NVIDIA or ATI?

I thought it would be interesting to see what people like/dislike about GPU vendors (only ATI/Nvidia, dedicated cards). The point of this is to list every GPU you've owned. And list pros/cons you've noticed about each vendor or in general about that GPU brand. Perhaps you noticed all the ATI cards have poor drivers or all the Nvidia cards have a problem running something. My experience is below and a example of a decent posting format thats easy to understand.

GPUs:
ATI Mach32 (4MB & PCI, I think)
ATI 9000 64MB (PCI)
ATI 7000 32MB (PCI)
Geforce 6 Series 128MB (PCI-E)
Geforce 8600M GT 256MB GDDR3 (PCI-E)
ATI HD 3850M 512MB GDDR3 (PCI-E)

Experiance:
ATI Mach32: Sentenced to death in 2003, still worked but I de-assembled the Windows 3.1 (Its Hard Drive died) and pry'ed the ATI chip out of the card as a souvenir.

ATI 9000: Still working in my P3 (On 24/7/365).

ATI 7000: Still working in my P2 (In closet for storage).

Geforce 6 Series: Died in 2008 on my P4, GPU Fan Stopped. GPU Works, but was overheating. Reverted to Integrated Graphics.

Geforce 8600M GT: Died in 2009 only a year old, faulty Nvidia GPU. Bye Laptop.

ATI HD 3850M: Still working in my new laptop (current).

Pros/Cons:
Nvidia:
+ Great Drivers
+ Good Cards Overall
- GPU Life has been bad for me with them.
- Sometimes had problems running OpenGL.

ATI:
+ Decent OpenGL Support
+ Haven't had a ATI GPU die.
+ Handles AA/Resolutions like nothing.
- Annoying Drivers (Sometimes)

Summary:
I think both are good, but I'm edging more to ATI now from the fantastic card life I've had with them.

 

Are you doing laptop gpus or including desktop ones?

 

i've only had nvidia gpu's till date + 1 riva tnt 2(Desktop) + 1 sis 6326 (Desktop).

 

named a few laptops i ve used :
dell 1705/nvidia 7900 gs;
dell 1720/nvidia 8600m gt
dell xps m1730 / 8700m gt+ageia physics
hp dv7t /9600m gt( returned the same day)
gateway p7811fx/nvidia 9800m gts
studio 1737/ati 3650
i also had a dell e1505 with dedicated ati 128mb card for some time in 2006.

overall, i just hate ati cards, they have aweful display quality, colors and objects are never as crisp and sharp as nvidia cards.
i despise ati so much that i went out of my way to try out hp and gateway computers becuz studio 1735 offered ati card only.
by contrast, nvidia has come up with new improved cards every year,
9xxx series is a lot better than 8xxx, even 8600 mgt is better than 7900 gs,
yet 8600 is a midend, 7900 gs is a highend.

 

Desktop

NVidia 4200 128mb It is still working to this day (fastest card at the time)
NVidia 7600 it was to replace the 4200 but it died and im back on the 4200

My dad has never liked ATI because of driver support

 

From ATI I've had
ATI mobility Rage pro
ATI mobility Radeon 7500
ATI Mobility radeon 9100IGP
ATI 9250 - desktop
ATI xpress 200m (X300 IGP)
ATI mobility radeon X600
ATI X1550 low profile
ATI mobility radeon X1600
ATI X1600 pro - desktop
ATI X1950XTX - desktop
And my current desktop uses 2 HD4850's in crossfireX

As for nVidia
FX5200
FX5500
6100IGP - notebook
6600GT
7600GT
8700m GT - notebook
8600GT
8800GTS 320MB
8800GT 512mb

The only cards that have died on me was the X1950XTX which was from a faulty PSU that also killed every other component in the PC, so not a fault of ATI.

Pros and cons of each, well really none, they're both similar give or take some performance in different games when comparing their direct competitor. I've never really had issues with drivers aside from the last few nVidia cards, the 8700mGT and 8800GT having some minor scaling issues on my 1080P LCD tv when playing older games that use 640x480 that my current ATI desktop doesn't have. Also all of the ATI cards I've had can use 2048x1560 on my 23" CRT while the nVidia ones won't go above 1880x1440. But still, nothing that really sets them apart aside from their price/performance which ATI is currently winning at.

