http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+Alleges+NVIDI...article8608.htm

How you guys think about this news from Tech daily? Turstable?

alaa... easyla... nVIDIA's IQ is not good, ATi's IQ is way much better, no seriously... , you guys should know it already...

That was for video encoding right? Not really care, im always into gaming...

yeap indeed...
but in both (gaming & video rendering), ATi's always better, i don't know why, i don't know the reason... but it was there since Radeon 8 series

Could be Nvidia releases drivers which draws faster while ATI goes for the drivers which draws more accurately.

If so, then Nvidia will always score higher scores in benchmarks with not-too-visible graphics quality reduction.


Maybe this shows what Nvidia was really up to with its improved drivers.

This post has been edited by ff7yta: Sep 5 2007, 12:56 PM

ATI -> Quack.exe
NV -> 3DMark

The pot calling the kettle black.

sounds like a bug on Nvidia side, and their latest driver's just trying to mask the problem. But then again, not that I would even care, since I only use the lowly 6600GT

but recently the 2900xt does score very well in 3d mark but doesn't perform very well in games...

i notice this too. the 2900 xt kicks 8800GTX ass but when playing bioshock the ati card lags by at least 10 FPS

Used to be, where the AF quality of Nvidia cards were inferior to ATI's. That all changed with the 7-series iianm. In terms of 3D rendering, they're both pretty much equal now.

The AF quality for both NV and ATi had only become equal with the 8-series . Alot had complained 7-series quality , which even worse than 6-series .

tried the 2600xt ddr4, it's a complete suicide while gaming with AA + AF on... it's very very low FPS n the image quality is really annoying... some 2900xt users reported same issues with their gpu... whenever the AA + AF is on, the card is dying... (i was impressed with their 3dmark score but given up on the idea to change to 2900xt after some comments on gaming)... i dunwan to play games without AA + AF on...

Ahh cool. Thanks for the correction.

In fact, the 8 series AF quality is better than any ATI card now. NV did a really good job there.

yea, they did a good job there, and its about the ONLY thing where nvidia card kicks 2900XT's ass. Other than AA/AF issue, judging from other factors i dont see why 2900XT should be left behind at all. And the difference between 2900XT and 8800GTX is HUGE.

Well as far as i can see, NV did such a good job and/or ATI did such a bad one that they had to price their top end card one step lower than NV's top end card. And that says a lot. Clearly this was NOT what they had in mind for R600. G80 seems to be the better chip in many ways. Why shouldn't the 2900XT be left behind? Because its paper specs look impressive?

I'm not sure whether this is relevant to this topic or not.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html...W50aHVzaWFzdA==

Bioshock is an Nvidia "The Way It's Meant To Be Played Optimized" game.

Wait for Cat 7.9 or 8.0 when ATI can get some real optimizations.


Oh, and [T]ardOCP is heavily nvidia-slanted, just see the forums and you'll know.
Bioshock should be faster on the HD2900XT than the 8800ULTRA in DX9.

Any card is meant to be played as long as it can provide more than 30fps continuously.

No, nVidia gave 2K Boston/Australia money and tech and marketing so that they'd optimize DX10 for nVidia GPUs.
DX10 architecture on both cards couldn't be more different.

On DX9, the raw speed path, 2900XT kills the 8800 Ultra. No, not a bug.

This is not the first time where 2900XT is winning on Unreal Engine 3, so obviously someone is up to something.

This post has been edited by X.E.D: Sep 6 2007, 10:27 PM