Ati 4850

[Feuerfalke]

And how does this show us, that nVidia is better?

Since you posted your frequencies:
ATI 9550 GPU: 250 MHz
ATI 9550 Memory: 200MHz


The 9550 is something very useful for running Office, nothing else. Even when it was released. That has nothing to do with ATI-Quality, though, or giving a reasonable basis to say that Crysis doesn't run with ATI-cards.

[BAXTER STOCKMAN]

When Doom3 was released in 2004 i had a athlon 2200+ 512mb ram and a 5700 128 mb. I was able to run it at medium settings 640x480 but when i try to run it at high settings 800x600 it was slow like hell . a few months after the release of Doom3 my friend bought a athlon 300+ with 512mb ram and 9550 and he was able to run doom3 in high quality 800x600 at 60 fps. A year after i bough my athlon x2 4400+ 1gb ram ddr 400 7900gt 512mb. And i had much more pefomance and better graphics in games than him. I was able to run Tomb Raider Legend with Next Gen graphics at almost full speed(they were a few slowdowns sometimes) but in his system next gen graphics were disabled. After a year in july of 2007, my 7900gt broke down due to heat problems so i went to the 8600 gt that was a piece of crap. And finaly this january i sold the 8600 gt for 80 euros and i bough the 8800gt for 160 euros( the delete 80 euros from the price of the 8800gt because i sold them the 8600)

Here you can read a good rewiev of ATI 4850/4870: http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/148...ion/index.html

In PT Boats, a game of 1C, Nvidia cards runs better. Seems this game optimised for Nvidia. Will be the same for Storm of War?

4S_Nero

[Feuerfalke]

Thanks for posting that test.

I think your question resulting from the test is also a good example how many people think: If I get more FPS with this card in this game, then it must be better.

Or even better: The game was optimized for this card.

To be honest, most of the time it is the exact other way. Drivers are optimized for games, especially to benchmark games, because they know exactly, that there are many people who just think just like what you just posted. nVidia is renown or better hated for that tactics by fans and enemies alike, because this advantage in speed comes with the price of a lack in quality of the rendering, especially in texture-filters and texturing of objects over distances.

The problem is, maximum FramesPerSecond is not the only important thing about graphics, as it says nothing about the rendering quality, stability of FPS and even less about the hardware used.

I know my question may seem superficial or stupid but my ignorance about video card is big. I need only some help because i need to buy a new video card. Now i play IL2 with ATI1950 pro 512

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by 4S_Nero

I know my question may seem superficial or stupid but my ignorance about video card is big. I need only some help because i need to buy a new video card. Now i play IL2 with ATI1950 pro 512

It's a pretty common opinion, nothing else, and I perfectly understand it.

I don't need to get a new gfx-card, honestly, but considering the bang for the money and the upcoming games (BlackShark and BoB) I consider getting an AMD/ATI HD4870. It's slightly slower than nVidias, but considerably cheaper than the nVidia-competitors and consumes less power, thus stays cooler.

I'll wait another few weeks probably, until both start fighting with even lower prices.

Originally Posted by Feuerfalke

It's a pretty common opinion, nothing else, and I perfectly understand it.

I don't need to get a new gfx-card, honestly, but considering the bang for the money and the upcoming games (BlackShark and BoB) I consider getting an AMD/ATI HD4870. It's slightly slower than nVidias, but considerably cheaper than the nVidia-competitors and consumes less power, thus stays cooler.

I'll wait another few weeks probably, until both start fighting with even lower prices.

Me too