Version: 2008

Comments on: Report confirms AMD gains on Nvidia

The competitiveness of AMD's new graphics chips is confirmed by a report.

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (14 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by AppleSuxLeo November 11, 2008 10:04 PM PST
-15.2% who are you trying to kid? ATI runs hotter , uses more power , and costs more. But most of all , ATI has poorly written drivers.
Reply to this comment
by 3tire November 12, 2008 3:34 AM PST
ATI runs hotter....?!?! What are you, 12 years old? How do your statements prove the market share loss didn't happen?
by tipoo_ November 14, 2008 8:25 AM PST
blind fanboyism right here. even in the face of all the recent driver problems Nvidia has had, you are saying this?
by sharmajunior November 11, 2008 10:45 PM PST
Applesuxleo clearly has no idea of what he is talking about.

Market research and aggresive tests have shown over and over again that ATI has performed better in recent years against NVIDIA. Looking at windows vista, NVIDIA caused over 70% of system crashes due to poorly drivers. Its true that ATI did have more problems with drivers in the beginning but their drivers are more stable now than ever. ATI drivers caused about 18% of crashes on vista and the remaining caused by Intel's GMA. Moreover, NVIDIA hid their flaws in their chipsets that shipped with Macbooks and iMacs which is a total disgrace. People today still have more problems with NVIDIA's chipsets than ATI chipsets.

ATI costs more. What does that mean? You get what you pay for, like a 2GB GDDR5 card 512Mb for about 400 bucks is not bad. Thats what its supposed cost comparing it to other cards of similar type and from different companies.
Reply to this comment
by 3rdalbum November 12, 2008 4:09 AM PST
I don't know if ATI-based graphics cards run hotter or use more power in reference design, but the "run hotter" part all depends on the OEM's cooling system. It seems that few OEMs stick to the reference design, and instead put better coolers in or overclock the cards... or both. ATI cards are cheap compared to similar performers from Nvidia, and having run both ATI and Nvidia on Linux I can testify that Nvidia's drivers crash all the time. I hear the problem is the same on Windows.
Reply to this comment
by Philips November 12, 2008 4:24 AM PST
You make overall valid point except the "ATI-based graphics cards run hotter" and "all depends on the OEM's cooling system".

ATI semi officially, through support channels, confirmed that PowerPlay on current generation of Radeon 4000 cards doesn't really work. For 4870x2 they even introduced BIOS hack to turn down frequencies when the card isn't used in full-screen 3D mode.

As was established by fans, main power consumption problem and one of the main sources of heat is GDDR5 memory. BIOS tweaking of the RAM frequency brought idle system from total ~140W to total ~105W (as was measured on outlet). IOW, RAM alone in Radeon 4870 is sucking hooping ~35W.

Read on here: http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=67928 - scroll down to post with screenshots.
by AppleSuxLeo November 12, 2008 5:21 AM PST
ATI is part of AMD=Amateur Micro Devices.
Reply to this comment
by gdmaclew November 12, 2008 5:43 AM PST
Now there's an intelligent statement.
by tipoo_ November 14, 2008 8:26 AM PST
AppleSuxLeo is part of the internet troll federation.
by Mr. Dee November 12, 2008 5:55 AM PST
nVidia's lousy device drivers probably caused this. Running an nVidia Geforce FX 5200 Ultra 128 MB AGP and a Geforce 6200 512 AGP on another system and both are not supported by pre-beta Windows 7 release. I am reverted back to AERO Basic. This shows that they are not supported by WDDM 1.1 driver.

In my laptop, I have an ATI X1600 Mobility Radeon which is supported by WDDM 1.1 with the same 64-bit device drivers I used for Vista. Quite obvious who really does a better job here.
Reply to this comment
by ashwinkn November 12, 2008 6:17 PM PST
That's actually not a fair comparison. The nVidia cards that you are referring to are older than the ATi card.
by kitabata November 12, 2008 6:24 AM PST
This article really does little for me from the perspective of a consumer. It says AMD is gaining on Nvidia - good for AMD, but it doesn't say it has surpassed them. That's like saying it's running a closer second in a 2 horse race.
Reply to this comment
by bunkey91405 November 12, 2008 9:58 PM PST
I applaud this news. After having horrible experiences with NVidia motherboards, 680i and 780i, I have vowed to stay away from NVidia products. You add the report of failing NVidia notebook GPUs and ATI making a competitive GPU in the 4800 series, at least someone looking for something other than NVidia, now has a valid alternative. And the numbers prove I am not the only one doing this.
Reply to this comment
by tipoo_ November 14, 2008 8:25 AM PST
awesome, i hope they put that cash into R&D for their new processor architecture.
Reply to this comment
(14 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About Nanotech - The Circuits Blog

Brooke Crothers has served as an editor at large at CNET News, an editor at Dow Jones' Asian Wall Street Journal Weekly, and a senior editor at InfoWorld. His CNET blog covers chip technology and computer systems, and how they define the computing experience. He also contributes to The New York Times' Bits and Technology sections. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Nanotech - The Circuits Blog topics

advertisement
advertisement