This is why nvidia is better than AMD!

http://dfbrigade.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2448

BF3 outright refuses to run on a 2900XT whereas it runs just fine on a first generation 8800GTS. Both cards had similar performance. With AMD you need atleast a 3xxx series card to run BF3. Now yes the 8800 was a huge success and the 2900XT was a failure but still why doesnt AMD do something to support the game? There is no reason why the 2900XT cant when the 8800GTS can.

The ATI DX9 cards dont have official windows 7 support whereas nvidia DX9 cards do.

I am really not trying to be a fanboy here but it's just pretty obvious that nvidia has so much better legacy support. I cant imagine how pissed off I would be if my GTS 250 outright refused to run BF3.

For people who dont regularly upgrade it has to be said that nvidia seems the better option.

http://dfbrigade.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2448

BF3 outright refuses to run on a 2900XT whereas it runs just fine on a first generation 8800GTS. Both cards had similar performance. With AMD you need atleast a 3xxx series card to run BF3. Now yes the 8800 was a huge success and the 2900XT was a failure but still why doesnt AMD do something to support the game? There is no reason why the 2900XT cant when the 8800GTS can.

The ATI DX9 cards dont have official windows 7 support whereas nvidia DX9 cards do.

I am really not trying to be a fanboy here but it's just pretty obvious that nvidia has so much better legacy support. I cant imagine how pissed off I would be if my GTS 250 outright refused to run BF3.

For people who dont regularly upgrade it has to be said that nvidia seems the better option.

Gambler_3

I know several people with 8800s who are having a really hard time to get bf3 working properly.

also lol

I know several people with 8800s who are having a really hard time to get bf3 working properly.

NailedGR

A low end low memory 8800 might have poor performance but thats because of the hardware not because of lack of support. My card runs it fine so I dont see why the better 8800 cards wont as they are essentially the same.

The second you made this thread you proved that you are nvidia fanboy.

The second you made this thread you proved that you are nvidia fanboy.

Silicel1

[QUOTE="Silicel1"]

The second you made this thread you proved that you are nvidia fanboy.

WWIAB

He also failed to account for the fact that nobody (pretty much) has a 2900 nowadays while quite a few have 8800 variants (also the same architecture was used for several other cards following the 8800). Clearly it was not only worthwhile for nvidia to continue to support this card but also easy.

AMD has no reason to support games like BF3 on such an old card.

[QUOTE="Silicel1"]

The second you made this thread you proved that you are nvidia fanboy.

WWIAB

And I also pointed out the lack of support for DX9 cards so it's obvious it's not one rear occurrence, AMD gives poor support to dated hardware unlike nvidia.

He also failed to account for the fact that nobody (pretty much) has a 2900 nowadays while quite a few have 8800 variants (also the same architecture was used for several other cards following the 8800). Clearly it was not only worthwhile for nvidia to continue to support this card but also easy.

AMD has no reason to support games like BF3 on such an old card.

Tezcatlipoca666

AMD didnt bother supporting the X1900 series either for windows 7 when nvidia supported the 7800/7900 series. The X1900 was more successful and popular than the 7800/7900 series so there you go.

The 3870 has identical performance to the 2900XT, it's obvious AMD works on a timeline instead of what a card is actually capable of.

They both have their share of winners and losers ! And all pc gamers benefit from the competition.

You're using a boundary (and specific) case, which really weakens your argument.

I hear it doesn't work on the 800xt either :(

AMD is the suxxors.

weird thread, don't see how it is relevant today.

AMD's 2000 and even 3000 series are the laughing stock of hardware

AMD's 2000 and even 3000 series are the laughing stock of hardware

wis3boi

I prefer Nvidia, drivers and software, pretty much all around.

That being said, I must say ATI/AMD HD4 HD5 and HD6 series cards are no slouches (really stepped up their game with them)! AMD has also come a ways in its driver support. (still not as good as Nvidia's though)

But AMD has surpassed Nvidia's throne on Multi GPU scaling with the HD6 series! (when the games fully support it)

We have an HD6870 in my GF's rig, and it is a pretty fantastic gpu honestly! But I prefer my GTX570 (and its software more)

Though I wouldn't be so fast to put AMD's gpu lineup down!

I've had both nvidia and ATi/AMD (7500 > 9700pro > 6600GT > 4650 > 6950 along with a 550Ti in my wife's computer.

Dropping support for a garbage card is no reason to declare one company better than the other.

I always buy Nvidia Cards but seriously......

When was those cards got release? Like 4-5 years ago and you're gonna run BF3 on the lowest of the lowest setting to play it.

AMD is not bad at all actually they're pretty good nowdays and why use too much time support some really old cards when you can support the new cards?

