Looking at Nvidia due to ATI support issues

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for 9XP
9XP

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 9XP
Member since 2005 • 338 Posts

Hi,
I'm generally an ATI fan, but it has come to my attention more that once that my X1950 PRO (512) is not supported by certain software products. I've decided it's time to pump up my rig with some graphic processing power, but due to already mentioned reasons I might go with Nvidia this time. What I would like to know is if the HD4XXX series have any known issues that would make the 9XXX a better choice. I've looked at benchmarks and prices and I think I'm going for one of the HD4850s or 9800GTs.
Any comments are accepted and appreciated.

P.S. I've put up a poll for those of you that don't want to comment.

Avatar image for jtcraft
jtcraft

2770

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 jtcraft
Member since 2005 • 2770 Posts
I'm going to tell you what others are going to tell you. Wait for the DX 11 cards to come out. Prices on current cards will drop. Which could put a 4870 or 4890 into your price range. As far as Nvidia is concerned you might want to consider a GTS 250 instead of the 9800gt.
Avatar image for GTR12
GTR12

13490

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 GTR12
Member since 2006 • 13490 Posts

I'm going to tell you what others are going to tell you. Wait for the DX 11 cards to come out. Prices on current cards will drop. Which could put a 4870 or 4890 into your price range. As far as Nvidia is concerned you might want to consider a GTS 250 instead of the 9800gt.jtcraft

This, or a GTS250, you can't compare a 9800GT to a 4850.

Avatar image for zipozal
zipozal

1809

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 zipozal
Member since 2007 • 1809 Posts

techforless has a 4850 for 81 freaking bucks here!

hell of a deal

imagine a year from now a 5850 for 80 bucks :D

Avatar image for 9XP
9XP

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 9XP
Member since 2005 • 338 Posts
@jtcraft I know that and I am going to wait for the HD5XXX series if I decide to go with ATI. @Amith12 & jtcraft thanks for the info on the GTS info. Didn't see it on the benchmarks and price lists, but like I said my main concern is gaming support issues and the models I specified are just an example. If the HD prices drop I might consider 4870/4890. So my question still remains: Should I be concerned about support issues considering ATI? Currently my concern is RE5 as it doesn't support X1950 PRO. Thanks for your replies. For now I think I'll wait for the DX11s and get a high end HD4XXX.
Avatar image for RayvinAzn
RayvinAzn

12552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 RayvinAzn
Member since 2004 • 12552 Posts
[QUOTE="9XP"] Currently my concern is RE5 as it doesn't support X1950 PRO.

What? Yes it does, the X1950 Pro is a DirectX 9.0c/SM 3.0 card with at least 256MB of VRAM. And it's a damn sight more powerful than the minimum requirement HD2400 Pro. Who says the game doesn't support your card?
Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#7 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
Just how much are you looking to spend on a graphics card? I too finally left ATi because i was so sick and fed up with their support... or more accurately, lack thereof. Even though I am glad that now XFX is making Radeon cards with (double) lifetime warranty, that still doesn't change the bad taste in my mouth that ATi gave me for all the aggravation I put up with them for the better part of three years in problems with what was once a marquee product for them - the 9800 Pro. How they chose to treat me during those years just screams of a company that can't be bothered to back any of their products - no wonder they (ATi) defaulted everyone else to one-year warranties, instead of three years where they should be. Back on topic... I would greatly suggest trying to get a GTX 2** series if you can't hold out for the GTX 3** series to come out.
Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#8 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
What? Yes it does, the X1950 Pro is a DirectX 9.0c/SM 3.0 card with at least 256MB of VRAM. And it's a damn sight more powerful than the minimum requirement HD2400 Pro. Who says the game doesn't support your card?RayvinAzn
Capcom. And even if it was listed as a supported GPU, do you really want to game on just the minimally spec'd model? seriously? Then again, if OP really wants to know for sure, he could always install and run the RE 5 PC demo. It gives a fair amount of benchmarking, testing both extremes of conditions in the game for what could be considered demanding on the rest of the system.
Avatar image for powerslide67
powerslide67

266

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#9 powerslide67
Member since 2006 • 266 Posts

dude the hd4850 anyday.

