in those games that you've mentioned.
It might be your card itself that's shit since it's zotac.
It's also that 400's in general were overheating. If you read what I posted above some months ago, my 480 was recently toasted and I was planning to get an evga 580 which but since then I've decided on buying a msi 580 and a few weeks later I got a second 580 from msi.
The cards are perfect, they are cool and silent and the drivers perfect pristine in every single game that I've tried, including the ones you mentioned above.
Don't blame the products, blame your hardware or your windows config.
I still maintain what I've said months and years ago!

Ati drivers suck major ass and if mys single opinion is not enough for you then I can tell you that I have a few online friends from different countries, all gamers and all started being ati lovers and now they constantly bitch and whine about their ati drivers.
Why is it that only ati users bitch and while about their drivers and I only see an nvidia user criticize the drivers once every 10 years?
1

User is offline   TerminX 

  • el fundador

  #58

I don't agree with you very often, but you're entirely correct that ATI's drivers are horrible. Any sort of a better price/performance ratio being achieved by going with an ATI card is immediately and conclusively offset by the poor quality of drivers you'd then be stuck with.
0

#59

View PostTX, on 08 May 2011 - 06:29 PM, said:

I don't agree with you very often, but you're entirely correct that ATI's drivers are horrible. Any sort of a better price/performance ratio being achieved by going with an ATI card is immediately and conclusively offset by the poor quality of drivers you'd then be stuck with.

Don't worry, it's very easy to find somebody to agree with, when it comes to this subject because it's so overwhelmingly true.
I was merely stating the obvious.
I've noticed a breed of nvidia haters that simply accuse nvidia for non existing problems just so they prove that ati is equal to nvidia instead admitting that ati is completely destroyed from a competitive point of view.

This post has been edited by Mr.Deviance: 08 May 2011 - 07:55 PM

0

User is offline   Spirrwell 

  • tile 1018

#60

NVIDIA is superior than ATI, but I think there should be another video card maker. There are times when I have trouble with NVIDIA drivers. That's due to hardware conflict, but I'd still like to have another choice. Just one more. Unless there's one floating around that I don't know about.
0

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic


All copyrights and trademarks not owned by Voidpoint, LLC are the sole property of their respective owners. Play Ion Fury! ;) © Voidpoint, LLC

Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options