|
REL77
Green
Posts: 11
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
 |
« on: December 17, 2001, 11:15:13 AM » |
|
ATI or GeForce?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
REL77
Green
Posts: 11
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #1 on: December 17, 2001, 11:15:13 AM » |
|
I was wondering, I am upgrading my video card, to either the ATI 8500, or a GeForce 3 TI (lower end) card. I have the Abit KG7-Raid board, an Atholon XP 1700 (1.47GHz). 512 DDR Ram. I play games, but is not my main concern. I use my comp as my DVD player in my room, and care more about overall quality, instead of just amazing FPS rate. I would assume the ATI is better, but I want all your expert opinions. I didnt know is either was better on the VIA mobo or something? Let me hear what you all think...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
andymac
Member
Posts: 584
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #2 on: December 17, 2001, 11:25:34 AM » |
|
I think you are going to hear that "ATI drivers are no good", this appears to be the common response to this sort of question.
In the case of the 8500 this may be true as it appears that the card was released prior to the drivers having a chance to be tested. That being said, the first reviews I saw on the 8500 all complained about the drivers but the second round of reviews indicated that they were improving.
I have a Radeon LE in one of my systems and the drivers for that card are relatively mature now so it is absolutely stable and the image quality is excellent for a card in it's price range. I have seen systems in my local computer shop (where I am too often) using both the latest Geforce and the ATI 8500, my impression is still that the Radeon image quality is better but this is largely subjective.
For DVD playback, my experience has been that the ATI card/DVD software combination offers excellent playback, most reviews will support this.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Arrow
Ace
Posts: 2,620
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #3 on: December 17, 2001, 12:56:50 PM » |
|
(I can't believe I'm going to say this) If you use your computer mainly for DVD playback and non-game appilications, then yes (choke! some one get the paramedics), get the ATI 8500 as most Geforce3s don't have built-in video out. ATI usually has the video out you'll need. Nvidia cards usually don't (my VisionTek doesn't). Nvidia cards are made specifically for games with the drivers fine tuned for games. ATI's cards have more uses than what Nvidia offers, but ATI's drivers are flakey, especially with games. I've seen a few developers complain about ATI's driver support (or lack there-of) on several different websites. On a hardware level, the ATI 8500 is a better product than the Geforce 3. On the software level, Nvidia's coders are far better ATI's (think NFL pro-bowlers vs. a peewee football league; if your not from the states, switch in your version of football for the NFL  This is why Nvidia has bested ATI in most reviews. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
crosscourt
Game Guru
Posts: 22,215
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2001, 02:30:02 AM » |
|
Ati has great products but espeically in the gaming area has alot of work to do on their drivers to get good results.In the multimedia area Ati is tops so you have to decide what you want to do most.If you game geforce cards are a better choice with game optimized drivers and all the developers test using nvidia cards.If you casually game and want other features Ati is a good choice as well as the Matrox g550 card but
first decide how much you want to spend,then what will you be doing most,then make your decision with the Ati 7500 at $149 and the geforce 2 Ti 200 at $139 and the geforce 3 Ti 200 at $189 very good buys for gamers,CC
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Viahardware.com first moderator
|
|
|
|
isbath
Regular
Posts: 34
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2001, 04:28:45 AM » |
|
i just got A geforce2 gts from creative and took out my ati rage fury. i had no probs with both cards, ati is th ebetter card on paper, but needs a powerful system, nvidia rock solid drivers as someone said, choice is yours, p.s i got a sblive and geforce and my system is solid as a rock, the pm133 mobo given me no probs ever!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
penguin22
Veteran
Posts: 360
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #6 on: December 18, 2001, 03:29:38 PM » |
|
I know that it is a silly reason, but I ended up getting a GeForce3 due to speed (the obvious parT) and resolution... Explaining: Nowhere on ATI's site and pdf's did I see that the ATI Radeon 8500 supports a res of 1280x960, which is what I use because it follows the 4:3 aspect ratio as opposed to the 1280x1024 resolution. I also found that Gainward PowerPack !!! had a clarity that is almost equal to the ATI Radeons. But my deciding factor as I mentioned was resolution support. (One to be exact)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
crosscourt
Game Guru
Posts: 22,215
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #7 on: December 18, 2001, 06:52:12 PM » |
|
Hey Penguin,the Radeon does support 1280x960 but the image quality of the Radeons isnt as big a factor anymore because both the gf3 and the Jyro 2 have excellent image quality rivaling Atis cards. One quick comment though if you buy a gf3 Ti 200 dont expect it to perform faster than the geforce 2pro/ultras in non optimized games,its 175mhz gpu is too slow compared to the 250-275mhz gpu on the pro/ultra and the older games will run faster on these cards. Check out www.rivastation.com they have a vga chart up with good benchmarks that show the gf3 being beat in many games and apps by gf2 cards,CC |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Viahardware.com first moderator
|
|
|
|
nikos_24
Regular
Posts: 192
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #8 on: December 18, 2001, 07:47:49 PM » |
|
My opinion is that just for quality DVD playback you don't need a brand new model.
