nVidia or ATI

[ABEC [LU]]

Just a quick question wanting a quick answer...

Whose on top? ATI FIREGL or NVIDIA QUADRO FX?

 

[Aprox]

Thats a good question, there arnt to many benchmarks out there for pro line video cards either. Based on pure opinion I am going to say Nvidia, only because I thnk they have been doing pro line cards longer.

Might want to drop a thread at this site:

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=29

 

[ABEC [LU]]

Reason being is I am looking into a BOXX Technologies system... www.boxxtechnologies.com

I'll check out out attached link bud, thanks!

 

[ShepsCrook]

It really depends on the type of rendering you do I believe. As well as game development. One of the brands (ATI or NVidia) is better with OpenGL but the other is better in DirectX. Something like that.

 

[ABEC [LU]]

Something to keep in mind, I do think I am leaning toward nVIDIA currently. Their SLI qork is impressive. Thanks... I am still looking for opinions, not purchasing for another few months as I am waiting for BOXX to offer AMD Quad Cores.

 

[ShepsCrook]

Oh... Quad cores? You'll be waiting for more than just a few months I believe. I could be wrong, but I haven't seen to much about this on the horizon.

 

[Sazar]

Just a quick question wanting a quick answer...

Whose on top? ATI FIREGL or NVIDIA QUADRO FX?

Performance-wise, typically the Quadro is a better product.

Price-wise, the FireGL typically offers better value for the money.

 

[albybum]

I have alternated between ATI and NVidia for a few years. I like NVidia and I don't think an NVidia card would be a bad purchase from my experience.

I honestly believe that the ATI hardware is better for my use. The gaming performance is good. The output to displays (Svideo to TV, Composite, DVI) seems better from my experience with ATI.

There is one major issue I have with ATI. Their drivers are horrible. They always have been. For the past few years, they have become more stable, but also more bloated, especially if you use that horrible control panel they developed.

My recommendation would be to use ATI Hardware and use alternate drivers like the Omega drivers without the bloated control panel. They are still based on the original ATI stuff, but they seem to run better for me.

 

[Not Bman]

It's totally a personal choice, I like both, always have troubles choosing. Look at reviews of each and then there ya go.

 

[Steevo]

ATI has better video quality, then and now.
Nvidia has better performance, then and now?


They are right, ATI drivers have a tendancy to suck, but there is no call for complaint against CCC, I use it, and on a proper system it only takes a second or less to pop up. If not, then there is something wrong. Or you are a fanboy who listens to people complain that are using a 7 or 8 thousand series card and a less than 1Ghz CPU to bring it up in 3 or less seconds.

I like the new features that the drivers offer, and I feel that the ATI drivers are now close to or on par with Omega Drivers. But I still think there is work to be done.

 

[LeeJend]

From the horses mouths.

http://www.ati.com/products/workstation/benchmarks.html
http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_11761.html

That's sad. The most recent independent comparison articles I could find were 3 years old.

Has some interesting commentary from ATI and Nvidia when they were asked what the difference was between consumer and commercial cards.

Just at a glance it looks like the top end card$ from nvidia can beat up the top end card$ from ATI.

 

[Tuffgong4]

beating a dead horse. With this new round of cards you can find a comparable card at all performance levels. It pretty much matters on what you prefer or what you can afford...there are great deals on both cards but you won't go wrong with either company. Though I think the 7900 GT is the best bang for your buck right now

 

[Aprox]

You guys need to keep something in mind... these are not gaming cards. So the usual assuptions about the companys products do not stand. These are professional line workstation cards that cost atleast twice that of your standard gaming cards.

 

[ABEC [LU]]

Aprox is totally right. The system I will be purchasing is not at all for gaming, far from it in fact. It will be used for graphic design and video production with some 3D work. The system will be tuned for Maya 7, Adobe CS, and Adobe Production Studio.

Personally, I have always owned nVidia cards and I have been thinking about the alternatives. As it stands nVidia is my choice but because this will be a large capital expenditure on my part I want to keep my options open

Thanks for the advise, keep it coming!

 

[Steevo]

ATI 16 bit RGB precision Vs 10bit or 12bit in Nvidia.

64 bit native HDR support Vs ?? for Nvidia.

1Gb Memory Vs 512Mb for Nvidia

The tests that are shown on the two sites are a good example of how the cards perform the same, and a search on a few other sites leads me to believe the ATI is on par or a bit higher with performance at quality tahn the Nvidia solution.

Nvidia 4500 SDI Quadro $???? (not found, 4500 non SDI is $1800)

ATI Fire GL750 $1999 Available now.

 

[ABEC [LU]]

hmmm. interesting. will keep in mind.

 

[Sazar]

Steevo, like to like I would still go with Nvidia's quadro series because you simply have more options and better overall compatability and speed.

Not to say the firegl's are not a good option, the quadro's are simply a more mature solution imo.

There is a reason it costs more.