AMD to nVidia: Put Up or Shut Up

[Originality]

Better question- who is willing to pay £500 for some tech that only marginally performs better (in real terms) over it's apparently "outdated" predecessors? Enthusiasts and graphic engineers (the latter not so much)

Nvidia and AMD are getting nervous- graphics on the PC are plateauing, and people are moving over to consoles, depriving them of a big money milker. So they just treat every card as if it's revolutionary, despite no real person being able to notice or care about any difference. nVidia and AMD make the GPUs for the consoles anyway, so they're not losing out. Anyway, they're still pushing for who can play Crysis on max details on 40"+ screens. We're still another generation away from seeing that.

PS: Who the fuck does SLI or that Crossfire thing, anyway? Why would you need 2 cards, unless your monitor was the size of a shed? Again, Enthusiasts, for bragging rights, and graphic engineers (those doing modelling, animation and HD film rendering). And Folders. And you don't need a monitor the size of a shed - a high-end projector is enough.

^Edited.

 

[Steve the Pocket]

Who really cares? I mean until the consoles get updated to the newer version like Xbox 720, were not going to see graphical enhancements on the PC. Consoles are holding back what any of these GPUs can really do because every game on the PC is Multi-Platform pretty much. I will say yes we still get higher graphics on those games with like Direct X 11 but nothing major like what these developers spout about their graphics card.

The GTX 580 alone is way above the current generation graphics but here we are using it for games such as Call of Duty Black Ops. The rivalry is nice to have but seriously? I'll stick to my GTX 460 considering it runs everything on high still because graphics won't go anywhere till we get a new damn console to handle it.

It's kind of a moot point when we keep getting console-to-PC ports that barely run at all, expensive graphics cards or not. Besides, some of us like being able to play new releases on our three-year-old computers without top-of-the-line cards, thank you very much.

 

[Goody]

My 5770 can run every single game at max settings on 1080p (1920x1080, 60hz, progressive scan) with 4x AA and 8X anisotrpic filtering, admittedly I have to push the fan speed up when I go on a game, but it does it none the less.

 

[imperialreign]

Nice - we haven't seen the two go at it since the days of the X1900 and 7900 series.


As to all the other tripe that has quickly filled this thread - some users need to actually do some research before making claims.

 

[Wolfram23]

I like how they are both strutting and knocking each other over what is pretty much just two of their old cards stuck together. Wow, way to push the envelope and develop something new, neither one has the right to brag about repackaging already released product, and the fact that it took them so long to do it. Both of these cards are scams, the only people who will use that power would get more out of a quadro/firepro.

They can debate on who has the best card when they both put out a new line of cards, my guess is they both ran into some delay with their upcoming generations not living up to the hype and are trying to create a smokescreen while they either try to revamp their next series or create enough corporate love that few will care.

...What? The 590 is two 580 GPUs downclocked and the 6990 is two 6970 GPUs downclocked. Both the 500 and 6000 series cards are brand spanking new.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Yeah! Rivalry, Brawl style, let them duke it out! Show us who is best! Rise to the challenge! Exclamation point!

 

[Jamous]

...COMBINE TO MAKE AN EPIC HYBRID!

 

[Wolfram23]

Threads like these are fun with console lovers who never bothered to research PC hardware start to spout shit about who needs it, no point, etc. (Not saying that's everyone who likes consoles, but there's already a few posts like that)

There's a few reasons for cards like this. For example, some people want to play on huge screens. I'm not talking about a 40" 1080p HDTV, because the image quality on that is far worse than a 24" 1080p monitor (read: pixel density). Just the other day I saw an amazing PC this guy is building. 4 GTX 580s in quad SLI, to power 3 30" 2560x1600 screens. Granted, he claimed to already have spent over $11000 on it (including a $1500 CPU) and I think it's excessive, but, that's the kind of person who wants these cards.