 

I have to kinda disagree, for me, I see really no difference in picture quality on the cards (its a per pixel representation). You might have had to just adjust some color settings in the graphics options. Or the resolution was lower than the screens native. Or maybe just a poor screen.

I noticed my 8600M GT had poor colors when I got it but I just had to crank up the digital vibrance. And ATI has their own version of those color settings too.

Would you guys also mention your use with your cards. Because that usually can have a effect on their lifetime.

For me, I stress the hell out of my cards. All my desktop PC's that I use run 24/7/365. And my laptop is on whenever im at home or nearby it.

 

hmm can't remember all of it but i will try lol
very 1st was a I740....
Nvidia
TNT2 ( forgot which version ..I think it was the simplfy one)
Geforce 2XXX(can't remember that either ..lol)
Geforce 5600
Geforce 8800 ultra
ATI

9100
9200
9600

laptop
ATI
9300 (HP DV9xxx....4 yr old laptop)
4870X2( soon...)
Nvidia
8800 GTX (XPS M1710)
9800 GTS (P-7811FX)

My experience with them was the 1st nvidia card I ever bought was not working , the TNT 2 because of the driver , then switch to ATI for a while with AMD cpus. I like ATI cards they really stable , never get a overheat or have any problem with them yet. but the Geforce 5600 I got was a pain... it just keep restarting , so swap it out with the 9100 and it ran smooth ( I was like hmm 14 at the time so didn't bother to check what is wrong with it lol)
then got deployed so don't need a comp till 8800 came out , got myself one of those with a BD and a 24" screen. it was NIIICE~~~ Now I think I like ATI more just because I like underdog more (impression of when AMD came out the 1st athlon and ATI's 4800 serises lately ..)

 

I'm only 16 which explains my lack of a big list:

ATI

HD3870 x2

Not much to base on, but they play the games I need them to play!

 

There seems to be a couple of things wrong with your statement.
1) In this article, the independent subjects actually preferred the ATI solution. (This however is a nitpick, as MM said, it's a color settings difference)
2) The 9xxx series isn't really any better than the 8xxx series and the 2xx series isn't really any better than the 9xxx series, why? Because it's still a rebranded 8xxx. The reason for the large performance gap (between the 7 and 8 series) is because Nvidia went and redesigned their core going from 7 to 8.

ATI Radeon 9200 (worked, got thrown out due to upgrade)
ATI Radeon 9600 (still chugging along in desktop, used to game)
Nvidia FX5500 (purchased and returned in one afternoon)
ATI Radeon 3870 (sold to a friend, still working, gaming)
ATI Radeon 4850 (still going, gaming)
ATI Mobility Radeon X1200 (worked, went away with the horrible laptop when it had MB issues, gaming)
ATI Mobility Radeon HD2600 (still gaming)

I guess the biggest reason I haven't ever gone with an Nvidia card is because (as far as I can remember back in Canada) ATI always offers better price/performance.

 

Oh god... My history is terrible... I've had one laptop and two desktops, and the second desktop doesn't even count lol...

NVidia Riva TNT2 running detonator drivers. - Good old 32MB... Was a good card, the latest game I was able to play on it was Neverwinter Nights 1. Then the Hard Drive exploded (literally - it blew the side out of two chips and poured smoke lol) and I bought an XBox ~blush~

That was five years ago.

In August last year, I crawled back to PC gaming and got myself a notebook with the 9500M GS (had to be NVidia because I was so happy with the TNT2 of old, and for some reason, I just thought that ATI looked... I dunno, of poorer quality). I'm embarrassed to say that, because I know that they're great cards, and my prejudices are completely unfounded.

My experience with the 9500M has been fantastic though.

I guess I'm an NVidia man through and through, unless ATI comes out with a new GeForce-Breaker that gets everyone raving lol...

 

*scratches head*

Ever heard of the 4870, 4870 X2, or the 4890 for that matter?

There was quite a bit of raving over those cards. If the mobile versions ever actually get to market, there will finally be a high-end mobile alternative to Nvidia.