Avatar image for RayvinAzn
RayvinAzn

12552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 RayvinAzn
Member since 2004 • 12552 Posts
[QUOTE="codezer0"]Capcom. And even if it was listed as a supported GPU, do you really want to game on just the minimally spec'd model? seriously?

The game doesn't specifically state that G80 is supported either, but I think we both know it is, and I think it's safe to say that the X1950 Pro is far enough ahead of the HD2400/GeForce 6800 series to be considered above minimal spec (although I agree that hitting recommended settings would be ideal). It won't support DirectX 10 features, but it'll probably be able to pull off medium settings. Getting the demo is the best idea though, glad you found a link to it.
Avatar image for UltimateGamer95
UltimateGamer95

4720

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#11 UltimateGamer95
Member since 2006 • 4720 Posts

Hi,
I'm generally an ATI fan, but it has come to my attention more that once that my X1950 PRO (512) is not supported by certain software products. I've decided it's time to pump up my rig with some graphic processing power, but due to already mentioned reasons I might go with Nvidia this time. What I would like to know is if the HD4XXX series have any known issues that would make the 9XXX a better choice. I've looked at benchmarks and prices and I think I'm going for one of the HD4850s or 9800GTs.
Any comments are accepted and appreciated.

P.S. I've put up a poll for those of you that don't want to comment.

9XP

4850 is going to give you so much better performance. ATi's latest Catalyst drivers are rock solid and I got a performance boost even on my integrated HD3300 graphics chip.

Avatar image for badlalo59
badlalo59

901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#12 badlalo59
Member since 2007 • 901 Posts

[QUOTE="RayvinAzn"]What? Yes it does, the X1950 Pro is a DirectX 9.0c/SM 3.0 card with at least 256MB of VRAM. And it's a damn sight more powerful than the minimum requirement HD2400 Pro. Who says the game doesn't support your card?codezer0
Capcom. And even if it was listed as a supported GPU, do you really want to game on just the minimally spec'd model? seriously? Then again, if OP really wants to know for sure, he could always install and run the RE 5 PC demo. It gives a fair amount of benchmarking, testing both extremes of conditions in the game for what could be considered demanding on the rest of the system.

^Agreed....BTW I own a 4870 and can't help but recommend it for your VCard instead of the 4850. It can't be much more and as someone else mentioned the Drivers are great and have no issues. Hopefully you have a power supply thats up to snuff. You'll need a decent one.

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#13 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
ATi drivers have been historically great for DirectX... but what about OpenGL? It was the frequent, recurring, and otherwise unexplainable OpenGL problems that many Radeon card(s) had that finally had me tell ATi to go **** itself and went back to NVIDIA.
Avatar image for topsemag55
topsemag55

19063

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#14 topsemag55
Member since 2007 • 19063 Posts

GeForce 9800 GX2 1 GB card is the top-performing 9-Series card.

Avatar image for jamesfffan
jamesfffan

1269

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 jamesfffan
Member since 2004 • 1269 Posts

OpenGL support was integrated into I think the 9.1/9.8 package.

9.1 support added

9.8 more support added

Avatar image for XaosII
XaosII

16705

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 XaosII
Member since 2003 • 16705 Posts

ATi drivers have been historically great for DirectX... but what about OpenGL? It was the frequent, recurring, and otherwise unexplainable OpenGL problems that many Radeon card(s) had that finally had me tell ATi to go **** itself and went back to NVIDIA.codezer0

No one uses or cares about OpenGL anymore.

Avatar image for Marfoo
Marfoo

6006

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 Marfoo
Member since 2004 • 6006 Posts

OpenGL support was integrated into I think the 9.1/9.8 package.

9.1 support added

9.8 more support added

jamesfffan

He just means the driver performance for OpenGL is terrible in comparison to Nvidia OpenGL performance, not the support for OpenGL 3.0.

[QUOTE="codezer0"]ATi drivers have been historically great for DirectX... but what about OpenGL? It was the frequent, recurring, and otherwise unexplainable OpenGL problems that many Radeon card(s) had that finally had me tell ATi to go **** itself and went back to NVIDIA.XaosII

No one uses or cares about OpenGL anymore.

