On May 8, 1:11*pm, "BillW50" wrote:
,
Abi Normal typed:









On May 8, 10:39 am, "BillW50" wrote:
,

Paul wrote:
... ATI and Nvidia cards usually have the best feature support
(stuff just works).

Huh? Which galaxy does this happen in? As here, ATI and Nvidia has an
extremely high failure rate. And I avoid either of them for my
general
purpose computers. Only on my dedicated game PCs use them.

And didn't Nvidia already fork out $200 million in a class action
lawsuit? They didn't pay this because their stuff just works. But
rather
because they don't work.

Nvidia settles bumpgate class action
lawsuithttp://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1736698/nvidia-settles-bumpg...

Lawsuit claims Nvidia hid serious flaw in graphics
chipshttp://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/lawsuit-claims-nvidia-hid...

I believe he was referring to software that works and not hardware.
Please try to follow along! {B^)}

What good is the software when the hardware doesn't work? So perhaps you
should try to follow along. Plus many say that ATI and Nvidia software
isn't so hot anyway.

"Remember when the first Radeon came out. They (ATI) were found to have
cheated and tweaked their drivers to do extremely well on benchmarks,
but in reality, sucked at other real world applications?"

Why I think ATI sucks and won't buy their hardware if I can avoid ithttp://www.techimo.com/forum/graphics-cards-displays/34498-why-i-thin...

And a simple Google search will show zillions of other people who don't
buy that neither company has such great software either.

--
Bill
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows XP SP2

Actually, the ATI benchmark cheats were pre-Radeon, back in '94 or
'95. I know well, because I was the author of the version of the PC
Magazine benchmark that was cheated upon with special code added to
drivers to look for repetitive sequences of primitive operations,
still the best way to measure raw horsepower of hardware plus close to
the metal drivers. (Actually, benchmarks written to the bare iron are
still truly the best, but writing software to talk directly to a
graphics chip has become a black art, and ever so much more
complicated given the computing power on the graphics chips
themselves.) PC Magazine, rather than exposing the cheaters in
public, simply redesigned the graphics benchmarks. It's not the first
time, nor is it the last time, that a hardware company, usually
graphics, has done something to the hardware or software to make their
product look better than it really is. Overclocked graphics cards are
very common, leading to burnout or malfunction of graphics chips run
beyond specification. Back before the day of the ATI cheats, graphics
cards manufacturers would put different fixed frequency oscillators on
cards, to drive graphics chips beyond spec. Now it is even easier to
tweak card performance with the variable oscillator circuitry on a
card. You can get software for free to overclock your nVidia or ATI
graphics card.

Honestly, the two-horse graphics race between AMD/ATI and nVidia is
now a pretty awful one to watch. Both seem to have regular disasters,
but there are no other alternatives any more, except for integrated
graphics. I'd like to hear one of their marketing shills spell the
work R-E-L-I-A-B-I-L-I-T-Y... Ben Myers