Poll: AMD/ATI vs nVidia (2008)

[AKHandyman]

It looks like I was the only one to vote for Crossfire ... that's okay ... it works when done right and it is much cheaper now with the advent of the HD3850 and HD3870 cards on the scene ... and in January, ATI will release the dual-core video processor on a single card ... now TWO of those babies in Crossfire will surely make nVidia worry (at least for a little while ...  )

[Clownhoes]

I was told the same, don't bother with SLI or crossfire just go for a single card.

[FLATLINE]

I answered Nvidia only because thats the only card I have ever purchased. Recently I purchased a e-GeForce 6200 PCI. I bought this card in the hopes of increasing performance in an older Dell Dimension 3000. Did it increase performance? I doubt it. It was minor if anything. I have been able to confirm for myself though that a PCI graphics solution isnt a solution at all. At around $75 I think I got ripped off but I knew there was that possibility going in so I cant blame anyone but myself. Would I purchase a Nvidia card again? Sure but next time around I will make a better choice for sure and stay away from a PCI card.

[gav]

sli has its purposes.  it will drive good FPS in large resolutions for less money than a single card.  right now i have 2 air cooled OC'd 8600gt's pulling more FPS in most games than my friends 8800gt that i swapped into my system for testing. the i OC'd the 8800gt and did beat my scores in 3dmark06. in large displays with huge resolutions SLI works well.

[tonster]

Yeah, it's too bad SLI isn't linear, unlike when the voodoo 2's were out.  3dfx definitely screwed the pooch with cards after the voodoo 2's, but it makes you wonder why the voodoo 2 could provide almost linear progression with regards to performance, but newer, shinier cards can't.  Just a rhetorical question...unless someone really has the answer.
Tony

[NeoPlasmaX]

I like them both.  I can't honestly say that I have witnessed one outperforming the other, but I am not a gamer.

Just personal preference?  Nvidia.

Spawn

I simply agree with this comment... I like both but I disagree with personal preference...  I am a gamer and an avid viewer of HD vids and user other intensive graphics applications and I see AMD/ATI edging over in certain areas more so than Nvidia (usually only outperforming in framerates and overclocking in gaming by a hard to notice amount without having some utility test it)...  Personally, I can sacrifice 2 frames in games for better quality and performance in the other categories which is where ATI did noticably over Nvidia in the last showdowns...   

Price wise, they all seem a bit overpriced when first introduced...  And it it seems the hardcore showoff that has nothing else to do with their money is the only one that really needs those cards...  Most games up to date play fine on slightly older generation cards only sacrificing minor details and a frame per sec for a savings of up to $200.00 by waiting around about a year to a year and half after introduction it seems...    

AMD/ATI for Video but not Processors...  haha

[tunk]

short and sweet:

I've used both - Geforce MX440 - ATI9700Pro - 6800Ultra in SLI - single 8800GT.  Although I'm not the most computer savy person in the world, IMO it's a horse apiece, never had a problem with either of them.  If I had to pick one...maybe leaning towards Nvidia because of the "skyboxes" ATI cards put on my Quake3Arena game

Btw, I'll never do SLI again...I can't justify doubling the price for a performance increase I didn't notice AT ALL (and those 6800ultras were $500 at the time)

[Volt]

short and sweet:


Btw, I'll never do SLI again...I can't justify doubling the price for a performance increase I didn't notice AT ALL (and those 6800ultras were $500 at the time)

 I agree. You will notice a difference on 3DMark, but in gameplay, little if any.

[tonster]

SLI is good for one thing....LCD's.  Because LCD's have a native resolution that they look much better in, you are stuck with high resolutions to get the best looking game.  SLI helps at higher resolutions mostly.
Tony

[tunk]

SLI is good for one thing....LCD's.  Because LCD's have a native resolution that they look much better in, you are stuck with high resolutions to get the best looking game.  SLI helps at higher resolutions mostly.
Tony

Tony, it's funny tho, I DO HAVE an LCD screen...max resolution 1680x1050...I didn't really notice anything.  Maybe if I could go to 1600x1200

[tonster]

Are your games set to play at 1680x1050?  That would be a setting within the game.  If they aren't then you are probably running at a much lower resolution in game.  Tony

[KtheC]

I run SLI on a 20" Dell LCD at 1600 x 1200.  It looks awesome and I get
great frame rates.  I always try to run whatever game I am playing either at that resolution or as close to it as I can get.
2 evga 7900gt 256mb vid cards.

[tunk]

Are your games set to play at 1680x1050?  That would be a setting within the game.  If they aren't then you are probably running at a much lower resolution in game.  Tony

"older" games such as Half Life 2, UT4, Doom 3, Painkiller,  I ran max res. 6800's in SLI.  The "newer" ones I.E. Bioshock, COD4, Clive Barker's Jericho, Hellgate London, Crysis(well, duh )even Oblivion, didn't run well maxed out.  I suppose that's because the graphic engines are "better" now than a couple of years ago and the 6800 is an older model.

I can run all my games maxed out with most of the eye candy turned on high with my single 8800GT 512mb

[tonster]

8800 GT is da bomb...wish I could afford one.  Specially with the newer process (60 nm I think).  They will overclock, run cooler and take less power.  woop woop. 
Tony

[Wildrat]

I guess I have chosen already since I am running CrossFire on my XP64 Pro machine. It suites me fine and is probably over kill for what I do.