@dannzen
With the exception of the GTX470/480 review sites typically show nvidia cards to actually be quieter on average. Especially the low-medium end cards. Idle power consumption is typically lower while full load power consumption is usually higher for nvidia. Having compared my GTX 260 against my friends 5770 I can vouch for this "OMG NVIDIA IS SO MUCH LOUDER LOLZ" being nothing more than the usual myths spread by the ati fanbase. Their are many reasons to buy an ati card over nvidia, but significantly lower noise and temperature are not among them (unless you're talking about the GTX470/480 which are surprisingly quite but do put out a lot of heat). I will admit though that these days nvidia cards typically have about a 15% higher full load power consumption vs. an equivalent ati card. But for me personally the extra 20-30 watts isn't enough to bother me.
I am however very interested in ati's MLAA implementation. One of the major things that an ati card can do that my nvidia card can't that I do actually want, and yet this is one of those features that very few people seem to know/care about.
Squall Leonhart Wrote:the 460 has more REAL cores, the 5830 only has 224
That's good to know, since that's what I got. When I saw the higher number, after I already ordered, I thought I got screwed.
NaturalViolence Wrote:But then again a 460 is supposed to be more expensive ($160 for a 5830, $170-200 for a 460 depending on if it's the 1GB edition or regular). Not sure where those prices in the OP came from.
Newegg and
TigerDirect, and I'm sure you can find others where it's $150 after rebate.
In the newegg listing, it says $199, but hit "SEE PRICE IN CART" link and it's $169. Then after the $20 mail-in rebate, it's $149. Free shipping.
So, I wasn't going by the "list price", but by the price you can get, if you shop around a bit. And, as it turns out, the nVIDIA web site also compares the GTX460 with the 5830. Best deal you can get on a 5830, at
newegg, is about $150, after rebate.
Of course, you can always pay extra for a quieter fan, built-in overclocking, or whatever else the card designer might offer.
NaturalViolence Wrote:I am however very interested in ati's MLAA implementation. One of the major things that an ati card can do that my nvidia card can't that I do actually want, and yet this is one of those features that very few people seem to know/care about.
I'm interested. Tell us about it. Or, better yet, make a
Wikipedia article about MLAA.
Quote:dont forget the power consumption in full and idle + loadness of nvidia cards...
these 3 factors helped me by my decision....
i have a ati 5770 in my rig
the airplane loadness of a nvidia sucks...
and iam using my i7 rig undervolted as workstation...
Good for you and your inferior 5770 with its inferior shaders, and inferior quality filtering, inferior precision and inferior drivers.
(01-21-2011, 04:59 PM)hypnotoad Wrote: [ -> ]Squall Leonhart Wrote:the 460 has more REAL cores, the 5830 only has 224
That's good to know, since that's what I got. When I saw the higher number, after I already ordered, I thought I got screwed.NaturalViolence Wrote:But then again a 460 is supposed to be more expensive ($160 for a 5830, $170-200 for a 460 depending on if it's the 1GB edition or regular). Not sure where those prices in the OP came from.
Newegg and TigerDirect, and I'm sure you can find others where it's $150 after rebate.
In the newegg listing, it says $199, but hit "SEE PRICE IN CART" link and it's $169. Then after the $20 mail-in rebate, it's $149. Free shipping.
So, I wasn't going by the "list price", but by the price you can get, if you shop around a bit. And, as it turns out, the nVIDIA web site also compares the GTX460 with the 5830. Best deal you can get on a 5830, at newegg, is about $150, after rebate.
Of course, you can always pay extra for a quieter fan, built-in overclocking, or whatever else the card designer might offer.
NaturalViolence Wrote:I am however very interested in ati's MLAA implementation. One of the major things that an ati card can do that my nvidia card can't that I do actually want, and yet this is one of those features that very few people seem to know/care about.
I'm interested. Tell us about it. Or, better yet, make a Wikipedia article about MLAA.
Anyone remember nvidia's quincunx?
yeah.. thats basically all MLAA is, an ugly blur filter.
its better to apply it in a manner that can be controlled.
This is why you don't buy reference cards because they're loud at high gpu load and can get quite hot/warm!
^not true, its got nothing to do with the reference design itself, but part of the components used in it.
the fan on the 470 and 480 for instance was unbalanced which caused excessive vibration, and inevitably vibration whine.
Quote:yeah.. thats basically all MLAA is, an ugly blur filter.
its better to apply it in a manner that can be controlled.
I disagree. It's a godsend for games that use deferred rendering. BFBC2 is a great example. It uses deferred rendering, HDR, and per-vertex pixel shading. This makes implementing AA a nightmare. The games has built in AA, but it only works in d3d10 mode, it only affects a few objects such as guns, and it's effectiveness depends upon lighting conditions, in desert maps or other brightly lit areas it literally does nothing. Despite it's ineffectiveness the performance hit is still huge! With nvidia unless you have a 400/500 series card using the SGSSAA patch/hack it's literally impossible to get any force of driver level AA working.
If you use ATIs MLAA. Almost no aliasing, no blurring of objects, almost no performance hit.
Pros:
-Has almost no performance hit (depends on the game)
-Can be almost as effective as SSAA and way more effective than MSAA in some games
-As long as it's a d3d9 game it just works, period, no matter how the graphics engine of the game is set up
Cons
-Does not work with d3d10/11 or opengl for some reason
-Can be less effective than msaa in some games
-Can blur textures and hud elements in some games
-Screws up text at low screen resolutions
In some games it's really really good, in others it's really really ineffective. I'de say its a 50/50 split between the two. In games where it is effective edges don't look blurry, they look like a straight edge, just like MSAA/SSAA. Although technically all AA is a form of blur filter. But this is the best damn post-processing blur filter I've ever seen quite frankly.
Sure SSAA is better. But MLAA is for times when SSAA/MSAA can't be used properly or the game's MSAA does a terrible job.
Adding more to this post later.
you don't need mlaa in d3d10.
and its a lie that you absolutely cannot use msaa and deferred rendering. its just most studios are too lazy to implement it.
I know it's possible to use msaa with deferred rendering through d3d10 but the fact is many games don't have it implemented and it can;t be forced through nvidia inspector properly so for those games mlaa is your only hope at decent AA. And in many games is does actually work really really well. Plus it has almost no performance hit, which makes it great for games where you want to have some AA but the game is running poorly even without AA.