Funerall

Well I just want to learn what happened lastly. I've been away for a while and is there anything I missed?

My aim is not to cause any argument. Just to learn...

Thanks...

fullerms

We are all waiting for news. Tried holding my breath, but it was too hard

There has been no news and its understandable given the huge sword hanging over the developers head. There was a slight glimmer of hope, and now we are faced with the harsh reality. You want features from a particular vendor, buy their product. If you want the best of both worlds, buy from both of them.

Mods:
Please dont ban me

mkey

This sounds like something a console user would say.

physx is not that big of a deal, IMO.

__________________
... what?

fullerms

Its not only the physx, but also stuff like video encoding. ATI supposedly introduced hardware accelerated encoding which never worked. Nvidia in the meantime has made some improvements with CUDA.

mkey

Are there any actual differences in encoding speed?

EDIT:
Well, I'm sorry you find my question offensive, I would hate to up my post count needlessly (because this is a very important thing, to have a high post count on NGOHQ) so I'll edit this post.

1. This topic is futile, so It's a tad hard to add anything. There is no ATI physx at the moment and there won't for the time being. Even if there was physx for ATI I wouldn't know what to do with it.

2. Anyone who buys ATI products does so because he/she/it finds Nvidia cards too expensive. but if you want the best single card the money can buy, you'll probably go with an Nvidia GPU.

__________________
... what?

fullerms

you have something to add to the conversation? Or just looking to up your post count?

For all I know software like badaboom works with cuda to deliver gpu accelerated encoding. ATI is yet to deliver. I read somewhere that cat 9.6 will have some improvement in this area. I have owned only ATI cards, and might be swinging over to the green camp for my next upgrades.
ATI's software and drivers suck!

zme-ul

I don't get the thread; if U're unsatisfied with ATi and can't live without physx, go nvidia way
no one will stop you

__________________
人は地獄を作った

fullerms

No offense taken.

But the point is ATI hardware holds so much promise which their software utterly fails to deliver. I bought a HD4870 1Gig a few months ago and using it for both games and HTPC use. The 48xx series held so much promise when it was launched and UVD2 was a big selling point.

Few months down the line, even hardware accelerated video (DXVA) is touch and go with subsequent Catalyst software releases. Hell, ATI cannot even decode certain H.264 (5.1 high) profiles using hardware. Profiles which nvidia started supporting in their drivers after user requests. Hardware accelerated video encoding with ATI is just a promise on paper.

Back to the topic of physx, ATI owners were hoping for a hardware accelerated solution. When it became obvious that the Havok solution was not coming out anytime soon, Rege's work held some promise.

Like many owners, I might go for a two card solution. A low end nvidia to handle the physx and the ATI 4870 as the main card. That was what I was suggesting to the thread starter.

lyla

I can encode and transcode videos using my ATi card, it works very well and is SUBSTANTIALLY faster than software encoding solutions, so I am not sure what you are on about....x64 has problems with it, but Ati have delivered on the video encoding. Just not to 100% of users.

mkey

I still claim it's not worth it to get two cards. At least basing on the prices here, a 1GB gainward GTX285 goes for around 500$. A 1GB Gigabyte 4870 costs something over 300$, while (let's say) a 512MB Zotac 9600 goes for around 130$. IMO the 285 is worth the extra 70$ in this case.

Of course, if you already have an ATI card and absolutely want physx, then it might be worth getting a secondary Nvidia card.

__________________
... what?