PDA

View Full Version : Advice - to upgrade or not


--Jerry--
January 20th 04, 11:34 PM
If you have any GF4 card you do not need to upgrade your graphic card for
next 3-6 months and then a new GPU must appear. All games are running OK on
full GF4 cards (NOT MX!!!). I tested Radeon R9700 and FX 5900 and I did not
notice any improvement in speed in any applications. All that was present
was a DX 9 support and I could see that only in benchmarks like 3D Mark etc.
Drivers are so well opimised for GF4 cards that I was surprised that FX and
Radeon cards do not bring any noticable acceleration exept in tests. That is
valid for any GF 4 card (Ti 4200, 4400, 4600 and 4800SE). Any MX card is
slow and it is worth to upgrade.
And one thing - ATI drivers sucks. ATI cards are so fast, picture is so
sharp, colours are so vivid but drivers... They are not so bad in Windows
but in games are horrible. Flashing shadows, missing textures, missing
distant objects etc. So if you are using Nvidia based card you are going to
be very dissapointed if you upgrade to ATI card (no, I am not working in
Nvidia marketing departement) and that is a fact that prevent me from
keeping ATI R9700 card in my PC. Look how often new ATI drivers appear. All
users that are using ATI cards admitt that there are some problems with
drivers. Some of them never used Nvidia cards and they do not know how
important good drivers are.
So for now I am still using my Ti4800SE and am waiting for new card from
Nvidia.

Andrew
January 20th 04, 11:58 PM
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 23:34:21 +0100, "--Jerry--" >
spread this FUD:

>If you have any GF4 card you do not need to upgrade your graphic card for
>next 3-6 months and then a new GPU must appear. All games are running OK on
>full GF4 cards (NOT MX!!!). I tested Radeon R9700 and FX 5900 and I did not
>notice any improvement in speed in any applications.

Try enabling FSAA and see if you make the same statement.

>And one thing - ATI drivers sucks.

Thats not my experience with the 3.7 Catalysts.

>Look how often new ATI drivers appear.

And how often do NVidia drivers appear? At least as frequently if not
more.

>All users that are using ATI cards admitt that there are some problems with
>drivers.

As I said, 3.7 is great for me.

> Some of them never used Nvidia cards and they do not know how
>important good drivers are.

I used GF1,2,3&4 series cards and went through dozens of "good"
drivers.

>So for now I am still using my Ti4800SE and am waiting for new card from
>Nvidia.

Thats fine, thats your choice, but that doesn't mean you have to
spread BS about ATI cards and drivers.
--
Andrew. To email unscramble & remove spamtrap.
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.

--Jerry--
January 21st 04, 12:08 AM
>> Try enabling FSAA and see if you make the same statement.
And ATI R9x00 and FX cards are too slow for DX 9 applications too.

> >And one thing - ATI drivers sucks.
>
> Thats not my experience with the 3.7 Catalysts.
Or worst with 3.9 Catalyst.


> >Look how often new ATI drivers appear.
>
> And how often do NVidia drivers appear? At least as frequently if not
> more.
Yes, but new drivers are out often to bring more speed and not so many
bugfixes as Catalyst.


> >All users that are using ATI cards admitt that there are some problems
with
> >drivers.
>
> As I said, 3.7 is great for me.
Depends what games and applications are you using.

>
> > Some of them never used Nvidia cards and they do not know how
> >important good drivers are.
>
> I used GF1,2,3&4 series cards and went through dozens of "good"
> drivers.

Again, that depends what games and applications are you using. Nvidia
drivers do not have so many bugs.


> >So for now I am still using my Ti4800SE and am waiting for new card from
> >Nvidia.
>
> Thats fine, thats your choice, but that doesn't mean you have to
> spread BS about ATI cards and drivers.
This group is for Nvidia users and there is many questions about upgrades.
My post us there to give them a clue and not to spread BS about ATI. As I
mentioned, ATI is faster and better than Nvidia but drivers are different
story.

Andrew
January 21st 04, 12:14 AM
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 00:08:29 +0100, "--Jerry--" >
wrote:

>This group is for Nvidia users and there is many questions about upgrades.
>My post us there to give them a clue and not to spread BS about ATI. As I
>mentioned, ATI is faster and better than Nvidia but drivers are different
>story.

Well try getting a clue yourself first before trying to educate
others.
--
Andrew. To email unscramble & remove spamtrap.
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.

J. Clarke
January 21st 04, 05:55 AM
--Jerry-- wrote:

>>> Try enabling FSAA and see if you make the same statement.
> And ATI R9x00 and FX cards are too slow for DX 9 applications too.
>
>> >And one thing - ATI drivers sucks.
>>
>> Thats not my experience with the 3.7 Catalysts.
> Or worst with 3.9 Catalyst.
>
>
>> >Look how often new ATI drivers appear.
>>
>> And how often do NVidia drivers appear? At least as frequently if not
>> more.
> Yes, but new drivers are out often to bring more speed and not so many
> bugfixes as Catalyst.

Geez, the reason they bring out new drivers so often is that they used to
get criticized for not bringing out new drivers often enough. As for bugs
vs speed, the nvidia driver updates don't give more speed, they cheat
better on benchmarks.

>> >All users that are using ATI cards admitt that there are some problems
> with
>> >drivers.
>>
>> As I said, 3.7 is great for me.
> Depends what games and applications are you using.