Check this Benchmark of BF3 - Start around 4:17.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ib_AJQRWdE&feature=relmfu

AMD driver is really good now compare to a few years ago.

id like to say gambl3r you just mad that the gtx 600 series is going to be a JOKE being gtx 500 rebagdes and all while amd's next single core is going to kick the hades out of a gtx 590. and lets not forget the problems the 590 is having with exploding lol

id like to say gambl3r you just mad that the gtx 600 series is going to be a JOKE being gtx 500 rebagdes and all while amd's next single core is going to kick the hades out of a gtx 590. and lets not forget the problems the 590 is having with exploding lol

ionusX

Fanboy vs. fanboy...

Love it.

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

id like to say gambl3r you just mad that the gtx 600 series is going to be a JOKE being gtx 500 rebagdes and all while amd's next single core is going to kick the hades out of a gtx 590. and lets not forget the problems the 590 is having with exploding lol

ravenguard90

Fanboy vs. fanboy...

Love it.

yes well i accept that fact that i have a bias and move on.. gambl3r on the other hand flaunts it like theres no tomorrow and then ends up with threads like this where he gets smack talked into taking long breaks from GS. and its not like i dont give nvidia any attention i cant help it if facts are facts while others make war in fantasy land..

what i got is far beyond the reach of an astronaut..

heres something to dwell on TC..

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

id like to say gambl3r you just mad that the gtx 600 series is going to be a JOKE being gtx 500 rebagdes and all while amd's next single core is going to kick the hades out of a gtx 590. and lets not forget the problems the 590 is having with exploding lol

Spike1988

i have facts hes got "zomg piles of fail thats years old" backing him up..

its like saying that because the nes was bad (hypothetically) and n64 was going to suck too.. i have open admissions that something is gtoing to be a waste of time to even consider starring me in the face. and im accusing his denial of facts as cause for this random outburst of fanboyism..

this sint stooping to anyone level.. its calling him out using counter fanboy-esque methods. i accept and acknowledge that the hd 2000 series was very bad and that the 3000 series lacked refinement, but if we spent forever dwelling on the past then i guess we can start discussing the fx5000 and gtx 300 series as well then cant we :lol:

[QUOTE="Spike1988"][QUOTE="ionusX"]

id like to say gambl3r you just mad that the gtx 600 series is going to be a JOKE being gtx 500 rebagdes and all while amd's next single core is going to kick the hades out of a gtx 590. and lets not forget the problems the 590 is having with exploding lol

ionusX

i have facts hes got "zomg piles of fail thats years old" backing him up..

its like saying that because the nes was bad (hypothetically) and n64 was going to suck too.. i have open admissions that something is gtoing to be a waste of time to even consider starring me in the face. and im accusing his denial of facts as cause for this random outburst of fanboyism..

this sint stooping to anyone level.. its calling him out using counter fanboy-esque methods. i accept and acknowledge that the hd 2000 series was very bad and that the 3000 series lacked refinement, but if we spent forever dwelling on the past then i guess we can start discussing the fx5000 and gtx 300 series as well then cant we :lol:

Well, technically, you're pulling up irrelevant information as well in your claim, as you said it yourself that the benchmark of AMD's new GPU beating out the 590 is untrustworthy.

That's not to say I'm supporting Gambler_3's allegations, however. His comment is just as irrelevant.

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

id like to say gambl3r you just mad that the gtx 600 series is going to be a JOKE being gtx 500 rebagdes and all while amd's next single core is going to kick the hades out of a gtx 590. and lets not forget the problems the 590 is having with exploding lol

Spike1988

Because I say it is!

Gambler_3

That's what I pretty get out of your posts here.

Joking aside though, to each their own.

You can tell us why you think Nvidia is better, but that doesn't mean everyone will share your opinion. It seems you're actually bitter that AMD doesn't have driver support for their worse than 8800GTS type video cards to run Battlefield 3. I fail to see why you're bitter about it, seeing as how you don't own AMD; therefore it doesn't pertain to you.

Does it suck for those that might....sure. Then again, maybe those few that do still own these older AMD GPUs, maybe they don't give a crap about Battlefield 3....

It just seems poor to base an opinion of a company and their products (compared to their competition) on such a narrow subject to draw your conclusion that one company is better than the other.

I think ATI make really good cards, although I personally prefer NVIDIA for the followinh:

1. Better drivers
2. CUDA supporting Folding@Home
3. NVIDIA 3D version.2
4. TWIMTBP (AKA, working closely with developers to help them optimize their game!)

Nvidia is better because they have the better hardware, has little to do with BF3 support on 4 year old cards. Pretty stupid argument to make.FPSfan1985

Why would you go out of your way to provide new drivers for a product you're no longer producing? Providing drivers is not going to make them any more money. Also how do you know that this was AMD's fault and not DICE's or perhaps Nvidia did a deal to get early access to the code base?

