I would go for Nvidea in you want it for FSX (As ATi cards don't like the triangle rendering system thingo that FSX uses
Please explain, my ATi 5850 seems quite happy with FSX, as you can see from these pics...
That's the same thing I been tellin folks! Holy Chicka-moley! I love thee garbage out of my ATi card, and the stuff that all those "typical" NVidia fanboys ALWAYS say, is that ATi sux, can't use 'em for FSX, FSX blew up an ATi card, textures look bad, FSX called ATi's momma dirty-names, NVidia is better, blah blah etc.
***I even had one guy tell me that ATi can't make clouds in FSX. That clouds can't be seen by a guy using ATi. Well, that (I said to myself) is just *deeerr uuuhh* dumb.*** (not to pick on the guy, he obviously listened to some wierdo NVidia fanboy "know-it-all" tell him that it's true)
Worry not, my friend. They obviously just don't know. The raw data that FSX has programmed in it can only be rendered to look a certain way, right? I'm pretty sure that textures in FSX don't know if they're being rendered by NVidia or ATi. Data->Pictures. To say so is just silly, like John Cleese in "Monty Python's The Quest for the Holy Grail". None of them textures look ANY different on NVidia or ATi (barring any other effects, such as REX or others) and it's funny to hear some folks really talk about quality involving cards.
Personally, I don't get it! They are SO comparable, that there isn't really any room for comparison.
This one does
this like
that, and
that one does
that like
this. 6 of one, or a half-dozen of the other. FPS is very similar, textures look the same, it's all up to the users preferences, really.
And that "triangle thingo" that was previously mentioned isn't really an ATi or NVidia thingo, but a CPU thingo. DX11 is supposed to make that triangle-thingo a video card thingo also. Can't wait for that. Especially if there is a new flight sim made using DX11, wow that would be hot and sexy!
Da end.
A typical example of the arguments and enthusiastic fist fights that would occur in a suggested; "Advanced User Section"?....
...
...
...!
Does it remind you of the FSX and Hardware discussion Forums over the past many years?.....dangerous ground!...
...
...!
Intel v AMD...nVidia v ATI....PC v Mac...Tyres v Tires...Tomaytoes v Tomartoes...etc...etc...
Paul....."Peace"....
....!
Whooooa!! I don't see an arguement here. I don't know how it sounds when others read what I post here, but I'm not trying to argue with anyone. No "heated" arguement, anyway (Arguement: a logical, point-for-point discussion, not a flamewar).
I've used ATi from the beginning! I see someone post something against them, who only "heard" of a problem with something, and quickly, it becomes a rumor fired, flamewar on one of these dang threads. That isn't my intent. All anyone can say is what they KNOW, and I wished it would stay that way. Now I'm all defensive! I hate that.
I'm a 1%-er, I guess, in the hardware wars. Still lovin my AMD and ATi card. I don't like people saying that there's all kinds of problems with stuff I've used, and especially when I know it just ain't so). "Well I've never had a problem, and here's the proof" is how I like to settle these kinds of problems. No offense intended, even in the slightest. Really!
I was going back and forth once with another guy about how he was sure that my equipment sux, and how I can't possibly be liking my FSX experience, etc, because my hardware, rumors, etc. How the benchmarks say that I can't do anything right, I've got a clubfoot, my house is the wrong color, my cat is pregnant, you get the idea. One guy said, and I quote, "ATi can't render clouds in FSX. What about those darn clouds?" That just sounds ridiculous to me. I was having a good time with my x700 pro 3 1/2 years ago! Albeit, I had the sliders way down, but it was fine.
What I'm hoping will happen, is that people will stop and THINK about what is told to them, and that they do this BEFORE they just spread this possible mis-information on to other people. How unbelieveable is it that ATi wouldn't put clouds (or couldn't) into FSX? But this guy totally believed it, because someone told him (and I don't know who it was, NickN or not, and I'm fairly certain he wouldn't do that). He never stopped to think that the hundreds of thousands (or millions) of folks that are actually using ATi wouldn't notice? "*DEERRHH, you know whut Hank? I'ma gonna use one 'em NVidia cards, cuz this ol' ATi don't mayke the dang clouds at tawl." I don't talk like that, nor have I EVER had a problem with clouds. I like my ATi clouds!
I'm not trying to anger ANYONE (even you NVidia guys), just trying to clear up a little junk floating around out there.
This, more than anything, (
and this is for you NNNG, with the upmost respect and agreeance) is the reason Benchmarks have importance. I don't need to know how good it is, I already know how good it is. I guess, though, for this reason alone, there needs to be a qualitative number to hand to others when things get said that really just can't be true, or are totally unbelieveable, even.
I'll tell you what I do. I am a specifications junkie. I can tell how much better something is, just by reading specs. That's how I know that the cards out there are so comparable, that you really can choose either top-end card and be totally blown away (with the exception of ATi 5970, only because NVidia's equivalent isn't out yet, to my understanding).
I hope this sheds some light on things. I recommend a system like what I got, because I get GREAT performance. The scores can't rate an entire system, only it's components. From there, you can make a composite number, but there's a WIDE margin for error when doing that, I'm sure. I say so because of this: I'm using an old card, and PhII. Scores don't like these, but I get AWESOME performance. I wish there was a way to prove that.
Da End.
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:56 pm
.