Big developers don't care about OpenGL, and neither do gamers. Programmers still love OpenGL for being cross platform, simple to use and simple to code for. because of that it wil never die.

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#18 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts

No one uses or cares about OpenGL anymore.

XaosII
:| I have the desire to rip you apart for that snide remark, but the mods here would probably nuke my account for it with their ignorance. So I'll leave it with this: There are still many good games out there that use OpenGL. And I know that id uses OpenGL pretty much exclusively, being one of the proponents for it. From a programmer's standpoint (which I can speak, since I did have to code stuff to use OpenGL and Direct3D for graphics), OpenGL's rendering code most of the time makes a lot more logical sense in how to do things, thus it's actually pretty damn easy to render stuff. And with OpenGL 3.*, it not only supported all the new technologies that DX 10 claimed to support, it did so without breaking support for prior OpenGL software, which is more than I can say for what Microsoft tried to do with DirectX 10.* and are now attempting to mend and blend together in 11. And as marfoo stated, my biggest problem with ATi's OpenGL support has always been that they treat it like... well, forgive the horrific analogy, but ATi has in the past treated OpenGL like a jew at a nazi concentration camp. Rewind back to '04, when the Radeon 9**0's were the top-end thing money can buy, and the X**0's were still on the horizon. ATi introduced a rather crippling bug that basically broke and crashed OpenGL games, most notably the Knights of the Old Republic games. For six months, ATi wouldn't even acknowledge the issue. Then finally they came up with a support page indicating that they were aware of the problem, but still no actual fix posted. It took until Christmas before they finally release a driver that fixed the problems... only to break it againin next month's Catalyst Driver. :| Then came with how tired-dog awful 9**0's and X**0's were running with Doom 3 when it first came out, even though by all accounts, it should have been much faster, especially with how NV had some pretty good drivers going within weeks to address performance for it. Well, ATi made big promises of a massive overhaul to their drivers that would finally make OpenGL performance actually respectable in the coming months. And keep in mind, there were still a lot more 9800's than X800's on the market at the time, both in people's systems and in stores. Then the big release, and... nothing. The supposed OpenGL fix only applied to flagship X8** series cards. Everyone else that had a mid-range X**0 and below basically got nothing - if anything, performance was even worse with the new driver. Yet complaints and writeups to ATi about this netted no change. From an end user's standpoint, ATi basically gave the consumer the finger and told everyone to go buy a $400 upgrade if you want OpenGL performance worth a damn. Even more when the X800 "Phantom Editions" were paper launched...
Avatar image for UltimateGamer95
UltimateGamer95

4720

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#19 UltimateGamer95
Member since 2006 • 4720 Posts

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

No one uses or cares about OpenGL anymore.

codezer0

:| I have the desire to rip you apart for that snide remark, but the mods here would probably nuke my account for it with their ignorance. So I'll leave it with this: There are still many good games out there that use OpenGL. And I know that id uses OpenGL pretty much exclusively, being one of the proponents for it. From a programmer's standpoint (which I can speak, since I did have to code stuff to use OpenGL and Direct3D for graphics), OpenGL's rendering code most of the time makes a lot more logical sense in how to do things, thus it's actually pretty damn easy to render stuff. And with OpenGL 3.*, it not only supported all the new technologies that DX 10 claimed to support, it did so without breaking support for prior OpenGL software, which is more than I can say for what Microsoft tried to do with DirectX 10.* and are now attempting to mend and blend together in 11. And as marfoo stated, my biggest problem with ATi's OpenGL support has always been that they treat it like... well, forgive the horrific analogy, but ATi has in the past treated OpenGL like a jew at a nazi concentration camp. Rewind back to '04, when the Radeon 9**0's were the top-end thing money can buy, and the X**0's were still on the horizon. ATi introduced a rather crippling bug that basically broke and crashed OpenGL games, most notably the Knights of the Old Republic games. For six months, ATi wouldn't even acknowledge the issue. Then finally they came up with a support page indicating that they were aware of the problem, but still no actual fix posted. It took until Christmas before they finally release a driver that fixed the problems... only to break it againin next month's Catalyst Driver. :| Then came with how tired-dog awful 9**0's and X**0's were running with Doom 3 when it first came out, even though by all accounts, it should have been much faster, especially with how NV had some pretty good drivers going within weeks to address performance for it. Well, ATi made big promises of a massive overhaul to their drivers that would finally make OpenGL performance actually respectable in the coming months. And keep in mind, there were still a lot more 9800's than X800's on the market at the time, both in people's systems and in stores. Then the big release, and... nothing. The supposed OpenGL fix only applied to flagship X8** series cards. Everyone else that had a mid-range X**0 and below basically got nothing - if anything, performance was even worse with the new driver. Yet complaints and writeups to ATi about this netted no change. From an end user's standpoint, ATi basically gave the consumer the finger and told everyone to go buy a $400 upgrade if you want OpenGL performance worth a damn. Even more when the X800 "Phantom Editions" were paper launched...