 

I have only used Nvidia to date, but coming with my new M17 are 2 3870m from ATI, So I guess Ill find out about ATI.

I remember when ATI first came out. Nvidia was better to go with, because they had more time in the field, but now, its been awhile so I am sure they are just as capable of making cards just as good, if not better, than nvidia. And after all the reviews I have read I am pretty sure.

 

ATi has been making video cards long before nVidia was even a company. nVidia actually came out long after ATI. I think you have it backwards.

 

geforce 4 series card (desktop) - brilliant card never had one issue
geforce nvs quadro (laptop 8400gt equivalant) - another pleasing card

next will try to go ati, just for a change

 

Geforce 5200
Geforce 5700 ultra
ATI X800 pro (fried it trying to flash it but got it rma)
ATI X800 XT (what i got out of my RMA)
ATI MR X1900
NVidia Go 9800GS

yeah im kinda new to the computer game, about six years or so but i have had nothing but good experiences with both nvidia and ati. but im kind of a band wagon hoper when it comes to video cards and cpu's i had ATi when it was smashing nvidia back in the day and before that i didnt know anything about ati, and now im going back to nvidia in my notebook because of, 1 the price and 2 i hear that they have much much better driver support in their mobile counterparts compared to amd at the moment. hopefully i can get up there again and bulid a desktop again after being out of the game for the past 2 years.

But my whole thing on Nvidia vs ATI is that its a personal preference. which ever game u are really into u should buy the card that plays it better. i was and currently am, a huge source fan. so i am still big into ati but i cant justify the price to pay for a mobile 3870 or whatever it is they have out. just food for thought i guess

 

My first notebook was a Toshiba Satellite. It had the ATI Mobility Radeon 7000 which was an IGP. Ran it for two years before selling it. I bought my current notebook almost 2 years ago. It has the GeForce Go 7600 which died last September. However HP was generous in replacing it for free. Have nice experiences with the Go 7600.

 

Only once I'd already gotten my 9500M GS and come here lol... Never had any experience with them, and I missed all the discussion lol...

Hmmm... Guess it depends whether we're talking 2D-only cards... (I don't know much of anything abiout that, since I woulda been <5yo lol)

ATi's certainly been around longer...

As far as I can tell, ATi released their final Mach Series card in 1994, which was still only 2D.

NVidia's NV1, which was their first 3D card, was released in '95, so if we're talking 3D-capable, Sn0w may be right, but I think the real first graphics face-off was when the Riva series was released.

At that time it was competing with the 3DFX Voodoo cards, which were the absolute s**t at the time, I believe. Yes NVidia bought out 3dFX, but that wasn't til 2002...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATI_Mach
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3dfx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIVA_128
wikipedia.org/etc etc etc...

Couldn't find when ATi's first 3d GPU came out...

 

NVidia is a bit more geared towards gaming I think.

 

My graphics processors:

Toshiba R25 Convertible Tablet Notebook (June 2005)
Intel Extreme Graphics 2 w/ 64 MB shared VRAM (Intel GMA 850)
Sucky GPU but it got me started with PC gaming, even though I didn't think about PC gaming at all when I got since it was specifically for school. First game on it was Far Cry, then Age of Empires II, and then Call of Duty which was my first foray into online gaming.

Gateway MX7525 Notebook (January 2006)
ATi Mobility Radeon X600 w/ 128 MB VRAM (64 MB DDR dedicated, 64 MB shared)
2 Vertex Shaders/4 Pixel Shaders/4 Texture Mapping Units/4 Render Output ProcessorsMy first real GPU, and got me truly into PC gaming thanks to the ability to actually play many of the games my Toshiba couldn't. Liked it alot, played BF2, Call of Duty 2, HL2, CSS on it mostly, plus it had an Athlon 64 4000 mobile which was a beast!