Also, the point of a dual GPU card, as opposed to the cheaper and faster option of doing, for example, two 6970s or two 580s, is twofold (although related). PCIe has bandwidth. 16 lanes of bandwidth being the highest. For a lot of people, when you put 2 cards in SLI/CF you wind up with them each getting only 8 lanes of bandwidth (the i5 760's P55 chipset does this, as do most of the new Sandy Bridge i5 2600 P67 chipsets). 8 lanes will bottleneck the top end cards like 6970, 570, 580 etc. So it's possible that a dual gpu card on a single 16x lane is faster than two cards on 8x lanes. Then there's quadfire/quad SLI. You may not have 4 PCIe slots at 8x/8x/8x/8x - or if you do, again, you could just use two lanes at 16x/16x. So like before, the single card using more bandwidth can maybe be faster than more cards at lower bandwidth. And with certain $300 P67 motherboards, they do actually allow 16x/16x thanks to the NF200 chip, so there's another place that the two dual gpu cards can reign supreme.

 

[Velociferocks]

Whats the big whup? In three months there will be an even more powerful card than these two put together.

 

[Johnnyallstar]

Oh, I would just love this rivalry to get a little teeth again.

 

[Scrythe]

I'm not the conspiracy theory type, but I swear nVidia and AMD are the same goddamned company.

 

[Blemontea]

Nvidia if your reading this i just want to say this
your graphics card in my laptop as of right now is... SHIT! and by that i mean it crashes, a lot. You certainly dont have my vote right now until i see some improvment.
From
A GeForce GT 130M User

 

[Snotnarok]

I'm sorry ATI you have catching up to do for all the years of shitty service you've given many laptop owners with no updates for the mobile cards.
Fastest card my ass is all I'll say for the shit I went through to get games running on a video card that could have run the game 4 times over

 

[ImprovizoR]

If I know nvidia, and I think I do, they will cheat like they always do.

 

[ph0b0s123]

Before the fan boys come out, the winner of this contest has already been decided... It's a draw. Really it does not matter for this gen whether you get an ATI or Nvidia card. Which ever you get, you win. That is the same at most high end price points. It all depends on which games you play as each company's cards this gen have advantages in different games. Any decent non biased review site will tell you this.

The only oddity is the 580 which is in a class of its own (but you certainly have to pay for it). Cannot remember a time when neither ATI or NVidia could land a killing blow. And there is nothing between their high-end cards, hence why they can both claim fastest, because it all depends what game you are playing. Neither is fastest across the board.

My 5770 can run every single game at max settings on 1080p (1920x1080, 60hz, progressive scan) with 4x AA and 8X anisotrpic filtering, admittedly I have to push the fan speed up when I go on a game, but it does it none the less.

No, you can't.... I don't believe for a second you can run metro 2033, stalker or DA 2 at max settings and get anywhere decent frame rates. But maybe you are happy playing at 15-20 FPS.

 

[B-rad747]

one shall enter... and one will make a better card in six months

 

[Keava]

Aww can i volunteer to be the judge? Like both AMD and nVIDIA give me their cards and i'll run tests and then after many envelopes full of additional 'help' money (i have to buy the games for something too you know, else it won't be a proper test) i will declare my verdict? Pretty please?

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

Sounds like it just a ego contest between the two companies, I bet they've both already developing even powerful cards as we speak. I mean very few people are actually going to buy these cards as it just is not worth it given the current standard of most pc games.

 

[Baneat]

Better question- who is willing to pay £500 for some tech that only marginally performs better (in real terms) over it's apparently "outdated" predecessors?

Nvidia and AMD are getting nervous- graphics on the PC are plateauing, and people are moving over to consoles, depriving them of a big money milker. So they just treat every card as if it's revolutionary, despite no real person being able to notice or care about any difference.

PS: Who the fuck does SLI or that Crossfire thing, anyway? Why would you need 2 cards, unless your monitor was the size of a shed?

Hey,

SLI/XFire's a common choice amongst people with aging video cards (Your choice, get a full card-upgrade or buy another (depreciated) of your old card and get a nice boost in performance)

The 6990/GTX590 are pretty significant cards cause they're basically crossfires on one board, it gives insane performance compared to any single-gpu card as a result.

I wouldn't pay £500 for one, but people are happy dropping £1000 on a guitar that doesn't sound amazingly better than their current one.

I prefer to upgrade a £150 card when it stops playing most games on high, about once every 2 years.

Note that I'd buy a second 9800GT instead of upgrading to my 5850 if my motherboard actually supported SLI, since 9800GT's can be had second-hand for about £40 now

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Come on! Some good honest, face to face competition.

How sad is it that this is so refreshing?

As good as competition is this comes as childish to me.