Yes indeed I agree! (oh and by the way they were called the X800 platinum editions not the phantom editions, but you got the rest right).

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#20 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts

Yes indeed I agree! (oh and by the way they were called the X800 platinum editions not the phantom editions, but you got the rest right).

UltimateGamer95
No, they were known as the Phantom Edition for one reason, and one reason only... You couldn't **** buy one even if you wanted to and had the money for it. No store could ever get one - neither brick & mortars like Best Buy, online retailers like Newegg, or even powerful OEMs like Dell or HP could get their hands on them. Pretty much, they only existed in the hands of those in the reviewing press that were given units to install, benchmark and show off how good they were compared to what NVIDIA had at the time (which IIRC was stillt he FX series), but even the most die-hard ATi fanboys I knew at the time couldn't ever find a place that had them listed, much less in stock.
Avatar image for UltimateGamer95
UltimateGamer95

4720

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#21 UltimateGamer95
Member since 2006 • 4720 Posts

[QUOTE="UltimateGamer95"]

Yes indeed I agree! (oh and by the way they were called the X800 platinum editions not the phantom editions, but you got the rest right).

codezer0

No, they were known as the Phantom Edition for one reason, and one reason only... You couldn't **** buy one even if you wanted to and had the money for it. No store could ever get one - neither brick & mortars like Best Buy, online retailers like Newegg, or even powerful OEMs like Dell or HP could get their hands on them. Pretty much, they only existed in the hands of those in the reviewing press that were given units to install, benchmark and show off how good they were compared to what NVIDIA had at the time (which IIRC was stillt he FX series), but even the most die-hard ATi fanboys I knew at the time couldn't ever find a place that had them listed, much less in stock.

Avatar image for Marfoo
Marfoo

6006

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 Marfoo
Member since 2004 • 6006 Posts
[QUOTE="UltimateGamer95"]

[QUOTE="codezer0"][QUOTE="UltimateGamer95"]

Yes indeed I agree! (oh and by the way they were called the X800 platinum editions not the phantom editions, but you got the rest right).

No, they were known as the Phantom Edition for one reason, and one reason only... You couldn't **** buy one even if you wanted to and had the money for it. No store could ever get one - neither brick & mortars like Best Buy, online retailers like Newegg, or even powerful OEMs like Dell or HP could get their hands on them. Pretty much, they only existed in the hands of those in the reviewing press that were given units to install, benchmark and show off how good they were compared to what NVIDIA had at the time (which IIRC was stillt he FX series), but even the most die-hard ATi fanboys I knew at the time couldn't ever find a place that had them listed, much less in stock.

Is this response to "Phantom Edition", because that was the slang for the card, we're aware it's actually platinum edition. Or did you just want to post a picture?
Avatar image for UltimateGamer95
UltimateGamer95

4720

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#23 UltimateGamer95
Member since 2006 • 4720 Posts

[QUOTE="UltimateGamer95"]

[QUOTE="codezer0"]No, they were known as the Phantom Edition for one reason, and one reason only... You couldn't **** buy one even if you wanted to and had the money for it. No store could ever get one - neither brick & mortars like Best Buy, online retailers like Newegg, or even powerful OEMs like Dell or HP could get their hands on them. Pretty much, they only existed in the hands of those in the reviewing press that were given units to install, benchmark and show off how good they were compared to what NVIDIA had at the time (which IIRC was stillt he FX series), but even the most die-hard ATi fanboys I knew at the time couldn't ever find a place that had them listed, much less in stock.Marfoo

oops sorry I didn't know that the "phantom edition" was the slang term for the card.

