Nvidia vs ATI (OpenGL): Score 1-1

It is only for the new cards, but it seems like ATI decided to do something about their OpenGL performance.

Hexus's X1800 XT preview didn't show it (for some reason, Doom 3 is not part of Hexus's benching suite), but Firingsquad's preview showed that ATI's X1800 XT was still lagging behind Nvidia's 7800GT (sans X) for Doom 3. With the large performance gap, I pretty much assumed that no driver tweaks would allow ATI to turn this around.

Well, I was wrong. I am pretty astounded to the improvement simply through a driver update. The only downside is that the X800 series didn't seem to get the same boost.

Firingsquad didn't test Serious Sam 2 Demo though, which Hexus's preview has shown to perform better on Nvidia hardware. It would be interesting to see whether this latest driver update has fixed the issue mentioned in the preview and/or boost the performance.

In any case, it would appear that ATI has worked out one of their former weaknesses.

Let the GFX card battle rage on :)

[An AMD crossfire ATI system seems more and more appealing to me ;)]

The x1800xt is looking better and better. Apart from that very high price :(

Only took a whole new generation of hardware and a software fix then? ;) Nah, good stuff i'm glad they've managed to catch up at long last - the more competition the better!

A reason to consider ATI on my next upgrade.

Now they just got to work on the VFM front.

Ati's merchandise is far too expensive at the moment, both Crossfire compared to SLi, the 1800XL to 7800GT, and 1800XT to the 7800 GTX. nVidia still ftw at the moment...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kempez815

The x1800xt is looking better and better. Apart from that very high price :(

---

And that the G72 a.k.a 7800 on a 90nm process is due to be released in a couple of months. We could well see an ultra version, but more probably more aggressive pricing from NV.

pwned... As much as I marvel 7800s architechture.. This is just pwnage..

I suppose the Ultra should heat up the competition.. or Nv decides to bring something out like this as well.. 82.11 maybe? 50% performance increase in DX9 games!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawyen

82.11 maybe? 50% performance increase in DX9 games!!

---

We wish :(

lol Btw I think your sig is waaaaay over the limits of the size the admins have decided....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dangel

...they've managed to catch up...

---

What a bizzare reading of the market :shocked2:

I know that there is an element of 'chicken and egg' about this, but consider for one moment:-
1) 9700 Pro - fastest card in the world at launch
2) 9800 Pro - fastest card in the world at launch
3) 9800 XT - fastest card in the world at launch
4) X800 XT PE - fastest card in the world at launch
5) X850 XT PE - fastest card in the world at launch
6) X1800 XT - fastest card in the world at launch

That is 6 generations in a row that ATI have held the lead

If you want to talk 'ancient history' and go back to the 'glory days' of the Ti200/500 etc...

...then I will concede that there was a long time when the green-folk strode the earth like giants

However, from 22nd August 2002 - to the present day - each successive red generation has taken the performance crown

What is surprising is that in HEXUS's 5 main benchmarks at 1600x1200 4x/8x (which is where it really counts - yes ?) - the 7800GTX could only squeeze a win in Chronicles of Riddick

Surprising because (correct me if I am wrong) all of these titles are 'touched' by the extraordinarily well-funded hand of TWIMTBP

If you then reduce that lead (wipe it out completely ?) for Riddick with the new memory controller progamming in the OpenGL patch...

...then you end up with an almost 100% ATI 'redwash'

Personally, I thought that 7800GTX Vs X1800XT would be a much closer run thing :devilish:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bania

What a bizzare reading of the market :shocked2:

I know that there is an element of 'chicken and egg' about this, but consider for one moment:-
1) 9700 Pro - fastest card in the world at launch
2) 9800 Pro - fastest card in the world at launch
3) 9800 XT - fastest card in the world at launch
4) X800 XT PE - fastest card in the world at launch
5) X850 XT PE - fastest card in the world at launch
6) X1800 XT - fastest card in the world at launch

---

Note the key phrase there - "at launch"! If nVidia had always released a card twice as fast and half as expensive the day after launch, what you said would still be true. Now, nVidia didn't release a card like that, but they did release the 7800GT(X), without a response from ATi for a considerable amount of time, and I don't think even the X850XTPE could keep up. There have also been other areas where nVidia has outdone ATi - recently, I believe this includes the mid range AGP market, essentially since the 6600GT was launched. nVidia may also be better value - perhaps not important at the bleeding edge, but a consideration at X1800XL price levels and below.

And ATi have never, to my knowledge, caught up with nVidia Linux drivers.

Now, that makes it sound as though I hate ATi - I don't. In fact, it is quite the opposite - assuming I had the choice between an ATi card and a nVidia card, and they both performed equally well at the same price, I would plump for the ATi. However, I have a nVidia card right now because their support for Linux is better, and they had the better card for the price.

Urgh, that went on a lot longer than I thought it would. Sorry!

Mike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mike_w

Now, that makes it sound as though I hate ATi - I don't. In fact, it is quite the opposite - assuming I had the choice between an ATi card and a nVidia card, and they both performed equally well at the same price, I would plump for the ATi. However, I have a nVidia card right now because their support for Linux is better, and they had the better card for the price.

