ATI selected for Xbox 2. Which is better for Mac? ATI or Nvidia?

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by macphoria, Aug 15, 2003.

  1. macrumors 6502a

    macphoria

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    #1
    Microsoft selected ATI to supply graphics card for its next generation Xbox. Obviously Microsoft thinks ATI is doing something better than Nvidia.

    My question for you is, as far as Macs are concerned, which company do you think makes better product? ATI or Nvidia?
     
  2. macrumors demi-god

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #2
    Actually Nvidia distanced itself from MS and didn't want to be a part of the next Xbox. I prefer ATi because their cards tend to have a superior 2D picture compared to Nvidia (w/the current cards that difference might be too small to matter but I haven't spec'd out cards for over a year) and sense I do absolutely zero 3D on my Mac (aside from what's built into OS X) 2D was my biggest concern. :)


    Lethal
     
  3. macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #3
    nVidia used to be the top dog, but for a while now, ATi has been really impressive and really outmuscles the nVidia chips just about in every case. If I could choose, I'd go for ATi.
     
  4. macrumors 6502a

    Rezet

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Connecticut, United States of America
    #4
    Heh I remember when VooDoo was some really hot stuff. BTW what happend to them?

    ATi is very good. But it seems nVidia is one step ahead now with it's 256mbs video card. And considering that it's cheaper than ati 9800 pro, I'd go with nvidia. Honestly, i think either way you go, You will get enough power to last....
     
  5. macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #5
    Microsoft wanted better control of the chip and it's cost so ATI was the only company willing to give up a chip in exchange for a lump sum and royalties (or that's how it'll probably play out in the long run).

    ATI's not going to be making the chip for the XBOX, MS will be licensing the chip and doing it themselves.

    So it'll be a royalty stream from XBOX sales, and no huge revenue numbers for ATI if MS can turn the machine around.

    But the extra revenue will help MS. :rolleyes:

     
  6. macrumors demi-god

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #6
    Poor business decission killed 3Dfx. In short, they wanted 100% control of their chips so they bought a fabrication plant. Then they also aliented other card makers, found out they didn't know squat about fabrication, start loosing $$$ and missing product cycles. Mean while Nvidia got on the rampage and started the 6 month product cycle "standard" which made 3Dfx look even more behind. By the time the VooDoo 5x00 cards came out they were 6 or 8 months late and 3Dfx closed it's doors a few months after that. Parts of 3Dfx, the name, some R&D, etc., were purchased by Nvidia. Also, game developers moved away from Glide to OpenGL didn't help much either.


    Lethal
     
  7. macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #7
    I remember back when I had a Gateway, having a 3Dfx card in your gaming rig was the ultimate show of your coolness factor.
     
  8. macrumors 604

    iJon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    #8
    well this is different than computers. xbox probably chose this because ATI had a better bid than nvidia and ati won the bid.
    also the problem with ati and computers has been driver problems with computers. this wouldnt be a factor since every xbox would be the same and every game would be made to fully utilize the xbox2.

    iJon
     
  9. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    United States
    #9
    i have an ATI Radeon 9000 in my current machine. the last (and only) two nvidia cards i've had both caused me grief. i'll never have another nvidia card in my computer again. i just don't see the reason in supporting a company that screws its customers.
     
  10. macrumors 604

    iJon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    #10
    just because you have problems doesnt mean the screw their customers. i have had no problems with my nvidia cards and its a year old and i can still play games at full detail. most of my friends, including myself had problems with our ati cards as well as my amd chip. its all dependent on the computer. all i know is i went from amd/ati to intel/nvidia and it has been awesome, not a single problem. but like i said, its all in the computer, but i dont think nvidia rips off their customers.

    iJon
     
  11. job
    macrumors 68040

    job

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2002
    Location:
    in transit
    #11
    I think ATi's cards offer more bang for their buck.

    A comparison at insidemacgames.com between the Radeon 7500 and Geforce 4MX shows that while both offer similar 3D performance, the Radeon beats the Geforce in 2D, color, and DVD playback.