Is this response to "Phantom Edition", because that was the slang for the card, we're aware it's actually platinum edition. Or did you just want to post a picture?

oops sorry I didn't know that the "phantom edition" was the slang term for the card.

Avatar image for Bebi_vegeta
Bebi_vegeta

13558

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 Bebi_vegeta
Member since 2003 • 13558 Posts

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

No one uses or cares about OpenGL anymore.

codezer0

:| I have the desire to rip you apart for that snide remark, but the mods here would probably nuke my account for it with their ignorance. So I'll leave it with this: There are still many good games out there that use OpenGL. And I know that id uses OpenGL pretty much exclusively, being one of the proponents for it. From a programmer's standpoint (which I can speak, since I did have to code stuff to use OpenGL and Direct3D for graphics), OpenGL's rendering code most of the time makes a lot more logical sense in how to do things, thus it's actually pretty damn easy to render stuff. And with OpenGL 3.*, it not only supported all the new technologies that DX 10 claimed to support, it did so without breaking support for prior OpenGL software, which is more than I can say for what Microsoft tried to do with DirectX 10.* and are now attempting to mend and blend together in 11. And as marfoo stated, my biggest problem with ATi's OpenGL support has always been that they treat it like... well, forgive the horrific analogy, but ATi has in the past treated OpenGL like a jew at a nazi concentration camp. Rewind back to '04, when the Radeon 9**0's were the top-end thing money can buy, and the X**0's were still on the horizon. ATi introduced a rather crippling bug that basically broke and crashed OpenGL games, most notably the Knights of the Old Republic games. For six months, ATi wouldn't even acknowledge the issue. Then finally they came up with a support page indicating that they were aware of the problem, but still no actual fix posted. It took until Christmas before they finally release a driver that fixed the problems... only to break it againin next month's Catalyst Driver. :| Then came with how tired-dog awful 9**0's and X**0's were running with Doom 3 when it first came out, even though by all accounts, it should have been much faster, especially with how NV had some pretty good drivers going within weeks to address performance for it. Well, ATi made big promises of a massive overhaul to their drivers that would finally make OpenGL performance actually respectable in the coming months. And keep in mind, there were still a lot more 9800's than X800's on the market at the time, both in people's systems and in stores. Then the big release, and... nothing. The supposed OpenGL fix only applied to flagship X8** series cards. Everyone else that had a mid-range X**0 and below basically got nothing - if anything, performance was even worse with the new driver. Yet complaints and writeups to ATi about this netted no change. From an end user's standpoint, ATi basically gave the consumer the finger and told everyone to go buy a $400 upgrade if you want OpenGL performance worth a damn. Even more when the X800 "Phantom Editions" were paper launched...

So what new games are coming with OpenGL?

Cause the only thing i've been hearing is Dx11 this and Dx11 that.

Avatar image for jamesfffan
jamesfffan

1269

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 jamesfffan
Member since 2004 • 1269 Posts

Most of the time issues do get sorted out, I mean look at many other software updates on different platforms whether its PC, or console, something get's changed then something else goes wrong, its a never ending cycle, but I don't have issues playing crysis/warhead/bioshock/fear/fear2/masseffect/lotro/gtaIV/doom3/quake4/TheWitcher/ElderScrolls 4:Oblivion

Avatar image for 9XP
9XP

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 9XP
Member since 2005 • 338 Posts

I think I'm still going with ATI because OGL is not a big problem for me.

P.S. Cool down a bit guys. After all it's a happy time of the year where I'm from. Temperatures drop, CPU clocks increase. Happy time!

@jamesfffan I've played all these games myself and had no problems other than lag due to my rig's lack of power and occasionally a bad crack (yes I use cracks, because I hate switching CDs when I get bored of one game)

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#27 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts

So what new games are coming with OpenGL?

Cause the only thing i've been hearing is Dx11 this and Dx11 that.

Bebi_vegeta
Wolfenstein just came out, which also uses OpenGL. Anything that uses id's engines would use OpenGL. And IIRC, Lucas's games also use OGL