Searched the forums for a bit on 4870 and came up with quite a number of messages about crashing with most of the conclusions being 'driver problems' and 'wait a few weeks for xxx drivers.'
Now, of course I'll have to search on Nvidia problems and see if those are less than 104,000 hits..... Steve On 7/11/08, Steve Tomporowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is AMD/ATI's driver support finally gotten mature enough? That is > what always burned me in the past. The drivers were always crap right > out of the box and updates were few and far between. And the review > sites would never tell you stuff like visible skyboxes, etc. > > Of course now, with the 8800GT, Nvidia dropped the ball with people > waiting over a year for driver corrections with respect to the Unreal > Tournament series. > > And, of course, I expect to get a chorus of 'I've never had a problem > with an ATI card'. > > My experience has been ATI = trouble, except if its a cheap 2d card > you do nothing with. > > Steve > > On 7/11/08, FORC5 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > some of us just DO NOT like ATI video cards. Everyone I ever messed with > > gave me grief, nVidia never has. FWIW > > Well every plug in, just built a system with built in ATI and it gave me no > > problem. chipset was AMD/ATI. > > fp > > > > At 06:35 AM 7/11/2008, Brian Weeden Poked the stick with: > > >Absolutely agree - why bother with Nvidia? Sure, they have the single > > >fastest card overall but that same card is on average only a bit faster > > >than > > >something $250 cheaper (and in some cases slower). > > > > > >To quote Anand: > > > > > >"A pair of Radeon HD 4850s can come close to the performance of a GeForce > > >GTX 280, and a pair of Radeon HD 4870s are faster across the board - not to > > >mention that they should be $50 less than the GTX 280 and will work on > > >motherboards with Intel-chipsets. Quite possibly more important than the > > >fact that AMD's multi-GPU strategy has potential is the fact that it may > > >not > > >even be necessary for the majority of gamers - a single Radeon HD 4850 or > > >Radeon HD 4870 is easily enough to run anything out today." > > > > > >His review: > > > > > >http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341 > > > > > >And another roundup that reaches the same conclusions: > > > > > >http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/07/11/summer-2008-graphics-performance-roundup/1 > > > > > >---- > > >Brian > > > > > >On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Hayes Elkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> And add to mix the 8800 Ultra, which still has higher theoretical specs > > >> in > > >> certain areas (it is still the fastest card period for Flight Simulator X > > >> and few other older games). > > >> > > >> All in all, the GTX280's have the most upside. > > >> > > >> Frankly for the price, the Radeon 4870 mops the floor with everybody. Is > > >> 5fps worth $300 more in Crysis? > > >> > > >> > Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 07:54:38 -0400 > > >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com > > >> > Subject: [H] Fastest Nvidia Card??? > > >> > > > >> > Been searching the web on this, but it's beginning to get rather > > >> > confusing...which Nvidia chipset/card is the fastest...for gaming? > > >> > You've got the 9800GX2 versions and the GTX 280 which run about the > > >> > same price. The hardware on the GTX series seems to have more of > > >> > everything, yet, the GX2 seems to be faster in certain cases. Then > > >> > this is made more complex as the drivers have evolved, so benchmarks > > >> > seem to vary from month to month. Anything definitive out there? > > >> > > > >> > Thanks....Steve > > >> > > >> _________________________________________________________________ > > >> Making the world a better place one message at a time. > > >> http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_BetterPlace > > > > -- > > Tallyho ! ]:8) > > Taglines below ! > > -- > > The speed of the leader determines the rate of the pack. > > > > >
