Nvidia or ATI

[/\E]

Exactly. Has been. Is not.

Worse was put in quotation marks to show the consumer's assumption.

Actually 2900XT was a really good card, as I learned some time ago (yes, I thought it was bad, or "old", but was quicky corrected for loling at someone suggesting the 2900XT as a solid card. It is.)

Who are you kidding? No it wasn't, it was a power whore and produced a lot of heat. The 8800GTX dominated that thing. I think I would go for a card that I could actually OC on the stock cooling. Yes, it is an old card, it's ATi's excrement after the X1k series. ATi has been down since the R300 and R400 days. But with the 48xx/X2 they are severely underrated today.

Most? Do you know some of your stuff? The 4-series cards totally caught NVIDIA by surprise and coupled with other difficulties NVIDIA were having such as having to recall thousands of integrated GPUs and getting sued by their own shareholders, NVIDIA lost quite significant amounts of market share and their stocks are doing anything but well. IMO saying that ATi is overrated is an overkill, if not just plain wrong.

No, my argument was not that it was "overrated" instead that they are underrated in today's performance. Are you needing to read my post again? Yes, "most" I say, otherwise why would "most" ATi users say that Nvidia is overpriced?

Actually, most of their success can be attributed to their marketing skills. Until Athlon, AMD hardware had been inferior to Intel's offerings and AMD's clever marketing strategies and tactical partnerships is what kept them afloat and in the end made them pretty popular. If you wonder how I know this, I did a Business Management (VCE Units 1&2 - just to add the "fancy factor") assignment on AMD/Jerry Sanders, and because the subect is what it is I had to focus on their marketing/business operation a lot...

No...this is not AMD vs. Intel... I was simply saying that ATi has never really had a good marketing scheme and AMD's acquisition did not help. And it really didn't, AMD has no form of advertising to the consumer marketplace. AMD is usually assumed(by the average joe) to be bad when someone goes to Circuit City and buys some HP with an AMD CPU, it usually goes "AMD, what? Get outta here." I've seen it that way and from many ppl. AMD's only real form of advertising is word of mouth and you don't see this? It's been a LONG time since I have seen an AMD commercial on TV, how about yourself?

 

[TechShark]

/_\ E your computer seems like it kicks ass... (off topic i know)

the one with SLI dayumn

 

[/\E]

/_\ E your computer seems like it kicks ass... (off topic i know)

the one with SLI dayumn

Crysis @ 1920x1200 with Very High 4x AA =45FPS
World in Conflict @ 1920x1200 Very High 4x AA =35FPS
CoD4 Maxed 4x AA = 120FPS
ETQW is about the same as CoD4
STALKER is around 75FPS

I spent too much on this... This is the last pricey gaming rig I build.

 

[TrainTrackHack]

Worse was put in quotation marks to show the consumer's assumption.

Umm...

Who are you kidding? No it wasn't, it was a power whore and produced a lot of heat. The 8800GTX dominated that thing. I think I would go for a card that I could actually OC on the stock cooling.

If "worse" is only the consumer's assumption, why would you go ahead and bash the card?

As for the card being "crappy", 8800GTX did not "dominate", it "outperformed" the 2900XT. I've yet to come across a benchmark that shows the 8800GTX dominates the 2900XT, while I have seen benchmarks where the 2900XT actually does outperform the 8800GTX, in some cases by a significant margin. Also, while it wasn't quite as good performer, it was sold at a much lower price point than competing NVIDIA offerings and won price/performance-wise.

But with the 48xx/X2 they are severely underrated today.

And do you have any proof? Evidence? According to what I've been hearing and seeing, they're anything but underrated. And I repeat that they snatched away a big chunk of market share away from NVIDIA, how does an underrated card practically punch a dominating competitor in the face just like that?

No, my argument was not that it was "overrated" instead that they are underrated in today's performance. Are you needing to read my post again? Yes, "most" I say, otherwise why would "most" ATi users say that Nvidia is overpriced?

That was what we call a "human error". I did mean to say "underrated", not "overrated".

No...this is not AMD vs. Intel...

So? I never started to argue AMD's superiority over Intel or the other way around, I was simply saying that AMD's success largely relied on their marketing strategies, not technological advantage, so as to rebut your plain wrong and ignorant statement:

I don't think AMD has ever had marketing skills

I was simply saying that ATi has never really had a good marketing scheme and AMD's acquisition did not help. And it really didn't, AMD has no form of advertising to the consumer marketplace.

AMD's only real form of advertising is word of mouth and you don't see this? It's been a LONG time since I have seen an AMD commercial on TV, how about yourself?

So? If that was supposed to rebut my statement on AMD's marketing, I hope you realise "Marketing" involves a lot more than just commercials and ads.

 

[/\E]

Umm...
If "worse" is only the consumer's assumption, why would you go ahead and bash the card?

