So what do people think of the Nvidia 7 Series and ATI X1 Series?

Personally, I like the 7800GTX, as it is ?100 cheaper and is faster the same in all games but F.E.A.R (the benchmarks I have seen). F.E.A.R is considerably faster on the X1800XT, but that is only because ATI have doubled the RAM on it, wgcich allows it to store the high-res textures that F.E.A.R uses. I suspect that Nvidia will soon add an extra 256MB of RAM to it's flagship cards - the 7800GT and GTX. It is also worth noting you could build a 7800GT SLI rig for the amount of money you'd spend on the X1800XT, and it would be considerably faster.

Let the arguement begin (though please don't make simple, snyding comments)!

In the benchmarks I've seen, the nvidia card competes well, but when the ATI card is better, it is *seriously* better. It's a shame it can't be benchmarked in games that will take advantage of the 512MB of memory, like EverQuest 2. I'd love to see how it plays in UT2007 though :D

I've always been against nVidia, ever since I made the switch over to ATI. I hate their hardware, and I especially hate their software, and I seriously hate the nForce 4 chipset and how difficult they have made it, but I still use it :/

I just want to see what happens when the 512MB Nvid is released, that's the only reason the ATI card wins in anything.

What's wrong with th nVidia software? From what's been said about Catalyst, Forceware wipes the floor with it. The nForce 4 chipsets are currently the best available. I don't see what you mean about difficult?

If you've built a machine with a VIA/SIS chipset, you'll find it much easier. Most nvidia software is buggy, or somewhat pants.
The Radeon has a faster clock than the nvidia, also. When 512MB nvidia cards are released, I won't care.

OK, I don't know about being simpler - I experienced no problems with nForce 4.

As for clock speeds, you like AMD, right? Nuff said!

There is an explanation for that, they perform better than the Intel's because they handle 3 IPC rather than 2, and they have an integrated memory controller, and they are 64bit. The statistics add up. Same with the ATI vs. nvidia.

I don't know what IPC is, the memory controller makes it better, and 64bit means nothing without the software. They're actually faster because they have better architecture - a much shorter pipeline. I know nVidias have much better architecture, how else would they get away with lower clocks and same benchmark results?

Because of what we both said. IPC = Instructions Per Clock.

Right, yes I see. I think IPC may be indirectly linked to pipeline length, not sure though.

But anyway, on a more topic related topic; I think the ATI card is better, even though the card may have a marginal performance gain, and a huge price tag. The problem, at the moment, is that not much software is going to take advantage of that huge amount of ultra fast memory.

AFAIK, the memory is the same on the 7800GTX, just there's more of it. The only program that benefits from more memory (which I've seen results in) is F.E.A.R., where the ATI card goes quite some way ahead. The thing is, that's just to do with memory, so I think the X1800XT 256MB should be compared with the GTX, until the 512MB version of the GTX comes out (there are 6800 Ultra 512MB, so I suspect we won't be waiting long).

The memory on the Radeon is faster than the Geforce.

Actually, the memory speed depends on the manufacturer, i.e. Asus, as they put the memory on it.

The Geforce is limited to 1.3GHz, and the Radeon to 1.5GHz.

That's limited in the default sense... And also, I've already talked about clock speeds, and memory clocks are essentially the same, it's about the way the chip handles it.

Well, no matter what anybody says, I think ATI are better. I want to exclude myself from any form of nvidia vs. ATI debates from this point forward... honest.

Ditto, but replacing ATI with nVidia. I'm not sure about leaving the debates, though...

ATI are cr*p cause they have no compatablity with any other companys cards to use the ports were nVidia will work with nearly anythin including ATI and ATI drivers are dum they think watever card uv got in that is ATI including the Intel onbord stuff.

Right. Solution is not to mix and match, with any card.

Sometimes you'll want to use a spare card you have lying about, or onoard, to add more moniters, rather than spending more money. So, if your main cards an ATI, then you cat use that spare PCI 5200 (example).

Not sure why you'd want less than the best though.

I don't get you. When you want multiple screes, the main card still does all the processing, and the sub cards just add extra ports for screens. Anyway, if you don't want less than the best , why do you buy ATI (also, I thought you said you weren't going to argue anymore)?

I don't think I have since. I'll not post in this one any more.

Woo! No more people arguing for ATI! Only kidding. You just couldn't resist posting some more, could you?

You know I can't answer... lol!