Geforce 3 I think would be too much.
Don't waste your money if you don't really need amazing fps in 3D applications.
I have a legacy Diamond Viper 2 (which is kind of crap for 3D aps) that is really great for dvd playback (has a tv-out too).
You have to know that built-in tv-outputs or inputs are not as high quality as standalone cards.
I would buy a G-force 2 and a standalone tv-out card.ASUS is cool.Pinnacle for tv-output/tv-tuner etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
EvilDonnyboy
Regular
Posts: 80
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #9 on: December 18, 2001, 11:36:44 PM » |
|
As of current drivers, the ATi 8500 will beat the Ti200. The ATi is compared to the more expensive Ti500. Plus new drivers in the horizon will most likely put the 8500 slightly ahead of the Ti500 in Q3 based games (Q3, RTCW, MOH).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Arrow
Ace
Posts: 2,620
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #10 on: December 19, 2001, 08:37:10 AM » |
|
EvilDonnyboy, I have a feeling that the ATI 8500 beats the Ti 200 is more a matter of clock speed that drivers, as both the Ti 200 and 500 (and the original GF3) use the same drivers. The big difference between all three Geforce 3 varients is clock speed and manufacturing processes. Same as the difference between a Geforce 2 GTS, Ultra and MX.
As for Q3 based games, ATI is known to have had made specific optimizations just for the Quake engines, which won't help you on DOOM 3, Unreal 2, Half-Life or Lithtech. Personally, I think the argument is strong that ATI put in optimizations for Q3 just to get better reviews and sales.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
penguin22
Veteran
Posts: 360
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #11 on: December 19, 2001, 08:44:20 AM » |
|
Thanks for the info crosscourt and I'll have to agree with everyone. You do not need the latest and greatest videocard if all you want is decent 3D performance and DVD playback. Most of the cards on the market do this fine. I put a GeForce2 MX in a computer I built my friend and it runs 3D games decently and also plays DVD's fine (even using the SVHS output).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
REL77
Green
Posts: 11
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #12 on: December 19, 2001, 10:27:09 AM » |
|
Hey, thanks guys.... You all have been more help than I could have imagined, I just read that ATI has those new drivers coming out specifically for the 8500... I really think they will solve alot of the problesm with the card. I think I might end up picking it up, I am not sure about the OEM or the retail. It looks liek I will go with the OEM cause everyone says you can overclock it and have it be as good. The 8500 will do my DVD playback fine, but will still give me my needed FPS when I play my Quake 3.... I appreicate all you'lls advice... It really helped...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
crosscourt
Game Guru
Posts: 22,215
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #13 on: December 19, 2001, 02:52:42 PM » |
|
Just to clear things up abit no one card will be thefastest in all games and both companies have tried to enhance their cards to perform well in the most popular games.The game engine,drivers and type od card are the main factors but as in the case of Quake 3 new dlls and in UT new opengl renderers have become available to improve performance regardless of the card.
Games are tested primarily with Nvidia cards so gamers that should be a clue.
Ati and Matrox with their g550 have the best multimedia packages on the market but i wouldnt want either for gaming because both have game driver isues that havent been solved.CC
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Viahardware.com first moderator
|
|
|
|
Dave Gong
Regular
Posts: 237
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #14 on: December 24, 2001, 01:14:32 AM » |
|
Ati released new drivers recently which puts it almost at the same level as the Ti500 in some applications, even beating it in some games. I definitely wouldn't count Ati out.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
crosscourt
Game Guru
Posts: 22,215
Join Date: Dec, 2001
|
|
« Reply #15 on: December 24, 2001, 01:18:11 AM » |
|
Hey Dave the 8500 is a great card but with game developers more intersted in a single standard and the geforce 3 has such an easy method of programming the gpu the Nvidia cards will continue to be the standard for gamers and used in testing with games more often but I think Rel77 needs more multimedia so either the 8500 or the matrox g550 would be excellent choices,CC
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Viahardware.com first moderator
|
|
|
|