Because, the consumers' assumption may or may not differ from my opinion. Can I not voice that and someone understand that fact?

As for the card being "crappy", 8800GTX did not "dominate", it "outperformed" the 2900XT. I've yet to come across a benchmark that shows the 8800GTX dominates the 2900XT, while I have seen benchmarks where the 2900XT actually does outperform the 8800GTX, in some cases by a significant margin. Also, while it wasn't quite as good performer, it was sold at a much lower price point than competing NVIDIA offerings and won price/performance-wise.

Excuse me for not acting like I have some Ph.D in Psychology and English especially when I don't get "under" and "over" confused(note to sarcasm). Saying "dominated" is my way of saying that it had beaten the competitor. It might have won price-performance with the 8800GTX, but it still wasn't ATi's greatest card.

And do you have any proof? Evidence? According to what I've been hearing and seeing, they're anything but underrated. And I repeat that they snatched away a big chunk of market share away from NVIDIA, how does an underrated card practically punch a dominating competitor in the face just like that?

I watch more than this kiddie forum... Maybe if you would get off of this place and visit some other forums(Xtreme, OCF, etc.) you would have an actual idea of what is going on. I see more stuff about Nvidia cards being posted than ATi.

So? I never started to argue AMD's superiority over Intel or the other way around, I was simply saying that AMD's success largely relied on their marketing strategies, not technological advantage, so as to rebut your plain wrong and ignorant statement:

You still mentioned Intel and I killed Intel out of the debate. AMD's success did not rely on marketing, AMD's success was in the fact that gamers, performance enthusiasts, and hobbyists were involved enough to see that the Athlon "outperformed" the P4. But this isn't about AMD vs. Intel, this particular area in the conversation is about how AMD DEFINITELY did NOT help ATi's marketing situation or ability. If you can show me that AMD has had a cunning and/or strategic method of marketing for ATi then I will accept that my statement was wrong.

So? If that was supposed to rebut my statement on AMD's marketing, I hope you realize "Marketing" involves a lot more than just commercials and ads.

Of course it does consist of more but, if I were to produce a product that I kept a secret, I wouldn't expect to sell it.

 

[TrainTrackHack]

Because, the consumers' assumption may or may not differ from my opinion. Can I not voice that and someone understand that fact?

Soo...you put "worse" in quotation marks in order to show consumer's assumption, which I understand as "consumer's assumption is that ATi is worse than NVIDIA", and then you bash the card because consumer's opinion may or may not differ? I can't exactly see your point, but whatever.

Excuse me for not acting like I have some Ph.D in Psychology and English especially when I don't get "under" and "over" confused(note to sarcasm). Saying "dominated" is my way of saying that it had beaten the competitor. It might have won price-performance with the 8800GTX, but it still wasn't ATi's greatest card.

You're excused, and as for you intelligent "note to sarcasm", I did not get those words "confused", I'm higly aware of the difference between those two, it was simply a mix-up, or a "human error"; I accidentally typed in the wrong word. Does it help if I say that I don't even speak English as my first language, and that I've only lived in an English-speaking country fot 3 years? And to me, "dominate" means "to soundly beat" and 8800GTX did not "soundly beat" 2900XT. And I don't have any degrees either, I'm a college student (or high-schooler, whatever the proper term in America is).

I watch more than this kiddie forum... Maybe if you would get off of this place and visit some other forums(Xtreme, OCF, etc.) you would have an actual idea of what is going on. I see more stuff about Nvidia cards being posted than ATi.

So do I, for that matter, I watch places other than this "kiddie forum". And your assumption that I only watch this "kiddie forum" is just plain stupid and ignorant. I have a life outside this forum, and the internet/computer altogether. Shall we keep using arguments relevant to the debate rather than resorting to outright stupid assumptions and insults?

You still mentioned Intel and I killed Intel out of the debate.

It was only to demonstrate the point that AMD didn't become successful because of their products were better (which they really weren't until the release of Athlon). Can you compherend that? The point, I repeat, is: AMD was TECHNOLOGICALLY INFERIOR to Intel, their only competitor. AMD's success can be largely attributed to their MARKETING STRATEGY. See? I only used to make my statement more clear, not to turn this into an "AMD vs Intel" flamewar.

AMD's success did not rely on marketing, AMD's success was in the fact that gamers, performance enthusiasts, and hobbyists were involved enough to see that the Athlon "outperformed" the P4.

Oh, yes, how about before Athlon when their processors were outperformed by Intel CPUs? AMD and Intel have been in direct competition since 1982, if not earlier, and it was not until Athlon released more than 15 years later that AMD actually had a technological advantage, yet they made due. Read the quotes I provided just for you.

If you can show me that AMD has had a cunning and/or strategic method of marketing for ATi then I will accept that my statement was wrong.

