The latest STEAM survey



I think ATI overplayed how many DX11 cards they sold if only 5% of 2 Million gamers on Steam own one (DX11 card), I mean that is horrible. I am surprised how many gamers are still on dual cores, but when gaming at high resolution an E8500@4ghz can equal an i7 920 in GPU bound games. So it's not that big of a surprise I guess, hell I get 40-50fps avg in Metro 2033 at High 2xAA 8xAF @1920x1200 (w/ 295 + E8500@4ghz+ 8Gb RAM) and that is higher than the ATI 5870 with both in DX10 mode.

I was also not aware of the fact that Intel owns almost 70% of the users, that is huge. I think it's time for Intel and NVIDIA to team up to knock AMD/ATI so far on their ass that they have to get back in the ball game and compete.

4/1/2010 1:42:08 PM

Or maybe AMD and ATI should team up and ... Oh. Right.

4/1/2010 1:45:36 PM

This will all change once a game comes out that forces people to upgrade. At every price point, ATI cards are the best $/performance. On the CPU side, AMD's AM3 line beats the i# line in price at the lower end, especially when you consider the number of people that can easily upgrade to the latest AM3 processors vs the price of upgrading from 775->1156.

4/1/2010 1:50:26 PM

Metro 2033 is bringing everything except the 295 and the 5970 to their knees. I bet less than 10% of NVIDIA owners have a 295 and the 285 can't even handle 1680x1050 in Metro, the 285 has to play at 1280x1024 to cope with the game.

The point is ATI releases a new card that loses to a 1.5yr old NVIDIA card, that is failure. Then rapidly they release the 5970 with no die shrink and nothing besides a CF 5870 on the 4870X2 layout. IMO that is pathetic for AMD/ATI to do, doubling the SP,ROPs,TUs,etc is not good enough in the current GPU business. Also the 5970 is hugely expensive and hot, a lot of people are having trouble with OCing due to a shotty VRM. NVIDIA is about to kick the hell out of ATI on April 12th:








[Edited on April 1, 2010 at 1:56 PM. Reason : /]

4/1/2010 1:55:25 PM

Sorry, but no.
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,707055/Metro-2033-Benchmarks-with-DirectX-11-and-GPU-Physx/Practice/
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-480,2585-12.html

Excuse me while I dismiss your benchmarks from nVidia.

[Edited on April 1, 2010 at 2:12 PM. Reason : f]

4/1/2010 2:08:55 PM

haha you trust THG, lol

not to mention these are brand new cards with brand new drivers vs 6 months of ATI drivers.





[Edited on April 1, 2010 at 2:24 PM. Reason : http://www.anandtech.com/show/2977/nvidia-s-geforce-gtx-480-and-gtx-470-6-months-late-was-it-worth-t]

4/1/2010 2:18:09 PM

I searched google for metro 2033 benchmarks, and those were the first two sites. I'm sure there are others.

But to the point, we are talking about $/performance. nVidia came out with a platform that cannot beat ATI for under $500, which was the entire point of this thread. The market is not comprised by the people that spend $2k+, just look at your OP.

I agree that if money is no object and that if you want to play Metro 2033 at 1920x1080, that you should probably buy 2x 480's.

4/1/2010 2:44:28 PM

here is a good review of Metro 2033 performance, but the 480/470 weren't out yet:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/metro-2033.html

the weird thing about Metro vs Crysis is Metro performance on my 295 goes from 120 to 30. Crysis sits around almost the same FPS the whole game.



[Edited on April 1, 2010 at 3:37 PM. Reason : .]

4/1/2010 3:35:50 PM

LOLOLOLOL THERMI

4/1/2010 3:38:01 PM

My Question is: Who cares? Do people really spend that much money on video cards anymore? Outside of academic usage, I just don't see the point at all.

Maybe this is just confirmation that I've fully outgrown the technerdrace part of my life, but this seems like an entirely superfluous conversation.

4/1/2010 5:34:43 PM

^I've felt that way for a couple years now which is what got me to be more into consoles than PC gaming because its a lower up front cost and I don't have to care about this sort of B.S.

4/1/2010 5:36:07 PM

who cares? Tech talk should

4/1/2010 6:02:02 PM

It's hard to afford to be on the bleeding edge of hardware.

4/1/2010 6:34:36 PM

buy from eVGA and just RMA every time a new gen hits, I have done this 3 times.

4/1/2010 6:38:19 PM

And you'll burn in hell too. Sorry I don't trade cash for ethics

4/1/2010 7:03:25 PM

Quote :

"I think it's time for Intel and NVIDIA to team up to knock AMD/ATI so far on their ass that they have to get back in the ball game and compete."

Which is funny, as Intel refuses to license Nvidia's chipsets now on their boards. Intel just wants to kick GPUs out totally from mobo's and have an integrated CPU/GPU that they will make and own the market themselves.

4/2/2010 11:29:51 AM

Intel is the only company that makes decent chipsets so i got no problem there.

4/2/2010 11:35:24 AM

Yea go check out the gaming benchmarks of Intel integrated graphics. Their newest loses to 5 yr old video cards.

4/2/2010 11:41:34 AM

^that has nothing to do with chipset quality.

4/2/2010 1:53:07 PM

you were replying to a comment about Intel graphics

4/2/2010 2:01:54 PM

HURF DURF learn what a fucking motherboard chipset is, i.e. P55

4/2/2010 5:42:34 PM

you are the only one talking about chipsets, I own a P45 board; don't you think I know what chipset is based on the first few posts?

the point is someone came in talking about intel driving home integrated graphics and you say that is fine with you.

4/2/2010 7:13:51 PM

Quote :

"Intel is the only company that makes decent chipsets so i got no problem there."

Quote :

"Yea go check out the gaming benchmarks of Intel integrated graphics. Their newest loses to 5 yr old video cards."

Quote :

"^that has nothing to do with chipset quality."

Quote :

"you are the only one talking about chipsets"

lol, and Noen is right. The gaming performance of the core i3/i5 IGP has nothing to do with the quality of other Intel chipsets.

4/2/2010 8:41:10 PM