    If you want raw 3D horsepower, it's a near tie between the two, the only difference being cost and your AGP connection type (2X/4X). However I think ATi's products are better all-round cards allowing for a more balanced every day use.
     
  12. macrumors 601

    cb911

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Location:
    BrisVegas, Australia
    #12
    i'd go for the ATi anytime. besides from most of the benchmarks i've seen, for some reason i always associate nVidia as having the mentality of going for more MHz, and ATi as having a better way of handling data.

    There's only so much you can do by making your cards faster and bigger. 256MB RAM might 'futureproof' your machine for a while, but 256MB provideds virtually no performance increase over 128MB, except when playing games in high resolution, where large texture's are used. (for example 1280x1024, more noticable when playing at 1600x1200 or higher.)

    I'm betting that ATi will develop better technology, instead of just making their cards bigger and faster.
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    Rezet

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Connecticut, United States of America
    #13
    Nah man, I disagree. nVidia's latest 256mbs card (forgot the name of it) costs just as much as Ati's 9600 pro i think.
     
  14. macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #14
    ATi seems to have the lead on technology right now, how things will be a year from now is anyone's guess, but if I could choose which chip goes in my next PowerBook, I'd go for ATi without a moment's pause.
     
  15. mim
    macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    flesh, melbourne.... heart, london
    #15
    Yeh, I'm with you Powerbook G5 - ATI were the first of the graphic chip guys who started taking laptop graphics power seriously. However unreasonable that errr....reason is, I would choose them.

    The little sticker on my GameCube that says "powered by ATI" probably doesn't hurt either....:)
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Vlade

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Location:
    Meadville, PA
    #16
    Just to let some of you know, a 256 MB has the same performance as a 128 MB card 99% of the time, the only exception was in some games at 8X anti aliasing (but nobody would use that because 8X slows everything down too much on most newer games).

    Anyways, it keeps going back and forth, whenever ATI releases something, its king, 3 months later, nVidia is king, 3 months later...
     
  17. macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #17
    The Gamecube is just awesome, seriously--IBM PPC processor and ATi GPU...what else could you want?
     
  18. mim
    macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    flesh, melbourne.... heart, london
    #18
    Eternal Darkness 2!
     
  19. macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #19
    When I got Eternal Darkness, I played it to death until I finally beat it. I swear, that game is just too awesome, I love all the ambiance...and for the longest time, I was freaked out by the insanity effect when things would "go wrong" or just baffle me until I figured out what was happening...dude, I got a heart attack when it flashed to a blue screen of death...I seriously thought it had crashed and I was like "Noooo, I didn't save yet!"
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    Rezet

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Connecticut, United States of America
    #20
    Eternal darkness is a good game. Too bad it's one of not many on gamecube. I persoanlly prefer XBOX's edition of Silent Hill 2 for "Creepy - Scary" effects...
     
  21. macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #21
    I just recently saw the commercials for Silent Hill 3, it looks cool but it just says it's for PS2 for now. I never bothered playing the Xbox version of Silent Hill 2 since I already beat it on the PS2 long before it came out for the Xbox...but since I sold my PS2 (for more than I paid for it, too!) I guess I'll have to wait and see if it comes out.
     
  22. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    #22
    ill still go with nVidia, although i like both companies. nvidia has much better drivers, especially on the PC......but that doesny make a difference.....does it. crud, i just proved myself wrong again:rolleyes:
     
  23. macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #23
    I don't really care which chip goes into Xbox 2 as long as it runs games like Halo 3...
     
  24. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2003
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    #24
    Why Not Both?

    Hold it!

    Remember something first.

    The g4 is only and can only be made by moto, if t could be done by ibm they would be much faster so apple should get cards from both incase one company goes bad
     
  25. macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #25
    I'm confused...where does the G4 come in when asking what graphics chip one prefers?
     

Share This Page