I never said AMD had any cunning and/or marketing method for ATi, I was simply rebuting this:

I don't think AMD has ever had marketing skills

Regardless...

Qutotes on AMD's key person: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Sanders_(businessman)

He eventually moved to Motorola, then to Fairchild Semiconductor. He became known as one of Fairchild's best sales people in the 1960s and was famous for his style and flair.

Sanders took his trademark style into his position as the CEO of AMD. He remained the company's consummate salesperson, always available to come in on the really tough negotiations and close them.

Sanders gave the company a strong sales and marketing orientation, so that it was successful even though it was often a little behind its competitors in technology and manufacturing.

He drove the company through hard times as well. In 1974, a particularly bad recession almost broke the company, but a brilliant sales deal worked out by Sanders with one of the company's distributors saved the company.

In 1982, he was responsible for a licensing deal with Intel that made AMD a second source to IBM for the Intel Microprocessor series, a deal that eventually made the company the only real competitor to Intel.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/10/04/BU153179.DTL

And there was Sanders, Fairchild's young, brash, hotshot sales engineer.

"Jerry was the guy who really architected how to sell and how to market integrated circuits," said Wilfred Corrigan, CEO of LSI Logic Corp. and an early Sanders colleague. "Many of us used to think he missed his calling, he probably should have been in the movie industry."

At Fairchild, Sanders rose from sales to a succession of management positions in marketing and seemed headed for one of the company's top vice presidencies.

He started AMD, a company known less for its technological advances, as was the case with Intel, and more for its ability to market and sell its somewhat imitative products.

http://www.uiaa.org/urbana/illinoisalumni/utxt0402e.html

After graduation, Sanders first went to work for Douglas Aircraft, then Motorola, then Fairchild Semiconductor, an innovative company for integrated circuits in the 1960s. On the job, Sanders kept learning — often to help make sales. Never a research scientist, Sanders was primarily a business-end thinker before co-founding AMD

 

[/\E]

Soo...you put "worse" in quotation marks in order to show consumer's assumption, which I understand as "consumer's assumption is that ATi is worse than NVIDIA", and then you bash the card because consumer's opinion may or may not differ? I can't exactly see your point, but whatever.

You're excused, and as for you intelligent "note to sarcasm", I did not get those words "confused", I'm higly aware of the difference between those two, it was simply a mix-up, or a "human error"; I accidentally typed in the wrong word. Does it help if I say that I don't even speak English as my first language, and that I've only lived in an English-speaking country fot 3 years? And to me, "dominate" means "to soundly beat" and 8800GTX did not "soundly beat" 2900XT. And I don't have any degrees either, I'm a college student (or high-schooler, whatever the proper term in America is).

So do I, for that matter, I watch places other than this "kiddie forum". And your assumption that I only watch this "kiddie forum" is just plain stupid and ignorant. I have a life outside this forum, and the internet/computer altogether. Shall we keep using arguments relevant to the debate rather than resorting to outright stupid assumptions and insults?

It was only to demonstrate the point that AMD didn't become successful because of their products were better (which they really weren't until the release of Athlon). Can you compherend that? The point, I repeat, is: AMD was TECHNOLOGICALLY INFERIOR to Intel, their only competitor. AMD's success can be largely attributed to their MARKETING STRATEGY. See? I only used to make my statement more clear, not to turn this into an "AMD vs Intel" flamewar.

Oh, yes, how about before Athlon when their processors were outperformed by Intel CPUs? AMD and Intel have been in direct competition since 1982, if not earlier, and it was not until Athlon released more than 15 years later that AMD actually had a technological advantage, yet they made due. Read the quotes I provided just for you.

I never said AMD had any cunning and/or marketing method for ATi, I was simply rebuting this:
Regardless...

Qutotes on AMD's key person: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Sanders_(businessman)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/10/04/BU153179.DTL


http://www.uiaa.org/urbana/illinoisalumni/utxt0402e.html

I appreciate all the reading you posted...

Since, AMD has done nothing for ATi's marketing and nothing has changed my mind about ATi being underrated in today's market, my point stands and this debate is over.

 

[TrainTrackHack]

Since, AMD has done nothing for ATi's marketing and nothing has changed my mind about ATi being underrated in today's market, my point stands and this debate is over.

Way to call quits. However, I'd like to remind you that
1) I never said/claimed that AMD had done anything to ATi's marketing
2) Apparently I can't change your mind about ATi being underrated...but if you're so sure of this, would you pleeeeze be so nice as to point me to, well, any legit site that proves your point, so I at least know there's something to back up your statement.

And at last, just to clarify... you said your point still "stands" (I can't see any of them standing)...which one out of all the ones you've made during this debate are you referring to?