Same is true of nvidia.

>> > Some of them never used Nvidia cards and they do not know how
>> >important good drivers are.
>>
>> I used GF1,2,3&4 series cards and went through dozens of "good"
>> drivers.
>
> Again, that depends what games and applications are you using. Nvidia
> drivers do not have so many bugs.

Except when they do.

>> >So for now I am still using my Ti4800SE and am waiting for new card from
>> >Nvidia.
>>
>> Thats fine, thats your choice, but that doesn't mean you have to
>> spread BS about ATI cards and drivers.
> This group is for Nvidia users and there is many questions about upgrades.
> My post us there to give them a clue and not to spread BS about ATI. As I
> mentioned, ATI is faster and better than Nvidia but drivers are different
> story.

Plenty of complaints about the nvidia drivers here. Making a perfect driver
to work with an OS as complex as Windows and a chip as complex as current
video boards are takes time.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Darthy
January 21st 04, 08:42 AM
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 23:34:21 +0100, "--Jerry--" >
wrote:

>If you have any GF4 card you do not need to upgrade your graphic card for
>next 3-6 months and then a new GPU must appear. All games are running OK on
>full GF4 cards (NOT MX!!!). I tested Radeon R9700 and FX 5900 and I did not
>notice any improvement in speed in any applications. All that was present

I will kind of agree on that... but a person who can't afford an
ATi9800/5900 today will tomorrow as their prices are now hitting below
$200. (ah competition)

But a 5900/9700 will smoke a Ti4x000 card anyday, try a modern game -
not Quake3, get back to us. On my same hardware, it's a noticable
difference in game play.... if you have a Celeron 2.4Ghz or old P3
system - it won't make a difference.

>Drivers are so well opimised for GF4 cards that I was surprised that FX and
>Radeon cards do not bring any noticable acceleration exept in tests. That is
>valid for any GF 4 card (Ti 4200, 4400, 4600 and 4800SE).

Not on your machine. You don't seem to know much about 3D video....
anyone worth their grain of salt knows that a 4800se is a 4400 with a
new name and AGP-8x thrown in (results = nothing)

>And one thing - ATI drivers sucks. ATI cards are so fast, picture is so
>sharp, colours are so vivid but drivers... They are not so bad in Windows
>but in games are horrible. Flashing shadows, missing textures, missing

What games? None of my games do that. FUD. From GLtron to UT to
UT2003 to MS TrainSimulator to HALO to COD, no problems.

>keeping ATI R9700 card in my PC. Look how often new ATI drivers appear. All
>users that are using ATI cards admitt that there are some problems with
>drivers. Some of them never used Nvidia cards and they do not know how
>important good drivers are.

Never had a problem with ATI drivers. Had problem with the last batch
of Nvidia drivers. Nvidia comes out with drivers more or less the
same as ATI. FUD

Both have issues... yes. But none are perfect.

>So for now I am still using my Ti4800SE and am waiting for new card from
>Nvidia.

Good for you, enjoy your Ti4400.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

Dark Avenger
January 21st 04, 01:41 PM
"--Jerry--" > wrote in message >...
> If you have any GF4 card you do not need to upgrade your graphic card for
> next 3-6 months and then a new GPU must appear. All games are running OK on
> full GF4 cards (NOT MX!!!). I tested Radeon R9700 and FX 5900 and I did not
> notice any improvement in speed in any applications. All that was present
> was a DX 9 support and I could see that only in benchmarks like 3D Mark etc.
> Drivers are so well opimised for GF4 cards that I was surprised that FX and
> Radeon cards do not bring any noticable acceleration exept in tests. That is
> valid for any GF 4 card (Ti 4200, 4400, 4600 and 4800SE). Any MX card is
> slow and it is worth to upgrade.
> And one thing - ATI drivers sucks. ATI cards are so fast, picture is so
> sharp, colours are so vivid but drivers... They are not so bad in Windows
> but in games are horrible. Flashing shadows, missing textures, missing
> distant objects etc. So if you are using Nvidia based card you are going to
> be very dissapointed if you upgrade to ATI card (no, I am not working in
> Nvidia marketing departement) and that is a fact that prevent me from
> keeping ATI R9700 card in my PC. Look how often new ATI drivers appear. All
> users that are using ATI cards admitt that there are some problems with
> drivers. Some of them never used Nvidia cards and they do not know how
> important good drivers are.
> So for now I am still using my Ti4800SE and am waiting for new card from
> Nvidia.

Strange... I got a nice 9500 Pro, second hand, plays games great. Yeah
I know it might be not the fastest in DX8, It has slight limitations
versus it's bigger brothers.....

But the drivers are rock stable 3.8 and up are great. I though use
omegacorner drivers!

There is not much direct improvement, what you get with the 9700 Pro
card. But indeed, FSAA works better for instance.

And yes nvidia drivers work pretty fine, and runs games but rather
show not that what has to be shown then that it simply refuses.

Every game I had I could play on my ati 9500 Pro card, the few games
that had problems had it solved with the next driver version.

I self also still got an ti4800SE and...umm..do not install the latest
forceware on them, they get unstable.

Maybe indeed pre 3.1 had nvidia definitly better driver support, but
currently nvidia is crapping in, great cards still but their drivers
are getting worse fast.

While the ati drivers only get better.... strange.

:-)