HP dv6045nr Notebook
Nvidia Geforce Go 7200 w/ 256 MB VRAM (64 MB DDR2 dedicated, 192 MB shared)
3 Vertex Shaders/4 Pixel Shaders/4 Texture Mapping Units/2 Render Output Processors
I bought this computer with lack of real knowledge and understanding of ATi's and Nvidia's product numbering system. I though I was getting a much better GPU as well as my first computer with DDR2 SRAM (2 GB of it) and a dual core processor (Turion x2 TL-56). Despite the marginal graphics horsepower increase, it played at higher resolutions more easily thanks to the extra VRAM. Also was my first foray into GPU OCing and benchmarking which was fun, though my antics helped to kill it only 1.5 years into it's life.

Custom built desktop
Nvidia Geforce 8800GTS w/ 320 MB GDDR3 VRAM
92 Unified Shaders/48 Texture Mapping Units/20 Render Output Processors
This was my first and only desktop I've ever had or built. The 8800GTS was a beast, and so far has been the most powerful GPU I've ever owned. I never delved into OCing with it, because it didn't need it and every game I played on it got ripped a new one except Crysis (or course!). I wish I had my desktop still, but there was a hardware issue that turned it into a worthless brick, and I ended up selling off the rest of the parts.

Asus G50VT-X1
Nvidia Geforce 9800M GS w/ 512 MB GDDR3 VRAM
64 Unified Shaders/28 Texture Mapping Units/16 Render Output Processors
This computer has gotten me back into the game I suppose. It's been wonderful so far and has responded very well to OCing, and I've taken the time to experiment with different drivers for it which has been fun. I've been doing alot of tweaking and what not, more so than any other computer I've had as well. Doing it in conjunction with you guys here has been fun since we all shared knowledge and experience.

As far as future plans go, I'd like to go ATi this time around as I did like my X600 plus the price/performance ratio is very good, plus I've had so many Nvidia based systems.

 

cool thread

I am going to post both my desktop and notebook cards to show progression

ATI Mach64 1mb 2d card, very good for the time voodoo was pretty much the only 3d at the time.

ATI Xpert@Play 4mb 2d/3d card, this was one of the first affordable 3d cards and ran extremely well, I remember using tvout with g-police. Then the fateful day arrived when ATI enabled OpenGL in the driver, and stability vanished.

Voodoo Banshee 16mb, this was a great card, enabled glide opengl and d3d, I miss Glide

Geforce 2mx 32mb, budget geforce2, ok but didnt take long before

Geforce 4mx 128mb, this was a mainstay for a while ran games well, stable drivers.

during the last two cards I had built Various ATI Rage systems for friends, and family, needless to say they went to Nvidia after having some ridiculous driver issues, like office 97 crashing the ati display driver on a Rage 32, Rage Fury and Rage Fury Maxx. The cards were powerful, when you could get anything running.

it was when I got my mx440 that my friend with an Intel I740 8mb card finally needed to upgrade, that card must have been the best performing card, over the longest time. Intel need to get back to those days.

anyway after that I went onto a Geforce 5200 128mb, thinking that it would be a decent upgrade from the 4 MX440, I was wrong, it was slower, even after I o/c'd it. Thats when I learned the hard way that the second number in Nvidias naming system was the one that counted.

got a 5900xt, and WOW what performance!!!

then went to a 6600GT because I wanted dx9

then I got my first laptop, with an ATI X1200 (acer) and it was fast, but just not quite fast enough, I got the ati because the release of the geforce go7600 model was delayed, I even paid MORE for the ati.
had lots of driver trouble, (whats the score needing .net for display drivers?)
ended up improving performance using Omega drivers (that dude is a lifesaver)

finally I now have 2 laptops, my trusty Clevo from Novatech with an 8800m gtx, mmmmmmmm still going strong

and the amazingly surprising X4500HD in my business samsung 12" laptop which I dont really game with but its stable and the tests were impressive to say its not a big gamer card.

so there you go
I like ATI's image quality etc but their drivers suck

I havent had a gpu fail on me yet.

customers and friends have had both ATI and Nvidia cards fail and other brands, but thats the nature of the game.

 

Yeah, what I meant was for gaming cards.

In the mid-late 90s Nvidias only real rival was 3dfx...I think ATI didnt really come out with gaming gpus until 99-2000? I know ATI has been around for awhile, but I just remember Nvidia coming out with gaming cards before ATI.

