http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030912/index.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/business/20030911/index.html
Basically, the two articles say that Nvidia’s GeForce FX cards are VASTLY outperformed by ATI’s cards in the most recent Half-Life 2 beta test, mostly by double. In fact, on some of the tests, ATI’s ~$150 Radeon 5600 outperforms the ~$450 GFX Ultra.
This bugs me. I’ve been a huge Nvidia fan ever since the advent of the original GeForce. Are they really slipping so much? I remember back when “ATI” was synonymous with “flush your money down the toilet”. But… now I’m considering jumpin’ ship. I was gonna order a GFX 5600 this weekend, but considering that card’s pathetic performance in these tests, I’m gonna hold off. HL2 is definitely THE game that I’m looking forward to, so I’ve gotta steer my decision in that direction.
HOWEVER… there are some other things to keep in mind, namely that, in most other tests (such as Quake 3 or 3DMark 2003), Nvidia and ATI have a very rough parity (Tom’s Hardware’s last rounds of tests show that the FX 5900 whomps the Radeon 9800, for instance).
Nvidia says that the discrepancy is simply in software drivers, and complains that Valve went through with these tests without allowing them enough time to optimize their drivers for HL2, stating that they’ve only had access to the current beta for two weeks. There’re also some accusations of a deal between ATI and Valve.
So I’m gonna wait, and really start reconsidering my choice of video card purchase. Nvidia had better pick up their act, though, or else they’re gonna be nothing but a motherboard company. Then again, ATI went through a far worse slump, and managed to make an amazing recovery…
But Nvidia’s got until November to shape up, or they lose a customer…