 

[/\E]

Way to call quits. However, I'd like to remind you that
1) I never said/claimed that AMD had done anything to ATi's marketing
2) Apparently I can't change your mind about ATi being underrated...but if you're so sure of this, would you pleeeeze be so nice as to point me to, well, any legit site that proves your point, so I at least know there's something to back up your statement.

And at last, just to clarify... you said your point still "stands" (I can't see any of them standing)...which one out of all the ones you've made during this debate are you referring to?

My best evidence would be ATi's prices when compared to Nvidia's. Why does ATi have to have their 4870's price cheaper than that of the GTX 280?

 

[TrainTrackHack]

My best evidence would be ATi's prices when compared to Nvidia's. Why does ATi have to have their 4870's price cheaper than that of the GTX 280?

Because the 4870 performs worse than the GTX280. There would be no point selling the 4870 at the price of the 280, when the 280 performs better. That's like asking why is Lada cheaper than Ferrari.

 

[voyagerfan99]

I went with nVidia this time. Got myself a GeForce 9600 GSO [384 MB]. I must say I'm impressed. I can now play FEAR and FS9 on high with no problems. FSX is another story.

It definitely beats my X1650 Pro.

 

[john_doe_134]

two words................. F*** it

 

[lenny77840]

Nvidia

I would say NVIDIA.
They are a little ahead of ATI in my opinion.

 

[nemiux]

Well, i have more exp. with nvidia, i use 8800GT, but i used ATI. Well, i play much games, so by looking at graphics i would never choose ATI, nvidia is for me.

 

[disturbedpanda]

NVIDIA GTX260 is one of the best I've had.

So unless something happens to really lower my view of NVIDIA, I'm not going to buy from ATI.

Also, when was younger, my ATI integrated GPU... well it sort of "melted".

 

[funkysnair]

can someone start this thread again?

i think the voting would be much closer than what it is now!

 

[Cpetrie]

I chose nVidia because my limited experience has been exclusively with them, leading to my subsequent blind loyalty.

 

[lubo4444]

umm... I got them both but i'm a bit more for nvidia

 

[SiliconDoc]

HOT TIP ! low price ! NVIDIA is preferred here - setting up EASY

wat do u prefer? Nvidia or ATI

Since I have to install so many, Nvidia ROCKS compared to ATI - yes I hate to say it - but ATI driver issues - I'd like to SMASH some upgrades and customer systems....

If I want a customer happy (me happy really - making money and reputation)- they get an NVIDIA CARD. PERIOD.

Oh sorry about that. All you massively experienced master geeks can handle ATI cards and their drivers- it's just the noobed customers can't.
Or me - noob I'm sure some of you think

Here's a GREAT DEAL for the people who love good advice.

$189.99 after rebate for an OC'ed @ 620 GTX 260 - yes this card ROCKS.
YOU ALSO GET THE FREE - Rainbow 6 Vegas 2 game - almost too good to be true....
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127361

Oh gawd, Sahhweeeeeet ! Oh it's a dream, it runs great, no problems - it's heavy metal - fan is quiet - everything is great. Included drivers are no problem...
My golly you'll love me for tipping you. ( No kisses please! )

It is the BEST DEAL on the whole internet- I challenge anyone to find better and post it.. ain't happenin.

 

[SiliconDoc]

Buddy, that all works except for 1 thing

I have to say it.. Sorry for all those of which I offend but here it goes.

Its soooooooo damn silly to pick one over the other and then say that one is better then the other. They are both great company’s and both have great products.

What’s good this year is not necessarily going to be what's good next.. I'd much rather pick a product because it's the best which means NVIDIA’s 6800GT over ATI's X800 Pro this year. Last time around it would have been ATI 9800Pro or XT model over just about all the NVIDIA FX series but unfortunately in my case I could only afford the 9600Pro at that time :-(..

It all comes down to who has the better product at the time.. I'm all about the best bang for the buck because too many good things are missed out when we blindly follow one company because we like it's name.

Also here's the proof for you all. It's that sort of attitude is why the 9800pro/XT is the around the same price and sometimes more then the much better X800 Pro, it's because people dont research and dont really know what they are buying 9x out of 10.. It's a fact ;-)... It's also a fact that this sort of attitude has many people thinking that the 9800Pro is still ATi's top product even when they know of the exsitance of the X800Pro.

That all works except for 1 thing - DRIVER ISSUES.
Now you point out that the noobs don't research - and rest assured the noobs do tech at the same level.
Therefore my friend - NVIDIA WINS - they have had far less driver issues for a long, long, long ,long time.
A long time.
Far far far less driver issues.
Yes, a stupid freakin noob can successfully install an Nvidia nearly 100% of the time -NOT SO WITH ATI.

Yes, that fact that you have said there are so many idiots out there settles the case against your own conclusion !

haha!
I know, I know - I agree with you like 90% of the time there friend.
( ps - yes your years old post is still getting read - yer e famous my friend ! )