 

Actually ATI produced performance cards like the RAge series. It's just that their drivers were so bad that they couldn't really live up to their potential though they were ok cards.

 

Only ever had nvidias. First was the crown prince: Geforce 4 MX. Disgusting, couldn't even pixel shader 1 when a geforce 3 could.

My beloved 6600. I could Crysis on low on that with a 1.7ghz computer.

Now i'm on a 9600m gt and was crysising on super high at about 25fps, and for some reason my laptop has major slow downs and can only crysis on medium at 23fps..... grrrr

 

Laptop 9600M GT != 9600 GT.
The mobile cards are quite slower than the desktop counterparts. Yet the 9600M GT still isn't that bad at all. Gets the job done, am I right?

 

Laptop 9600M GT = 32 Shaders/16 texture units/8 Render Output Units (die shrink and CPU/Shader clock increase of the same GPU in the desktop and laptop 8600GTs and desktop 9500GT)

Desktop 9600 GT = 64 Shaders/32 texture units/16 Render Output Units. The laptop version of this same GPU is in the form of the 9800M GS/GT/GTS. I do know that the GS version of the 9800M does have 4 of the TMUs disabled possibly due to heat/power concerns, and is quite overclockable which is nice, especially if you flash it to GTS speeds and voltages which I need to do sometime to my own.

While Nvidia has great mobile and desktop GPUs, their numbering system is getting way out of hand, since consumers who really don't know what they are doing are going to think the mobile and desktop counterparts are the same. ATi thankfully keeps their numbers in line which is nice. Of course the mobile versions are slower due to power constraints, they are comparable performance wise across the entire desktop and laptop lines.

 

The Geforce 4 MX wasn't that bad... It played UT2004 rather fine. Not too bad for what is essentially a Geforce 2 lol.

 

I been a loyal user of Nvidia.

 

I had a discussion with one of my friends thats in the business and he told me that ATi is really starting to lag because of their crappy drivers. The majority of people that are having problems and bringing their computers in have ATi and it ends up being due to just plain crappy drivers on their part and just to note he works at an enthusiast shop not BB or FS or somewhere ridiculous like that

 

I hear this all the time, ATI has bad drivers and so on. But what about them is bad? I've used both nVidia and ATI for over 10 years and don't ever remember problems with either of their drivers. Nor do either of my current high end nVidia and AMD desktops have any issues with their drivers.

You install them, and they just work. Color options are there, custom resolutions are on both, scaling, video options, filtering and AA settings etc. What exactly is all of this about bad drivers?

 

prefer nVidia, they run a lot cooler than similar ATI's

 

Both companies are very competitive and often go back and forth on performance every generation. Currently, ATI offers better a performance/price ratio but Nvidia has better driver support (which is important for brand new games). Comments about perceived differences in "picture quality" are almost always unfounded. I have never found any difference between the two and both companies offer robust tools to adjust visuals.

 

Apparently ATi is suffering from very unstable frame rates, lack of optimizations for new games, graphical glitches and just a bunch of crap along those lines.

 

Not from what Ive experienced. I think alot of people blow it out of proportion. Only problems ive had with ATI so far is Catalyst 9.3 caused crysis warhead to pause while loading. So i installed back to 9.1 and its good.

Ive had things like that with Geforce too.

Really to me, drivers in ATI on average are probably a bit worse than Nvidia. And thats about it. And the way ATI handles AA' I wouldn't give it up for better drivers.

And ive had no problem with OpenGL 2.1 & 3.0 at all.

 

Brand loyalty is great and all but..............both brands have been king of the hill, both brands have had less than stellar cards, and both brands have had cards that just get too hot. Thank god there is at least this much competition or we wouldn't have the kind of performance we have today.

I've only ever had one GPU failure and it happened to be a Nvidia 7950m GTX. I have ATI in Crossfire in my new laptop and the 3870's run cooler than the 7950 GTX. Might be the other way around next time.

The only complaint I have about ATI is that they throw out their driver updates without a concern for their mobility users. Fortunatey, we mod their drivers to work for us.

All I know is I'll get whatever is top dog at the moment I make my purchase.