---

I'm kind of curious why you would chose ATI if everything was equal. If everything was exactly equal, I would chose my card based on what is in the box (i.e. cables, software, etc.). If all of that was equal as well, I would buy (assuming I had the time to research) whoever had the smaller market share in the interest of keeping competition as healthy as possible. Am I missing something in being incapable of making a better decision in the impossible event of a tie, or are you just trying to pad your post to avoid a confrontation with a fanATIc?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bania

What a bizzare reading of the market :shocked2:

---

..only if you ignore the fact that nVidia actually ship cards on time ;) When I went to buy a X800XT PE I couldn't - nobody had stock. So I waited, and waited and.. er. waited. Then I saw a 6800 ultra on sale and thought "what the heck". Turned out it was an amazing card - that I could buy. So, a couple of months back when i needed a new card i had another look - and ATI were/are even later to market (to the point of farce) so I had to buy a 7800GTX. All fine and dandy talking benchmarks, but mine are simple - cost versus performance, availability etc. You'll note (from my sig) I have two ATI based systems and one nVidia one..

To my mind the 9700 generation stood well above nVidia's offerings, the x800 didn't because of availability problems and lack of SM3.0 support etc, and the X1800XT isn't (even now) in shops AND (back on topic!) is the first ATI card to support crossfire (SLI has been out for a darn long time) and get decent scores in OpenGL games - so yes, I'm glad they've finally caught up (or will do when they actually ship a card!)! In respect to 'generations' of architecture - there's a big difference between a 'refresh' and a new generation - the 9700/9800 were essentially the same, as were all the X800 series and this is bourne out in ATI's own internal numbering system. The R520 (X1800..) series is the first new architecture from ATI since the original X800.

Now, as i've said before, I still think one or two things need improving from ATI - crossfire looks messy right now compared to SLI, pricing doesn't look so hot (versus performance) either and they now look to be out of synch with nVidia releases so i'd expect them having a tough time getting toe-to-toe with nVidia on the next series of cards. Not least because ATI have a lead on clockspeed because of moving to a new process, rather than outright better architecture (an overclocked GTX gives you a good idea of this, at least in my own experience with benchmarking) which I'd expect nVidia to do as an interim update to the 7800 series in the not-so-distant future. There's a lot in R520 for ATI to be proud of though, and some of the hardware layout looks darn interesting (athough strangely missing 'features' of the 360's chip..), but it's a real shame they're so many months behind the 'launch'. But, as I've also said - i'm glad they're back in the game now and hope they can provide a challenge to nVidia's next part - because that's good for me and you! :crazy: No offence, but really stop being so ATI-centric - it's a big evil corporation (just like nVidia) not some kind of religion!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dangel

..only if you ignore the fact that nVidia actually ship cards on time ;) When I went to buy a X800XT PE I couldn't - nobody had stock. So I waited, and waited and.. er. waited. Then I saw a 6800 ultra on sale and thought "what the heck". Turned out it was an amazing card - that I could buy. So, a couple of months back when i needed a new card i had another look - and ATI were/are even later to market (to the point of farce) so I had to buy a 7800GTX. All fine and dandy talking benchmarks, but mine are simple - cost versus performance, availability etc. You'll note (from my sig) I have two ATI based systems and one nVidia one.. (Plus all the other stuff he said.. wayy WAYY too long to quote)

---

Nodd.. Ditto, the 1800XT might have the performance edge over the GTX at stock, but the lack of tangible products on shelves really hurts.. Whats with having all this improvements but only see them in previews around tech forums?

Its not really entirely about the fastest card now.. Although there might be a niche market of bragging rights community that has those sort of hobby.. But a mojority of us just like to game now and wants something NOW that has enuf firepower to tame zeus. TBH, the 7 series GTX fits in pretty well... I dare say most of us are within that second category, maybe once in a while there are ppl who either has so much cash thatthey can collect graphics card or they really just want bleeding edge stuff but too intellectually challenged to know how to overclock.

Again, its good to see R520 finally being 'partly' launched. At least there's reference boards to preview (Unlike Voodoo 6).. But saying about how ATI always been red-washing the greens is a little overrated TBH..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smtkr

I'm kind of curious why you would chose ATI if everything was equal. If everything was exactly equal, I would chose my card based on what is in the box (i.e. cables, software, etc.). If all of that was equal as well, I would buy (assuming I had the time to research) whoever had the smaller market share in the interest of keeping competition as healthy as possible. Am I missing something in being incapable of making a better decision in the impossible event of a tie, or are you just trying to pad your post to avoid a confrontation with a fanATIc?

---

I simply prefer ATi's drivers, on Windows at least. The releases are easier to keep track of, and just seem more sensible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mike_w

I simply prefer ATi's drivers, on Windows at least. The releases are easier to keep track of, and just seem more sensible.

---

MMMm I don't. Well kinda of. Let me explain - I hate the catalyst control center - it's a big fat horrible .NET app :( I'm still installing with just the normal control panel and hoping they don't force me down the control center route..

Anyone see ths article?

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27236

Interesting results but note that neither card scored less than the magic 60fps which is the frame cap in the doom 3 engine..
Also it's pretty hard not to be impressed with a stock GTX by comparison (remembering the huge gap in clock and memory speed).