Why would you go out of your way to provide new drivers for a product you're no longer producing? Providing drivers is not going to make them any more money. Also how do you know that this was AMD's fault and not DICE's or perhaps Nvidia did a deal to get early access to the code base?

markop2003

Real customer care is how you support a product that didnt too well on the market, anyone can support a successful product because it is only in the direct benefit of the business to do so. I am not really prasing nvidia for supporting 8800, they are doing the "normal" thing and not something that goes beyond good customer care. Same is the case with them supporting DX9 cards for windows 7.

The problem with what AMD is doing is that it wasnt even asking for too much as far as I am concerned.

Can you imagine 3 years from now a GTX 470 doesnt support a game that 5870 plays just fine in low settings?

I think ATI make really good cards, although I personally prefer NVIDIA for the followinh:

1. Better drivers
2. CUDA supporting Folding@Home
3. NVIDIA 3D version.2
4. TWIMTBP (AKA, working closely with developers to help them optimize their game!)

Daytona_178

[QUOTE="Daytona_178"]

I think ATI make really good cards, although I personally prefer NVIDIA for the followinh:

1. Better drivers
2. CUDA supporting Folding@Home
3. NVIDIA 3D version.2
4. TWIMTBP (AKA, working closely with developers to help them optimize their game!)

mitu123

I've had both nvidia and ATi/AMD (7500 > 9700pro > 6600GT > 4650 > 6950 along with a 550Ti in my wife's computer.

Dropping support for a garbage card is no reason to declare one company better than the other.

GummiRaccoon

the 2xxx series was a joke of a series, it was AMD's way to play catch-up with nvidia, and their fell flat on their faces, its sorta like the FX series with nvidia, or the 4xx series with nvidia, oh the list goes on...

the 2xxx series was a joke of a series, it was AMD's way to play catch-up with nvidia, and their fell flat on their faces, its sorta like the FX series with nvidia, or the 4xx series with nvidia, oh the list goes on...

theshadowhunter

the 2xxx series was a joke of a series, it was AMD's way to play catch-up with nvidia, and their fell flat on their faces, its sorta like the FX series with nvidia, or the 4xx series with nvidia, oh the list goes on...

theshadowhunter

[QUOTE="theshadowhunter"]

the 2xxx series was a joke of a series, it was AMD's way to play catch-up with nvidia, and their fell flat on their faces, its sorta like the FX series with nvidia, or the 4xx series with nvidia, oh the list goes on...

Gambler_3

[QUOTE="theshadowhunter"]

the 2xxx series was a joke of a series, it was AMD's way to play catch-up with nvidia, and their fell flat on their faces, its sorta like the FX series with nvidia, or the 4xx series with nvidia, oh the list goes on...

Gambler_3

Same problem you have with bulldozer.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

Whats wrong with the nvidia 4xx series? :?

wis3boi

People with inadequate PSU or cooling could buy the 470, you know the 480 wasnt the only card in the series. And we havent heard about an abnormal failure rate for the GTX 480 so it's thermals arent nearly as big a deal as you are making it sound like.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

Whats wrong with the nvidia 4xx series? :?

GummiRaccoon

Same problem you have with bulldozer.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="theshadowhunter"]

the 2xxx series was a joke of a series, it was AMD's way to play catch-up with nvidia, and their fell flat on their faces, its sorta like the FX series with nvidia, or the 4xx series with nvidia, oh the list goes on...

wis3boi

Too hot? so? people have the money to buy them, people can cool em.

Also what about the GTX460? it is probably the best price-performance card when it came out, and the SLI scaling...

Nobody is saying the GTX 480 and 470 are the greatest cards in history but to even call them a flop in any way is just absurd. They had their pros and cons but one pro is always enough to over shadow most things and that is performance where they had AMD firmly beat.

Nobody is saying the GTX 480 and 470 are the greatest cards in history but to even call them a flop in any way is just absurd. They had their pros and cons but one pro is always enough to over shadow most things and that is performance where they had AMD firmly beat.

Gambler_3

No one called it a flop. Well other than you.

[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="Gambler_3"]Whats wrong with the nvidia 4xx series? :?

GTR12

Too hot? so? people have the money to buy them, people can cool em.

Also what about the GTX460? it is probably the best price-performance card when it came out, and the SLI scaling...

No one called it a flop. Well other than you.

GummiRaccoon

The discussion clearly implies it to be a flop and a "joke". It even got compared with the FX series.

[QUOTE="theshadowhunter"]

the 2xxx series was a joke of a series, it was AMD's way to play catch-up with nvidia, and their fell flat on their faces, its sorta like the FX series with nvidia, or the 4xx series with nvidia, oh the list goes on...

wis3boi