rec.autos.simulators

by **Larr** » Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:25:05

My friend, I have LIVED the ATI Driver Hell, so they have a LOT to prove to
me.

-Larry

> From the article posted:

> " If you're still "stuck in the past" and think that ATI is plagued with
> driver issues, than go ahead and keep your head stuck in the sand like an
> ostrich, buy a 5900 Ultra and then start crying when your pals are smoking
> your ass in games like Half Life 2 and Halo because they're running ATI
> hardware. "

> Mike
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> > I've been wanting to get a new card, but to be honest my current PNY
> Ti4400
> > works so damned well that it's hard to justify it. My main game is
> NR2003,
> > and I have no frame-rate problems at all.

> > If I did get a newer card it would be so I can turn on all the
card-based
> > goodies (FSAA, Anistropic, etc...) and stay at around the same frame
> > rates/resolution (I run 1280X1024 on my 22" display).

> > Right now, I'd have to go with a 9800 AIW, but I'm watching the ATI
driver
> > situation very, very carefully before I decide.

> > -Larry

> > > Just one piece of information out of many, but worth a brief look for
> > those
> > > about to decide.

> www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_desktop/00...

by **Goy Larse** » Sat, 13 Sep 2003 16:00:47

> My friend, I have LIVED the ATI Driver Hell, so they have a LOT to prove to
> me.

And nVidia has always had stable and bug free drivers ? :-)

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"

http://www.theuspits.com

"A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
--Groucho Marx--

by **Steve Simpso** » Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:17:16

Actually, yeah, pretty much.

I'm told that ATI's driver's are much improved though.

by **Goy Larse** » Sun, 14 Sep 2003 02:48:43

> I'm told that ATI's driver's are much improved though.

I don't know too much about that, I only play a few games and they've
all run pretty well on my various Radeons, except for Panzer General III
which has some strange bugs in it, but since I only installed it to see
if I missed something the first time around, I don't think I did, I
didn't bother to see if I could fix it

I'm not trying to tell people that Ati has better drivers than nVidia,
but nVidia has a history of pretty buggy drivers themselves, so it's
kinda amusing to see people talking about not going the Ati route
because of buggy drivers, that's all

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"

http://www.theuspits.com

"A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
--Groucho Marx--

by **Gamertilldeat** » Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:10:10

The choice is simple if you want DX9 performance. Half Life 2 has benchmarks
today and Microsoft claims this is the game that DX9 is most utilized in,
and what DX9 games of the future will be. NVIDIA made a fatal error by not
putting enough oomph in their core and following DX9 architecture. This is
why the FutureMark bench mark controversy. FutureMark was to look ahead to
the latest in DX9 unlike other Benchmarks and NVIDIA had to manipulate their
drivers to make a reasonable benchmark. If you are looking forward to Half
Life 2 and want to spend as little as possible for performance in a GPU. I
recommend the 100.00 ATI 9600 pro. Beats even the FX5900 Ultra 256 in Half
life 2. NVIDIA claims this inequity can be addressed in future driver
updates, however skeptics think rather in their next design of GPU. Read the
articles easily found on the web and make an educated decision for yourself.

On this day of our lord, Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:15:49 GMT, "Roger

I can agree with that and that is why I am buying a 9800pro soon, even
though I know the drivers won't be as *compatible* with all my games
as the ATI drivers will be. But that is a sacrifice I am willing to
make to gain performance over my aging Ti4200. I'm not saying the card
is not good, I'm just saying the drivers are not as compatible as
Nvidia drivers. I know this from reading various news groups and web
forums. I play all genres of games so maybe your experience is not as
varied as mine is.

by **spamtra** » Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:41:39

You haven't seen the HL2 videos have you? I thought HL was very
overrated, but I can't wait for HL2.
--

Help make Usenet a better place:
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

by **Dave Henri** » Sun, 14 Sep 2003 07:32:55

I have also seen reports that ATI based cards do work better in Half
life 2. But Doom3 favors Nvidia products. So it's also more than just
drivers and hardware, it's how developers access the graphic subsystem.
I personally with my non pro ati 9000 still have holes(missing textures)
in my cars despite searching for every old Nvidia file I can find.
With both Nvidia cards and ATI cards I have seen some addon tracks have
a display problem where the mountains are shrunk down into a rectanglular
shape that just sits on top of the skyline. So instead of having the
mountains fill the screen they are shown more like a very large billboard.

dave henrie

by **Tim Mise** » Sun, 14 Sep 2003 10:06:40

Uh, yeah, just keep thinking that it's "great drivers" when their new driver
gives you a 20-30% improvement over the previous driver. So many nvidia
disciples are so elated with that improvement that they never stop to think
that it was actually crappy drivers in the first place they had been using
that were holding back 20-30% of their hardware capabilites for the prior 6
months.

Also, keep thinking that it's perfectly normal to use different drivers for
different games...yep, I run the detonator 12.11 for NR3 but have to switch
to Det 20.41 for SCGT and then over to 17.24 for Viper racing etc. This was
the normal musical driver routine for years with nvidia up to as recently as
the GF4.

Yep, just keep thinking that glide isn't important, FSAA isn't important,
3dMark03 isn't important, visual quality isn't important, DX9/Half Life 2,
driver cheating, .....someone please stop me!!

The nvidia media (brainwashing) machine is very powerful and some are unable
to resist it's great powers!

-Tim

by **Larr** » Tue, 16 Sep 2003 14:28:43

Of course not, but the oddities have been minor in comparison.

All you ATI guardians can put away your swords. Please :) Just because I
said I want to keep an eye on the drivers, doesn't mean I don't like ATI or
won't buy one. In fact, I probably will. nVidia has lost the bubble IMHO.

Larry

> > My friend, I have LIVED the ATI Driver Hell, so they have a LOT to prove
to
> > me.

> And nVidia has always had stable and bug free drivers ? :-)

> Beers and cheers
> (uncle) Goy
> "goyl at nettx dot no"

> http://www.theuspits.com

> "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
> --Groucho Marx--

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:07:11

I haven' regretted making the switch. Check the buglist in the rage3d forums
though, to be sure.

Achim

IMHO.

by **Magnus** » Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:24:48

Some preliminar tests of an early 5x Nvidia driver. VERY interesting
reading IMO. Very curious where this will end....
http://www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_rel...

I also did this earlier:
http://tempstuff.d2g.com/dator/FX5900ultra-vs-9800pro.jpg

Cheers!

/Magnus T

- - - - GPL Track Database - - - http://magnust.d2g.com - - - -
364 tracks and counting. 209 real and 155 fantasy tracks. Soon you can
drive one different track each day for a whole year ;-) Currently
you'll have to take one day off, hehe.

rec.autos.simulators

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders

9800 Pro vs. 5900 Ultra Pixel Shaders